Sleeper 321 Speedy on eBay

ndgal

It could actually be one of 3 different references and could have one of 2 different movements.
This is either a 145.012-67 (Cal 321), a 145.012-68 (Cal 321), or a 145.022-68 (Cal 861).
All three references (starting from a 145.012-67 from the 2nd quarter of 1968) look exactly alike from the “outside”
Most likely this is a 145.012-67 (the most common reference out of the 3) but at this point in time, it is safe to say that no one actually knows (including the seller) because if they would have had this watch opened, they would have realized it was not battery operated...

ndgal

It could actually be one of 3 different references and could have one of 2 different movements.
This is either a 145.012-67 (Cal 321), a 145.012-68 (Cal 321), or a 145.022-68 (Cal 861).
All three references (starting from a 145.012-67 from the 2nd quarter of 1968) look exactly alike from the “outside”
Most likely this is a 145.012-67 (the most common reference out of the 3) but at this point in time, it is safe to say that no one actually knows (including the seller) because if they would have had this watch opened, they would have realized it was not battery operated...
Buyer took a safe bet at $5,500. Can’t lose either way.
Seller is happy that a watch that obviously didn’t cost or mean to them that much has miraculously turned into $5,500 overnight.
Everyone walks away happy!

ndgal

If that’s the case then you tripped over Dollars busy trying to pick up Pennies...

ndgal

So if the watch was $500.01 less you would have clicked that buy it now? (You said you would have pulled the trigger had it been priced under 5K...).
And then what? It would have cost you $6,500 after duties instead of $7,000? It’s all same same.
Trust me, $500 was not the deal breaker here as there were still a good $2,000 (at least) left on the table even after all of that was said and done.

padders

Yikes. Good point. Ethics aside for a minute, what if it really does need a battery! Forcing a return could be interesting if it’s quartz powered lol.

ndgal

You made me Google “Pickelhaube”.
Smarter now. Thanks! 👍

ndgal

In my opinion, (and I really don’t want to steer this thread into a whole “Ethics debate”) it was not your duty or place to have any discussion with the seller after the sale to let them know that they might have sold the watch for a cheaper price than they could have gotten had they left it up for auction.
Obviously, they were fine and happy with their decision to sell the watch at the price that they were offered.
With 437 feedbacks on eBay, they are obviously no “Internet newbies” and in this day and age (we’re a few days from 2020) to not be able to at least google the fact that this is not a battery operated watch, they deserved every penny that they got, and did not deserve each and every penny they didn’t... #crymeariver #noneedforheroes

diggin5

So the uneducated and "honest mistake" sellers deserve to be lowballed? I find it predatory to take advantage just to get a deal. There was an auction going on, it would likely have ended higher, but someone convinced the seller to end it 24 hours early basically by lying. That's a lot different than winning an open auction or finding a $20 Speedy at a junk sale.

Patrik83

My guess would be that this is a 145.022-68 based on the hands. It looks like they came with the watch. But it also look like a bit of chrono creep.

diggin5

So the uneducated and "honest mistake" sellers deserve to be lowballed? I find it predatory to take advantage just to get a deal. There was an auction going on, it would likely have ended higher, but someone convinced the seller to end it 24 hours early basically by lying. That's a lot different than winning an open auction or finding a $20 Speedy at a junk sale.