And while I really, really like Rolex, they were not the last to use modified facts for their marketing even back in 1927. After Mercedes Gleitze successfully swam across the Channel on her 8th attempt, our good Hans Wilsdorf sponsored her two weeks later on her "Vindication Swim" to prove she really did it. She failed this time but it did not stop him to advertise about the success of the watch in newspapers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Technically Rolex was not dishonest in this event. I don't think Rolex modified the facts.
Mercedes did her vindication swim after it was brought to question the legitimacy of her swim after another lady hoax her swim. Rolex learnt of the event and would provide Mercedes with the Rolex wristlet watch in return for a testimonial on how the watch performed.
She did not complete the swim, nor did she wear the wristlet, wearing it around her neck. As reported by the papers at that time "Hanging round her neck by a riband on this swim, Miss Gleitze carried a small gold watch, which was found this evening to have kept good time throughout."
She did give Rolex a testimonial and this was what Rolex advertised in the papers later...
"Rolex introduces for the first time the greatest triumph in Watch-making – ROLEX ‘OYSTER’ – The Wonder Watch That Defies The Elements. MOISTURE PROOF WATER PROOF HEAT PROOF VIBRATION PROOF COLD PROOF DUST PROOF"
"Miss Mercedes Gleitze carried an "Oyster" throughout her recent Channel Swim. More than ten hours of submersion under the most trying conditions failed to harm its perfect timekeeping. No moisture had penetrated and not the slightest corrosion or condensation was revealed in the subsequent examination of the Watch."
Rolex did not advertise that Mercedes completed the swim or that it was worn on her wrist or that is was worn on the earlier swim that took 15 hours to complete.
Ok, you could say that the heat proof, vibration proof, dust proof is a bit of a stretch as it was not proven by the swim.
