Hello again from Cornwall. Here is the latest 2500 table update, and we now have 39 entries which is a pretty decent sample for ten day’s work. Very many thanks to everyone who has contributed so far -
Some points for discussion -
* The first thing you may notice is that I have now divided the table into two approximately equal halves, at the change between case numbers in the 10,72x,xxx series and the 10,78x,xxx series. This is because I wanted to make the following suggestion to you all – it looks to me as if there may have been
two quite separate batches of the 2500 JUB. So far there have been no examples with case numbers beginning 1073, 1074, 1075, 1076 or 1077 (numbers from within the gap), which suggests that this may be a genuine hinge point, perhaps of two batches of 2,000 watches each.
* Supporting this idea is the fact that so far all examples having the 2500 reference engraved inside the back, or with rose gold cases, and/or engraved “Centenary” on the back are
below this dividing line, not above it.
* I can still make no sense of the Centenaries with engraved backs, like Doug Gravina’s -
I would have thought that once the change had been made to an engraved back, all subsequent examples would have carried the engraving. But they are scattered at random, and account for only 12% of the total, less than the RG watches. So perhaps the engraved back was a later custom option, and ordered at additional cost by the purchaser?
Let me know what you think . . .
