Have you had problems with Steve Mullholland?

[aboen]

Hope it works out of you.
IMO you deserve a full refund, no matter of elapsed time… especially on a misrepresented watch (by mistake, I'm sure)
Surely Steve with make it right though.

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by aboen

Hope it works out of you.
IMO you deserve a full refund, no matter of elapsed time… especially on a misrepresented watch (by mistake, I'm sure)Surely Steve with make it right though.

An "expert" making a mistake?

[aboen]

Originally Posted by MonBK

An "expert" making a mistake?

Everyone makes ‘em. How one handles it is what matters to me.

[newsboy]

Whether the warranty time has elapsed or not the seller should offer a full refund especially on this watch.
Period

[pawnshopkiller]

You are using the forum to manipulate your desired outcome which isn't in accordance with the terms stated in the sale

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by aboen

Everyone makes ‘em. How one handles it is what matters to me.

Agree, I clearly remember making one in 1969.

[conrail]

Originally Posted by djkennedy67

Subtona

Advertised on this forum - Full set Matt 5513.

I believe the chances of it being a matt 5513 are very slim as it was shipped from the factory in 1985 - papers showing RTTX.

It is either the last matt 5513 ever produced and I've hit the jackpot or a redial. I think the former.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=221006

Regards

David

Nowhere in this ad did Steve say it was 100% original. So regardless of whether or not it should have come w/ a matte dial, Steve isn't claiming either way. So if you're doing your homework and questioning AFTER you buy, that is on you, not Steve.

[conrail]

Originally Posted by aboen

Hope it works out of you.
IMO you deserve a full refund, no matter of elapsed time… especially on a misrepresented watch (by mistake, I'm sure)
Surely Steve with make it right though.

Let's stop throwing around the word "misrepresented." The ad doesn't say original or that the dial came w/ the watch. I don't recall, but I don't think the conversation as to oriignality came up (correct me if I'm wrong) until AFTER the sale had happened. And even then, what Steve told the OP personally is his opinion only that it is original to the watch. Reasonable minds can differ as to whether that dial should have come with the watch, unless this is one of those rare vintage Rolex bright lines?

[jdc]

Originally Posted by conrail

Nowhere in this ad did Steve say it was 100% original. So regardless of whether or not it should have come w/ a matte dial, Steve isn't claiming either way. So if you're doing your homework and questioning AFTER you buy, that is on you, not Steve.

If I was buying on ebay this would be the case, I would hope that buying from a trusted vintage seller I could have more confidence, its seems I'm naive but if this is the attitude one has to take it does not sit right with me.
As I said before this could all be a misunderstanding and its not directed at Steve but more to your general comment on homework.

[djkennedy67]

If it is sold as a gloss 5513 with matt dial fitted then I believe that would be fair. I would certainly not have been interested.

As there is a considerable difference in value between a genuine matt submariner and a gloss submariner with a dial swap then it is being misrepresented.

I love the look of the watch, but i have been sold one thing when it is actually something else.

Believe me nobody would be happier if someone could tell me that 8.67mil Submariners were matt!


PS I have been emailed by a forum member who informed me that a lot of 8.5mil, and onwards, gloss dials were swapped out under warranty because of cracking and replaced with MK III service dials. Could this explain the anomaly?

[conrail]

Originally Posted by jdc

If I was buying on ebay this would be the case, I would hope that buying from a trusted vintage seller I could have more confidence, its seems I'm naive but if this is the attitude one has to take it does not sit right with me.
As I said before this could all be a misunderstanding and its not directed at Steve but more to your general comment on homework.

I'm with ya there - but it's also why I hate the "trusted" seller label with vintage and have been saying so for the past year or so; more of these little "incidents" are coming out. Sure you're not gonna receive a brick in the FedEx box from a "trusted" seller, but people gota do their homework!!! Vintage isn't like new watches where you know exactly what you'll get b/c they're all the same; vintage is open to serious interpretation and opinion differences, even among astute experts.

Ah well - if I were the seller I'd make it right and take it back so everyone were happy; don't see, apart from the US customs issue (kinda a big deal), why that can't happen. But that is a decisions between the parties to this private transaction.

[pawnshopkiller]

...

[psv]

Steve M. clearly states the linked FS ad:

"5 day no questions asked return policy (no time limit on issues of authenticity,However the odds on there bieng any non Rolex parts are next to zero,I thouroghly inspect each and every watch that I sell)"

There is considerable testimony stating that dial doesn't appear to be correct and/or original with regards to the serial number of this particular watch, thus it is now up to Steve to prove the contrary at this point in my opinion. If he doesn't want to get involved in that process he should simply refund the watch per his stated refund policy.

It is as simple as that in my book. Otherwise it should be noted to presumptive buyers that Steve M doesn't adhere to his own policies and stated business rules, however, I'm fairly certain that the parties will work this one out as one's reputation is all that counts in this business. Best of luck and keep us posted.

[jdc]

Originally Posted by conrail

I'm with ya there - but it's also why I hate the "trusted" seller label with vintage and have been saying so for the past year or so; more of these little "incidents" are coming out. Sure you're not gonna receive a brick in the FedEx box from a "trusted" seller, but people gota do their homework!!! Vintage isn't like new watches where you know exactly what you'll get b/c they're all the same; vintage is open to serious interpretation and opinion differences, even among astute experts.

Ah well - if I were the seller I'd make it right and take it back so everyone were happy; don't see, apart from the US customs issue (kinda a big deal), why that can't happen. But that is a decisions between the parties to this private transaction.

Fair points

[cakey007]

X2

Hope it gets resolved ok for everyone

Originally Posted by jdc

Fair points

[bewithabob]

Gosh,this is a disappointing story. I hope Steve weighs in here soon, and provides a satisfactory alternative. There is risk now in shipping back to the US, which makes the situation murky for both parties.

[theloxmyth]

Sorry for the interruption, but where does it state "matte" in the advert.

I see only "maxi."

"FS-Full set 5513 MAXI Submariner ND..box-papers-booklets-band..etc..7k
BEAUTIFUL is too understated to describe MY feelings about this watch..but most of you know that the 5513 has been my favorite watch to sell/collect and heck..even just to talk about!
the 5513 was really the first sports rolex that was produced in abundanced and priced so that even the working class gents of the time could realistically afford to buy one(with a tiny bit of saving upo)
It has the widest and most varied spectrum of dial styles and is just affordable enough to attempt to own one of each!
anyways..here we have a great example 5513 with nice thick case,nice strong movement keeping good time,nerly mint dial with lovely light yellow patina on the matching hands and hour plots
maxi dial
8 million series case
93150 bracelet
box (inner and outer)
papers
booklets
paperwork envelope
and finally a signed photograph of the famouse wound that tried to annihilate the Mulholland!..lol
(just kidding..you DONT want to see it!)
7K u.s. currency and includes Insured world-wide shipping(international customers may experience some difficulties in returns ,so please ask any questions before you commit..I dont mind answering them,it's my job!..lol)
5 day no questions asked return policy (no time limit on issues of authenticity,However the odds on there bieng any non Rolex parts are next to zero,I thouroghly inspect each and every watch that I sell)"

Regards,

[conrail]

Originally Posted by psv

Steve M. clearly states the linked FS ad:

"5 day no questions asked return policy (no time limit on issues of authenticity,However the odds on there bieng any non Rolex parts are next to zero,I thouroghly inspect each and every watch that I sell)"

There is considerable testimony stating that dial doesn't appear to be correct and/or original with regards to the serial number of this particular watch, thus it is now up to Steve to prove the contrary at this point in my opinion. If he doesn't want to get involved in that process he should simply refund the watch per his stated refund policy.

It is as simple as that in my book. Otherwise it should be noted to presumptive buyers that Steve M doesn't adhere to his own policies and stated business rules, however, I'm fairly certain that the parties will work this one out as one's reputation is all that counts in this business. Best of luck and keep us posted.

He clearly states "authenticity" not "originality" - big difference. Nothing has been raised to question that it is a genuine Rolex dial.

[psv]

I realized that as well, but then we're opening a whole another can of worm. I know Steve, and a bunch of other sellers, on VRF argue that a Rolex can be constructed by various parts and be sold as "original" and "authentic" while others, like me, feel that it is a bit of a Franken-watch, cobbled together by parts as the watch actually never came out of Bienne factory in the first place. But back to this thread.

My view on this particular deal, as the fact appears until now, hasn't changed.

[perpetualman88]

As many have stated when it comes to vintage watches many things are argued even amongst top experts when dealing with "originality" and "authenticity"

When buying vintage pieces it is good to ask the seller many questions regarding what their views of originality and authenticity is when it comes to vintage pieces in general. This will give the buyer an idea if the sellers views of originality and authenticity parallel theirs

Hope SM chimes in soon

[theloxmyth]

Originally Posted by perpetualman88

As many have stated when it comes to vintage watches many things are argued even amongst top experts when dealing with "originality" and "authenticity"

When buying vintage pieces it is good to ask the seller many questions regarding what their views of originality and authenticity is when it comes to vintage pieces in general. This will give the buyer an idea if the sellers views of originality and authenticity parallel theirs

Hope SM chimes in soon

"We are presently in New York city for the IWJG show"

I e-mailed him about his "wound picture." That's all.

[greekbum]

Originally Posted by djkennedy67

PS I have been emailed by a forum member who informed me that a lot of 8.5mil, and onwards, gloss dials were swapped out under warranty because of cracking and replaced with MK III service dials. Could this explain the anomaly?

I think these situations are best worked out between the 2 parties involved. I know Steve personally and he is a very fair guy.
As for the paint defect thing and service dials........I am of the opinion that the very 1st batch of WG glossy dials had paint defects and spider cracked. They were replaced with the newer WG glossy dials that did not have this defect. Never was a WG glossy dial replaced with a matte during a Rolex service its the other way around. Keep in mind in the mid 80's when these were introduced most people wanted the NEW look and matte was the old style. No way a person that bought a NEW style watch would see Rolex putting the OLD style dial acceptable to them at the time.

[conrail]

Originally Posted by psv

I realized that as well, but then we're opening a whole another can of worm. I know Steve, and a bunch of other sellers, on VRF argue that a Rolex can be constructed by various parts and be sold as "original" and "authentic" while others, like me, feel that it is a bit of a Franken-watch, cobbled together by parts as the watch actually never came out of Bienne factory in the first place. But back to this thread.

My view on this particular deal, as the fact appears until now, hasn't changed.

Yea its def a murky area with few bright lines. Unless and until Rolex publishes the definitive guide, which I don't think they will because they probably can't - our best resources are the various forums (fora?) :)

[inspires]

Originally Posted by conrail

He clearly states "authenticity" not "originality" - big difference. Nothing has been raised to question that it is a genuine Rolex dial.

Sorry but I'd have to disagree, as now we are playing with the semantics of picking and choosing words. I highly doubt that Steve would use this as an excuse for not offering a refund.

I have to agree that much due diligence is required before buying vintage, but I also empathize that the buyer relied on a 'trusted' seller to be upfront and knowledgable of what was sold. As a 'trusted' seller and known vintage dealer there should have been more transparent communication and knowledge passed throughout the sale. Just my 2 cents.

[conrail]

Originally Posted by inspires

Sorry but I'd have to disagree, as now we are playing with the semantics of picking and choosing words. I highly doubt that Steve would use this as an excuse for not offering a refund.

I have to agree that much due diligence is required before buying vintage, but I also empathize that the buyer relied on a 'trusted' seller to be upfront and knowledgable of what was sold. As a 'trusted' seller and known vintage dealer there should have been more transparent communication and knowledge passed throughout the sale. Just my 2 cents.

Well there is a big difference between those two words, and its a pretty clear difference. Authentic = genuine Rolex part. Original = came out of the factory on that watch or at least is correct to the time period. A watch can easily be a 100% genuine Rolex watch but not original (e.g., dial swapped out at some point, hands changed, etc... but still 100% Rolex product).

I don't think he's playing semantics with his words - he is clear this is a genuine Rolex product or he'll take it back anytime. He may or may not be passing judgement on the originality of the watch.

[Pep04]

Originally Posted by pawnshopkiller

You are using the forum to manipulate your desired outcome which isn't in accordance with the terms stated in the sale

I read through the whole thread and while I know NOTHING about vintage watches let alone sales, I will not give an opinion to that regard.

However, since you have offered your opinion on the matter when you don't have a dog in this fight (pressumably), I feel that you could receive opinions on your posts.

You are coming off a bit defensive and strong for a member that himself has many watches on the For Sale forum. I, for one, would be scared to enter into any business dealing with you when it is clear you will stonewall the buyer should there be any discrepancy. The seller is ALWAYS going to be a seller and should ALWAYS make the customer happy. Unless the buyer is trying to scam you, you should ALWAYS make sure the buyer is happy. It is sound business practice. I have been in business since I left high school and it has always been my business philosophy which has carried me fairly far.



Take what I say for what it is worth and not a criticism. Step back and do yourself a favor. I highly doubt you are gaining any customer's trust with your posts. Notice the Moscos, DavidSWs etc have steered clear of this controversy like they do all others.

[sdwtchlvr]

This seems to be quite a mess. If it were me, I would exchange the watch for something else that satisfies as being original and authentic and chalk it up as a lessoned learned. Vintage can indeed be tricky. I'd bet it's safe to say that there are a lot more vintage pieces out there with replacement service parts or "swapped" parts than all original examples. There is just no way to know, even if everything on the watch is period correct. Unless you buy from the original owner or you are the original owner.

That isn't to say that the seller shouldn't stand by his product...especially a well known, respected seller. If something was marketed with specifics and priced accordingly, then that is what should have been delivered. The seller is saying the dial is original to the watch and I suppose he's challenging anyone to come up with hard facts to say otherwise. Would Rolex know what dial originally came with this watch? Perhaps a service center could research that for you if you took it in for service.

[RolexWatcher]

Originally Posted by inspires

Sorry but I'd have to disagree, as now we are playing with the semantics of picking and choosing words. I highly doubt that Steve would use this as an excuse for not offering a refund.

I have to agree that much due diligence is required before buying vintage, but I also empathize that the buyer relied on a 'trusted' seller to be upfront and knowledgable of what was sold. As a 'trusted' seller and known vintage dealer there should have been more transparent communication and knowledge passed throughout the sale. Just my 2 cents.

1+ on this as well.

You need to be upfront and knowledgeable of what was sold, whether new or vintage.

[michel33]

This watch was sold for the price of an original matt dial 5513, this is a first indication of how to construe the seller's ad.
When the buyer sent him an e.mail about the dial being original to the watch or not, the seller asserts it is an original matt dial 5513, right? He does not argue that his ad did not mention the word "original", that the buyer should have done his "homework" or whatever BS, right?
So what exact word is written or not in his ad is no more relevant, as this is a binding assertion that clearly gives us the correct interpretation of the seller's ad.
By asserting the watch has an original matt dial, the seller commits himself to refund the buyer if it is not true. Period.

[pawnshopkiller]

Originally Posted by Pep04

I read through the whole thread and while I know NOTHING about vintage watches let alone sales, I will not give an opinion to that regard.

However, since you have offered your opinion on the matter when you don't have a dog in this fight (pressumably), I feel that you could receive opinions on your posts.

You are coming off a bit defensive and strong for a member that himself has many watches on the For Sale forum. I, for one, would be scared to enter into any business dealing with you when it is clear you will stonewall the buyer should there be any discrepancy. The seller is ALWAYS going to be a seller and should ALWAYS make the customer happy. Unless the buyer is trying to scam you, you should ALWAYS make sure the buyer is happy. It is sound business practice. I have been in business since I left high school and it has always been my business philosophy which has carried me fairly far.



Take what I say for what it is worth and not a criticism. Step back and do yourself a favor. I highly doubt you are gaining any customer's trust with your posts. Notice the Moscos, DavidSWs etc have steered clear of this controversy like they do all others.

You have no idea who you are talking to. I have more watches then most sellers here. I have a Shop in my community where my reputation is strong and flawless so I could care less if you wouldn't buy a watch from me as I don't need the forum to sell anything.


Steve is my friend and I myself have just went through a ordeal shipping a watch into the USA and had it stopped by customs and had to pay Duties and taxes which is exactly what will happen to Steve if this fella who didn't do his homework before he bought a watch and then didn't bother to inspect it for a month returns the watch...





So say what you will at the end of the day most of the people reading this will still be a wanna be or a hater and I will still have 64 Rolex watches.