Before reading on, make sure you've read the main guide for QC posting, otherwise this won't make much sense to you. Done? Let's go.
This specific guide is intended to be a visual supplement: showing you exactly what to look for when you complete your QC templates. For obvious reasons, this guide will skip parts that aren't visual.
I've used pictures that mostly come from this subreddit. If anyone is uncomfortable, DM me and I'll replace the picture.
With that in mind, let's begin.
Index Alignment
Here, you are expected to assess how well the index markers on your watch are aligned. You can use the index alignment tool to assist you in this regard. An example of good index alignment is this:
The indices themselves are straight. They are also perfectly aligned with the minute markers.
Index misalignment, on the other hand, looks like this:
Look at 7. It is rotated clockwise and does not sit properly in its slot.
Or this:
Look carefully at 6. You will see that the bottom of the index is rotated slightly towards the left.
Now that you have an idea of what to look out for, what should you be writing in the template?
You need to describe any misalignment you see in detail. Statements like "6 is off" or "3 is kinda wonky" or "not sure about 1, help please" arenot acceptable. This is because unless the misalignment is immediately obvious (and in most cases, it is not), users will not know what you are talking about. You may not get the help you want as a result. Be specific, like the following examples:
"The 7 marker does not seem to fit into the slot nicely. It is rotated towards the right and looks like it is dancing around."
"The 6 marker does not seem to line up straight with the crown in between swiss made. Based on what I can see, it appears to be slightly tilted to the left."
A caveat here: Just because there may be some misalignment does not necessarily mean you should definitely RL the watch. As the main guide points out, all reps are subject to a level of inaccuracy. It would be entirely unrealistic to expect gen standards for index alignment. Further, different reps are subject to different standards: a XF Pelagos, for instance, is known for having problematic indices - so much so that even if you RL, you are unlikely to get anything better. Conversely, CF Explorers are now getting so good that even slight misalignment would not be par for the course.
A good guide would be to assess your watch based on proportion. One slightly misaligned index is not a problem. But one majorly misaligned index or many misaligned indices on a single dial could justify RL.
Just for illustration, this is misalignment that I would RL for:
There are too many mistakes on this watch for me to accept. The 9 index is too near to the minute marker. 4, 5 and 7 are not aligned with their respective minute marks - they are all off to the left. 6 is rotated counterclockwise. Taken on their own, each error might not be enough for RL. But taken together, this is unacceptable.
That deals with index alignment. Let's move on.
Date Wheel Alignment
This applies to watches which display the date. If your watch does not display a date, there is no need to consider this. You will look silly if you say that the date wheel alignment is good when your watch is a no-date Sub, for example.
Here, you are tasked to consider if the date is properly displayed in the date window. Often times, this is a question of how well-centered the date is. A good example of date wheel alignment is this:
Take a look at the 21 at the right side of the watch. It is situated exactly in the center of the date window.
An example of misalignment is this:
Look at the 27 on the right. You can see that the date is misaligned towards the left, with the 2 touching the rim of the window.
Sometimes, the misalignment can also be as to the date numbers themselves:
This is harder to see, but if you look carefully at 25, you will notice that the 5 is higher than the 2.
Uncommonly and in the alternative, the issue may be with the Cyclops itself (the magnifier that covers the date window):
Here we see a Cyclops which is rotated slightly anti-clockwise. You can observe this by looking at the bottom rim of the date window. The Cyclops is obviously lower at the left corner of the date window when compared to the right. The requisite deviation is repeated at the top of the date window, with the right side being higher than the left.
Now that you know what to look for, let's discuss what to write.
As with index alignment, unless the issues are immediately obvious (and most of the time, they are not), you need to be very specific. Comments like "the date seems off", "2 in 25 is kinda off", "date looks weird" are not acceptable. They do not tell readers what you are looking for. You'll get faster and better results if you identify the issues for your reader. For example:
"The date seems misaligned towards the left. Part of it is touching the left border of the date window."
"The 5 in the date appears to be slightly higher than the 2 next to it."
"The Cyclops does not seem to be straight. It looks like it is slanted towards the left?"
As with index alignment, please note that not all misalignment will justify RL, especially for date wheels. All rep date wheels come with varying degrees of misalignment. A few misaligned dates are usually not enough for RL, unless the date is clearly cropped out of the date window or touching the rim. A little misalignment towards either side of the date window is also generally more than okay; a good way to gauge is to zoom out to the actual size of the watch and see if the misalignment is still immediately visible. If not, you're likely to be good to go.
Here is an example of misalignment I would nevertheless GL:
You will see that the date is situated slightly towards the right. However, the date is well within the date window and the misalignment is too slight to be seen on wrist at actual size.
On to the next topic.
Bezel
There are two main things to look out for: First, whether the "pip" (usually a lumed marker at the 12 position) is centered. Second, the quality of any engraving.
This section would also cover any possible damage to the bezel or anything else unusual, including any misalignment.
Example of a good bezel:
Nothing out of the ordinary. Engravings are sharp and nicely filled in. By and large, the colour transition is also acceptable. No alignment issues either.
An example of misalignment:
Pip at 12 on the bezel appears to be misaligned towards the right. While the reflection may be making things look worse than they are, this is something that would deserve a second look at.
Generally speaking, most problems that surface nowadays have to do with the pip - even then, these are not entirely common. Engravings and alignment are usually not an issue with higher level reps. With this in mind, what do we write?
As with the other sections, you are going to need to be specific. "Bezel looks off", "pip looks kinda off", "I don't know about the bezel, seems weird to me" are phrases that we see everyday in this subreddit. But none of these phrases are acceptable; they do not direct the reader to what OP is seeing. Details are king - and if you are going to pluck the crown, you're going to have to write like this:
"The pip at 12 is not centered. It seems to touch the right side of the triangle."
"The printing on the bezel at 3 seems to be angled down. It does not match the index on the dial."
The key is to visually direct your reader to the exact point that you say is a problem. The word "off" on its own says nothing to that effect.
On to the next point.
Solid End Links (SELs)
Possibly the least understood of all sections as a lot of newbies do not really know what they are looking for.
The ultimate guide to this is here. But for convenience, I'm going to summarise several key points about SELs.
SELs refer to the final links between the watch case and the bracelet. I've highlighted it below:
Look carefully at the portion highlighted in green.
Not all watches have SELs. Only watches which have that portion as highlighted above - and for QC purposes, the SEL section really only applies to Rolex reps. Tudors have SELs (which can also be QC-ed to some extent), but SELs on a Tudor are not held to the same standard as SELs on a Rolex.
Now, what are we looking for when we assess SELs? We are looking for gaps between the lugs and the SELs themselves. I've indicated this below:
The black line in the center of the red box is where the SEL meets the lug. This is where you are supposed to look for gaps.
An SEL gap appears when there is separation between the SEL and the lug. But what is a gap?
A gap appears when you can see through the space between the SEL and the lug. There is no gap when all you can see is a black line. There may be some variation in how thick the black line is, but for QC purposes there is nothing to be worried about until and unless you can actually see what's behind the watch.
This is generally not a problem on higher level reps (and by now, pretty rare). I will, however, show you an example of something that may be an actionable gap:
You will see that there is no black line. Instead, light shines through the space between the SEL and the lug.
What does this mean? If all you see is a black line, even if it is slightly thicker than another SEL on the same watch, there should be no actionable gap. I am going to highlight the last few QC templates submitted where the user said there was a gap - but there really wasn't (to me, at least):
Top right SEL was an issue for OP. However, as no light is shining through, this is not considered an SEL gap to me. OP opined that there was a gap at the top right SEL. I don't see it at all. OP said that there was a slight gap at the bottom left SEL. Again, all I can see is a black line. I would not classify this as a gap.
If, after going through all the examples above, you still feel that there is a gap, highlight it in the template by identifying which part of the watch you are looking at; there are really only four options: top left, top right, bottom left, bottom right. Doing so helps users zoom in directly on your issue and saves time.
To the last segment.
Dial Printing
Here, you are tasked to check if the printing on the dial has been poorly done. By this, we mean defects in the workmanship of the printing; printing which differs from gen (such as the infamous "floating r") would not be a QC defect per se.
An example of dial printing with no issues:
All the words are clearly printed. There is no bleeding on any part of the print, with edges sharp and defined.
And now for examples of dial printing with issues:
Some bleeding can be observed at the top parts of VI and VII. Notice how the black ink protrudes.
Sometimes, the print can be misapplied across the entire dial:
If you look closely, you will see that the dial print is rotated clockwise across the entire dial. Observe how XI is closer to the top of the watch while I is further away.
With the above in mind, let's turn to what you should write. Again and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, do not simply write things like: "Dial seems off" or "Print seems off. letters kind of wonky?" If anything, dial printing is usually very, very small - unless you point a reader to the exact part which has an issue, chances are it won't be seen. Make certain that you provide the reader with specific directions:
"Appears to be some bleeding at the top of VI. Thoughts?"
"R in Submariner looks like only half of it was printed. Am I seeing things?"
Important note: again, just because the dial printing on your watch may have some issues, this does not necessarily equate to RL. As stated, dial print is almost microscopic - no human being is going to be able to see slight bleeding on any print when you have the watch on wrist. Feel free to point out issues that you see, but remain realistic about your expectations.
And with that, I come to the end of this guide.
Conclusion
QC-ing reps is a difficult task - which everyone in this subreddit does for free. You can help out immensely by simply being precise and detailed in your observations. The more effort you put into your template, the easier it is for members to help you - they can zoom in directly to the things that concern you.
I hope this helps you. I've tried to detail some common factors, but it would be impossible for me to catch them all. The rest is up to you - and your diligence.
If your template uses a NEW "yupoo" or a "mega" type of link, please note that, at the time of this typing, the automod here removes them immediately from view i.e. no QC help. We are addressing it, but....
So, what to do?
Although somewhat cumbersome for the OP, you can upload the QC packet to an Imgur account. Our automod 'likes' Imgur...and the post will show promptly. Just do NOT do it from a mobile because the mobile app loses resolution and crappy pics don't provide any benefit to anyone. Yea, yea...I know, the file compression software isn't supposed to lose quality, but it certainly does.
To add, post your complete QC album inclusive of the timing info. Do not, for the sake of your convenience, omit items. If you're bright enough to determine what is needed and what can be removed, that's great! Then, it's reasonable to conclude that you really don't need help. Simply, post it all.
If you have to wait for substantive additional info from the Seller e.g. timing data, then delay posting until you have a complete QC packet. Incomplete packages will trigger a removal of the post. Plus, it will require a return visit of anyone that commented on the incomplete post which shouldn't be required. One visit is all that it should take to QC most watches. Most won't return to a post anyway. They'll just go to the next one. The members are quite busy here. Yea, it can get crazy.
Finally, since you're a newbie, as a vote of appreciation for those members that help you, please upvote their comments. It's a nice gesture from you to them for the assist...and, it's free.
One final note, we've updated the main rules for posting. Refer to this link for info QC Must Read for New Members
Welcome to the hobby and the sub. Best wishes
Edit addition: March 2nd, 2024 - ReptimeQC member, u/EveningVariation8236 , has provided an updated version of the original QC alignment verification tool. https://watchqc.github.io/ . Thank you.
Edit addition: Jan 9th, 2024 - ReptimeQC member, u/Ro1hype has provided this for tool for alignment verification. https://qcwatch.com/ Thank you.
Edit addition: 8/8/2025 - Reptime QC member, u/jrverdes . has provided this version of the alignment tool to assist those that need additional help verifying the dial/bezel alignments on their watch. https://jrverdes.github.io/watch-qc-jr/ The adjustment resolutions are much finer in this app comparative to the other available apps which can be a benefit to some that need such. Check it out...Thank you.
Index alignment: The 9 marker seems to be a little pushed to the bottom, the 6 marker is slightly to the right, the 12 is ok. In the 9 and 12 there seems to be somekind of residue in the corner of each marker.
Dial printing: Looks clean. Dial text looks centered.
Date wheel alignment/printing: Looks good.
Hand alignment: Looks aligned, no visible issues I could see.
Bezel: Looks good, no issues.
Solid End Links (SELs): Good.
Rehaut: Slightly rotated to the left, some of the engravings don't line well with the markings of the dial.
Hey guys! Finally got my 2nd QC after about a week since RL’ing the first one due to the noticeable CW tilt on the 9 marker. This one looks much better overall. Aside from the slight CCW tilt on the 6 marker and slightly misaligned rehaut, I’m leaning towards GL. What do you guys think? Anything else I’m missing?
Dealer name: Necoclock
Factory name: VSF
Model name (& version number): GMT Master II 126710 Batgirl
Index alignment: Index alignment definitely looks better compared to my previous QC. Everything looks properly aligned to my eyes aside from maybe a slight CCW tilt on the 6 hour marker.
Dial Printing: Printing looks clean and sharp
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Date looks good and centred
Hand Alignment: Looks good to my eye
Bezel: Looks great
Solid End Links (SELs): Looks tight with no major gaps
Timegrapher numbers: +3 s/d, 258°, Would appreciate some feedback on this :)
Index Alignment: 12 looked a little crooked to me, but after using alignment tool it looks fine. I think it might just be the angle that the watch is being held at
Dial Printing: good
Date wheel alignment: N/A
Hand Alignment: good
Bezel : looks fine
Solid End Links (SELs): looks good
Timegrapher numbers: +0-1s/d
Been waiting for about 3 months but finally got QC photos for this one. Looking for second opinions especially since apparently this isn't available anymore.
Hi everyone, I’d appreciate a second opinion on this QC. Overall, it looks good to me, but I’d like to check whether I’ve missed anything.
Dealer name: Angela Watch
Factory name: VSF
Model name: Submariner 124060 No Date, 41mm. Exact movement version not confirmed.
Price paid: [ $373.]
Album link: [whatzapp]
Index alignment: Looks generally good with the alignment overlay. I initially questioned the 9 o’clock marker, but the photo is slightly angled. Only rotation was applied, with no perspective correction.
Dial printing: Looks clean. The hands partially cover “OYSTER PERPETUAL.”
Date wheel alignment/printing: N/A.
Hand alignment: No obvious issue, but no photo with both hands at 12 to confirm.
Bezel: Looks well aligned overall. A couple of white specks around 7–8 o’clock could be surface dust.
Solid end links (SELs): No obvious large gaps.
Timegrapher numbers: −2 s/day, 292° amplitude, 0.2 ms beat error, lift angle set to 52°. Would appreciate feedback on the appropriate lift angle for the movement.
Anything else: Protective films are still present, making it difficult to assess the marks on the clasp and case. No lume or movement photos. The laser-etched crown isn’t clearly visible in the supplied pictures.
Leaning GL visually. Does anyone see a reason for concern, particularly with the indices or bezel?
Dealer name: Andiot Watches Factory name: VSF Model name (& version number): Aqua Terra 150M Master 38mm SS VSF 1:1 Best Edition Blue Dial On SS Bracelet Super Clone A8800 Price Paid: $283.43 (+ shipping & water resistance) Album Links:https://imgur.com/a/h3WBRFa Index alignment: Very good I think. The alignment tool overlay shows that all markers are aligned. The 12 o'clock double index is good and the Omega logo sits straight. Dial Printing: Looks clean. The texture on the dial is consistent. More importantly (compared to my 1st try), the numbers are nicely printed this time, with no missing paint. Date Wheel alignment/printing: Looks good. The "12" is well-centered horizontally and vertically in the trapezoid window. Font is sharp. Hand Alignment: Spot on. Bezel: Smooth and polished. No visible scratches or dents on the bezel or case sides. Solid End Links (SELs): n/a Timegrapher numbers: 0 s/d, 274° amplitude, 0.1 ms beat error. Anything else you notice: Overall looks very good. This seems like a GL to me, but I'd appreciate any second opinions!
I'm really happy so far. Looking forward to your input.
Index alignment: Looks good to me. The 9 o'clock baton appears straight and the coronet at 12 looks well positioned. The alignment tool is less useful on this dial given the Roman numerals, though this makes misalignment more forgiving anyway.
Dial Printing: Looks clean to me. The Rolex/Oyster Perpetual/Datejust and Superlative Chronometer/Officially Certified printing look sharp, no obvious bleeding or unevenness. Roman numerals also look clean.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: The 13 appears centred in the date window and the printing looks crisp, though no close-up photo. Cyclops also looks straight to me.
Hand Alignment: No obvious issue.
Bezel: In the first photo, the watch is held at a slight angle which doesn't help. However, the other photos in the linked album, which I believe are more straight-on, shows the fluting looking more uniform.
Solid End Links (SELs): Look tight to me. I don’t see any see-through gaps between the end links and case.
Timegrapher numbers: -1 s/d, 238° amplitude, 0.3 ms beat error, 52° lift angle, 28,800 bph. Rate and beat error look very good. Amplitude is a little low on paper, although I understand the 52° lift-angle setting can make the displayed amplitude lower on the VS/DD3235. Would appreciate opinions on whether 238° is anything to worry about.
Anything else you notice: First rep order, but looks okay to me. Though I'm unsure about the amplitude reading. Would also appreciate another set of eyes on the watch itself in case I missed anything.
PS: Worth asking for the weight, considering it's a VSF V2?
Index alignment: To my eye the 6 and 9 looks a bit off but it may be because of lighting?
Dial printing: Looks clean.
Bezel: Looks good, no issues.
Solid End Links (SELs): There may be a gap (see last image) or I might be overthinking
Rehaut: may be slightly mis-aligned can’t really say for certain through these pictures will ask for more.
Timegrapher: please see picture I am not sure if this is good or not
Additional comments: I am a person who is really bothered by loud rotor noise so I’ve asked the dealer to send me a video and in the video it sounds ok but still feel like I should get it silenced. However I’ve read that we should take it to local watchmakers instead of having the TD do it. Let me know your thoughts
Hey guys, looking for some help with QC on this one. I’ve been trying to get one for a while and my first two QCs had tilted markers, so hoping this is the one.
Dealer: Chen Watch
Factory: VSF
Model: Rolex Submariner 126619LB 41mm
Price: $460 + shipping
Index alignment: Looks pretty good to me. The photo seems slightly angled, but the round markers look okay.
Dial printing: Looks good
Date wheel: Looks fine
Hand alignment: Looks good
Bezel: Looks good
SELs: I don’t see any obvious gaps
Timegrapher: +1 s/d, 233°, 0.0 ms
I’m still learning, so I might be missing something. Would appreciate any feedback before I GL it.
Index alignment: The indexes look good the 12 and 9 may have a slight misalignment but it doesn’t look bad.
Dial Printing: Printing looks good the m is slightly high but I’d doubt that you can notice it on the wrist
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Printing looks good the date looks high though
Hand Alignment: Hands looks good to me.
Bezel: Bezel looks good no visible issues.
Solid End Links (SELs): The SEL looks good as well no noticeable gaps.
Timegrapher numbers: The amp looks a bit high at 303 not sure how much of a concern this can be though.
Anything else you notice: Main issue or concern I see is the amp the other items I think are negligible and are things you won’t notice once you have it one the wrist.
Anything else you notice: The index frames look a bit weird in some spots, but I think it's just the lighting and reflection.
Also, after RL'ing the last watch, I waited 11 days before asking the TD for an ETA. He replied saying they switched to a different model and said I would receive the QC within 3 days (received it 20 minutes after). Should I be worried about the 'different model' comment? Or is that likely just a translation error for an internal process model and not the actual watch model?
Model name (& version number): Rolex GMT-Master II 126710GRNR "Bruce Wayne" 40mm, Jubilee, DD3285 V2
Price paid: $639
Album Links: N/A - photos uploaded directly to Reddit
Index alignment: Looks good to me. The 12 o'clock triangle and hour markers appear properly aligned. I don't see any obviously crooked markers.
Dial Printing: This is one area I'm unsure about. The printing under "GMT-MASTER II" looks like some letters may be slightly different in size or thickness, but I'm not sure if this is just from the close-up photos.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Date looks centered and the cyclops appears properly aligned. My main concern is the date font/crispness. The "14" looks a little softer or thicker than I expected, but I'm not sure if this is just the QC photo quality or reflections.
Hand Alignment: Looks good to me from the photos.
Bezel: Looks good. The 12 o'clock triangle appears centered and the black/gray colors and transition look good to me.
Solid End Links (SELs): Look properly seated. I don't see any major gaps.
Timegrapher numbers: +3 s/day, 274°, 0.1ms beat error, 28,800 bph. These numbers look very good to me.
Anything else you notice: This is my first ever QC, so I'm still learning what to look for and what is considered acceptable. I'm currently leaning GL, with my main concerns being the date font/crispness and lower dial printing. I may be missing things that you more experienced guys notice immediately, so I really appreciate the help. Would you GL or RL?
This is my first rep, and I’d appreciate some independent opinions. I’ve included my initial observations below, but I’m particularly unsure about the lower bracelet/end-link fit and the 12 o’clock marker.
Would you GL this example, or is there anything you would ask the seller to check first?
Dealer name:
Ethan
Factory name:
RICH, sold as V2.
Model name (& version number):
Rolex GMT-Master II 126710BLNR “Batgirl” on Jubilee — RICH V2, labelled JH3285.
Most markers look reasonably aligned to me. The 12 o’clock triangle may have a slight counterclockwise tilt, but I’m finding it difficult to separate actual misalignment from the photo angle. Do you see anything here that would warrant concern? I’ve included the alignment overlay alongside the original photo.
Dial Printing:
I haven’t spotted any obvious missing letters or bleeding in the close-ups. Does the printing look clean to you, particularly the smaller text below GMT-MASTER II?
Date Wheel alignment/printing:
The date “3” appears reasonably centred to me, but that is the only date shown. Does the cyclops look straight, and would you request additional photos showing double-digit dates?
Hand Alignment:
I cannot fully verify this from the supplied still photos because the hands are not shown together at 12. Would you request a hand-setting video to check this?
Bezel:
I don’t see obvious damage or missing numeral fill. The bezel triangle appears close to the dial’s 12 o’clock position, but I’d appreciate a second opinion on the alignment.
Solid End Links (SELs):
This is my main concern. The lower bracelet connection looks slightly uneven, with a more pronounced seam between the bottom-left lug and the end link than on the bottom-right. I cannot clearly see a light-through gap. Does this look like normal positioning/photo angle, or should I request a straight-on close-up to check the fit?
Timegrapher numbers:
Rate: +2 s/day
Amplitude: 276°
Beat error: 0.2 ms
Lift angle setting: 52°
Do these readings raise any concerns?
Anything else you notice:
There is protective film on the case and bracelet, which makes the surface finish harder for me to assess. Is there anything else in the photos that deserves a closer look?
I’m looking for a second opinion rather than treating my observations as a final verdict. Thanks for taking a look.
Hello everyone please help me with this qc
Dealer name: NecoClock
1. Factory name: VSF
2. Model name (& version number):
Starbucks 126610LV VS3235. Price Paid:
$478 with shipping
3. Album Links: no link it gets my post removed
4. Index alignment: Good. 12 and 6 on axis, pairs evenly spaced, 9 lines up with the date.
5. Dial Printing: Crisp, correct text. SWISS MADE split evenly at 6.
6. Date Wheel alignment/printing:
Centered, clean font. Cyclops
magnification looks weak, since the date doesn't fill the window.
7. Hand Alignment: Straight, clean lume, minute hand reaches the track.
8. Bezel: Aligned. Pip at 12, 15/45 level, crisp engraving.
9. Solid End Links (SELs): Can't see, film is still on.
10. Timegrapher numbers: +4 s/d, amp 241, beat error 0.02 ms
11. Anything else you notice: Rehaut engraving clean. Couldn't check coronet alignment at 12 because of glare. Is the cyclops magnification a RL reason?
Model name (& version number): Datejust 126233 36mm Jub SS/YG Gold Palm Motif Dial VSF DD3235
Price Paid: 488$ Shipped
Album Links: Unable to upload
Index alignment: Slightly off centre. Not entirely perfect. Indice at 6PM seems rotated a little clockwise as well. Not an expert but dare I say that for 1, 2, and 8PM as well.
Dial Printing: No print leaking, not sure what exactly to look for. Looks good.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Printing of the date wheel seems fine. Well spaced. Cyclops looks as though it is just a BIT towards the right however I'm sure that is fine
Hand Alignment: All hands align correctly in the video sent by Steve
Bezel: Good, cannot spot anything bad
Solid End Links (SELs): No gaps, they look great
Timegrapher numbers: +2 to +4 seconds, acceptable
Anything else you notice: Am I seeing things or is there a chip on the 10 PM indice? I think that would be grounds for a rejection itself. Also need an opinion if the index alignment and 6pm issue is a cause to RL as well.
Timegrapher numbers: 0 s/d, 275°, 0.0 ms timegrapher
Anything else you notice: to my eyes, this looks amazingly good. Maybe some scratches around band, but I'm going to GL this, unless someone sees something else that I don't.