Problem with some Grey Dealers who are Investors

[TreiseKL]

Is exactly this

[Honza]

Looks a bit more polished. I do not like when people describe watches the way which is not true,

[PSTW]

It’s entirely possible someone gave the serrated edge a going over!

Yikes.

[Seibei]

Liar liar pants on fire. I wonder what else is wrong with it.

[joli160]

It can be the picture, bezel edges don't always look sharp on my pics as well. Otherwise fine looking watch

[steeevvvooo]

"unpolished" nowadays just tends to be a way of selling a watch that has some scratches which haven't been cleaned up. Annoys me and professional sellers should know better

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Old Expat Beast]

Bezel looks about right for a 30-year old Sub that's seen some use. Description is misleading of course.

[jerryguo]

also 16610 is not vintage.

[oysterquartz17000]

Originally Posted by jerryguo

also 16610 is not vintage.

A 1991 16610 is considered vintage.

[1665fan]

Lol that’s the tip of the ice burg when you see little lies and large lies...everyday...then the professional dealers will just omit the re-lumed hands and spots on the dial....or newer insert... oh I forgot sorry! Exactly why people on the new forum are scared of vintage....

[Mark020]

I miss the investor connection. And a grey dealer is selling new watches IMHO

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by oysterquartz17000

A 1991 16610 is considered vintage.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[swish77]

This has been going on for many years, and I can find plenty of listings from all kinds of sellers (dealers, collectors, and hobbyists alike) that inaccurately describe polished watches as "unpolished."

It's the reason the term is banned on the sales listings over on VRF.

[brockburst]

Originally Posted by oysterquartz17000

A 1991 16610 is considered vintage.

No.

[77T]

Originally Posted by oysterquartz17000

A 1991 16610 is considered vintage.

Definitively not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Toronto Soup King]

After that Watchuseek tc sub thread, if I ever buy a 16610 it'll be from a trusted dealer ONLY. "Unpolished", though...there are truly great examples of old watches out there, perfectly preserved, all original, in attractive combinations. But they're pretty rare, most of the nicer examples I see online are in the private collections of members right here, not for sale!

[brockburst]

Originally Posted by Toronto Soup King

After that Watchuseek tc sub thread, if I ever buy a 16610 it'll be from a trusted dealer ONLY. "Unpolished", though...there are truly great examples of old watches out there, perfectly preserved, all original, in attractive combinations. But they're pretty rare, most of the nicer examples I see online are in the private collections of members right here, not for sale!

What thread are you referencing?

[TreiseKL]

Originally Posted by Toronto Soup King

After that Watchuseek tc sub thread, if I ever buy a 16610 it'll be from a trusted dealer ONLY. "Unpolished", though...there are truly great examples of old watches out there, perfectly preserved, all original, in attractive combinations. But they're pretty rare, most of the nicer examples I see online are in the private collections of members right here, not for sale!

I stick around WUS/f23 Rolex pretty regularly, which thread is this?

[springer]

Personally, and based on the one photo, I can't tell if the watch has been "polished" or not.

What I am certain of is that it is not vintage but a classic.

[roh123]

Easiest just to let the pictures speak for themselves. People that need someone to tell them it is unpolished are usually just tire kickers anyway.

[goog53]

Said it a million times to Buy The Seller.

[coelacanthus]

Went to the website and saw other pictures. Absolutely polished all over. Not even a good job. I'd hope it was just a mix-up of description text or something. If they are really intending to advertise that as "unpolished", whatever that means, they are just kidding themselves.

[Juhuatai]

This dealer is utter garbage, his name has come up before.

[faimag]

Maybe they mean “unpolished since the last time it was polished”...

[othertbone]

Originally Posted by TreiseKL

Is exactly this

A 29 year old watch that has never been polished? Yea right!

[offrdmania]

It may be true that it is unpolished. What it doesnt say is that its unused.

[springer]

Originally Posted by coelacanthus

Went to the website and saw other pictures. Absolutely polished all over. Not even a good job. I'd hope it was just a mix-up of description text or something. If they are really intending to advertise that as "unpolished", whatever that means, they are just kidding themselves.

I just visited awad's web site and looked at this watch. It is clearly "over-polished" indeed.

There was no "mix-up by awad." Watches are misrepresented all the time by dealers. In this instance, they are not "kidding themselves" but instead, they are trying to pull one over on the inexperienced buyers.

[XavierM]

Every watch was at least polished once :)
This word is to me more often a good way for a dealer to sell a worn out case for a premium price than to describe an extremely rare and valuable aspect of a timepiece...
Only my humble opinion here...

[Robtayham]

Originally Posted by oysterquartz17000

A 1991 16610 is considered vintage.

I don’t think it’s vintage.

[coelacanthus]

Originally Posted by springer

I just visited awad's web site and looked at this watch. It is clearly "over-polished" indeed.

There was no "mix-up by awad." Watches are misrepresented all the time by dealers. In this instance, they are not "kidding themselves" but instead, they are trying to pull one over on the inexperienced buyers.

Yeah. Agreed. It is really a shame, and I guess it's still worth it for those dealers trying to pull something like this. By this post alone, I will never be even considering buying anything from this dealer...