The Timeless Watch Channel from YouTube won’t return Bogart watch [Watches now Returned]

Locked
Posts
2,290
Likes
4,573
Usman, if you check Oisin's IG stories it looks like he's selling your modded watches? I imagine he intends to send you the money but curious as to whether you have a formal arrangement with him on this?

1000% no chance in hell Oison will fence stolen goods and then forward the proceeds to the rightful owner. In fact, 1000% he will take in money for these modded Seiko watches and never send them. I'm really shocked at how he continues to get the benefit of the doubt from so many people. (It must be my dark soul and general cynicism that has me thinking differently from you all 😁)

EDIT: I stand corrected, Seiko owner reports he got $800 from Oisin for selling one of his watches. I'm shocked, and happy. I've never been more happy to be wrong !!
Edited:
 
Posts
7,982
Likes
27,949
Then at some point, Oisin doubted the provenance of the watch and turned cynical, thinking the OP was using his channel to help legitimize the thing

I believe this to be an incorrect reading. There was clearly some type of substantial provenance when the watch sold at auction in 2012, including a certificate of authenticity (see below). I assume that the OP took possession of that, and likely included it when he sent the watch to Oisin.

I think that Oisin was making up those doubts and using the fabrication as yet another excuse for having delayed the creation of a related video, and, in his livestream, in a cynical attempt to paint the rightful owner as somehow being a dubious character.


 
Posts
7,631
Likes
21,891
Funny thing that: did he have to pay 800 euro (or anything at all) to receive the Bogey watch in the first place? No.

It’s been stated a dozen times but worth repeating: the entire narrative about avoiding cost to return the watch is imaginary, as there are no duties owed to mail a watch that is not being purchased/sold.

Nevermind that, as we’ve solved for it: OP is free to contact Oisin and offer that the law firm of Sherman & Sterling will send a bonded courier with receipt of pick-up to a location of Oisin’s maximum convenience, and thereafter be held in escrow by Shearman & Sterling until OP can arrange for its retrieval.

In a matter of a few hours of agreeing to this cost-free, risk-free, effort-free means of returning the watch, Oisin can be prove up exactly how deep a misunderstanding this all is.

OP, the choice is yours as to whether and if you would like to attempt this offered solution.

Happy to also have the Seiko’s collected.

This by the way is a top international law firm which has the top worldwide practice for international dispute resolution, and they have won a historic arbitration award of 50 billion dollars against Russia for essentially expropriating the Yukos oil company from its shareholders.
There can be no doubt about their professional ability to handle a few watches.
 
Posts
178
Likes
683
I believe this to be an incorrect reading. There was clearly some type of substantial provenance when the watch sold at auction in 2012, including a certificate of authenticity (see below). I assume that the OP took possession of that, and likely included it when he sent the watch to Oisin.

I think that Oisin was making up those doubts and using the fabrication as yet another excuse for having delayed the creation of a related video, and, in his livestream, in a cynical attempt to paint the rightful owner as somehow being a dubious character.




Full provenance was sent, a file full

Picutres of serial numbers and movment.
Edited:
 
Posts
403
Likes
2,383
I believe this to be an incorrect reading. There was clearly some type of substantial provenance when the watch sold at auction in 2012, including a certificate of authenticity (see below). I assume that the OP took possession of that, and likely included it when he sent the watch to Oisin.

The question is, does the certificate authenticate the watch or its provenance?
 
Posts
5
Likes
7
1000% no chance in hell Oison will fence stolen goods and then forward the proceeds to the rightful owner. In fact, 1000% he will take in money for these modded Seiko watches and never send them. I'm really shocked at how he continues to get the benefit of the doubt from so many people. (It must be my dark soul and general cynicism that has me thinking differently from you all 😁)

There were people cheering OJ who was running from the law for murdering 2 people. People are messed up.
 
Posts
178
Likes
683
The question is, does the certificate authenticate the watch or its provenance?

Every single one of them, a file full of letters, receipts, tags, auction invoices, notations etc..

I even included a copy of Verita Thompson's book "Bogie and Me" about their affiar, She was the lady that bought him the watch.

 
Posts
372
Likes
1,987
What a sad bunch of people between these shady grey dealers and this conceded a&& hat acting like he is some kind of sophisticated human being . It is quite pathetic to watch but deep down all I see is greed deceit and ego.
 
Posts
3,998
Likes
9,015
The question is, does the certificate authenticate the watch or its provenance?

this is really another distraction for at least two reasons

(1) if Oisin believes it’s not legit, it says nothing of why Oisin will not return the watch as and when promised multiple times, and more importantly:

(2) we are all watch collectors, well versed in discussing in depth and adjudicating the validity of a watch’s legitimacy, and NOWHERE has Oisin claimed he was asked to only provide a fully positive “review” etc., so he could have without any real detriment to the substance of the video review simply explained the various pluses and minuses of the watch’s provenance - exactly the same points the OP recounted in his emails to Oisin that have been posted here.

in fact, what better black-and-white Bogart-themed video could there be than one with an underlying subtext regarding the finer points of the ‘mystery’ and who-dunnit behind the watch’s provenance?

the guy’s excuses are all internally inconsistent - and driven by having his back a bit against a wall.

luckily, we can provide him a completely cost, risk, and inconvenience-free way to be completely rid of this headache by returning the watch and demonstrating conclusively he has no intent to steal the watch or defraud the owner.
 
Posts
29,119
Likes
75,258
I feel for the victims here, and the loser who stole their watch/money needs to be adjusted, but for the guys who sent their valuables to a stranger on the internet to not be ultimately responsible is to send the wrong message. NO ONE should send their assets to some schmuck on youtube who has an online "channel."

You are being incredibly unfair to the two people who have had their watches taken. The only person who is at fault here is the guy who still has the watches. He is ultimately responsible.

I've actually done something similar to this - sent a watch of mine to someone to do a review on. It wasn't a YouTube channel, but another on-line watch reviewer who wrote an article. It was early in the building of a brand of watches for me, and I was actually approached by the reviewer (I had no prior experience or knowledge of him before this). The review didn't cost me anything, other than the cost of shipping the watch to to reviewer, and back again. It all went smoothly, a review was written that was fair, and I got the watch back in the condition I sent it in.

That is the only time I actually did this, but for years after I received countless requests for watches to review. Many had strings attached that they would keep the watches in return for the review, which is a non-starter for me.

I don't think you realize how common this practice is. You've simply come into this thread, blaming the victim while Monday morning quarterbacking, obviously with 20/20 hindsight so you know how all this worked out. I can assure you this happens many thousands of times per year, without negative incidents.
 
Posts
178
Likes
683
this is really another distraction for at least two reasons

(1) if Oisin believes it’s not legit, it says nothing of why Oisin will not return the watch as and when promised multiple times, and more importantly:

(2) we are all watch collectors, well versed in discussing in depth and adjudicating the validity of a watch’s legitimacy, and NOWHERE has Oisin claimed he was asked to only provide a fully positive “review” etc., so he could have without any real detriment to the substance of the video review simply explained the various pluses and minuses of the watch’s provenance - exactly the same points the OP recounted in his emails to Oisin that have been posted here.

in fact, what better black-and-white Bogart-themed video could there be than one with an underlying subtext regarding the finer points of the ‘mystery’ and who-dunnit behind the watch’s provenance?

the guy’s excuses are all internally inconsistent - and driven by having his back a bit against a wall.

luckily, we can provide him a completely cost, risk, and inconvenience-free way to be completely rid of this headache by returning the watch and demonstrating conclusively he has no intent to steal the watch or defraud the owner.

Finding a picture of Humphrey warring the watch, is the key to it's value...... I have emails from me saying this, and it would be great, however it's also not important to me either, money won't change my life as I'm HAPPY I would be over the moon if it sold for £500,000 as I can't work because i'm dissabled now... BUT it's not about that at all, and this is where it dosn't compute with Oisin .......It's just a wonderful story and maybe, just maybe a fan might see this and have a picture !! I was told and it's on Youtube in a documentary that he wore it in the fim "BEAT THE DEVIL" it looks like it but I can't get a clear shot of it.

 
Posts
9,483
Likes
51,968
Yesterday's live stream was two hours of my life that I'm never going to get back - and I had it on in the background while I was doing something else and still regret listening to it. I'm 100% in agreement with Archer on this one. The guy has wrongfully retained the watches with no good excuse and needs to return them to their rightful owners immediately. It's as simple as that. The live stream was a self-serving, profoundly narcissistic bunch of absolute nonsense. Case closed.
 
Posts
1,153
Likes
9,781
You are being incredibly unfair to the two people who have had their watches taken. The only person who is at fault here is the guy who still has the watches. He is ultimately responsible.

I've actually done something similar to this - sent a watch of mine to someone to do a review on. It wasn't a YouTube channel, but another on-line watch reviewer who wrote an article. It was early in the building of a brand of watches for me, and I was actually approached by the reviewer (I had no prior experience or knowledge of him before this). The review didn't cost me anything, other than the cost of shipping the watch to to reviewer, and back again. It all went smoothly, a review was written that was fair, and I got the watch back in the condition I sent it in.

That is the only time I actually did this, but for years after I received countless requests for watches to review. Many had strings attached that they would keep the watches in return for the review, which is a non-starter for me.

I don't think you realize how common this practice is. You've simply come into this thread, blaming the victim while Monday morning quarterbacking, obviously with 20/20 hindsight so you know how all this worked out. I can assure you this happens many thousands of times per year, without negative incidents.

Right! Natural selection, your naive and deserve it, etc, etc, etc...... Berating the victims is rather poor form. How does any of this help the situation?
 
Posts
756
Likes
1,340
That is the only time I actually did this, but for years after I received countless requests for watches to review. Many had strings attached that they would keep the watches in return for the review, which is a non-starter for me.

I don't think you realize how common this practice is. You've simply come into this thread, blaming the victim while Monday morning quarterbacking, obviously with 20/20 hindsight so you know how all this worked out. I can assure you this happens many thousands of times per year, without negative incidents.

It's worth mentioning that a ton of online, well-known blogs/websites also charge $$ for a review. A friend of mine, who reps several Swiss brands, said they never get their watches back, on top of paying that fee.
 
Posts
4,489
Likes
9,326
cvalue13’s generous and straightforward proposal for retrieving Bogart’s watch is sensible. But sadly, given what we’ve seen so far, I’d personally not give it much chance of success.

He’s stolen it and clearly has no interest in returning it. I’d say it’s 50:50 that he’s already sold it to a collector who doesn’t care.

I’d say it’s time for the cops. The sooner the better.

Just a fact , he did NOT SHOW IT on the video .... only the Modded Seikos

Bill
 
Posts
9,483
Likes
51,968
It's worth mentioning that a ton of online, well-known blogs/websites also charge $$ for a review. A friend of mine, who reps several Swiss brands, said they never get their watches back, on top of paying that fee.
And that’s fine if it’s disclosed upfront to the owner of the watch - hopefully in writing - and he or she agrees with it.
 
Posts
178
Likes
683
From Oisin
The Timeless Watch Channel [email protected]

The watch was shipped earlier today. Express overnight. Should arrive tomorrow.
I made the long trip to the other town. Though after what you did, you didn’t deserve that extra effort on my part. I had the right mind to fυck the damned thing into the river.
There was absolutely no need to pull the moves you did. I had absolutely no interest in taking anything that’s not mine.
If you think I’m going to let this go, you are sorely mistaken.
 
Posts
4,489
Likes
9,326
I believe this to be an incorrect reading. There was clearly some type of substantial provenance when the watch sold at auction in 2012, including a certificate of authenticity (see below). I assume that the OP took possession of that, and likely included it when he sent the watch to Oisin.

I think that Oisin was making up those doubts and using the fabrication as yet another excuse for having delayed the creation of a related video, and, in his livestream, in a cynical attempt to paint the rightful owner as somehow being a dubious character.


YUP

Scorched Earth policy...