Tiffany Dial 16013 Real or Fake?

[ionanator]

I recently purchased this Tiffany Dial 16013 on eBay. To my eye and based on the pictures, the Tiffany signature looked to be ok. I got a call from eBay authentication indicating it was a “custom” dial. Today I called Stoll & Co aka eBay’s authenticator and they confirmed that they believed the dial to be done by a third party other than Tiffany or Rolex. I am still not convinced but they do have me doubting my initial assessment. Your thoughts would be much appreciated!

I am attaching a link of the listing for reference and better quality pictures. https://www.ebay.com/itm/32565862280...mis&media=COPY

[TuRo]

E. B. authentication are I suspect correct. I'm no Tiffany expert but look at DATEJUST and Tiffany, and all the Rs in top and bottom of dial they look off and Tritium is super fresh. - check serial date of 16013 ( many early- mid 80s ) against the Tiffany dates of manufactured pieces in era and examples in that date range. Hope I'm wrong, but it's very fresh. I'm definitely open to persuasion by more learned tiff' tifossi though :-)

[CTech]

It is almost impossible to authenticate Tiffany & Co. printed dials unless there is some verifiable corroborating paperwork, such as an original sales receipt from Tiffany showing the serial number and an accurate description of the watch.

There are so many fake or aftermarket Tiffany dials around that the many people will assume that every Tiffany dial is aftermarket unless it has very good supporting evidence.

Authenticating such a dial would be extremely time consuming and would probably require the assistance of Tiffany, and so is well beyond the remit of Stoll & Co authenticating many watches per day for ebay.

The best way to find out a bit more about this, if you disagree with both the Stoll assessment and TuRo comments above, would be to take the watch to a Rolex Service Center and see if they accept it for servicing or if they also say the dial is aftermarket and would need to be replaced during service.

[ionanator]

Thank you both for your feedback. As far as I know Rolex will not service any Tiffany dial watches whether they are authentic or not. That was part of the official tension that led to the two companies parting ways in the 90s. It is my understanding that when it comes to Tiffany dials some were done at the Tiffany flagship store in NYC, others were done at local regional stores and others were printed directly by Rolex themselves. For what it’s worth, Adam Menta agreed with my initial assessment. It is always difficult to tell from pictures but I have seen this style of Tiffany signature in the past. The “Datejust” script did give me pause initially as well.

[ionanator]

I will also add that Rolex ADs/ Service dealers are not particularly knowledgeable when it comes to vintage specialty watches. That has been my experience at least, I am sure there are some out there that are.

[CTech]

Originally Posted by ionanator

As far as I know Rolex will not service any Tiffany dial watches whether they are authentic or not.

That's not necessarily true as there are a few threads on here about a Tiffany dial watch that has been serviced by an RSC.

I think there are differences between the RSCs or countries but the main deciding issue is whether the dial is original or not.

A genuine Rolex dial with Tiffany printing might be considered for service whereas a fake dial with Tiffany printing will not.

Some people believe that Rolex records exist that help determine whether a particular watch was sent to Tiffany, possibly already with a Tiffany stamped dial (done by Rolex), but there's no way for us to know whether this is correct.

[ionanator]

Good to know. If such records exist they would definitively prove it one way or another. I have not actually seen the watch outside of the listing and pictures. I think the best we can do is go off of the actual print in the pictures.

This article was helpful: https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-bl...any-dials.html

[ionanator]

Is anyone familiar with the stamping or printing process at the actual Tiffany locations? The ones I believe to be printed by Rolex directly certainly look different and more uniform.

[Mark020]

Is it just me or is the font of the SCOC text off?

[TimeLord2]

I have a Tiffany branded 1675 GMT from my dad who bought it from Tiffany and Co. No he did not keep receipts nor box. It cannot be authenticated by Tiffany nor Rolex, unless they release their records, which is not going to happen. BTW, Rolex will service my watch but that doesn't mean anything if you read the fine print on the service order. Thought you might find this an interesting read. https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=778533

[CTech]

Originally Posted by Mark020

Is it just me or is the font of the SCOC text off?

No, it's not just you. It's all off, as described by TuRo above.

So, it's a fake or aftermarket dial with a fake Tiffany stamp, and questions about whether Rolex would service this without a dial change, or whether it is a genuine Tiffany stamp seem to have some clear answers already.

[dhknola]

I have seen tropical watch sell two Tiffany Rolex, granted they were subs, with no accompanying paper work, but with a serial engraved on the back of one lug, maybe turn yours over and check, but your dial looks wonky.

[ionanator]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

I have a Tiffany branded 1675 GMT from my dad who bought it from Tiffany and Co. No he did not keep receipts nor box. It cannot be authenticated by Tiffany nor Rolex, unless they release their records, which is not going to happen. BTW, Rolex will service my watch but that doesn't mean anything if you read the fine print on the service order. Thought you might find this an interesting read. https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=778533

I read through the thread. The debate about servicing and whether either company will issue documentation is missing the point I think. The way I approach these dials is comparing to known authentic examples. My dilemma here is there is no consensus on what an authentic example is. Adam Menta, who I respect greatly stated the dial looks totally fine to him. Others here have noted issues with the dial which I totally appreciate. The more information the better.

[ionanator]

For additional reference the watch is a 58M serial number making it a 1979. As far as the tirtium that was not a red flag for me. The script is by far the biggest red flag. Thanks for the continued feedback.

[swaini3]

Maybe you can compare yours to the ones in this thread. I do see some deviations.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vint...5-t269668.html

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by ionanator

I read through the thread. The debate about servicing and whether either company will issue documentation is missing the point I think. The way I approach these dials is comparing to known authentic examples. My dilemma here is there is no consensus on what an authentic example is. Adam Menta, who I respect greatly stated the dial looks totally fine to him. Others here have noted issues with the dial which I totally appreciate. The more information the better.

Adam Menta?

[CTech]

Rather than continuing to try and authenticate the Tiffany stamp, I would suggest you look in great detail at the ROLEX script at the top of the dial and the Superlative, etc. script at the bottom.

There are many discrepancies in the font, placement of letters and serifs to suggest very strongly that this is an aftermarket dial, or at best one that has been repainted.

Attached are the script parts of a genuine 16013 dial of about the same age for reference. Look closely at the foot of the R in Rolex at the top and the shape of the O, S, C and others in the bottom set of text and then compare this to your Tiffany dial.

Alternatively, produce evidence that the Rolex printing is genuine by showing other examples of your font on verified genuine dials.

[rootbeer7]

The Tiffany script is incorrect at a minimum

[ionanator]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Adam Menta?

Adam Golden from Menta watches for anyone wondering 😂 I improvised.

[MrChamfers]

hmm, the R in Rolex and the S in superlative, were not printed by Rolex.

[springer]

I wouldn't touch it. Whoever said it looks good needs more authentication experience.

[1675-David]

Originally Posted by springer

I wouldn't touch it. Whoever said it looks good needs more authentication experience.

x2

[TimeToGo]

.
You would need to replace the dial, not worth the premium paid for this watch.

[BigBlue1]

As everyone has said provenance is key when it comes to Tiffany dials, without it, it means nothing.

[joli160]

There was quite the industry back in the day stamping dials.
Without a full package I consider all Tiffany dials to be fake.
So many people still pay a significant surcharge for something which cannot be authenticated in any way.

[ionanator]

I looked at all the listing pictures again carefully. The seller seems to have made a mistake, the watch looks to be a 1978 based on the serial not a 1979 as listed. I disagree with the idea that it cannot be verified with a certain degree of certainty visually without papers. If eBay did not force authentication for these sort of purchases and allowed for return period as before I am confident I would at least be able to assess whether the entire dial has been repainted with a visual inspection in the metal. Tiffany signatures have a lot of variation so that would certainly require additional steps. I agree with the comments that state the dial is a bit wonky in the pictures. Although the “R” in Rolex script I have seen in other examples. The “superlative chronometer officially certified” script is what I have the most issue with. Please note that the pictures attached to the post were shrunken and the aspect ratios may have been changed to fit posting perimeters. The actual listing pictures are the best representations I have at the moment. Thank you everyone for the input, I am not a dealer or looking to resell so this is very helpful to me.

[TuRo]

Just on the dial spacings....

Here is the nearest 78/79 dial with similar T SWISS T , with T's exactly over the minute markers and it also having close to a pseudo 'rail dial' (eg C of Chronometer being close to being directly over C of Certified - I'd forensically review that and all the letter shapes and spacings ....

Rolex Datejust 36
£3,736
https://chrono24.app/rolex/rolex-dat...GB&SETCURR=GBP

[TimeToGo]

.
You've been given sound advise but appears you want to wonder off with your own assessment.

Just enjoy if this is what you want..

[ionanator]

Originally Posted by TimeToGo

.
You've been given sound advise but appears you want to wonder off with your own assessment.

Just enjoy if this is what you want..

I was under the impression this forum was a place for constructive discussion. It appears you disagree. Yes assessing a watch in person is always better than studying less than stellar quality pictures on a screen. Unfortunately, that is what I have to do in light of eBay’s new programs.

[Dan S]

Aside from a forensic analysis with a ruler, I will say that the dial very much has a refinished look to me overall. Uneven spacing, uneven vertical placement, weird lume, etc. And the case and bracelet are very rough. Given the price, I think that the authenticators did you a favor, and you should just say thank you, and walk away.

No need even for a thread under the circumstances, but given that you started a thread, there's certainly no point in arguing with comments. If you solicit opinions, just read the responses. If you have your own opinion, that's fine, but just saying that you disagree because the photos are poor doesn't add any value. Your comments are classic responses for someone trying to justify their belief.