- Posts
- 500
- Likes
- 614
2913 FAP from Phillips - from swan to ugly duckling
- Posts
- 5,298
- Likes
- 24,229
Spacefruit
··Prolific Speedmaster HoarderEpic Thread Drift
- Posts
- 2,423
- Likes
- 4,676
mr_yossarian
·Epic Thread Drift
- Posts
- 7,081
- Likes
- 22,981
- Posts
- 1,300
- Likes
- 3,086
marco
·
- Posts
- 1,300
- Likes
- 3,086
marco
·Well - opinion is divided - there's mine and everyone elses !
Very briefly, my two penneth.
Full disclosure is is important, but it is unlikely that the staff of any auction house will be as knowledgeable as true collectors and afficionados. The same can be said of many dealers and indeed owners of 'special' watches.
I would challenge anyone on this forum to be a 100% expert in all the major collectable brands - and that's without specifying models. So how can we expect and demand that the auction house staff be an ultimate authority.
Consequently, it's very definitely up to the buyer to ascertain (by whatever means) the true provenance of anything he intends to purchase.
The above aside - personally, I have no problem with a watch that has been 'improved' in both aesthetics and value by the addition of original or correctly restored parts.
After all, digging below the surface of the dial and bezel - how many of us know what mechanical repairs the movement may have had in it's life ? Have components been replaced with factory spares, or generic, or have they made on a watchmakers lathe ?? This may not have as much impact as a dial or bezel, but it still detracts from total 'originality'.
Clearly, any replacement or restored components should be openly revealed (where known) and the buyer will decide his maximum price accordingly, but
Anyway - as I said - this is just my own opinion.
This is a highly unusual forum.
The exceptional interface and architecture makes it the easiest to participate and follow of any forum I have seen - I do not underestimate the part this plays in drawing us all in. Ease of use makes for more posts and more participants.
We are a broad mixture here, but all feel happy to give away more than we take, and to enjoy all the debates however heated. The one thing that I like here is the almost bottomless honesty, and freedom to criticise in almost any way - as long as you are ready to take a debate. And for the most part these debates have been open and honest, knowledge based and interesting.
The knowledge shared here is freely given, and without condition or for personal gain. We can all make mistakes, and when we do, we are corrected more often than not with attitudes that take into account that no one is trying to take financial advantage of us. Many people I have met are very talented (sometimes in a narrow and obscure field). For the most part, we are not “normal”.
More than once people have said, “oh you just hate all dealers”. Nonsense. Dealers are a part of life. But they have to have different priorities than a collector, or they won’t eat and their children won’t go to school.
So When a dealer comes to this forum, and takes a defensive position regarding a watch - I cannot take what he says in the same way as a collector. This is not the first time this has happened, here on this forum. It never ends well, mainly because they were not able to put their hands up and go, ok I was wrong, you have a point. (I suspect too many dinners with PR girls).
There are other dealers here who share passion with their watches, without taking a financially motivated position in defense of a watch. They have found a way to be completely open and honest in a range that suits them, sharing acquisitions and knowledge, without compromising their business nor being light on the truth.
Its all down to honesty. With hindsight, it was spectacularly ill advised of Sacha to make such a meal defending a watch that has passed through his hands without disclosing it.
Now here is the thing. I would rather have Sacha come back and share more passion about other watches. We know what happened, and as long as he knows what happened, I am sure he will have much to contribute to this forum in the future. He made a mistake. If its the only one he makes he is better than me.
Well said William.
I hope Sacha is not offended by possible perceived criticism, it is only the "hurly burly" of a lot of very informed guys . Everybody knows a bit some more than others but when it is all collated and combined into a consensus it becomes a powerful opinion.
I enjoy Sacha's posts and hope he continues, give him his due not many dealer's would dare to enter this cauldron of combined knowledge.
- Posts
- 431
- Likes
- 739
JohnLy
·Not sure if the buyer follows the OF but based on your research (and assuming you are correct) it seems that Phillips might have to take this piece back. This is clearly a misrepresentation and against the auction's bylaws.
- Posts
- 431
- Likes
- 739
JohnLy
·Once upon a time …📖
No, this is not the fairy tale by our very own Hans Christian Andersen, but more a reverse version made true by the more shady frankeners in the dark corners of the vintage watch world.
This bird started out as a beautiful swan in 1961. But became an ugly duckling and in the process ended up like the black swan. It lost its innocence. Its authenticity.
Back to the real world: Lot 201 from yesterdays Phillips auction. Reference 2913 (-7 as it turns out). Serial 16684517. Produced on 28. April 1961. FAP marked and confirmed delivered to the Peruvian Air Forces.
What’s not to like? When I first saw it I thought ”a nice one and a very very strong result”. Then I looked closer and checked the serial with the ones in my archieves… and here’s what I found:
Serial and caseback scratches are the same throughout the history, but the face, oh the face. What a horror. For the record, I have no doubt that this is/was a 2913 FAP issued watch. The serial range is within the know range. Caseback marking is correct. It has the correct type of hands etc. BUT the transformation over the years 🤬. Sellers pictures below are bad, but can’t hide the obvious.
#1 For sale on chrono24 (2015). Repainted or fake dial and no bezel inlay. Extract states delivery to Peru only.
#2 For sale on chrono24 (2016, same seller). Dial replaced with a correct, but very tired one.
#3 For sale on chrono24 and here on OF (2016, same seller). Now with a bezel “inlay”, which seems to have issues. Looks like the chinese aluminum reproductions.
#4 For sale on the Phillips auction (2017, new seller properly). Now with a nice correct dial and a nicer redone bezel. Perhaps lume touch-up. Hard to tell from one picture. No movement shot, but text states a cal. 501 17Jewels !? (US version cal 500) Properly just a typo (earlier add shows 19J cal 501 which is ok). Extract now states delivery to Peruvian Air Forces (new policy at Omega Museum to include more notes). Same serial and still same caseback.
Looks good right 🙄 Realised price is CHF 56t. 😲
Sellers asking in 2016 was Euro 17t. (which was high enough for this condition). CHF 56t. !!! More than the perhaps most wanted SM300 of them all, a Conself ll 165.024 sold at Christies today for CHF 50t.
From the phillips auction text: ” The present example is preserved in most attractive and original condition “
So whats the moral of the story. Is it a problem that the parts have been changed - clearly to help sales? Well, no, not if you disclose it. The previous owner/dealer didn’t and the auction house didn’t/didn’t know or didn’t run a simple check on the interwebs and now it is sanctions by them. Talk about authenticity laundering.
Well, perhaps the buyer don’t care and just enjoy the watch for what it is. Right 🙁
We all know that a 100% autenthic vintage watch is a hard claim. No one really knows if parts have been swapped in the last 60 years. And if the parts are correct for the reference/serial, perhaps that’s fine, as long as you don’t know. BUT when the truth comes out, it’s stigmatized - from a collectors point of view. From my point of view.
/The end
P.S.: sorry for the buyer if he DOES care, but especially at this price level, someone should tell the truth, since it’s cleary now more an investment piece. No real collector at this level would have neglected to do the basic research before a bidding war.
P.S.S.: And all the frankeners who think they can get away with it, didn't live happily ever after
- Posts
- 2,260
- Likes
- 17,801
Paedipod
·
prefer the "Mad Dog"
Epic Thread Drift
- Posts
- 602
- Likes
- 548
MCC
·I guess this whole thread underlines the importance of "caveat emptor", it is easy to be seduced by the look of a particular watch or by believing that what is being offered represents particular value for money. There appears to be a consensus on OF that a watch can be valuable, rare and desirable even if all the parts were not original to that specific watch. So, a significant part of the question is to what extent is it right to rely on a description and if that description is being provided by an apparent expert should it carry more weight?
I consider myself to be a relative novice but even I can spot many watches that are offered for sale that are obviously incorrect (wrong hands, bezel etc etc) and yet that carry a significant price tag. Eventually, someone must buy these watches possibly lured in by impressive photographs and a persuasive description but ultimately some responsibility must also be borne by the buyer too. If someone is selling a watch ( or anything else come to) that as part of their business then the relationship between them and the buyer is naturally based on the transaction and nothing else. I would naturally be more wary of someone that is selling for profit than someone that might be sourcing a watch on my behalf even if I am reminded of the cases where celebrities have sued people that have sourced watches for them when they have found that the watches had a problem.
This thread has certainly reminded me that:
1) I know a lot less than I think
2) You can never have enough information, insight and opinion
2) I should not let my heart rule my head
I consider myself to be a relative novice but even I can spot many watches that are offered for sale that are obviously incorrect (wrong hands, bezel etc etc) and yet that carry a significant price tag. Eventually, someone must buy these watches possibly lured in by impressive photographs and a persuasive description but ultimately some responsibility must also be borne by the buyer too. If someone is selling a watch ( or anything else come to) that as part of their business then the relationship between them and the buyer is naturally based on the transaction and nothing else. I would naturally be more wary of someone that is selling for profit than someone that might be sourcing a watch on my behalf even if I am reminded of the cases where celebrities have sued people that have sourced watches for them when they have found that the watches had a problem.
This thread has certainly reminded me that:
1) I know a lot less than I think
2) You can never have enough information, insight and opinion
2) I should not let my heart rule my head
- Posts
- 1,294
- Likes
- 2,293
jhross98
·
- Posts
- 1,294
- Likes
- 2,293
jhross98
·
huh. taken down. even more interesting. . .the plot thickens
- Posts
- 628
- Likes
- 1,168
SgWatchBaron
·huh. taken down. even more interesting. . .the plot thickens
- Posts
- 1,294
- Likes
- 2,293
jhross98
·it was a post pointing out issues with a patek 2499 that sold at philips for like 2.9mm CHF. post now deleted. . .very very interesting and i wonder what happened to it
- Posts
- 2,845
- Likes
- 9,196
- Posts
- 1,294
- Likes
- 2,293
jhross98
·post was from gary_g who writes for one of these watch blogs. i have no idea who bought it. but why would it come down without a trace?
- Posts
- 168
- Likes
- 126
jakeh417
·post was from gary_g who writes for one of these watch blogs. i have no idea who bought it. but why would it come down without a trace?
Okay I tried to look for the deleted post but failed. I did see the original post, and one of the major points was that the marker at the 9 o'clock was off center with the painted mark? It was couple millimeters lower.
- Posts
- 12,100
- Likes
- 40,207
abrod520
·The date subdial also overprinted the main minutes track. It looked like a poor redial to my inexperienced eyes
- Posts
- 518
- Likes
- 966
wkimmd
·😲
The date subdial also overprinted the main minutes track. It looked like a poor redial to my inexperienced eyes
it was a post pointing out issues with a patek 2499 that sold at philips for like 2.9mm CHF. post now deleted. . .very very interesting and i wonder what happened to it
- Posts
- 2,549
- Likes
- 6,999
sxl2004
·Nowadays, what can you expect for 2.9M?
😁
😁