Is this watch a Seamaster?

Syrte

@Kafue welcome to the forum. For all of @kafue’s claims about having done extensive research on other watches, it’s obvious the OP is completely unexperienced— bidding on a crappy watch without asking for more pictures or for size confirmation, not knowing the size of vintage watches, or even realizing this was not a Seamaster.
And in most Western countries, auction houses as professionals have a duty to describe items in ways that are not misleading. In this instance there is a complete misdescription of the item as a Seamaster which is arguably a more valuable model. Whether or not that was his main motivation, that doesn’t matter. If it were a Seamaster he would be able to resell it at a certain price which he cannot. End of story.

I even bet material errors in description which impact the value of the item may be listed in the terms of the auction house, which the OP should read.

don’t know what all that moralistic stuff is all about.

what country are we talking about where this would pose a problem?

Dan S

Sorry, but this is not a reasonable analysis in my opinion. If you want to know the size of a watch at an auction, you either have to go measure it yourself or ask the auction house. If they don't give you an answer, then don't bid. It's not their fault if you make assumptions based on the size of the box and bracelet. And for the OP to claim that their photos were deceptive is just silly. Photos are photos, you can't tell the size of a watch from a photo.

The Seamaster part is a separate issue, and the auction house appears to have made a mistake. In my view, it's not truly a serious mistake, since the photos clearly show it's a crappy watch? However, technically their description was wrong.

Shabbaz

It's just a general OF thread. Somebody introduces a new watch, people start debating it, then get into a fight, people trying to be funny, eventually we'll see a picture of a cat and everbody drives happily back home after a hard day of work.

Waltesefalcon

I speak as a former mechanic at a shop that specialized in British sports cars so I have a bit of experience here as well. A 100/6 and a 3000 are two different models. The 100/6 replaced the 100 in 56 or 57 and the 3000 replaced the the 100/6 in 59. There are some overall similarities between the two models but the 3000 had a completely different engine and disc brakes up front. If your buddy built a 3 liter powered 100/6 that is exactly what it would be a "3 liter powered 100/6" not a "3000 Austin Healey 6 cylinder 100-6." It might just be a matter of semantics to you, but when it comes right down to it so is the size of the Omega in question when we talk about men's vs. women's sizes. This watch is obviously a men's watch, just on the small side for your tastes.

Syrte

@Kafue welcome to the forum. For all of @kafue’s claims about having done extensive research on other watches, it’s obvious the OP is completely inexperienced— bidding on a crappy watch without asking for more pictures or for size confirmation, not knowing the size of vintage watches, or even realizing this was not a Seamaster.
And in most Western countries, auction houses as professionals have a duty to describe items in ways that are not misleading. In this instance there is a complete misdescription of the item as a Seamaster which is arguably a more valuable model. Whether or not that was his main motivation, that doesn’t matter. If it were a Seamaster he would be able to resell it at a certain price which he cannot. End of story.

I even bet material errors in description which impact the value of the item may be listed in the terms of the auction house, which the OP should read.

don’t know what all that moralistic stuff is all about.

what country are we talking about where this would pose a problem?

Engee

I’m not an experienced buyer so without some item to reference the watch against I’d struggle to know the size. It looks to be of an appropriate size in proportion to the box and the bracelet is six links across. The Connie on my wrist now has a five link across bracelet so to my mind it could easily be a man’s watch. Add to that the rather unhelpful behaviour of the auction house refusing to allow the OP to examine or photograph the watch and the case is, at best, disputable as to who is at fault.

But all of this is not really relevant. None of us can know the OPs motivation for coming on here and so whether you feel he is being disingenuous or not, surely the options are to either treat his post at face value or ignore it?

He asked whether people thought, as he was led to believe, if it’s a Seamaster. Where this dispute lands on the spectrum of Buyer Beware -> misrepresentation is not for any of us to decide. The OP is simply seeking truth. If it is a Seamaster than he is lumbered with a watch he doesn’t want, and if it isn’t he may decide to pursue a case of mis-selling. That’s up to him. Whether any of us think he has a legitimate case is neither here nor there.

I like to see the best in others. I try not to assess people from a cynical perspective. I’d much rather believe the OP is genuine rather than trying somehow to con us into thinking something that isn’t true. If we take that approach then people will get the help they are asking for, and if any expert could give an answer but is suspicious of the poster they‘re not obliged to contribute.

Where's the value in 4 pages of argument about it?

Shabbaz

Ok. If you give me that Austin Healey 3000 I will sue that auction house to bankruptcy. The hell with them. They will never know what hit them. If we win I'll take the watch as well. How does that sound?

K Kafue

I wish I could share a lot more of my personal details with some of you

janice&fred

with all due respect what's the biggie? Even though i'm a double secret agent super spy I can post my pics and our real names on multiple watch forums for over a decade and no one spilled the beans yet!

janice&fred

well with that much worry on your part and with your complete conviction to your position it's curious that you would post about it in the first place. it sure seems like a whole lotta headache for a piece you said you paid only a bit more than it's scrap value. Why not simply pick the thing up and scrap it, and put the entire matter to rest? Having to worry about being identified and all the cloak and dagger doesn't seem worth it. Just my opinion.

VetPsychWars

There's no point to this whole thread except "I have regrets and how do I get out of it?"

I side with "suck it up". I also have bought things I didn't pay attention to and have regretted. Didn't piss and moan about it, either, it was more "aw shit, I didn't pay attention AGAIN."

Tom