Just came across Hodinkee's blog and I find it quite disappointing is when information given out by the experts is wrong ...



The blog implies that there is an applied logo (older) reference and a printed logo reference (newer).

As far as I am aware, old and new ninas share the same 885103/02. I would invite Hodinkee to provide a case back with the /03 reference in line with his statement.

Here is a later serial (2,569,XXX) with the printed logo and 885103/02 reference.

 

Information provided by "experts" is frequently wrong, and of course this goes well beyond the world of vintage watches. Opinions given by "experts" representing commercial interests (e.g. dealers, auction houses, etc.) and governments should, in particular, be treated with caution.

 

@Diabolik thanks for the notice, will correct immediately in my article, you are right the /03 I had seen seen described do indeed seem to still bear a /02 engraved on the caseback: https://shop.analogshift.com/products/universal-geneve-compax-ref-885103-03-nina-rindt
Not readable here: https://i1.wp.com/mentawatches.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/IMG_0799-Edit.jpg?fit=1800,2319&ssl=1

What I wish to mean is that you have two types of acceptable logo for the Nina Rindt, painted and applied.

Louis

 

Thank you Hodinkee.

You have a whole forum here dedicated to all things UG that is open to everyone.
If uncertain or if there is ambiguity, just ask ....

 

...before publication.

 

...IMO, dealers coming here with no intent of giving anything back to the community and only wishing to cash in on the knowledge accumulated on OF can bugger right off. Don't feel different when it's Hodinkee, far from it.

If they want to make money out of this, they better do the research. But hey, it's not like I could give any reasonable advice regard UG anyway, so knock yourself out - it's you guys spending your times pouring money into their pockets

 

How do you know he's not a forum member? I think it a fine thing that Dean's critique is responded to so quickly by a widely read blog. Its not the first time either. This is why OF is so respected.

 

What do you mean? He is a forum member! His post is right above the ones I quoted

Have a look at his post activity... What is the purpose of his membership? Apparently to respond to posts concerning at Hodinkee articles/goods.

And I know that it isn't the first time a dealer has responded to critique coming from here, nor should it.

 

Point taken ...How do you know if this is just his professional avatar? Perhaps he has multiple identities!

 

He is not selling the watch in question...he is simply a reporter.

 

speaking of the watch...I'm surprised it didn't sell for more. It looks like under the scratched crystal its a very nice example of a hard to find reference.

 

Where did I say he did?

Also - "a reporter"? For which news outlet? Oh, you mean he writes content for Hodinkee, the vintage watch dealership and watch accessory store...

 

you said in the first post:

He is not a dealer....the company he works for sells watches, but there is a difference. Im not sure why there is so much hate for Hodinkee.

BTW- gone are the days of "news outlets" being the only "reporters.

 

I'm sorry, but the difference here is that they are not making actual money from that particular sale - the are a dealership and articles such as the one quoted in the OP is a vehicle for building their reputation as vintage watch specialists, thus justifying high prices. It works, too. But it is a BUSINESS, not some random enthusiasts doing all the work in their spare time - it is for MONEY, don't be fooled.

It has nothing to do with Hodinkee in particular, I treat all dealers cashing in on others help and advice equally.

And Cajun, sorry, but the part you quoted did in no say that they were selling the watch - I said that they were dealers.

 

I struggle a bit with this logical line - at what point does one become a "dealer"; and, if one is a dealer, does that designation follow them around to any and all content they post or are involved with?

For example, if a member of this forum has learned a great deal about Speedmasters, much of it by reading and retaining information from this site and its members, and is able to build a collection of great Speedmasters which they occasionally sell for a profit, are they a "dealer"? They've built knowledge on the back of this site and are using that knowledge to buy low and, sometimes, sell high(er)....

In this instance, the writer at the site in question came on this forum and owned their mistake... what more should they be doing?

In my business dealings IRL I've gained a skill set by reading, watching and following the example of other professionals in my field, and use that skill set for the purposes of making money. I'm a dealer of my skills for personal profit. And I sure as hell make mistakes - when I do, I try my best to be accountable for them. That's the nature of business and, to some extent, life...

This is a public forum, accessible to any and all. Collectors, dealers and any other interested parties. If members would like to keep their (considerable) knowledge private and/or inaccessible to certain parties or classes of readers, then this is likely the wrong setting for expressing their thoughts.

Hodinkee seems to have become "the man" on many watch forums - a lightning rod for criticism. They're the ESPN of the watch world. They're certainly not perfect and their regular puff pieces (see their recent article about the abominable James Bond Seamaster) are annoying but I still read their site and am, on the balance, very much happy that they're around for my consumption.

I don't really see an issue here - either with the OP calling them out for getting something wrong, with their accountability in this thread or with their position in the watch world and interaction with this forum. They have every right to post about vintage watches, sell vintage watches, etc. And posters here and elsewhere have every right to call them out if they make a mistake. There's no wronged party and I respect the writer for their public mea culpa.

My $0.02...

 

If you don't follow the "logical line", it is because you failed to read my initial post - what I reacted to is the members offering free advice in the future for a dealership, which in return offers nothing back to this community. This is exactly what we time after time deal with when new members pop up, ask for advice and then leave again after one or two posts. Only in this case, Hodinkee (in this case) does it for money. Funny how the one-posters get a lot of bad press, but that people will willingly help dealers. I never said anything negative about them ammending the piece.


Read what I posted here:

You guys are free to do whatever you want, but you are only helping someone else making money. I, for my part, spend a fair bit of time replying to newbies on this forum, both in threads and in PMs, and hope to make this place more attractive and give newcomers a better chance of fending for themselves in the hobby. For this I charge $0. If someone wants to make money out of my hobby with my help they better pay for it - @sjg22, I bet that in your professional life you want your clients to pay you too, right? I bet that if they told you that they weren't going to pay you anything for your services that they'll profit from, you'll decline to work for them, right?

I agree completely with you that it is a fine line between hobby and business and I just go by my gut feeling. If I sell someone a watch and that gets flipped literally* just after reception for a huge profit, I'd put that guy firmly in the "in it for the money" camp. Yes, I have experienced that, as have a number of other members.

As for Hodinkee being a Prügelknabe, I don't think that they get more stick than other dealers. It just comes with the spotlight. I, for my part, don't think they are worse than other dealers, but I don't like the way they run the community and don't care for most of the content and tone of the pieces of watch journalism.

Hodinkee the salesmen : just another dealer.
Rest of Hodinkee : not my cup of tea.




*sorry for the correct use of "literally", I am sure it will cause some confusion.

 

I (lawyer) absolutely expect payment from my clients because that's part of our contractual agreement.

You, in posting your opinions and knowledge in an open and free forum, clearly have no expectation of payment.

Sorry, analogy doesn't work.

 

Okay, let me put it this way: are you fine with people using your free consulting to build their business and earn money? If so, go ahead. I am not. Which I already stated in my first post.

What I post on this forum I do for the benefit of the community, not for someone wishing to cash in on my knowledge.

 

I think you are making way too much out of this. For one Hodinkee has provided useful info to me as a collector.
The article in question is a regular feature that started way before they sold watches. Are you suggesting the author wrote this piece to deliberately inflate the prices so that they could benefit by featuring a Nina in next months listing?

So if the parent company of the Tribune also owns a coffee shop...should we ignore all articles on coffee in the Tribune because they are written to ultimately increase the cost of a cup of coffee? What about ABC...should we assume all articles or news stories on Star Wars were written to promote that franchise and otherwise have no value? There is clearly a line here...but to suggest that Hodinkee is crossing it specifically to inflate its own sales is a bit much. If you have any concerns speak with your wallet and don't buy from them.

Back to the OP's topic...I do find it quite disappointing that the author used a reseller as a source of his facts. It seems his research was seriously lacking. Thats what we should be discussing here.