Possible help for first time watch purchase

jeffwinger23 · Thurs. 9:46pm

I’ve been looking into buying an older De Ville for a few months now and finally pulled the trigger on one from a japanese seller on ebay (CLOSER), but it’s arrived and i’m not 100% sure if it’s authentic? the seller had great reviews and the watch looked authentic (to an incredibly untrained eye, of course, but through comparisons with other watches i found online from the same time), but i was hoping someone could give me some guidance on this, or tell me if there’s somewhere i can possibly get this checked out in person. below are a couple of images of the watch:

my main source of concern is the off-centre number on the back, is this normal for these models?

thank you for the help!

ErichKeane · Thurs. 9:52pm

Do you know the reference number it is supposed to be? My best guess is a 196.2532, which looks about right?

I looked through a couple of photos of them, and the serial number isn't particularly consistent on all of them?
See:
https://marketplace.watchcharts.com...532-cal-1532-qz-33mm-yg-ss-gold-dial-tone-men
https://www.ebay.com/itm/167935887875

That said, unless jpeg compression is killing it pretty bad, that back Deville logo looks inconsistent with what I've seen. I'd suggest removing the case back and looking at the movement to see if it is what it should be.

jeffwinger23 · Thurs. 10:12pm

ErichKeane
Do you know the reference number it is supposed to be? My best guess is a 196.2532, which looks about right?

I looked through a couple of photos of them, and the serial number isn't particularly consistent on all of them?
See:
https://marketplace.watchcharts.com...532-cal-1532-qz-33mm-yg-ss-gold-dial-tone-men
https://www.ebay.com/itm/167935887875

That said, unless jpeg compression is killing it pretty bad, that back Deville logo looks inconsistent with what I've seen. I'd suggest removing the case back and looking at the movement to see if it is what it should be.

the original listing has the ref as 7824.31.01, but i was having trouble finding watches with that number and was instead going by the year indicated by the serial number to find similar models. looks like the one you linked was correct and the one provided by the seller was wrong, which is why i wasn’t getting results (sketchy already).

is there something specific about the logo you think looks off? i’ve looked through the links you provided (thank you for your help, btw!) and maybe i’m not noticing what you are? here’s another couple of images of the back that are hopefully be a bit clearer

also, is opening up the back something i’d take it to a jeweller for?

JimInOz · Thurs. 10:13pm

Looks OK, the Manhattan "De Ville" logo in the first pictures may just be subject to distortion as Erich noted.
Just open it and confirm the movement and you'll rest easy.

Edit: Looks fine to me and Closer0924 is a pretty solid seller.

JimInOz · Thurs. 10:17pm

J jeffwinger23
opening up the back something i’d take it to a jeweller for?

a watchmaker, not a jeweller. But it look fine to me so probably not worth the hassle.

ErichKeane · Thurs. 10:17pm

The logo seems 'flat' to me? All of the ones I see online have a more 'rounded' shape to the embossing, and the 'deVille' word is a bit 'thin' on yours, most seem to be a bit thicker. But I could be over-analyzing, photos aren't great, and not having a perfect idea of when this came out/what the logo is SUPPOSED to look at makes it tougher. I don't have much personal experience with the Quartz Omegas unfortunately (for this conversation!).

Opening the case back is pretty easy, basically any jeweler that can change a battery can do it. If you photograph the inside of the case back + the movement, we'll be able to confirm the reference number better too.

ErichKeane · Thurs. 10:21pm

JimInOz
a watchmaker, not a jeweller. But it look fine to me so probably not worth the hassle.

I'm coming along on this now. I've not been able to find any fakes of this model out there, so I'm leaning towards the slight differences in serial number placement (I've seen ~4 different placements now) and logo design are just a matter of not comparing to the exact models.

jeffwinger23 · Thurs. 11:40pm

JimInOz
a watchmaker, not a jeweller. But it look fine to me so probably not worth the hassle.

thank you for the help! if i were to open it up regardless (just to be 100%), is there something specific i’d be looking for? would the watchmaker know what to look for?

edit: read over the other comments and this was answered, please disregard.

jeffwinger23 · Thurs. 11:42pm

ErichKeane
I'm coming along on this now. I've not been able to find any fakes of this model out there, so I'm leaning towards the slight differences in serial number placement (I've seen ~4 different placements now) and logo design are just a matter of not comparing to the exact models.

i may just decide to open it up and check anyway but thank you for your help! really appreciate the reassurance. i may update with a picture of the movement at some point in the future but thank you for taking the time!

Davidt · Fri. 1:01am

It looks genuine to me but when people think of an older DeVille, they usually mean a 166.020 or similar.
If you like this wqtxh that’s fine, but if you’re looking for a 60’s or early 70’s DeVille, this isn’t one of those.

JimInOz · Fri. 1:05am

J jeffwinger23
is there something specific i’d be looking for?

A caliber 1532.

padders · Fri. 2:51am

This is an utterly genuine but also utterly unremarkable quartz piece from the 1990s. Not one to get collectors hearts racing but nothing at all suggests it’s not legit.

The number on the back is not off centre, it is just that the back has been snapped back on not quite aligned North to South. Look at the brush lines and you will see what I mean.

Archer · Fri. 9:59am

It's fine...

Serial number: 58230245
Article ref: 78242101

jeffwinger23 · Fri. 10:37am

thank you everyone for your help!

ErichKeane · Fri. 10:43am

Archer
It's fine...

Serial number: 58230245
Article ref: 78242101

Ah! Looks like the seller's version of 7824.31.01 was almost there! Actually a 7824.21.01. So me getting the incorrect reference number explains the inconsistencies I was worried about (I saw an inconsistency in printing of the serial number as well, plus the location up/down, but the seal was the one that was throwing me the most).

BUT Archer looking up serial + ref matching (for some reason, fakers never bother to get them to match?), you should have no doubt.

Archer · Fri. 11:03am

ErichKeane
BUT Archer looking up serial + ref matching (for some reason, fakers never bother to get them to match?), you should have no doubt.

I have no yet ever had a fake with the right serial number for the model - I can't say it's not possible, but as you say usually they are pointing to a completely different model.

ErichKeane · Fri. 11:05am

Archer
I have no yet ever had a fake with the right serial number for the model - I can't say it's not possible, but as you say usually they are pointing to a completely different model.

Yep. Exactly! I guess I don't understand why they are willing to put in so much other effort to scam folks, but "go to a store to try on the real thing, then look at the serial number" is never something they bother with.

I realize when selling on the street it isn't particularly relevant, but when any OB/AD could look this up for you when buying online...

Possible help for first time watch purchase

jeffwinger23

ErichKeane

jeffwinger23

JimInOz

JimInOz

ErichKeane

ErichKeane

jeffwinger23

jeffwinger23

Davidt

JimInOz

padders

Archer

jeffwinger23

ErichKeane

Archer

ErichKeane

Similar threads

Spitfire flies for first time in 55 years.

First Time Watch - Planet Ocean 43,5mm Blue - is this legit?

Considerations for first watch purchase

First Time Watch Buyer - Need Some Help

Quality Control Checklist for New Watch Purchases - Please Add Thoughts

Advice for a first time watch buyer