How do we explain this to a newbie?

[TuRo]

I'm a solitary voice I fear, but I really love that dial, because the lume plots and gilt lettering are beatitfully intact amid a weirdly camo' dial .

[Andad]

Originally Posted by pauldavidthorpe

I'm a solitary voice I fear, but I really love that dial, because the lume plots and gilt lettering are beatitfully intact amid a weirdly camo' dial .

See post 60.

[minimalista]

This thread clearly shows that you can't explain 'this' to a lot of folks.

For those concerned about this being an unscrupulous listing, you can rest assured that no one willing to pay $24K for this watch is being mislead or lied to. The collector who bought this knew exactly what she/he was buying.

The listing describes the patina as having a 'complex and extensive tropical pattern' in the same sentence as 'excellent.' If you look closely at the printing and lume plots they are indeed excellent.

The color change in the dial is a result of years of aging. It is not rust.

Do an advanced search on this forum for '1966' with the poster being 'Jacek' and you will find examples of 'Gilt Bart Simpson Dial' listed for significantly higher prices that quickly sold based on the lack of repeat listings. This one going for less is a function of the market which has receded this year.

Several of the posts in this thread have disparaged the seller. I have personally purchased multiple Rolex's from Jacek and can attest to his honest and ethical conduct. He is among the best of the best vintage dealers.

Thanks for reading my take on this.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by pauldavidthorpe

I'm a solitary voice I fear, but I really love that dial, because the lume plots and gilt lettering are beatitfully intact amid a weirdly camo' dial .

That's fine that you like it. But in colloquial speech about watch, "excellent" does not mean "damaged."

It would seem to be more precise to say "This watch is most excellently damaged, dude!"

[MrChamfers]

The lume plots and dial printing do not look excellent.
The overall effect is kind of cool, but not worth the price of one that is in undamaged condition.
If an undamaged one costs 30k then this was a good deal!

[Filipão]

So, this has turned out to be a thread on "Protect a reputable dealer that is misleading buyers" versus "No reputable dealer would ever do it".

I'm clearly on the second batch. No excuses, no pardon, the greater the delear's reputation the less one expects such devious behaviours!

[minimalista]

Guess it depends on who's favorite dealer we are talking about...."what is Tim supposed to do? Make a statement by dropping the price in half?"

[Al1969]

This thread has been an interesting read. I have very little knowledge of the vintage market, but enjoy learning on TRF from the experts.

It makes you wonder how he(the seller) would describe the watch, if you were trying to sell it to him? Will he negotiate you down and point out a damaged dial, resumed hands, lugs, etc..?

[minimalista]

I've traded multiple watches to this dealer, Jacek. I've sent him photos and he made a cash offer each time. No negotiating or calling out any issues with the watches. Each price offered was very reasonable and more than I could have sold the watches for myself had I tried. Note that most of the pieces traded were vintage, non-Rolex and he did not list them for sale. I assume that he traded them or had clients that purchased them directly.

There is a small community of folks that are interested in patinated vintage watches. I found this thread while researching vintage submariners and was surprised to hear what I consider disparaging comments about the dealer who has always treated me with courtesy and respect and has never misrepresented anything. He has taken the time to help me understand the confusing nuances of the vintage and neo-vintage Rolex space. In the ad the photos say it all. No one was mislead by the ad and the watch sold quickly and has not shown up in the market afterwards.

I took the trouble of posting here to provide my experience. Many vintage dealers are sole proprietors running business that employee others. They stand behind their products and earn their good reputations. It may be satisfying to some - who assume that a dealer is making a huge profit at the expense of others - to weigh in with negative comments for whatever personal ax they have to grind, but that doesn't make it true.

The reality is that the market sets the price. This was never more noticeable than the past couple of years when standard run of the mill neo-vintage Rolex sports watches doubled in price.

[springer]

Originally Posted by minimalista

I've traded multiple watches to this dealer, Jacek. I've sent him photos and he made a cash offer each time. No negotiating or calling out any issues with the watches. Each price offered was very reasonable and more than I could have sold the watches for myself had I tried. Note that most of the pieces traded were vintage, non-Rolex and he did not list them for sale. I assume that he traded them or had clients that purchased them directly.

There is a small community of folks that are interested in patinated vintage watches. I found this thread while researching vintage submariners and was surprised to hear what I consider disparaging comments about the dealer who has always treated me with courtesy and respect and has never misrepresented anything. He has taken the time to help me understand the confusing nuances of the vintage and neo-vintage Rolex space. In the ad the photos say it all. No one was mislead by the ad and the watch sold quickly and has not shown up in the market afterwards.

I took the trouble of posting here to provide my experience. Many vintage dealers are sole proprietors running business that employee others. They stand behind their products and earn their good reputations. It may be satisfying to some - who assume that a dealer is making a huge profit at the expense of others - to weigh in with negative comments for whatever personal ax they have to grind, but that doesn't make it true.

The reality is that the market sets the price. This was never more noticeable than the past couple of years when standard run of the mill neo-vintage Rolex sports watches doubled in price.

Nice post...very thoughtful indeed.

But, on the contrary, calling some of the comments made here "disparaging" because forum members posted truthful comments regarding a written description for a watch being offered for sale at Tropical watches which was not accurate is not disparaging. Sorry to disagree but it is quite clear the written description did not match the photos of the watch when it was listed for sale.

[RFC]

Don’t think the description of this watch by this one seller is an exception. An “excellent” rating is widely used rather loosely. Dare to say that over 90% of the listings I routinely read by many sellers considered as reputable characterize cases as “excellent” when they’ve been polished, and have noticeable nicks and scratches or signs or wear and tear. Don’t get me going about dials or hands that have corrosion or cracks described as “tropical” or “spider”. “Good” would be a more appropriate description of a used piece but that doesn’t sell.

[1675-David]

Originally Posted by pauldavidthorpe

I'm a solitary voice I fear, but I really love that dial, because the lume plots and gilt lettering are beatitfully intact amid a weirdly camo' dial .

You are not a solitary voice at all Paul, I'm liking that dial too but... (and this English lesson is not directed at you, I just want to have it said) "Excellent" according to the Oxford English Dictionary is "extremely good, possessing outstanding quality or superior merit"
"Extremely" is the adverb form of the adjective extreme, which means "of the highest degree or intensity", and "good" means of "high quality; excellent."
Calling a dial excellent means just that, excellent. Calling a dial "excellent with light wear" "excellent with a missing hash mark at 27" or "excellent with pleasing martian cactus vibe"
is pushing the truth envelope in my opinion. One of the things that make this hobby so appealing is that a watch or dial doesn't need to be "Excellent" to be beautiful or desirable and if a seller is routinely describing everything as "excellent" it speaks to a kind of disengagement from what can make a vintage watch so special.

[Dan S]

I agree that in the collectible world, in general, "Excellent" is used to represent a very high standard. Something that is nearly flawless, a step below "Mint".

However, it does seem that some people posting to this thread have accepted the degradation of this term, or they think that it is relative. Perhaps someday there will be grading standards for watches.

[Bobcat Sig]

Originally Posted by GoWarriors

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I personally think the original watch posted in this thread looks pretty cool.

As do I. I'm also a new entrant into the vintage watch world. I like interesting and different so I dig it, description aside.

Originally Posted by pauldavidthorpe

I'm a solitary voice I fear, but I really love that dial, because the lume plots and gilt lettering are beatitfully intact amid a weirdly camo' dial .

I'm with you.

Originally Posted by Al1969

This thread has been an interesting read. I have very little knowledge of the vintage market, but enjoy learning on TRF from the experts.

I'm here for the same reason. Really good information here and I'm enjoying learning about it all.

Originally Posted by minimalista

The reality is that the market sets the price. This was never more noticeable than the past couple of years when standard run of the mill neo-vintage Rolex sports watches doubled in price.

This bears repeating, semantics of 'excellent' aside.

[TunaTuna]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

“The glossy black gilt dial is excellent with a complex and extensive tropical pattern”

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=855999

I’ve bought several watches from J. over the years, and his reputation is worth defending. But…is this where we’ve gotten to? How is this severely damaged dial in any manner “excellent”? What does this make those examples with clean, mirror finishes? I dunno, but the need to convince the uninformed, or new-to-the-hobby that dials like these are “excellent” (and coming from a trusted dealer no less) is just depressing. Especially when asking $23K.


[IMG][/IMG]

RSC would fix that right up... and you'd lose a lot, but it will look like new lol

[Tavli3]

I think it would behoove all especially the newbies if there were some posts of what Tropical is supposed to look like. I think it was springer or swish who posted their datejust with what I would say is what tropical dial should look like. To me it’s a thing of beauty and it’s what I have in my minds eye when looking at other tropical dialed watches.

As for the watch in question from my perspective it’s a piece of crap. This is not a rebuke of the seller personally since I don’t know him or ever have dealt with him. Simply the description is inaccurate and as many have said can be deceptive to the inexperienced buyers. Which of course is damaging to the whole vintage watch hobby. With all the shady shenanigans that we have discussed in the past it makes all but experts weak in the knees when buying vintage Rolex. Which again is bad in every which way you can think of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[springer]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I agree that in the collectible world, in general, "Excellent" is used to represent a very high standard. Something that is nearly flawless, a step below "Mint".

However, it does seem that some people posting to this thread have accepted the degradation of this term, or they think that it is relative. Perhaps someday there will be grading standards for watches.

Here's a start for you .................

New - never worn watches

Mint - has been worn but looks almost new and only exhibits some very minor imperfections or wear that is visible when looped to properly see the defects. There should be no dial, hand or bezel insert issues if applicable.

Near Mint - a few very light scratches and/or a couple small surface marks/dings. There should be no dial, hand or bezel insert issues if applicable. Inserts should be very nice without any scratches or dings.

Excellent - same condition as near mint but with more dings and/or marks and scratches. No dial or hand issues. Inserts should be free of any significant dings or scratches.

Average - a worn watch with bracelet some stretch and case dings, scratches marks and very minor hand or dial corrosion or mismatched hands.

Below Average - Case issues, overly polished, dial and/or hand issues to include a scratched dial or exhibiting missing lume. Also would have dial or hand issues to include corrosion. missing lume or mismatched hands.

Poor - same issues as below average condition but with service parts, very poor case condition, non symmetrical lugs, poor or overly polished crown guards, hands in poor condition with either the dial and/or hands missing lume and a dial that has significant issues.

[espanol]

I've read every single comment here, and one noticeable theme is that many are unable to separate seller from product description. Many are seeing this as an attack on Jacek's character, when rather, it's a reflection of how he conducts descriptions of his products.

I bought an item from Jacek, and it was flawless. He handles his photographs, website, communication, payment, packaging and shipment all extremely well. He is also splattered all over the internet if you Google his name, so also an online presence.

That said, I agree with OP, the description of this watch is totally misleading. So much so, that one could lean on his description to buy a product that is not as advertised. The dial is damaged, full stop. One could not describe it as "Excellent," and the defense cannot be made that "experienced buyers will know." Jacek sells product, and to falsely describe the product is an absolute problem. Use any of the 'cute' terms you wish like Vietnam tiger stripes, but to describe the product as "Excellent" is the problem here.

This should not be a reflection of Jacek's character, IMO, but should absolutely be considered when conducting business with TropicalWatch.

[1675-David]

Originally Posted by espanol

I've read every single comment here, and one noticeable theme is that many are unable to separate seller from product description. Many are seeing this as an attack on Jacek's character, when rather, it's a reflection of how he conducts descriptions of his products.

I bought an item from Jacek, and it was flawless. He handles his photographs, website, communication, payment, packaging and shipment all extremely well. He is also splattered all over the internet if you Google his name, so also an online presence.

That said, I agree with OP, the description of this watch is totally misleading. So much so, that one could lean on his description to buy a product that is not as advertised. The dial is damaged, full stop. One could not describe it as "Excellent," and the defense cannot be made that "experienced buyers will know." Jacek sells product, and to falsely describe the product is an absolute problem. Use any of the 'cute' terms you wish like Vietnam tiger stripes, but to describe the product as "Excellent" is the problem here.

This should not be a reflection of Jacek's character, IMO, but should absolutely be considered when conducting business with TropicalWatch.

I'm in full agreement with all your points except the last one, maybe I'm a bit strange, but the way I run my business is an absolute reflection of my character and my customers know that and so do the people who recommend me. (I'm not in the watch selling business BTW )

[espanol]

Originally Posted by 1675-David

I'm in full agreement with all your points except the last one, maybe I'm a bit strange, but the way I run my business is an absolute reflection of my character and my customers know that and so do the people who recommend me. (I'm not in the watch selling business BTW )

Makes sense, but I'm not sure anyone here is equipped to comment on his character, as I'd wager no one here actually knows the man.

I'm a simple guy, I see a watch that is different than advertised, I make mental note, and move on. I'm not going to put the seller's character in question, I'll just try another seller. Simple really.

[TuRo]

Blimey - this one has some legs!! ... All I can say is this is nothing, Hyperbole wise, compared to say a Real Estate agent selling historical old houses or a Vintage Car Dealership would proffer on something they are keen to puff up a bit!
I think The Beatles are/were 'excellent', but my mate Charles thinks they are utterly over-rated todd - thus excellence is in the eye of the beholder I suspect, despite all the dictionary definitions to the contrary !

[TuRo]

Originally Posted by springer

Here's a start for you .................

New - never worn watches

Mint - has been worn but looks almost new and only exhibits some very minor imperfections or wear that is visible when looped to properly see the defects. There should be no dial, hand or bezel insert issues if applicable.

Near Mint - a few very light scratches and/or a couple small surface marks/dings. There should be no dial, hand or bezel insert issues if applicable. Inserts should be very nice without any scratches or dings.

Excellent - same condition as near mint but with more dings and/or marks and scratches. No dial or hand issues. Inserts should be free of any significant dings or scratches.

Average - a worn watch with bracelet some stretch and case dings, scratches marks and very minor hand or dial corrosion or mismatched hands.

Below Average - Case issues, overly polished, dial and/or hand issues to include a scratched dial or exhibiting missing lume. Also would have dial or hand issues to include corrosion. missing lume or mismatched hands.

Poor - same issues as below average condition but with service parts, very poor case condition, non symmetrical lugs, poor or overly polished crown guards, hands in poor condition with either the dial and/or hands missing lume and a dial that has significant issues.

Like that - Perhaps drop the descriptive eg Poor which can be subjective and give them a 1-7 title ✓

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by pauldavidthorpe

I think The Beatles are/were 'excellent', but my mate Charles thinks they are utterly over-rated todd - thus excellence is in the eye of the beholder I suspect, despite all the dictionary definitions to the contrary !

Oh, no, no, no. Charles is simply wrong.

[Bobcat Sig]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

Oh, no, no, no. Charles is simply wrong.

No way. Charles nailed it. The Beatles are absolutely overrated. #trheaddrift

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by springer

Besides that ratty dial, the lugs were improperly refinished and do not represent what factory lugs looked like when new.

To me this is the worst part here.

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig

No way. Charles nailed it. The Beatles are absolutely overrated. #trheaddrift

Oy vey

[TuRo]

Patek Philippe going for a bit of the ‘non-excellent’ dial look too from new, me thinks…

https://deployant.com/review-the-new...ref-5226g-001/

[FrenchBigCrown]

Originally Posted by TunaTuna

RSC would fix that right up... and you'd lose a lot, but it will look like new lol