Rolex Tiffany Archive Papers

[Wigwag]

Originally Posted by 77T

Are you claiming Rolex cancelled Tiffany’s AD status partly due to them imprinting the dials?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[TimeLord2]

Originally Posted by 77T

Are you claiming Rolex cancelled Tiffany’s AD status partly due to them imprinting the dials?

From what I have read, this is the case. On another note, they probably all use the same erroneous source. Here's Bob's take, actually Paul's: https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-bl...any-dials.html

[Richard Carver]

Originally Posted by 77T

Are you claiming Rolex cancelled Tiffany’s AD status partly due to them imprinting the dials?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes, same with Cartier. As Rolex started down the path in the early 80s to becoming the controlling behemoth it is today many ADs were cast aside for noncompliance.

[77T]

Rolex, upon AD contract renewal, could easily have removed the custom imprinting permission clause.

Of course, Tiffany could have declined to sign the new agreement.

It’s unlikely a contract gets cancelled based on a minor change in terms. Nobody (outside of the principals who aren’t talking) would have definitive data on the end of the Tiffany relationship in mid-‘90’s.

My opinion is the imprinting was an unlikely cause in and of itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Richard Carver]

Originally Posted by 77T

Rolex, upon AD contract renewal, could easily have removed the custom imprinting permission clause.

Of course, Tiffany could have declined to sign the new agreement.

It’s unlikely a contract gets cancelled based on a minor change in terms. Nobody (outside of the principals who aren’t talking) would have definitive data on the end of the Tiffany relationship in mid-‘90’s.

My opinion is the imprinting was an unlikely cause in and of itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

:)

[77T]

Originally Posted by Richard Carver

:)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[330ci]

Originally Posted by Richard Carver

Rolex did not add the co-sign; how could they possible know if it was correct or not? Their only concern is that it is an original Rolex dial. You say Rolex knows where each watch went but apparently you aren't familiar with how much dealer trading of inventory goes on. Rolex could tell you where a watch was shipped but not where it was sold. LOL, if they could do that there would be no gray market.

I know you're desperate to defend your purchase of one of these dials but it's beginning to feel like the desperation of the guys who bought/sold 40,000 dollar blueberry GMT inserts. :)

Make that call to RSC, I'm sure they will be happy to help you.

I’m not defending my purchase of one. I don’t own one, not have I owned or sold one as I’ve already stated.

The grey market didn’t even exist when these watches were being sold, if it was shipped to Tiffany you can be pretty well sure it was sold by Tiffany, and even if it was sold to Tiffany, they stamped it and off to a grey, it’s still a Tiffany Rolex. So still easy for Rolex to confirm with certainty whether or not it is appropriate to have a Tiffany dial

[Richard Carver]

Originally Posted by 330ci

I’m not defending my purchase of one. I don’t own one, not have I owned or sold one as I’ve already stated.

The grey market didn’t even exist when these watches were being sold, if it was shipped to Tiffany you can be pretty well sure it was sold by Tiffany, and even if it was sold to Tiffany, they stamped it and off to a grey, it’s still a Tiffany Rolex. So still easy for Rolex to confirm with certainty whether or not it is appropriate to have a Tiffany dial

Really? Made your call to RSC yet? :)

[TimeLord2]

Originally Posted by 77T

Rolex, upon AD contract renewal, could easily have removed the custom imprinting permission clause.

Of course, Tiffany could have declined to sign the new agreement.

It’s unlikely a contract gets cancelled based on a minor change in terms. Nobody (outside of the principals who aren’t talking) would have definitive data on the end of the Tiffany relationship in mid-‘90’s.

My opinion is the imprinting was an unlikely cause in and of itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Most likely a lack of chocolates and water being offered at service.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Richard Carver

Rolex did not add the co-sign; how could they possible know if it was correct or not? Their only concern is that it is an original Rolex dial. You say Rolex knows where each watch went but apparently you aren't familiar with how much dealer trading of inventory goes on. Rolex could tell you where a watch was shipped but not where it was sold. LOL, if they could do that there would be no gray market.

I know you're desperate to defend your purchase of one of these dials but it's beginning to feel like the desperation of the guys who bought/sold 40,000 dollar blueberry GMT inserts. :)

Make that call to RSC, I'm sure they will be happy to help you.

I'll agree with this.

Rolex servicing a watch with a branded dial is proof of nothing. They will also service an original dial if you have had your own name custom printed on it, or an engraving on the back.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by JBZ

Domino's does. And they'll get it to you in 30 minutes or less. Every Monday you can order two archives for $10.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Wigwag

I'm still waiting for you to post a source for your claim that "Rolex USA hold records of what serial numbers were supplied by Tiffany.", BTW.

[Wigwag]

Originally Posted by fmc000

I'm still waiting for you to post a source for your claim that "Rolex USA hold records of what serial numbers were supplied by Tiffany.", BTW.

I don't have one - feel free to ask them though if you don't believe me.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Wigwag

I don't have one - feel free to ask them though if you don't believe me.

OK so you're just posting unverified claims. Good to know.

Inviato dal mio SM-T719 utilizzando Tapatalk

[330ci]

Originally Posted by fmc000

OK so you're just posting unverified claims. Good to know.

Inviato dal mio SM-T719 utilizzando Tapatalk

As is everyone else on this thread. As usual mob rule wins out, still haven’t seen anyone prove that Rolex has serviced a watch with a known aftermarket Tiffany stamp either.

Blows my mind people will do anything to justify Rolex permitting an illegal practice(trademark infringement) on their watches.

[roh123]

Important enough client and I am sure most retailers/brands can go above and beyond. Including Tiffany and Rolex. Just because Tiffany did it once now doesn’t mean they will do it again to average Joe. That’s just how the world works. Not only related to watches.

[Wigwag]

Originally Posted by fmc000

OK so you're just posting unverified claims. Good to know.

Inviato dal mio SM-T719 utilizzando Tapatalk

It isn't a claim - it's a fact.

As mentioned by another poster, please feel free to call RUSA if you don't believe me

[77T]

Originally Posted by Wigwag

It isn't a claim - it's a fact.

As mentioned by another poster, please feel free to call RUSA if you don't believe me

Originally Posted by fmc000

OK so you're just posting unverified claims. Good to know.

Just curious, Fabio...do you have reason to believe that RUSA didn’t keep records of watch serial numbers shipped to Tiffany and any other AD over the years?

I had to work with them on a theft report and they were able to verify the original warranty paperwork matched the AD by me only providing the serial number. This was for several watches stolen in a burglary here - and the vintage DJ of my wife’s was from the ‘80’s and my DD was from the ‘70’s.

They didn’t know the name of the original buyer at that AD, but RUSA knew who the AD was. The insurance investigator and I were on the conference call. It was necessary to determine the watches had never been reported stolen prior to our burglary.

My first-hand experience confirms for me that they keep records at RUSA of inventory distribution to AD’s.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by Wigwag

It isn't a claim - it's a fact.

As mentioned by another poster, please feel free to call RUSA if you don't believe me

I have no idea what RUSA policies are, but continuously claiming something is fact and refusing to provide any proof suggests either you don’t have any proof, or you’re bluffing.

[joli160]

This discussion has been done many times in the past and not only here on TRF.
The outcome has always been that you need Tiffany provenance as stated by many true vintage experts on the various forums I am member of.

Without provenance these are to be considered fake and most probably are.

Imho it’s irresponsible to try to convince people otherwise which may cost them thousands of dollars if ever they want/ need to sell.

[GoingPlaces]

Originally Posted by joli160

This discussion has been done many times in the past and not only here on TRF.
The outcome has always been that you need Tiffany provenance as stated by many true vintage experts on the various forums I am member of.

Without provenance these are to be considered fake and most probably are.

Imho it’s irresponsible to try to convince people otherwise which may cost them thousands of dollars if ever they want/ need to sell.

Correct, at the end of the day you need papers/provenance. Otherwise it's not the same. Collectors and WIS will only accept proper paperwork, not an RSC service receipt.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by joli160

This discussion has been done many times in the past and not only here on TRF.
The outcome has always been that you need Tiffany provenance as stated by many true vintage experts on the various forums I am member of.

Without provenance these are to be considered fake and most probably are.

Imho it’s irresponsible to try to convince people otherwise which may cost them thousands of dollars if ever they want/ need to sell.

Yes, this is true to a certain degree, but the big difference now is that Tiffany itself seems to be offering an archive service to verify that a vintage Rolex was actually sold by the retailer with its name on the dial.

If this is indeed the case, these new Tiffany archive papers can prove that a vintage Rolex with a Tiffany-stamped dial is legit, eliminating the need for the original Rolex guarantee paper to prove it.

[roh123]

Originally Posted by swish77

Yes, this is true to a certain degree, but the big difference now is that Tiffany itself seems to be offering an archive service to verify that a vintage Rolex was actually sold by the retailer with its name on the dial.

If this is indeed the case, these new Tiffany archive papers can prove that a vintage Rolex with a Tiffany-stamped dial is legit, eliminating the need for the original Rolex guarantee paper to prove it.

I highly doubt anyone with a Tiffany signed watch will be able to request an archive extract. It probably requires you to be someone special to them.

[77T]

Originally Posted by roh123

I highly doubt anyone with a Tiffany signed watch will be able to request an archive extract. It probably requires you to be someone special to them.

Yes you’re right. If anyone had read the FAQ associated with the link I provided, it’s a very limited cohort who will get served.

https://www.tiffany.com/faq/archive-...fany-archives/

“While our mission is to support the research needs of our own employees, each year we allocate time to aid research by doctoral students, historians, museum curators, professors or journalists.

Because such requests require a significant commitment of staff resources, requests are rigorously vetted to ensure that fulfilling them is mutually beneficial.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by 77T

Just curious, Fabio...do you have reason to believe that RUSA didn’t keep records of watch serial numbers shipped to Tiffany and any other AD over the years?

I had to work with them on a theft report and they were able to verify the original warranty paperwork matched the AD by me only providing the serial number. This was for several watches stolen in a burglary here - and the vintage DJ of my wife’s was from the ‘80’s and my DD was from the ‘70’s.

They didn’t know the name of the original buyer at that AD, but RUSA knew who the AD was. The insurance investigator and I were on the conference call. It was necessary to determine the watches had never been reported stolen prior to our burglary.

My first-hand experience confirms for me that they keep records at RUSA of inventory distribution to AD’s.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

No, I have no reason to believe anything. Moreover, I have no stakes in the matter. I simply don't accept when people say that their beliefs are facts without proving them.

At least you proved that IN YOUR CASE (capital letters meaning "in your case only") Rolex was able to say to which AD a watch was sold. Other people seem to be happy enough to spread vaporware and leave to the others to refute their unproved claims.

Inviato dal mio SM-T719 utilizzando Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by fmc000

No, I have no reason to believe anything. Moreover, I have no stakes in the matter. I simply don't accept when people say that their beliefs are facts without proving them.

At least you proved that IN YOUR CASE (capital letters meaning "in your case only") Rolex was able to say to which AD a watch was sold. Other people seem to be happy enough to spread vaporware and leave to the others to refute their unproved claims.

Good deal and fair enough.

Agree that my experience was a single contact with RUSA.

However, it would be a reasonable deduction that RUSA keeps s/n information tracking to the AD who eventually sold it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[harry in montreal]

Wigwag the watchmaker, in your wisdom, how would you go about getting such information about a Tiffany sub before you buy it? Is there a Rolex hotline number do you use to verify a Rolex serial number? Maybe you have a Rolex dealer that is very helpful?

I’m not being a smart ass, but I’ve had very low success as this type of validation and would like to hear how you have obtained such comfort and confidence in your approach

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

Why does that document look like it came out of my Canon printer?

I would assume it did come out of a printer. Does your cannon spit out gold embossed seals as well? Not opining on authenticity, just not sure what your comment means. Would you expect the document to be etched on parchment?

[Kingface66]

[/IMG]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

I would assume it did come out of a printer. Does your cannon spit out gold embossed seals as well? Not opining on authenticity, just not sure what your comment means. Would you expect the document to be etched on parchment?

Just that if I was paying $1,000(!) for this authentication certificate, I would expect/want it to come on something a little sturdier and more presentable than that. Something along the lines of what a Tiffany provides with any of their fine jewelry. Something with actual embossing (not a foil-stamp applied seal). Like this:

[IMG][/IMG]

[Wigwag]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

Wigwag the watchmaker, in your wisdom, how would you go about getting such information about a Tiffany sub before you buy it? Is there a Rolex hotline number do you use to verify a Rolex serial number? Maybe you have a Rolex dealer that is very helpful?

I’m not being a smart ass, but I’ve had very low success as this type of validation and would like to hear how you have obtained such comfort and confidence in your approach

They wouldn't verify a serial number over the phone unfortunately. You'd have to take a punt, buy the watch and send it in for servicing. If they service the watch with the dial still in place, you know they've checked their archives and the watch is good