Quote:
Originally Posted by SubKing
I think we aren't going to get a response from MM at this point.
You would think, if it was a simple misunderstanding, MM would want to clear it up quick instead of letting it go on. Perhaps there just isn't anything that can be said?
The evidence is pretty strong as to what occurred.
As Swish pointed out, speculation is dangerous game, however I feel as information comes in, it's important that our small community talks about it. I think it would be wrong to not bring wrong doings to light as they unfold. This conversation made me look a little closer at things myself and saw some inconsistencies I myself in the past overlooked.
I have also recently been informed that there is allegedly more than one watch involved and Stephane is returning multiple watches back to MM which doesn't sound good. I guess a watch or two has been recently pulled from Stephanes site.
Makes me worry just how many watches have passed through MM hands and just how many were effected? We may never know the full extent. I then thought to myself, If Stephane was a victim, why doesn't he speak out? Perhaps it's a "can of worms" scenario? Perhaps this could effect watches that have been sold in the past that came from MM sold by Stephane?
Again this is just speculation, but from what I also heard is that a former TRF member was behind the relume. Since it's speculation I don't want to mention his name. But I find it likely as I have found old threads here of MM inquiring about this former TRF member over a decade ago.
I also think it's ironic that many of the domestic issues with vintage over the years all seem to be located in CA.. The higher quality "issues with vintage" that is.
I think we all know MM has seen this thread and has chosen (like past members) not to respond to it. There is no positive way out to engage in this discussion in my opinion.
If this is another thread that goes on the books as not addressed by those involved, then I think we have our answer.
I think for myself, I have heard enough info from respected members within the watch community which is enough to make me stay away from these guys.
As for the info above, I have only shared it because it all came from someone close to the source. I feel it is a bit more reliable than just hearsay.
I am making my own personal conclusion that the person behind all of this has never been gone and has been quietly operating behind the scenes for some time.
|
Threads like this is what makes public and open forum discussions an invaluable resource for current, and future collectors.
Regarding the observations of CA-based watch dealers, I would stay clear and far away. There are a few good ones, but more horrible ones, bringing down the average and increasing the chances of getting a lemon. So who can we trust? That's a great question. One that can only be met with controversy. But if you've been reading this thread, and the others recently brought to the public light, then you would know who you cannot trust. There is a thriving enterprise for vintage and pre-owned watches; beautifying vintage pieces with cosmetic enhances, false and deliberately misleading descriptions, etc. Good luck to everyone if they choose to ignore these findings.