- Posts
- 3,243
- Likes
- 7,711
issue with UG for sale here
- Posts
- 3,243
- Likes
- 7,711
bgrisso
·I would, respectfully, call you crazy 😁
Unless someone explicitly claims the dial is original, I would instead assume only that the diligence is up to you.
This point, by the way, being a separate if not unrelated to the point from this thread’s current discussion.
I completely disagree, as far I am concerned redials should be disclosed, again I am extremely surprised to see the disagreement this has created, I thought these general forum values and conventions were widely agreed upon and shared
- Posts
- 9,053
- Likes
- 46,931
gbesq
·I think that the concern would have been better handled, at least initially, via PM. For all I know, that was done here. If it was and the concern wasn't addressed by the seller to the OP's satisfaction, then perhaps it's appropriate to make it the topic of a post viewable by all members. That being said, one can certainly argue that it was none of the OP's business unless he was buying the watch. My own view is that while there is no requirement to disclose a redial -- or any other flaws -- that a given watch has, why wouldn't you do it, particularly if you intend to sell in the future? It takes a long time to build a good reputation, but not very long at all to lose it. I'm not in any way implying that the seller here was disingenuous in any way, but I do think that it's always better to be completely upfront about the condition of whatever you're selling.
- Posts
- 515
- Likes
- 3,169
Joe_A
·I don't know anything about vintage UG watches.
The dial looks like it could pass for an original . . . to someone who knows very little about vintage UG watches. It looks aged and it even has age spots!
Assuming that the watch dial was redone, is this an example of an old redial or a recent redial deliberately made to look old, and therefore to deceive?.
How do the knowledgeable among us know that the dial has been redone?
I've learned, so far, never to buy a vintage UG watch that hasn't been vetted here. 😉
What else should have have learned?
The dial looks like it could pass for an original . . . to someone who knows very little about vintage UG watches. It looks aged and it even has age spots!
Assuming that the watch dial was redone, is this an example of an old redial or a recent redial deliberately made to look old, and therefore to deceive?.
How do the knowledgeable among us know that the dial has been redone?
I've learned, so far, never to buy a vintage UG watch that hasn't been vetted here. 😉
What else should have have learned?
- Posts
- 3,979
- Likes
- 8,987
cvalue13
·I completely disagree, as far I am concerned redials should be disclosed, again I am extremely surprised to see the disagreement this has created, I thought these general forum values and conventions were widely agreed upon and shared
With all due respect, I was responding not to any suggestion that “redials should be disclosed.”
I was instead responding to @TheGreekPhysique ’s “expectation” that for “listings on this forum … the dial is original unless otherwise stated.”
Those are two quite different things, thank you.
Like you, I would hope that a person selling a watch would disclose a known redial; but unlike @TheGreekPhysique I would not be so foolish to think that a seller’s silence on the originality of the dial is somehow a guarantee of originality.
- Posts
- 12,588
- Likes
- 16,985
gatorcpa
··ΩF InvestiGatorI completely disagree, as far I am concerned redials should be disclosed, again I am extremely surprised to see the disagreement this has created, I thought these general forum values and conventions were widely agreed upon and shared
By this discussion, at least the people who read this thread will know differently.
If you are that concerned about it, you can contact the seller politely by PM, express your concerns in private and if the seller responds in a negative matter, contact the moderation team.
gatorcpa
- Posts
- 3,243
- Likes
- 7,711
bgrisso
·You are assuming that the seller knows this and is deliberately not disclosing a material fact. I’m not sure that is correct. It is not the responsibility of a seller to know every fact about every watch.
By this discussion, at least the people who read this thread will know differently.
If you are that concerned about it, you can contact the seller politely by PM, express your concerns in private and if the seller responds in a negative matter, contact the moderation team.
gatorcpa
As per my original post, I'm not assuming the seller knows this is a redial, and the first thing I did was contact the mods, and follow their instructions.
Probably the last time I will do either of those things.
sheesh 🙄
- Posts
- 1,576
- Likes
- 3,768
- Posts
- 515
- Likes
- 3,169
Joe_A
·The thread has been somewhat educational, but it could have been a lot better.
Have I missed the part where someone explained how one can recognize that the dial is a redial even while flying overhead in a plane?
Maybe the seller can learn something as well?
Have I missed the part where someone explained how one can recognize that the dial is a redial even while flying overhead in a plane?
Maybe the seller can learn something as well?
- Posts
- 148
- Likes
- 469
TheRealMe
·Took the words right out of my mouth.
As per my original post, I'm not assuming the seller knows this is a redial, and the first thing I did was contact the mods, and follow their instructions.
Probably the last time I will do either of those things.
sheesh 🙄
Please continue to make posts such as this. I don’t feel your post was controversial at all.
You might have saved someone from making a purchase they will ultimatel regret.
- Posts
- 1,204
- Likes
- 5,262
iamvr
·redials are quietly bought and sold here everyday
You‘re attacking the OP for a legit thread while making a claim that undisclosed redials change hands here everyday. If your expertise goes that far to spot all these redials I wish you‘d take @bgrisso ‘s approach and share your knowledge with everyone rather than keeping it for yourself.
- Posts
- 8,888
- Likes
- 28,353
tyrantlizardrex
·
As someone who has been around a long time and tends to ogle the watches that come up for sale, I would argue that redials (disclosed or not) are the exception rather that the rule.
Most of us don’t want to own redialled watches, most of us don’t buy redialled watches, and as a result there aren’t a large proportion of redialled watches getting sold through this forum.
- Posts
- 6,878
- Likes
- 12,927
Evitzee
·As someone who has been around a long time and tends to ogle the watches that come up for sale, I would argue that redials (disclosed or not) are the exception rather that the rule.
Most of us don’t want to own redialled watches, most of us don’t buy redialled watches, and as a result there aren’t a large proportion of redialled watches getting sold through this forum.
If the mods think disclosure of a redialled watch should be disclosed in the sales post then they should make that a requirement for all watches. But you can't regulate all risk out of the sales process.
- Posts
- 9,868
- Likes
- 47,084
Walrus
·Well that’s a darn good redial I mean I’d wear it.
- Posts
- 13,021
- Likes
- 51,954
Larry S
··Color Commentator for the Hyperbole.Good job @bgrisso, you followed OF protocol and provided a correct Watch for comparison. On occasion I have PM’d a seller over issues with a sales post. I have also discussed watches for sale here via PM. That said, it is entirely appropriate to discuss a watch for sale here in a separate thread. I’ve done it and it wasn’t fun but it was necessary because the seller wasn’t backing down. Lots of folks go to great lengths to make OF a resource to build knowledge and buy/sell well. Regarding UG, we have have some “robust” dial debates here. They always add to the knowledge base. Would you rather have some newbie buy this watch on what is supposed to be a safe forum, post his/her new treasure only to be presented with bad news? Believe me, that scenario is far more fraught than this.
Edited:
- Posts
- 8,888
- Likes
- 28,353
tyrantlizardrex
·That's true, but not really germane to this discussion. There are no restrictions on anyone selling a watch that has been redialled.
There was a very angry member close to the beginning of this thread making claims that "redials are quietly bought and sold here everyday", and as a result angry that this thread had been created.
I thought it was worth setting the record straight.
- Posts
- 891
- Likes
- 3,672
TheGreekPhysique
·With all due respect, I was responding not to any suggestion that “redials should be disclosed.”
I was instead responding to @TheGreekPhysique ’s “expectation” that for “listings on this forum … the dial is original unless otherwise stated.”
Those are two quite different things, thank you.
Like you, I would hope that a person selling a watch would disclose a known redial; but unlike @TheGreekPhysique I would not be so foolish to think that a seller’s silence on the originality of the dial is somehow a guarantee of originality.
I apologize for the wording as it seemed to have caused some confusion based on your interpretation. I should have prefaced my comment with a statement that obviously the onus for authenticity is on the buyer and, as it goes especially with regards to vintage watches, the buyer must do their homework. I just figured that was just a given by now.
Concerning my "expectation" statement that was more referring to my opinion of this forum and the members within it. My expectation is that if the seller does not describe the dial as being "repainted", "refinished" or any other synonym that than, in their eyes, its an original dial. If a seller does not believe the dial to be original and chooses to not disclose it in their listing than that is an attempt to deceive in my opinion. I would not "expect" that from members on this forum.
I see nothing wrong with that expectation. Although, as expectations go, they sometimes are not reality.
- Posts
- 9,868
- Likes
- 47,084
Walrus
·I apologize for the wording as it seemed to have caused some confusion based on your interpretation. I should have prefaced my comment with a statement that obviously the onus for authenticity is on the buyer and, as it goes especially with regards to vintage watches, the buyer must do their homework. I just figured that was just a given by now.
Concerning my "expectation" statement that was more referring to my opinion of this forum and the members within it. My expectation is that if the seller does not describe the dial as being "repainted", "refinished" or any other synonym that than, in their eyes, its an original dial. If a seller does not believe the dial to be original and chooses to not disclose it in their listing than that is an attempt to deceive in my opinion. I would not "expect" that from members on this forum.
I see nothing wrong with that expectation. Although, as expectations go, they sometimes are not reality.
- Posts
- 3,979
- Likes
- 8,987
cvalue13
·If a seller does not believe the dial to be original and chooses to not disclose it in their listing than that is an attempt to deceive in my opinion.
I get the point, and sympathize with it. I personally have no problem with the OPs post, which I think was very carefully crafted to avoid several potential pitfalls.
Separately and moving on, or back, to your point quoted above:
If a seller doesn’t believe the watch has been serviced in decades, is it a requirement or dishonest if they fail to specify that in the copy of their sale posting?
If a seller believes hands are service replacements, is it a requirement or dishonest if they fail to specify that in the copy of their sale posting?
If a seller believes the case has been polished to a butter-turd, is it a requirement or dishonest if they fail to specify that in the copy of their sale posting?
Or perhaps equally to the point, if a seller is either relatively new and/or dealing with a relatively ‘fickle’ (let’s call it) brand/era of watches, and has no actual attention for whether the watch has been serviced, has replacement hands, and has been polished to a butter-turd, what is the forum to do with such a posting?
I have a sense that a few ounces of hesitation expressed in this thread come from a vague wonder if just anyone could and/or should create responsive threads of critiques of for-sale postings to cover any number of issues a watch might have?
This OP, this watch, and this OPs carefully crafted thread might by reasonably be viewed as a rare instance where it went ok to have such a thread critiquing the copy of a sales thread.
I sympathize with most of the views expressed in this thread, including those that are contradictory.
At the end of the day, I’m just following the thread with curiosity and have no strong feeling either way.
- Posts
- 20,698
- Likes
- 47,551
Dan S
·We have one thread on one issue about one watch, I don't see a need for extrapolation to other issues, or speculation about a slippery slope. If we start to see a proliferation of improper threads, we can address that at that time.
