Very suspect EXII 1655

[Lol-x]

This one just doesn't add up:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-Explorer-I...item3ca8b30c36

The photos are inconsistent.
The description does not match the depiction of the watch in the photographs.

I would run in the opposite direction on this one.

[tudorman8276]

...Steve...what are the inconsistencies that YOU are concerned about??

[onkyo]

Steve, I am not seeing it either...... please tell us what you see.

[Lol-x]

O.K. go to the large photo blow ups

Problem A
Photo No. 2 shows documentation from the Philippines.
Photo No. 7 shows no such documentation.

Problem B
Photo No. 7 is taken on a tiled background which is different than all other preceding photographs. The photo actually looks familiar to me.

Problem C
Photograph 4 has a very different white balance from all other photos depicting the watch sitting on a timber background. Further evidence of a different watch.

Problem D
The markings on the dial below 6 O'Clock and the shape of the coronet on the dial are not consistent with a 3 million serial number & early 70's. They are more like late 70's to early 80's.

Problem E (just in case you are not convinced by Problems A-D above)
The seller says that the watch was serviced in 2000.
However, the service receipt from the Phillipines in photograph 2 is dated 25 September 2007.

Man you guys need to be more careful

There is more but if you ain't convinced now you never will
I didn't want to say the above but as you asked.......

[1000ftSub]

hmmm, Steve is right, something smells fishy

[onkyo]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

O.K. go to the large photo blow ups

Problem A
Photo No. 2 shows documentation from the Philippines.
Photo No. 7 shows no such documentation.

Problem B
Photo No. 7 is taken on a tiled background which is different than all other preceding photographs. The photo actually looks familiar to me.

Problem C
Photograph 4 has a very different white balance from all other photos depicting the watch sitting on a timber background. Further evidence of a different watch.

Problem D
The markings on the dial below 6 O'Clock and the shape of the coronet on the dial are not consistent with a 3 million serial number & early 70's. They are more like late 70's to early 80's.

Problem E (just in case you are not convinced by Problems A-D above)
The seller says that the watch was serviced in 2000.
However, the service receipt from the Phillipines in photograph 2 is dated 25 September 2007.

Man you guys need to be more careful

There is more but if you ain't convinced now you never will
I didn't want to say the above but as you asked.......

Agree Steve... all the different backgrounds looks like stolen pics. And the coronet is not an early 70's 1655.

Great find Steve... Someone should contact the seller and get a close up of the dial at a requested time.

[Lol-x]

Q. What appears in every photograph except photograph 7?

[FIB112358]

here is a link where one the pics is taken from

http://au.images.search.yahoo.com/im...it8h6&type=JPG

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by FIB112358

here is a link where one the pics is taken from

http://au.images.search.yahoo.com/im...it8h6&type=JPG

Exactly the watch is a 1981 model and the date showing "16" is the 16th June 2007, the date when it was posted on the German Rolex Forum.

I don't think the ebay seller is German, and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be using photographs to show the current condition of the watch that are over 2 years old.

[onkyo]

Originally Posted by FIB112358

here is a link where one the pics is taken from

http://au.images.search.yahoo.com/im...it8h6&type=JPG

Proof has been located... Nice detective work!

[tudorman8276]

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by FIB112358

here is a link where one the pics is taken from

http://au.images.search.yahoo.com/im...it8h6&type=JPG

Yes, nice going Lance

[FIB112358]

I too have also seen this pic of the 1655 on the paperwork before. It was in another eb auction for a different 1655...

[Andad]

I take it that you are not working for the 'defence' today boss.

Good work Mr Smith.

[pablofields]

the bezel on the watch posted for sale on the German site has a fairly intact "16" that is not worn/faded... unlike the watch shown with the Philipines papers. Have to look close up but even taking the lighting into account I think it's clear enough that the bezels are different.

Great catch Steve

[idk01]

Fantastic work guys!!!!

[Safetrends]

Steve good work, nice to see you working tonight.

:chuc kle:

[Lol-x]

It's back again as item number 260532654046

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-Explorer-I...#ht_500wt_1182

[Lol-x]

I don't get it, ebay asks the seller to take it down. The seller does that, then puts it up again just like it was originally.

That seller should be banned IMHO.

[idk01]

Threaded there to :-) on its way to the can

[idk01]

Gone

This listing (260532654046) has been removed, or this item is not available.

[Lol-x]

Nice going Dave.

Does this mean that ebay will have sanctioned the seller for relisting it after he agreed to remove the first offending auction, or can the seller simply relist it again in a day or so?

[onkyo]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice going Dave.

Does this mean that ebay will have sanctioned the seller for relisting it after he agreed to remove the first offending auction, or can the seller simply relist it again in a day or so?

These scammers are persistent .... expect to see it listed again.

[idk01]

I agree with Pav, unless his account is booted there is nothing stopping him from relisting as many times as he likes, on some occasions eBay will prod the listing after a small amount of time, but I'm sure that is a rarity, I would be expecting a relist

[Czechman]

Original listing is still there. It appears as though it was never taken down because this is the same link as in the OP.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-Explorer-I...#ht_500wt_1013

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by Czechman

Original listing is still there. It appears as though it was never taken down because this is the same link as in the OP.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-Explorer-I...#ht_500wt_1013

I don't think that is quite correct. The listing is still there but it says 'Ended 3 January'.

So whilst it may be visible the auction on the original listing has ended i.e. closed.

[idk01]

Original listing didn't sell and wasn't taken down by eBay, but the relist was taken down - http://www.rolexforums.com/showpost....7&postcount=18 post 18 from Steve in this thread :-)

[Czechman]

Sorry, missed the part about the sale ending.