Original papers vs. Extract archive vs. Certificate of Authenticity vs. Service paper

[jesulaiman]

Hi all, I had a confusion about these four things I stated on the title: Original papers, Extract from archive, Certificate of Authenticity, and Service papers. Although I roughly know what each of these are and what they contain, it’s confusing to me which confirms the authenticity of a watch and which doesn’t. Let me outline these one by one:

1. First, original papers/cert of origin is certainly on top of the list when it comes to authentication. If a watch comes with original papers, and the serial, case and movement number match, then it’s highly likely that it is authentic (although needs further physical confirmation).

2. Another one is the certificate of authenticity, which we can order for certain brands like AP. This means we send the watch to their service center and wait for months for them to check parts by parts and confirm its authenticity. This to me, serves as good as the original certificate/papers. But one needs to be patient for the waiting time and be willing to pay the expensive fee..

3. Third, does extract of archives actually proves anything? When we send photos of our watch, or bring the watch to a boutique and order the Extract, what I know is they would check their archive to see whether the watch with the specific serial no exist or not. If yes, they will issue the extract paper which list the details of the watch in question, but this does not guarantee that the watch we have is authentic (though somehow makes us feel safer since we know that the watch we have is in their database). Another question is, does this mean our watch get a green light of not being stolen or reported as lost & found? I can imagine if it is being reported as such, we would be alerted by them when we request for the extract papers.

4. At last, the service papers. If we send our watch for a service, do they need to first check whether our watch is authentic? I don’t think they will do the service if the watch is not authentic.. so does this mean that a service paper act as a certificate of authenticity too? Then why one needs to order a certificate of authenticity, rather than just sending their watch for a service? (maybe at a similar price but get a job done)
Also, in brands like PP, we can choose either a complete service which is checking the movements accuracy and parts maintenance and comes with 2 years warranty, or a part job which is only polishing (no waranty). But won’t they also check the authenticity the watch first before doing a part job/ polishing? If this is true, then if someone just wants to authenticate their watch, could they just send their watch for a part job which is cheaper, so they can check whether their watch is (i) authentic, (ii) not stolen or reported, and at the same time (iii) getting it polished?

Let me know your opinions!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jltait]

TLDR

Sending a watch to the brands’ owned service centers for a regular service should confirm authenticity. If during the course of service they examine any aftermarket parts you’ll hear about it for sure.

I believe an archives extract is merely a piece of paper with vital info about a specific piece. Think of it as a birth certificate. Just because someone may be holding a copy of your birth certificate doesn’t mean they are you, if that makes sense.

Ultimately all the things you list are just pieces of paper or cheap plastic cards which don’t really prove anything unto themselves, and are more easily replicated than the objects they are meant to accompany.