- Posts
- 10,888
- Likes
- 53,872
Walrus
·I don’t want to enter the drama but if the watch was listed by the auction house as a seamaster which it wasn’t I’d say that’s reasonable grounds to take some action
Is this watch a Seamaster?
- Posts
- 1,542
- Likes
- 3,354
Engee
·Advice to OP - Man up; Stop expecting others to take responsibility for your decisions and outcomes; Let things go when the line is blurry; Get your story straight when you want sympathy. If all you wanted was the strap, as has come out in your recent post, why did you reject it? Principle? What principles - refer to the auction house’s terms and conditions. Geez, harsh I know, but seriously, if you don’t want the strap because the size turned out wrong, how is that their, Visa’s or your bank’s fault?
Great stories there, thank you. But the "man up" bit is curious. I could argue that he is "manning up" if I were to use such archaic notions, by fighting back. Maybe the people who meekly take it on the chin are the ones who are the "snowflakes" here. Language like this doesn't help, especially in the light of the fact that we're talking about ways of dealing with things that confront us, where there is no right or wrong, just different.
You obviously have a lot of experience of auction houses. No doubt then you are aware that they are often being pulled up for unethical behaviour - collusion, low valuation then buying items, etc, - so they are not exactly innocents in the process. But more specifically, what's your opinion of the situation, such as this, where an auction house encourages remote bidding where they know that bidders may not be able to examine the item in person. Do you think that presenting your business as an international auction house, along with the sort of disclaimer you mention in your thread, is reasonable business practice?
Ebay allows sellers to auction items on a no return basis, but that excludes misrepresentation. Why should other auctioneers not be subjected to the same conditions?
- Posts
- 16,305
- Likes
- 45,005
JwRosenthal
·We have all made foolish choices in this hobby, it's part of the learning curve. It is up to the buyer to be educated in any transaction and the seller to be honest in their representation- I think we had a failure here on both parts, the OP has admitted as much. As has been suggested before, I think this thread has been an interesting commentary on how different people handle conflict. There really is no right or wrong answer here just a matter of perspective.
If the OP wants to pursue the matter based on the misrepresentation of the item, then that is his prerogative- insulting or demeaning him isn't helpful. I think @Omegerd was helpful (until the last paragraph) providing insight on the disposition and obligation of small live auction houses and the terms under which they operate.
I would personally walk away from this one (and claim the watch as it is already paid for) and take it as a learning experience- but I don't fault @Kafue for pursuing the matter over the misrepresentation- it is his money, it is his time, it is his choice.
If the OP wants to pursue the matter based on the misrepresentation of the item, then that is his prerogative- insulting or demeaning him isn't helpful. I think @Omegerd was helpful (until the last paragraph) providing insight on the disposition and obligation of small live auction houses and the terms under which they operate.
I would personally walk away from this one (and claim the watch as it is already paid for) and take it as a learning experience- but I don't fault @Kafue for pursuing the matter over the misrepresentation- it is his money, it is his time, it is his choice.
Edited:
- Posts
- 16,305
- Likes
- 45,005
JwRosenthal
·I think it also needs stating- many of the members here that started poking at you @Kafue were being cheeky initially, these same people are known to be very friendly and also like the slap & tickle from time to time. I understand you are in a new environment and feeling raw over the experience- but I think you jumped to the defensive very quickly and didn’t quite read the room. I hope you stick around and become part of the community and enjoy the kinship we have here over the love or watches- all watches, not just omega.
And nice Healey BTW.
And nice Healey BTW.
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
janice&fred
·oh I agree with what you say jaydubbya, but how could the OP have initiated this thread expecting overwhelming sympathy to his situation? His foul language towards differing opinions and obvious tongue-in-cheek jokes and raging "black and white" viewpoints towards relatively minor setbacks like purchasing this watch, along with his complete conviction to his stance makes one wonder if this entire thread was merely posted to cause raging debate. He has made it abundantly clear he is going to continue to fight rather than accept the mistakes he made himself in this purchase. Obviously this thread was not started in earnest with his title asking if the watch was a seamaster. He even seen the watch case back wasn't marked as one. this thread was to debate a moot subject as he clearly has already made up his mind not to follow thru with the transaction.
- Posts
- 5,001
- Likes
- 18,563
Shabbaz
·We have all made foolish choices in this hobby, it's part of the learning curve. It is up to the buyer to be educated in any transaction and the seller to be honest in their representation- I think we had a failure here on both parts, the OP has admitted as much. As has been suggested before, I think this thread has been an interesting commentary on how different people handle conflict. There really is no right or wrong answer here just a matter of perspective.
If the OP wants to pursue the matter based on the misrepresentation of the item, then that is his prerogative- insulting or demeaning him isn't helpful. I think @Omegerd was helpful (until the last paragraph) providing insight on the disposition and obligation of small live auction houses and the terms under which they operate.
I would personally walk away from this one (and claim the watch as it is already paid for) and take it as a learning experience- but I don't fault @Kafue for pursuing the matter over the misrepresentation- it is his money, it is his time, it is his choice.
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
janice&fred
·so remind me again what you were trying to accomplish in this thread? As a friendly tip, and as I and the majority of members have suggested, and according to you your own wife said the same, you might want to let this go. Surely this kind of unhealthy determination is going beyond rational thought. Heck you even tried to stick Visa with the tab to weasel out of paying for the thing. So what happened to that "right vs wrong" glorious fit of virtue signaling that you and engee droned on about?
- Posts
- 10,543
- Likes
- 16,486
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Pay the noob tax and move on. Everything else is just sound and fury. And cat pics.
- Posts
- 56
- Likes
- 27
Kafue
·We have all made foolish choices in this hobby, it's part of the learning curve. It is up to the buyer to be educated in any transaction and the seller to be honest in their representation- I think we had a failure here on both parts, the OP has admitted as much. As has been suggested before, I think this thread has been an interesting commentary on how different people handle conflict. There really is no right or wrong answer here just a matter of perspective.
If the OP wants to pursue the matter based on the misrepresentation of the item, then that is his prerogative- insulting or demeaning him isn't helpful. I think @Omegerd was helpful (until the last paragraph) providing insight on the disposition and obligation of small live auction houses and the terms under which they operate.
I would personally walk away from this one (and claim the watch as it is already paid for) and take it as a learning experience- but I don't fault @Kafue for pursuing the matter over the misrepresentation- it is his money, it is his time, it is his choice.
It is so interesting to read the responses that refer to things such as "Man Up" or "Take a F*****G" or similar.
How a commercial transaction which has laws to protect both sides of the same, can be translated by some into a show of "Manhood or Toughness or Maturity" is very interesting. You have to wonder why these persons are challenged in their own souls to bluster & proclaim their "strength, character or manhood" in a basic issue by puffing out their chests..
.
Statements like "Nooby Tax" are spot on, as is "if you want to challenge it, you're crazy, but it's your time & money". The rest...interesting!
- Posts
- 56
- Likes
- 27
Kafue
·Hi All,
For an update:
The auction house has agreed to refund the purchase price if I can prove the watch is not a Seamaster.
So I have taken the watch to a well known watch repairer, then taken some photos of the movement & the case. I sent these photos to another watchmaker who is a few hours drive away. Plus I then took the watch to a watch dealer who is also very well known.
All of them have confirmed that the Omega is not a Seamaster.
I then went back to the auction people, explained this to them & showed them emails regarding this.
They told me they would now go to the vendor & my funds would be credited.
That was a week ago.
Today I received an email from them saying that the vendor will find "provide certification that its an omega seamaster "
Just what else could I have expected!
Have included some photos for your opinions.
Any watchmakers on this Forum who want to give their opinions?
For an update:
The auction house has agreed to refund the purchase price if I can prove the watch is not a Seamaster.
So I have taken the watch to a well known watch repairer, then taken some photos of the movement & the case. I sent these photos to another watchmaker who is a few hours drive away. Plus I then took the watch to a watch dealer who is also very well known.
All of them have confirmed that the Omega is not a Seamaster.
I then went back to the auction people, explained this to them & showed them emails regarding this.
They told me they would now go to the vendor & my funds would be credited.
That was a week ago.
Today I received an email from them saying that the vendor will find "provide certification that its an omega seamaster "
Just what else could I have expected!
Have included some photos for your opinions.
Any watchmakers on this Forum who want to give their opinions?
- Posts
- 13,483
- Likes
- 31,785
X350 XJR
··Vintage Omega AficionadoIt's still not nor ever was a Seamaster.
- Posts
- 18,201
- Likes
- 37,965
JimInOz
··Melbourne AustraliaLooks like a 9CT locally cased example (of "not a Seamaster"), but the pictures are badly focussed so I can't tell for sure.
The "belt/garter" Omega symbol in the caseback looks to be too early for a Seamaster, as does the caliber.
I can't see the caliber (under the balance?) and I can't see the serial number which could date the movement.
Much better photos are needed for me to identify exactly what it is.
But I know what it isn't.
The "belt/garter" Omega symbol in the caseback looks to be too early for a Seamaster, as does the caliber.
I can't see the caliber (under the balance?) and I can't see the serial number which could date the movement.
Much better photos are needed for me to identify exactly what it is.
But I know what it isn't.
- Posts
- 1,441
- Likes
- 3,809
killer67
·Any Omega Seamaster variant since it’s inception in 1948 has said “Seamaster” somewhere on the dial so the vendor will have a tough time “certifying” that it’s a SM. To be fair, the vendor may also be untrained in these timepieces but that shouldn’t be a justification for you paying for his/her error/omission even if it’s accidental
You got em on the ropes now mate.
You got em on the ropes now mate.
- Posts
- 1,582
- Likes
- 5,896
bardamu
·So wait for the vendor providing certification that watch is a Seamaster. He will have problems with that.
- Posts
- 1,232
- Likes
- 5,682
Rochete
·Any Omega Seamaster variant since it’s inception in 1948 has said “Seamaster” somewhere on the dial so the vendor will have a tough time “certifying” that it’s a SM. To be fair, the vendor may also be untrained in these timepieces but that shouldn’t be a justification for you paying for his/her error/omission even if it’s accidental
You got em on the ropes now mate.
Not really. Many weren't marked 'Semaster' on dial until at keast 1950.
Still, OP watch is not a Seamaster by any stretch of imagination.
- Posts
- 3,763
- Likes
- 6,395
hoipolloi
·Seamasters must be waterproof, this one is not.
- Posts
- 16,305
- Likes
- 45,005
JwRosenthal
·The only certification they could actually come up with that has any authority is an Extract of Archives from Omega, which will cost them $80
and take weeks- and that will show it is NOT a Seamaster.
....and I have been of the mindset that both sides screwed up, just walk away from it. But now that they’re leaning into it rather than admitting they made a mistake in the listing, after you have gotten 3 verifications that it is not what they claimed, I say fυck them- lean right back. Make them get an extract and prove it’s a seamaster, that shouldn’t be your job considering they made the false claim.
and take weeks- and that will show it is NOT a Seamaster.
....and I have been of the mindset that both sides screwed up, just walk away from it. But now that they’re leaning into it rather than admitting they made a mistake in the listing, after you have gotten 3 verifications that it is not what they claimed, I say fυck them- lean right back. Make them get an extract and prove it’s a seamaster, that shouldn’t be your job considering they made the false claim.
Edited:
- Posts
- 56
- Likes
- 27
Kafue
·Looks like a 9CT locally cased example (of "not a Seamaster"), but the pictures are badly focussed so I can't tell for sure.
The "belt/garter" Omega symbol in the caseback looks to be too early for a Seamaster, as does the caliber.
I can't see the caliber (under the balance?) and I can't see the serial number which could date the movement.
Much better photos are needed for me to identify exactly what it is.
But I know what it isn't.
- Posts
- 56
- Likes
- 27
Kafue
·The only certification they could actually come up with that has any authority is an Extract of Archives from Omega, which will cost them $80
and take weeks- and that will show it is NOT a Seamaster.
....and I have been of the mindset that both sides screwed up, just walk away from it. But now that they’re leaning into it rather than admitting they made a mistake in the listing, after you have gotten 3 verifications that it is not what they claimed, I say fυck them- lean right back. Make them get an extract and prove it’s a seamaster, that shouldn’t be your job considering they made the false claim.
- Posts
- 16,305
- Likes
- 45,005
JwRosenthal
·Now this advice is exactly where I have been at since I first went to collect the watch. What some members here do not want to understand is that I held my end of the bargain & went directly to their office on the day after the auction & paid in full. Sure, I was terribly dissappointed at the size of the watch, mainly because it was the pink gold Omega watch band that I was after to matcg another watch I have. Plus the fact it was a Seamaster, which, & please correct me if I am wrong, put Omega on the map for the next decade.
Similar threads
- Posts
- 7
- Views
- 176
- Posts
- 4
- Views
- 477
- Posts
- 8
- Views
- 178
- Posts
- 10
- Views
- 742
- Posts
- 14
- Views
- 1K
- Posts
- 12
- Views
- 867