1996 GMT Pepsi 16700 Dial Question

[XavierM]

Good decision OP IMO.
This defect is also found all around the dial close to the minutes hash marks.
To me this defect is a huge pass: neither common (like tritium changing color over time), nor beautiful (like black turning to chocolate)

[XavierM]

Originally Posted by Mk2rick

Came across this post and I would like to share a negative experience with this seller last week . I was interested in his 16750 and had asked for UV pictures, but the reply from seller was "No", followed by .. "You'll just have to believe me". I never expected such a reply from a well reviewed seller. Reeks of laziness if you ask me.

https://lunaroyster.com/product/1985...si-on-jubilee/

Inside my brain, alarm bells were going off but I decided to revisit the watch's write up. Have a look at the write up yourself on the link above.

Sometimes you just got to be extra careful to see what is missing in the write up, especially what is not mentioned. Seller does drop key words like "no relume" and "no refinish" (I honestly fell for it initially).. but looking closer, these descriptions were with respect to what? Only the dial was mentioned. FYI: Every other listing of his has descriptions about the hands, but weirdly not this listing. Make of it what you will.

I decided to ask him directly if the hands were relumed? Seller read my message but didn't reply till hours later... Avoided my question totally and said i was a picky buyer and looking for perfection in a 30 year old watch. I guess asking for UV pictures is considered picky these days.

If you had bought that watch only to find out the hands were relumed, well technically the seller didnt misrepresent anything. You just didnt ask enough questions before buying. But if you had asked the right questions, you would be deemed to have been a picky buyer.

Stay safe folks, better to be safe (and "picky"), then sorry.

Disappointing as this seller usually has good stuff, detailed pictures and seems to represent things in an honest way.
He usually discloses when hands are relumed for example.

[ColoradoTime]

Originally Posted by XavierM

Good decision OP IMO.
This defect is also found all around the dial close to the minutes hash marks.
To me this defect is a huge pass: neither common (like tritium changing color over time), nor beautiful (like black turning to chocolate)

Thanks. I agree. Definitely the right call. Appreciate it

[ColoradoTime]

Originally Posted by Mk2rick

Came across this post and I would like to share a negative experience with this seller last week . I was interested in his 16750 and had asked for UV pictures, but the reply from seller was "No", followed by .. "You'll just have to believe me". I never expected such a reply from a well reviewed seller. Reeks of laziness if you ask me.

https://lunaroyster.com/product/1985...si-on-jubilee/

Inside my brain, alarm bells were going off but I decided to revisit the watch's write up. Have a look at the write up yourself on the link above.

Sometimes you just got to be extra careful to see what is missing in the write up, especially what is not mentioned. Seller does drop key words like "no relume" and "no refinish" (I honestly fell for it initially).. but looking closer, these descriptions were with respect to what? Only the dial was mentioned. FYI: Every other listing of his has descriptions about the hands, but weirdly not this listing. Make of it what you will.

I decided to ask him directly if the hands were relumed? Seller read my message but didn't reply till hours later... Avoided my question totally and said i was a picky buyer and looking for perfection in a 30 year old watch. I guess asking for UV pictures is considered picky these days.

If you had bought that watch only to find out the hands were relumed, well technically the seller didnt misrepresent anything. You just didnt ask enough questions before buying. But if you had asked the right questions, you would be deemed to have been a picky buyer.

Stay safe folks, better to be safe (and "picky"), then sorry.

MK2Rick,

Disappointing to hear. Sadly, that language very much gut checks with my experience as well - such as expectations from a 30year old watch, denial of a request for a video or FaceTime.

Thanks for adding to the post. I personally think that being "picky" in these situations is totally appropriate when you are spending 5 figures on a watch and dont have the luxury of seeing it with your own eyes, or holding it before you purchase it.

[GGGMT]

I would read no Relume no refinish as modifying both the dial in the hands. Other than a declination to provide a UV photograph, which seems stupid from a seller perspective, is there some other indication of these hands are relumed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk