The 'suspense' side for me remains how many other expensive watches he will be shown wearing once these ones will have been wiped off the blackboard by his lackey(s), or will the man(?) need to go on pretending to have, more, dead, rich 'friends' collecting priceless timepieces...?

The watches are simply the tip of the iceberg. You think through all his “borrowings” (dealings) this chap only fancied watches? Think again.

The watches are simply the tip of the iceberg. You think through all his “borrowings” (dealings) this chap only fancied watches? Think again.

Of course this is just the top of the iceberg, in the grand scheme of things the watches are pocket change :)

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

Sorry gentlemen, but to me one attempts to drown the fish in this story.

The point is IMO not about wanting to borrow 10, 20, who knows how many priceless timepieces.

It is: which are the reasons why people owning such watches for lending these out to some retired army lt. gen. (former army chief, dept. PM and min. of defence, ...and leader of the 'tigers of the east')?

Considering also it is not some kind of an exchange, ...as he officially doesn't own any such himself.

Another, tiny, detail, many of the watches have a (noble) leather armband, and I don't know one single watch collector who would lend any such out for a single day (the wrist size, the oily guy, the tropical climate, berk...), ...when it would not be with very 'good reasons', as a personal favour (like it would be with a pink, or black, Bentley f.i.), with quite some R.O.I. secured. What watch then, no importance...

Even if they were loaned (they weren’t), do you think one loans a watch like one of those without the implicit or explicit understanding of gaining something in return?

Politicians in other countries are prosecuted and convicted all the time for accepting “loans” with sweetheart terms. Even if we were to believe his implausible story, it still stinks to high heaven of impropriety and corruption.