"Unicorn" or "Franken"? In any case an interesting story.

Posts
13,322
Likes
31,439
Who’s been in this sport long enough to remember OmegaMania?
 
Posts
11,107
Likes
19,530
Makes you wonder who’s complicit and who’s just ignorant.

Clearly those with vested interests are happy to throw a bone Hodinkees way to ensure they get the dazzling, high gloss coverage they need to drown out Perezcope.
 
Posts
4,593
Likes
10,788
Like Hodinkee, there is a lot wrong with this Perezcope article. Obviously the author had an ax to grind.
 
Posts
27,277
Likes
69,574
Like Hodinkee, there is a lot wrong with this Perezcope article. Obviously the author had an ax to grind.

What specifically is wrong?
 
Posts
4,593
Likes
10,788
What specifically is wrong?

Well to start off with, the author presents this explanation by Goldberger as if his restoration of his watch was not something within his right to perform: "

I replaced the incorrect bezel and pushers faithfully, as they should have been in 1970."

However, the author spent plenty of time explaining how it's common practice in auctions that owners and auction houses are reluctant to reveal details about a watch's restoration. Goldberger never said the watch was in the exact condition as it left the factory. The salient detail of the watch, why its so rare, was its solid white gold case, which is the only known example.

Then the author wraps up his article with pure conjecture, (complete with spelling errors):

"Speaking of charity, neither Phillips nor Goldberger ever disclosed how much money ultimately went to the Children Action Foundation. There are conflicting statements as to what amount was donated. Hodinkee wrote that all of the procceds went to Children Action. According to SJX Watches it was only the net proceeds of the hammer price, whatever that means. Then there are rumours out there that only a small fraction of the nearly 6 million was given. It is weird, people are normally very proud to show how much money they donate to charity. They hand over large, oversize cheques with big sums on them. In this case? Nothing. Weird. We will problably never know.

Thank you for you interest."

There are rumours out there? WTF
;
Edited:
 
Posts
27,277
Likes
69,574
Well to start off with, the author presents this explanation by Goldberger as if his restoration of his watch was not something within his right to perform: "

I replaced the incorrect bezel and pushers faithfully, as they should have been in 1970."

However, the author spent plenty of time explaining how it's common practice in auctions that owners and auction houses are reluctant to reveal details about a watch's restoration. Goldberger never said the watch was in the exact condition as it left the factory. The salient detail of the watch, why its so rare, was its solid white gold case, which is the only known example.

Then the author wraps up his article with pure conjecture, (complete with spelling errors):

"Speaking of charity, neither Phillips nor Goldberger ever disclosed how much money ultimately went to the Children Action Foundation. There are conflicting statements as to what amount was donated. Hodinkee wrote that all of the procceds went to Children Action. According to SJX Watches it was only the net proceeds of the hammer price, whatever that means. Then there are rumours out there that only a small fraction of the nearly 6 million was given. It is weird, people are normally very proud to show how much money they donate to charity. They hand over large, oversize cheques with big sums on them. In this case? Nothing. Weird. We will problably never know.

Thank you for you interest."

There are rumours out there? WTF
;

Okay, by "wrong" I thought you meant factually incorrect, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Thanks for replying.
 
Posts
2,922
Likes
6,218
Well to start off with, the author presents this explanation by Goldberger as if his restoration of his watch was not something within his right to perform... the author spent plenty of time explaining how it's common practice in auctions that owners and auction houses are reluctant to reveal details about a watch's restoration. Goldberger never said the watch was in the exact condition as it left the factory...

Are you saying that it's acceptable for an auction to not disclose unoriginal parts?

And that if a description doesn't mention that a watch is factory original, all bets are off and the auction house bears no responsibility? They just have to read the name written on the dial in crayon?

This is an article admonishing the entire industry - not just one man.
 
Posts
1,372
Likes
1,996
I've yet to see Perezcope shoot and miss. His recent Cartier Trash article was also very good.
 
Posts
4,593
Likes
10,788
Are you saying that it's acceptable for an auction to not disclose unoriginal parts?

I'm not condoning auction house behavior. I'm merely pointing out the sensationalism and conjecture in the article.

I've yet to see Perezcope shoot and miss. His recent Cartier Trash article was also very good.

Well I guess you need to operationally define "shoot and miss". This article hardly proves or reveals anything. Every fact in the article was previously known before it was written. The only thing new was the conjecture.
 
Posts
3,618
Likes
22,105
This part of the article is also true though. Either way, this sphere of watch collecting, especially vintage Rolex and more so, vintage Daytonas, is fraught with deceit, subterfuge, fraud and ill intent. I had my big toe in that world for a short while and I quickly realized how much of a snake pit this was. Seems it hasn’t changed.

“…. It is weird, people are normally very proud to show how much money they donate to charity.”
Edited:
 
Posts
4,593
Likes
10,788
Please edit your above quote. Those are not my words. They were in my post as quoted by another.