Inaccurate descriptions - HQ Milton

[roh123]

I don’t like that they didn’t mention the corrosion. They just skipped that as others sometimes skip issues when selling something. I’m sure the ’excellent’ remark was to describe the outside form of the case. Not the corossion behind the caseback. Still not great to not disclose but anyone seeing the pics would have seen it. I would personally have mentioned it but where to draw the line? They run a business and need to be able to sell even average pieces like this.

I don’t think it is worse than not mentioning the dirty lume on this watch. If we are to complain on descriptions... Key thing is that the pictures show issues and buyers understand what they spend 10k+ on.

[1watch]

Originally Posted by roh123

I don’t like that they didn’t mention the corrosion. They just skipped that as others sometimes skip issues when selling something. I’m sure the ’excellent’ remark was to describe the outside form of the case. Not the corossion behind the caseback. Still not great to not disclose but anyone seeing the pics would have seen it. I would personally have mentioned it but where to draw the line? They run a business and need to be able to sell even average pieces like this.

I don’t think it is worse than not mentioning the dirty lume on this watch. If we are to complain on descriptions... Key thing is that the pictures show issues and buyers understand what they spend 10k+ on.

I don't even recall the pics of the piece in question, but do agree that more than expected minor pitting for the age should not be described as excellent. You really need to know what is usual and customary, given the age of a vintage watch and have some knowledge of typical aging on comparable examples from the same time period.

[springer]

Regarding for sale listings for pre owned vintage watches -

I would give buyers and collectors more credit than some here are giving them based on some of these responses.

When viewing a listing, anything that enhances the value of the watch is normally highlighted in the listing - and rightfully so since this affects the price. Additionally, a listing should also mention anything significant that adversely affects the value. Buyers know this.

Buyers want a level playing field and any seller that thinks buyers do not notice these listing "errors" or omissions is sadly mistaken. I'm not referring to minutia being discussed in a listing, such as a couple knicks or scratches on a case, bezel insert or hand set but significant issues that affects a buyers decision to purchase a particular watch in a listing and how this omission affects the value. Credible and honest listing reflect favorably toward the integrity of the seller.

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

I was thinking the exact same thing. Just an oversight. As far as I know, they have a good reputation. I don’t fault them for neglecting to proofread a particular listing. The photos clearly show the condition of the case.

Oversight? Proofread? You are way too kind. Dealers can’t make “oversights“. It’s called misrepresentation in the business world. Or worse.

[ILuvSubs]

Originally Posted by 77T

Well, it is a little more involved. Legally, a sales listing is simply an offer. The description may not include all the detail some would like. Nothing fraudulent in that so long as there are no lies in it.

The buyer has a responsibility to investigate and ask questions. The buyer deserves honest answers.

But a description doesn’t have to disadvantage the seller before a prospective buyer has appeared.

...

A certain competency and capacity on the part of the buyer is expected. The seller isn’t a teacher.

Thus, caveat emptor plays an especially important role in buying vintage watches.

This!

As long as the seller is not misleading or fraudulent in their disclosure of the watch (e.g., omitting to mention a material flaw, such as a relume, that is not evident from the photos), it is up to the buyer to make all the necessary enquiries or investigations.

If a seller chooses to let the photos do the talking with minimal description, then as a buyer you can ask further questions or you can walk away on the basis that you are not satisfied a seller has been fully frank in their disclosure and choose to look at another listing where a seller may be more descriptive.

I agree that good market practice is that a seller should disclose material flaws or issues.

[southtexas]

Originally Posted by ILuvSubs

This!

As long as the seller is not misleading or fraudulent in their disclosure of the watch (e.g., omitting to mention a material flaw, such as a relume, that is not evident from the photos), it is up to the buyer to make all the necessary enquiries or investigations.

If a seller chooses to let the photos do the talking with minimal description, then as a buyer you can ask further questions or you can walk away on the basis that you are not satisfied a seller has been fully frank in their disclosure and choose to look at another listing where a seller may be more descriptive.

I agree that good market practice is that a seller should disclose material flaws or issues.

This. And I believe they also offer a return period (not sure of restock fee). This allows you to get the watch for a proper inspection before the deal is final (again, assuming there’s not some ridiculous “restocking” fee).

Now, if they call relumed hands original, or claim certain inserts are real, then that’s another story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shinyhappyobjects]

Drew Zimmerman in PA did some excellent work on the edge of a caseback for me one time. Very clean. You can check out his work on IG at zimmermanwatchrepair

Originally Posted by Dan S

Yes, hand drag marks are semi-circular marks from the hand scraping against the dial, usually during part of the rotation.

I think it can be challenging to repair pitting by laser welding, since the new material may not bond very well. I have asked LAWW in the past, and they were reluctant to attempt it because they felt that the results might not be good. If others have first hand experience with having pitting repaired, I would be very interested to hear about it.

[Watchcollectables]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Yes, hand drag marks are semi-circular marks from the hand scraping against the dial, usually during part of the rotation.

I think it can be challenging to repair pitting by laser welding, since the new material may not bond very well. I have asked LAWW in the past, and they were reluctant to attempt it because they felt that the results might not be good. If others have first hand experience with having pitting repaired, I would be very interested to hear about it.

Pitting can be a disaster for welding as the metal under the surface is compromised . It can become very fragile as it is a form of corrosion . So when you weld you bond metal to metal but because the structure of the corroded case is not solid enough you end up just blowing holes deeper into the case . And as it’s impossible to see how deep the corrosion can go it’s really a
Matter of removing all loose material and starting afresh . This could mean loosing a significant percentage of the underside of the case before
You start to weld it correctly !

[colpol]

Anyone see the apology for an inaccurate piece on their IG account earlier ?

Wondered if anyone got an update on what happened ?

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by colpol

Anyone see the apology for an inaccurate piece on their IG account earlier ?

Wondered if anyone got an update on what happened ?

See the threads about the fake Daytona 6262.

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by Watchcollectables

Pitting can be a disaster for welding as the metal under the surface is compromised . It can become very fragile as it is a form of corrosion . So when you weld you bond metal to metal but because the structure of the corroded case is not solid enough you end up just blowing holes deeper into the case . And as it’s impossible to see how deep the corrosion can go it’s really a
Matter of removing all loose material and starting afresh . This could mean loosing a significant percentage of the underside of the case before
You start to weld it correctly !

Very well said. Thanks for explaining the real problems with pitting and why it is a serious issue for potential vintage watch buyers. If anyone buys a watch with pitting issues be prepared to buy a replacement case. I once bought a 1965 Omega Seamaster with known “slight“ pitting ( there is no such thing I learned) and had to pick up a new case. A tough way to learn a lesson but relatively inexpensive given the commonality of the watch. Not so much with a Submariner.

[Paulie 50]

Originally Posted by springer

Regarding for sale listings for pre owned vintage watches -

I would give buyers and collectors more credit than some here are giving them based on some of these responses.

When viewing a listing, anything that enhances the value of the watch is normally highlighted in the listing - and rightfully so since this affects the price. Additionally, a listing should also mention anything significant that adversely affects the value. Buyers know this.

Buyers want a level playing field and any seller that thinks buyers do not notice these listing "errors" or omissions is sadly mistaken. I'm not referring to minutia being discussed in a listing, such as a couple knicks or scratches on a case, bezel insert or hand set but significant issues that affects a buyers decision to purchase a particular watch in a listing and how this omission affects the value. Credible and honest listing reflect favorably toward the integrity of the seller.

Wise words.

[colpol]

Originally Posted by Dan S

See the threads about the fake Daytona 6262.

Didn’t realise it had generated a new thread
Thanks for pointing out

[Kliminator]

Link to the other thread for reference: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=770352

[ILuvSubs]

It’s a shame for HQ Milton re 6262.

Rather unfortunate coincidence for that to occur whilst this thread is still ongoing too.

I suppose it’s open for them to make a comment on this thread as they are on TRF.