Slowburn July 13, 2014 02:31 PM Why? Just Why? xdigitor July 13, 2014 10:52 PM Slowburn, Why not? The Skud July 14, 2014 12:12 AM RIGHT ON, SLOWBURN! Looks as if the Accounting Department found a lost inventory of widgets on a back shelf and gave a designer the task of finding a way of using them up. A huge amount of complexity for no actual timekeeping benefit. To have a unique timepiece should not equal difficulty of reading the thing once you are wearing it - Or is the object just to buy them and keep them in a safe somewhere? Slowburn July 14, 2014 06:27 AM @ xdigitor It makes the watch harder to read, less reliable, and more expensive without adding any improvement in accuracy. Mel Tisdale July 14, 2014 07:43 AM As Slowburn so eloquently puts it: "Why? Just Why?" My watch cost 40 złoty - about £8.00. It keeps excellent time and if I lose it, or it eventually gives up the ghost, I will put its replacement on instead (which I have already bought). On top of all that, the dial is infinitely more easily read than the one on this watch. I cannot imagine wearing a US$25,000 item on my wrist. There are a number of people out there who would not value my wrist as being anywhere near as valuable and remove it, together with the watch, rather than fiddle with the strap. Dan Lewis July 14, 2014 01:20 PM No matter it's cost, it's still insanity. All those impacts of all those little arms returning to position over the years. No, I don't like the design. I'm still a cave-being, loving Citizen's Eco-Drive design. Foofaraw July 14, 2014 01:21 PM I disagree with fellow posters. I see a work of art. If they were $24,950.00 less expensive I would most definitely purchase---too bad, over my budget. Gabriel Jones July 14, 2014 02:32 PM It is a nice looking watch, but being the type of person that doesn't have $25,000 to spend on anything, let alone a watch, I can think of a lot of things I'd rather pay money for. Slowburn July 14, 2014 09:12 PM I wish somebody would reintroduce a cheap, self winding, waterproof, balance wheel watch. Say 1950s technology. rocketride July 15, 2014 01:13 PM @ Slowburn For the same reason a dog licks his balls. . . because he can.