Tony (Spartan) Manikis Should be banned from TRF forum

[TempoKing]

Recently he wrote in the same Watchout section of TRF that he is dissappointed with me ?

The truth is he is disappointed because he did not get his crystal money - I do not succumb to threats and arrogant attitude from anyone. Who is he to threaten me with Forum exposure ? Such an unorthodox way - totally unbecoming from a TRF member -
Others have been banned for lesser infractions.

Tony Manikis (Spartan) has been and is.. a part time buyer and seller of many Rolex and other watches - he has admitted this in the many posts he started here at TRF (mind you he joined in 2010 and not a pledge member yet).

When he received the Quartz from me - He had plenty time to check it and most importantly he knew how to check it thoroughly -
trusted seller or not - (I am the one who first said in this forums)... do your due dilligence - check the watch when you get it and then check some more....so 11 months ago...if there were watch parts or watch functions that he was not happy with (?)... He should have simply returned it !
Because my warranty which is similar to Rolex - like Rolex - will not pay for "outside" parts such as a damaged screw case back, or crystal, or Tube, or Crown - again ...He could have returned it - no questions asked.

He paid $2,135 + $65 for postage with delivery via USPS Express Mail. - My cost was $1,650 plus $50 postage to get it - plus complete service for $190 plus polishing $60 (usually i pay $40 but the Rolex quartz is tougher to polish correctly...all in all... cost to me was $1,950.- and he paid $2,135 ? - No excuse for him to make so much noise just because the battery died (?)

Yes... it all started because the battery died after 11 months - and he told me I am responsible - So then he takes it to Rolex for a "free" battery I assume... and there "they tore the watch to pieces" which is a normal practice, ie. case back damaged, gaskets dried, crystal counterfeit, change the tube, change the crown etc. etc... so they can charge $1600 for a watch that only had a dead battery !!
- and is only worth $1,650 (?) .. (IWJG value is $1200 to $1400)

So Traders like Tony (Spartan) Manikis understand retail and wholesale prices - and - expect dealer to dealer pricing - when they buy -
but when they "think" they have a problem (?)... they want to be treated like...a retail... first time buyer.!

SO do not think ..even for a moment.. that Tony (Spartan) Manikis is a "newbie" who was "born yesterday" ...
and that big bad Tempoking took his "lollipop" and that's why he is crying.

He demanded $195 plus tax (?) and although $195 is not "real money" for anyone who's trading.
His insulting blackmailing arrogance was very real.. and he got $0.00

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...ighlight=17013

[ViperB]

I don't know Tony but I do know Tempoking. He's a stand up and honest guy. Always been honest and very helpful in all of our dealings. Even help me out when I know he wasn't making much money. He's a superstar in my book. 11 months later to say that the crystal is aftermarket is a long time. Buyer should have had the watch looked over in a reasonable time.

[Noonan]

Originally Posted by ViperB

I don't know Tony but I do know Tempoking. He's a stand up and honest guy. Always been honest and very helpful in all of our dealings. Even help me out when I know he wasn't making much money. He's a superstar in my book. 11 months later to say that the crystal is aftermarket is a long time. Buyer should have had the watch looked over in a reasonable time.

I disagree. The onus is on the seller to look the watch over that they're selling and list it accurately. If a Rolex contains aftermarket parts, it should be clearly stated in the sale listing. That's not the responsibility of the buyer.

[T. Ferguson]

Popcorn-beer smilie.gif

[Watchurself]

If aftermarket parts were on the watch, they should have been correctly identified in the thread when the watch was sold IMO. If the crystal is indeed non-rolex, it should be the seller who assumes responsibility. I'll be sure to remember this thread in the future when searching for reputable sellers on TRF..

[Greg G]

The watch was advertised in the ad as "super collectible".

Not having ever heard that term before I have no idea what "super collectible" means, but I don't believe the buyer is out of line expecting everything on it to be original.

ETA: Maybe a disclaimer in an ad saying that due to the difficulty of identifying parts, some parts may have been replaced with non Rolex parts.

[Wesley Crusher]

Sorry, OP, but you've really gone off the deep end with this thread. I think it will only do more damage to you as a seller than to Tony.

[mfnj]

Wow, I don't know you at all but in all honesty I liked you much better in the other thread. Now, I am not so sure

[Madhav]

The buyer should be made whole in terms of paying for the replacement of the fake crystal. The watch was advertised as genuine but found to have a fake part. That is the only issue here and everything else is noise. No doubt there are communications issues on both sides but that shouldn't distort from the salient issue in all this.

I don't think anybody should be banned and nobody's reputation should suffer but either take back the watch with a full refund (which wasn't offered by seller - seller offered to take it back with $700 profit) or pay for a genuine rolex crystal replacement (which wasn't accepted by seller).

[mannyv11]

I don't know why we couldn't keep it in the original thread that was already going on.
I have been around the forums for a couple of years now (getting close to 3) and have always thought tempoking to be a superstar around here. I have heard countless stories about how he has gone out of his way for others etc and I thought very highly of him.

I just really don't understand how from a sellers perspective based upon the OP original sale ad how you feel that you aren't responsible for a NON-OEM crystal on the watch. If you stated in your ad that the crystal was non-rolex then I would say you're 100 percent correct and it is on the buyer. But no where in the ad does it say anything about potential non-oem parts.

If I was the buyer and sent the watch to rolex for a service and had them tell me that there was a counterfeit crystal on it I would be very pissed as well. The watch was sold as 100 percent genuine, it was not. The responsibility should be on the seller in this situation to make it right. 195 dollars isn't a lot of money when it comes to your reputation which has been 100 percent stellar until now.

[Tridor]

The seller's rant in this thread, as well as the discussion contained in the companion thread, speaks volumes and should motivate folks to exercise caution when dealing with trusted sellers. Contrary to what may be a popular belief here on TRF, things can and do go wrong with transactions involving trusted sellers ... and it's threads like these which expose the soft underbelly of that industry. So, kudos to the OP buyer who had the guts to stand up for what was right ... an undisclosed aftermarket part is unacceptable, and attempting to "make it right" by offering to buy back the watch at a large profit is inappropriate. That is true regardless of whether the buyer is a newbie or a grizzled, watch veteran.

[Jocke]

I guess there will be no winners in this deal.

[FTX I]

I'm sorry for both of you and I hope you guys can work this out.

[lig]

One more seller added to my "avoid" list.

[threemonkeys]

The key to a good seller is how they respond when things don't go as planned. And in my opinion, this thread feels vindictive, hostile and unnecessary.

Regardless of the true reality, people will make judgements based on perception. And I don't believe the seller helped anyone's cause with his comment above.

It's quite disappointing that this could not have been resolved amicably and privately.

[jcd]

Originally Posted by lig

One more seller added to my "avoid" list.

Agreed. And that's unfortunate.

[Tridor]

Originally Posted by lig

One more seller added to my "avoid" list.

X2!

[AbsolutelyROLEX!]

I agree, kind of disappointing to say the least....

[FTX I]

The seller had a human reaction over what he believed us unfair with him, as he was the one with more to loose as seller. It was not the best reaction, as posting this thread was clearly a mistake, but gentlemen please lets not forget the his past here. OP, get your shit together, end this useless discussion and learn from this mistake. I say I would buy a watch from you in the future, but enough is enough.

[applebook]

Originally Posted by threemonkeys

The key to a good seller is how they respond when things don't go as planned. And in my opinion, this thread feels vindictive, hostile and unnecessary.

Regardless of the true reality, people will make judgements based on perception. And I don't believe the seller helped anyone's cause with his comment above.

It's quite disappointing that this could not have been resolved amicably and privately.

Agreed 100%. I change my opinion completely now. It doesn't matter is a seller has been perfectly stand up for years. All that it takes is one big mistake to sully his reputation. The only reason that most of us gave Temp the benefit of the doubt is because of his strong rep.

The seller has no right to dismiss an 11-month-old claim of a non-original Rolex part. It could 10 years later, and the seller is still responsible for his original ad. It isn't Tony's responsibility to have every part checked out for authenticity. It's the seller's responsibility to do before selling it!

For those of you who keep insisting that Tony was wrong to post this publicly, no one loses out more than buyers/sellers if incidents like these aren't brought to light. It nothing else, they teach us always to be vigilant and never just to trust others blindly just because they are well known.

P.S. Why should Tony be banned for speaking the facts? If the facts that he's brought forth are incorrect, then please correct him. Otherwise, calling for him to be banned is just petty.

[FTX I]

I agree with the above, but please let's cut the guy some slack. I read countless threads here where members were thanking him for being supportive, for being a great seller, a great friend etc. We simply dont know the details here. Im sure they will both solve this issue soon. The lesson I take from all this mess is always stand up for what you sell and... vintage is a real bitch.

[DCgator]

Originally Posted by Greg G

The watch was advertised in the ad as "super collectible".

Not having ever heard that term before I have no idea what "super collectible" means, but I don't believe the buyer is out of line expecting everything on it to be original.

ETA: Maybe a disclaimer in an ad saying that due to the difficulty of identifying parts, some parts may have been replaced with non Rolex parts.

...and you would still plunk down thousands of dollars even if the ad says "some parts may have been replaced with non Rolex parts."?

[DCgator]

Originally Posted by ViperB

I don't know Tony but I do know Tempoking. He's a stand up and honest guy. Always been honest and very helpful in all of our dealings. Even help me out when I know he wasn't making much money. He's a superstar in my book. 11 months later to say that the crystal is aftermarket is a long time. Buyer should have had the watch looked over in a reasonable time.

You say "Buyer should have had the watch looked over in a reasonable time." If I was sent I watch for which I paid a few thousand dollars and later had it serviced and was told there was a non-OEM part(s) on the watch you best believe I will have a serious discussion with the seller that sold it to me for selling me a watch that had a non-OEM part(s). Truth be told I trust these guys a lot to the point that I have never taken a used watch I bought to a watchmaker for authentication. It is neither an excuse or acceptable that seller didn't know about the non-OEM part when he/she sold the watch and therefore ought not be held liable That's a crock of shit.

I strongly believe that the sellers from whom I bought several brand new and used Rolex will rectify the problem should one arise re non-OEM parts or authenticity. My 2c.

I don't agree that buyer should be banned. If one is banned, both should be banned. Or, neither should be banned. Fair and square.

[Goiguidoc]

1. The seller has great reputation
2. It it's very difficult to spot an aftermarket crystal glass
3. Refunding the value of the glass would be fair and would contribute to point number 1
4. The 2 threads are useless
5. I would not ban the seller and the buyer, but they should sort this out privately
6. I will deal again with TempoKing

[ArcticMoose]

I just took six watches that I bought three or four years ago in for service. What I paid for them originally, and how much time has passed since the purchase, is irrelevant. They were sold as original, so original is what I expect the service technician to find. Any other result will lead to words with the seller.

[Takemusu]

Originally Posted by DCgator

You say "Buyer should have had the watch looked over in a reasonable time." If I was sent I watch for which I paid a few thousand dollars and later had it serviced and was told there was a non-OEM part(s) on the watch you best believe I will have a serious discussion with the seller that sold it to me for selling me a watch that had a non-OEM part(s). Truth be told I trust these guys a lot to the point that I have never taken a used watch I bought to a watchmaker for authentication. It is neither an excuse or acceptable that seller didn't know about the non-OEM part when he/she sold the watch and therefore ought not be held liable That's a crock of shit.

I strongly believe that the sellers from whom I bought several brand new and used Rolex will rectify the problem should one arise re non-OEM parts or authenticity. My 2c.

I don't agree that buyer should be banned. If one is banned, both should be banned. Or, neither should be banned. Fair and square.

Yes.

[Jocke]

Dealing with second hand watches are probably among the worst thing you can do. Buyer and seller have always a different
valuation on the condition of things. What can you expect from a watch that is 40-50 years old? I am sometimes asked whether
it is acceptable for a 40 year old Rolex goes -6 seconds when the seller claims it runs within COSC . Indeed, it can do
depending on how it's used and how it rest over the night and how often you reconcile it with a precise watch. When a
dispute arises , it is never easy to draw the line of what is acceptable or not what you are entitled to as a buyer? What
about the seller ? No this is no simple mathematics with given answers.

My personal opinion is that you should always expect a service charge in the price whether the watch is serviced or not,
do you do this then you should be good to. Then it's been hidden errors which you can not blame the seller if he had
done his best to prove the watch's condition and deficiencies. By this I mean in general and does not take a position on what
is right and wrong in this deal.

As for this business so it should possible to solve without a public pie throwing.

Just my 2 cents.

[powerfunk]

Originally Posted by TempoKing

my warranty which is similar to Rolex - like Rolex - will not pay for "outside" parts such as a damaged screw case back, or crystal, or Tube, or Crown

Sir, your warranty is not "similar to Rolex." Rolex Service Center would never have even issued a 2-year warranty for a watch with an aftermarket crystal that still needs a bunch of non-warranty work. Would you like it if I sold you a used Ford with a "like-Ford warranty" and no engine? Ford's warranty doesn't cover entire new engines, sorry!

Also, you have repeatedly brushed over the aftermarket crystal issue as if it's not even a problem! C'mon, man. I don't care how hard it is to identify an aftermarket crystal; you know darn well we here at TRF prefer original parts. I know the buyer "threatened" you, but your prideful "I don't have to take this bullying from anyone" attitude is misguided IMHO.

I think you should've offered to replace the crystal, but oh well...I'd still consider buying from you in the future. But only if that "similar to Rolex warranty" nonsense is gone from the ad.

[MonBK]

Looks like Jocke has found the solution.

From now on before we buy a watch we simply set aside $500 - $2,000 for service and replacement of aftermarket parts that the seller wasn't aware of or couldn't verify and is therefore not responsible for.

[Jocke]

Originally Posted by MonBK

Looks like Jocke has found the solution.

From now on before we buy a watch we simply set aside $500 - $2,000 for service and replacement of aftermarket parts that the seller wasn't aware of or couldn't verify and is therefore not responsible for.

It's up to each one how they do, I was just explaining how I am doing.

Let's say you buy a watch with fake parts that can not be checked without taking apart the whole watch.
Do you do this before selling it to the buyer to be completely safe?

I'm just curious.