- Posts
- 786
- Likes
- 652
Perseus
·TL : DR In my view, as long as a seller is honest about what has/hasn't been done - it really doesn't matter.
Selling of watches that are unserviced
- Posts
- 139
- Likes
- 701
stigmata
·my watchmaker always says to not service watches for the hell of it
he looks at it and puts it on the machine and decides from there!
he looks at it and puts it on the machine and decides from there!
- Posts
- 1,699
- Likes
- 1,654
- Posts
- 24,263
- Likes
- 54,033
Dan S
·I finally made my way through this thread, and the viewpoints are more diverse than I expected. Really interesting reading. Personally, I don't mind buying an unserviced watch, since then I am aware of its need for servicing, and I can have it serviced by a specific watchmaker that I trust. If a stranger advertises a watch as serviced, it may or may not be true, and even if it was serviced, it may have been serviced by a hack.
For context, I currently own roughly 50 vintage wristwatches (not including parts watches and PWs that are mainly display pieces), and I am aware of the service history of all but three of them. That means that I have either had them serviced myself, or I have very convincing evidence from the previous owner, and all have been serviced within the past 8 years, most within 5 years. The three outliers are watches that I have not really committed to keeping, although in one case I have already kept it long enough that I should probably face the facts. It is just my personality to want to maintain mechanical things properly (maybe it's an occupational hazard as a scientist/engineer). I enjoy knowing that my watches are serviced, and it's worth the expense ... to me. But I would not judge anyone for feeling or doing differently. Since I rotate through my watches, each one doesn't really experience a lot of wear and tear, so one might argue that I have overly invested in servicing them. But that's my comfort zone.
I will add one more point here, which actually seems at odds with my comments above. The worst things that have ever happened to my watches have happened during a service. Minor things have occasionally been broken or lost. Sometimes these things just happen because old watches are delicate, e.g. some lume may fall out of old hands or be lost from a plot on a dial. On a few occasions, the watch seemed to be fully functional before a service, and a watchmaker had a great deal of trouble getting it back into that same functional state after a service. On a couple of occasions, the watch never really worked perfectly again, despite multiple attempts, and I ended up selling them as needing repair. I am currently dealing with a situation like that right now, where one watchmaker that I use is really struggling to get a particular chronograph function to work right, and he has had the watch for a year. I have no doubt that these watches are cleaner and better lubricated than before their service, but they are definitely less collectible. This is painful when it happens, but I try to roll with the punches.
For context, I currently own roughly 50 vintage wristwatches (not including parts watches and PWs that are mainly display pieces), and I am aware of the service history of all but three of them. That means that I have either had them serviced myself, or I have very convincing evidence from the previous owner, and all have been serviced within the past 8 years, most within 5 years. The three outliers are watches that I have not really committed to keeping, although in one case I have already kept it long enough that I should probably face the facts. It is just my personality to want to maintain mechanical things properly (maybe it's an occupational hazard as a scientist/engineer). I enjoy knowing that my watches are serviced, and it's worth the expense ... to me. But I would not judge anyone for feeling or doing differently. Since I rotate through my watches, each one doesn't really experience a lot of wear and tear, so one might argue that I have overly invested in servicing them. But that's my comfort zone.
I will add one more point here, which actually seems at odds with my comments above. The worst things that have ever happened to my watches have happened during a service. Minor things have occasionally been broken or lost. Sometimes these things just happen because old watches are delicate, e.g. some lume may fall out of old hands or be lost from a plot on a dial. On a few occasions, the watch seemed to be fully functional before a service, and a watchmaker had a great deal of trouble getting it back into that same functional state after a service. On a couple of occasions, the watch never really worked perfectly again, despite multiple attempts, and I ended up selling them as needing repair. I am currently dealing with a situation like that right now, where one watchmaker that I use is really struggling to get a particular chronograph function to work right, and he has had the watch for a year. I have no doubt that these watches are cleaner and better lubricated than before their service, but they are definitely less collectible. This is painful when it happens, but I try to roll with the punches.
Edited:
- Posts
- 4,043
- Likes
- 13,950
- Posts
- 8,258
- Likes
- 19,449
- Posts
- 1,727
- Likes
- 5,960
GuiltyBoomerang
·Or this one:
- Posts
- 1,727
- Likes
- 5,960
GuiltyBoomerang
·Try running your Toyota for 10 years without service...
Sure works for Seikos and Citizens...
- Posts
- 1,699
- Likes
- 1,654
- Posts
- 2,520
- Likes
- 17,832
airansun
·I finally made my way through this thread, and the viewpoints are more diverse than I expected. Really interesting reading. Personally, I don't mind buying an unserviced watch, since then I am aware of its need for servicing, and I can have it serviced by a specific watchmaker that I trust. If a stranger advertises a watch as serviced, it may or may not be true, and even if it was serviced, it may have been serviced by a hack.
For context, I currently own roughly 50 vintage wristwatches (not including parts watches and PWs that are mainly display pieces), and I am aware of the service history of all but three of them. That means that I have either had them serviced myself, or I have very convincing evidence from the previous owner, and all have been serviced within the past 8 years, most within 5 years. The three outliers are watches that I have not really committed to keeping, although in one case I have already kept it long enough that I should probably face the facts. It is just my personality to want to maintain mechanical things properly (maybe it's an occupational hazard as a scientist/engineer). I enjoy knowing that my watches are serviced, and it's worth the expense ... to me. But I would not judge anyone for feeling or doing differently. Since I rotate through my watches, each one doesn't really experience a lot of wear and tear, so one might argue that I have overly invested in servicing them. But that's my comfort zone.
I will add one more point here, which actually seems at odds with my comments above. The worst things that have ever happened to my watches have happened during a service. Minor things have occasionally been broken or lost. Sometimes these things just happen because old watches are delicate, e.g. some lume may fall out of old hands or be lost from a plot on a dial. On a few occasions, the watch seemed to be fully functional before a service, and a watchmaker had a great deal of trouble getting it back into that same functional state after a service. On a couple of occasions, the watch never really worked perfectly again, despite multiple attempts, and I ended up selling them as needing repair. I am currently dealing with a situation like that right now, where one watchmaker that I use is really struggling to get a particular chronograph function to work right, and he has had the watch for a year. I have no doubt that these watches are cleaner and better lubricated than before their service, but they are definitely less collectible. This is painful when it happens, but I try to roll with the punches.
I have to second all @Dan S ’s observations.
I currently have about 50 vintage wristwatches. All the valuable ones have been serviced in the past five years, most of them in the past year. When I buy a watch, I assume I’ll have it serviced. Some of them have had to be serviced because the trauma of international shipping threw them out of adjustment, including one that came with a recent Simon Freese invoice.
I also have about 40 vintage pocket watches. None of them have been serviced in the last twenty years. But none of them have been wound more than once or twice in that time frame. (Other than this one, which I sometimes carry and recently had serviced😀
(I’m adding these photos to overcome the OF prohibition against threads with insufficient watch photos.)
Anything I’m going to wear more than once a year will be serviced. @Archer ’s comments and photos are so true, but ought to be obvious to all of us. These are mechanical things. There’s no mystery to this.
For me too, sadly, the vast majority of damage done to watches in my care has come from watchmakers, including reputable, long time, experienced ones. Glue on a pocket watch dial, a redial without notice, chronograph registers that don’t work properly, wrong crystals, marks on movements etc etc. And some watches never recover from their servicing. Still, a watch that’s worn will be serviced.
I respect vintage things, particularly those that are uncommon or notable. It’s not that I respect the object, per se, but that I respect what that object represents. That respect is part of what causes me to want to help preserve them for subsequent generations. Yes, I possess some watches that I elect to ‘consume’, to wear regularly and place at risk. But others, I’m trying to preserve them, although I might wear them twenty times in a year.
- Posts
- 24,263
- Likes
- 54,033
Dan S
·
Yes, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." I understand that philosophy. 😀
But in this context, I'm not willing to do the experiment to see how much damage will occur in the long run if I don't service my "unbroken" watches. Common sense tells me that they will inevitably suffer.
- Posts
- 25,980
- Likes
- 27,707
ulackfocus
·Common sense tells me that they will inevitably suffer.
DUDE!!!! WTF are you doing bringing COMMON SENSE talk on the internet! Are you nuts? THERE'S NO ROOM FOR THAT KIND OF THING!
- Posts
- 24,263
- Likes
- 54,033
Dan S
·DUDE!!!! WTF are you doing bringing COMMON SENSE talk on the internet! Are you nuts? THERE'S NO ROOM FOR THAT KIND OF THING!
Sorry, I don't know what I was thinking. 😟
- Posts
- 4,043
- Likes
- 13,950
- Posts
- 2,675
- Likes
- 7,487
gostang9
·Even better is “Not serviced but my watchmaker has looked it over and said it’s okay”. 😗
I think the dilemma is in the big differences between watchmakers and not knowing what level of watchmaker it was nor how thorough they are.
- Posts
- 2,675
- Likes
- 7,487
gostang9
·... The first phase of watch “collecting” is to buy everything and anything you can get your hands on, call it the Oh shiny” phase.
After some time you realise that most of this stuff is never going to be worn without being fixed and that you’re not going to fix it.
Hence the line...
- Posts
- 2,675
- Likes
- 7,487
gostang9
·are so into buying watches (and usually servicing them), but buy at a faster rate then they can service, and the watch goes into a drawer, to be forgotten and never worn (school of 'the diseased watch collector')
Damn... that's me...
- Posts
- 2,675
- Likes
- 7,487
gostang9
·Well you won't ever buy one of mine if I sell because half my watches are unserviced, or I don't know their service history.
I love many of the watches you share here on OF and on IG, the only factor that would keep me from buying a watch from you is that they are generally smaller than I like to wear (I prefer >37mm...). I know my preference is sacrilege to many on OF, but it is what is is... 🙁
And if I sell them I might say "my watchmaker says it's okay" if I've asked him to examine it. (although upon reflection I might refrain from saying such thing).
Some people send out for service every watch they buy. But not everyone does it.
If a watch keeps decent time and I know I'm only going to wear it occasionally, I don't get it serviced.
Even if I plan to keep it long term. Everyone has their priorities.
Also, the conventional wisdom is, you should not service a watch just prior to selling. It won't add any value to it and might put off purists, because they prefer to know who worked on the watch and keep control over who's going to service it.
Finally, there's nothing as capricious as motivations and intent when it comes to watches that are essentially not needed, and superfluous objects of style and craft. Whatever plans you might have when you acquire a watch can change in a few months depending on your budget and life priorities.
- Posts
- 2,675
- Likes
- 7,487
gostang9
·to me, on the other hand, it makes complete sense and the quote below sums it fairly well..
- Posts
- 2,675
- Likes
- 7,487
gostang9
·... but a lot of buyers work to the idea that a great XYZ should be the same price as a crappy XYZ they found on the internet.
TL : DR In my view, as long as a seller is honest about what has/hasn't been done - it really doesn't matter.
I think @Syrte points might be representative of large swathes of watch collecting enthusiasts. 👍
And man alive does it cost a lot of money to get these things running when they're broken... but in my case, it's always got me into a good honest example of a reference at much less than it would have cost otherwise.
Apologies for the brain dump, this made a lot more sense in my head. 😕
Edited:
