Please consider donating to help offset our high running costs.
Now here is the thing. I would rather have Sasha 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
I have to agree with this. I do think we are reacting very negatively to watches which have been restored. This is a touchy subject and becomes more touchy the more expensive a watch is. Furthermore the question of how much research should be done prior to a sale is important.
I've said this before: Is ignorance really bliss? Is everybody happy ever after with a sale, as long as they believe that their 60 year old watch is all original, and very unhappy when they find out it has been restored? It's still the same watch in the same condition after all. I believe there should be more tolerance and even admiration for well-restored watches.
Of course this does not give anybody the right to deceive and claim it hasn't been restored, which is something else entirely. It is a very difficult thing to claim that a watch hasn't been restored and needs proof of this fact for decades which is usually not possible with most of these vintage watches.............
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 not without considerable research.
I would also suggest that as the supply of perfect examples of 'grail' pieces becomes more scarce - the less perfect versions including re-done dials and bezels will climb in price to fill the demand 'void'.
I suspect that if we were to revisit the example at the centre of this thread in a couple of years - it will seem a very good buy indeed.
Anyway - as I said - this is just my own opinion.
We are not the only ones, struggling with these terms...... the Vintage Rolex Forum banned the word " unpolished " , because that is something nobody can claim ,if the Rolex has been serviced in the past. same here with Omegas. they have been serviced in the last 50 plus years, or they would be dead. we need to be more careful with thrown around terms like " fake ", " franken ", " barn find "...................................................
To fool us here, the hegemony of OF, a repro dial has to be perfect down to pixel level, because that's what we do, blow up the pictures and examine the pixels. To replicate the aging on the back of a dial, or the patina on a plot, is not something I think a counterfeiter would spend the time, and multiple failures, to do.
Again yet but my instincts are that they never will. They might throw us for a while, just like the 2915 bezel, but not permanently
To fool us here, the hegemony of OF, a repro dial has to be perfect down to pixel level, because that's what we do, blow up the pictures and examine the pixels. To replicate the aging on the back of a dial, or the patina on a plot, is not something I think a counterfeiter would spend the time, and multiple failures, to do.
Again yet but my instincts are that they never will. They might throw us for a while, just like the 2915 bezel, but not permanently.
Being nearly good enough, nearly perfect replica, nearly looking the same - thats 1m miles away.
you deal with BIG EGOS at Auction Houses. The guys, who describe the auction text, think they know better and write what they want anyway
This is so true, and most unfortunate.
I have heard the argument that these "experts" can't be expected to have an in-depth knowledge about the nuances of every brand. Fair enough. But let's use an example from medicine: a general practitioner knows a lot about many disorders, but if they are either stumped or suspicious that an ailment falls out of their area of expertise, what do they do? (If no big ego there also...). They send you to, or consult with a specialist.
In fact, on many fora, there are pockets of experts that know a phenomenal amount about very specific watch issues. In stead of sitting in the auction house ivory towers, when there is a pressing question: why not engage the watch collector community? Does it undermine their expertise? I think not: it shows honesty, send besides, it's good public relations.