Seems I have the honor of making the first post in this subforum!
No doubt the watch below is a beautiful watch, currently advertised at Chronocentric:
At first glance, it looks like an "in-between" model watch, not quite a Mark II and not quite a Mark III. I have communicated several times with the owner of the watch and he has not been forthcoming with any part of the serial number which I have requested politely three times.
This ad presents a good opportunity to discuss what may be - or may not be - an "honest watch."
Parts of a Mark III:
The dial is clearly a Mark III dial as one can deduce from the size of the applied Saturn logo.
The central minutes and hours paddle hands are of the shorter Mark III variety and are orange-tipped as expected. The thin stick subdial hands suggest a model that is at least a late Mark IIb, but is more typical of a Mark III.
The photos of the partial movement shot and inside back case shot, clearly indicate a typical Mark III date and movement coloration with mobile stud carrier in evidence.
The back of the case indicates a Mark III Seapearl case back with the ?72/02/?
Parts of an earlier watch, possibly a Mark IIb:
The white tachymetre scale, sans tachymetre word spelled out, suggests a Mark II or earlier watch.
The central seconds hand is almost something, but almost what? All the thin red stick central seconds hands that I have seen belong to a Mark II or earlier watch, but I have not found one yet where the center circle is not also painted red?
The crown: it's had to tell for sure, but it looks like the crown is short as one would expect for an early Graph.
So why have I persisted in requesting the serial number - clearly a six-digit number?
It was on the off-chance that the watch had either a very late Mark IIb S/N or a very early Mark III S/N.
In other words, I was engaging in wishful or "magical" thinking!
Comments welcome.
~ Joe
Edit: Some final thoughts . . .
To someone who is not concerned whether the watch is wholly original or whether it may be a "put together" watch, at the right price, the watch may be attractive and worthy of consideration. To a collector though, this watch must be suspect.
Have I missed anything?
What has bothered me though is that the present owner appears to be deliberately hiding something. He answered each of my questions up to the point where I was insistent upon learning the first four digits of the serial number and then . . . no further response. His final email included: "Feel free to make me your best reasonable offer as this is the best info I can provide about my watch." Best would have included at least a partial S/N!
I think we all feel better when a seller describes a watch fully, pointing out its virtue as well as it's flaws and when the ad is accompanied with a sufficient number of photos to make a decent evaluation. The ad has only one photo in it. The rest of the photos came to me via email. I was able to bring the case back photo into Photoshop to try and highlight the S/N . . . and almost succeeded, but there is not quite enough there to see the first significant digits!
No doubt the watch below is a beautiful watch, currently advertised at Chronocentric:
At first glance, it looks like an "in-between" model watch, not quite a Mark II and not quite a Mark III. I have communicated several times with the owner of the watch and he has not been forthcoming with any part of the serial number which I have requested politely three times.
This ad presents a good opportunity to discuss what may be - or may not be - an "honest watch."
Parts of a Mark III:
The dial is clearly a Mark III dial as one can deduce from the size of the applied Saturn logo.
The central minutes and hours paddle hands are of the shorter Mark III variety and are orange-tipped as expected. The thin stick subdial hands suggest a model that is at least a late Mark IIb, but is more typical of a Mark III.
The photos of the partial movement shot and inside back case shot, clearly indicate a typical Mark III date and movement coloration with mobile stud carrier in evidence.
The back of the case indicates a Mark III Seapearl case back with the ?72/02/?
Parts of an earlier watch, possibly a Mark IIb:
The white tachymetre scale, sans tachymetre word spelled out, suggests a Mark II or earlier watch.
The central seconds hand is almost something, but almost what? All the thin red stick central seconds hands that I have seen belong to a Mark II or earlier watch, but I have not found one yet where the center circle is not also painted red?
The crown: it's had to tell for sure, but it looks like the crown is short as one would expect for an early Graph.
So why have I persisted in requesting the serial number - clearly a six-digit number?
It was on the off-chance that the watch had either a very late Mark IIb S/N or a very early Mark III S/N.
In other words, I was engaging in wishful or "magical" thinking!
Comments welcome.
~ Joe
Edit: Some final thoughts . . .
To someone who is not concerned whether the watch is wholly original or whether it may be a "put together" watch, at the right price, the watch may be attractive and worthy of consideration. To a collector though, this watch must be suspect.
Have I missed anything?
What has bothered me though is that the present owner appears to be deliberately hiding something. He answered each of my questions up to the point where I was insistent upon learning the first four digits of the serial number and then . . . no further response. His final email included: "Feel free to make me your best reasonable offer as this is the best info I can provide about my watch." Best would have included at least a partial S/N!
I think we all feel better when a seller describes a watch fully, pointing out its virtue as well as it's flaws and when the ad is accompanied with a sufficient number of photos to make a decent evaluation. The ad has only one photo in it. The rest of the photos came to me via email. I was able to bring the case back photo into Photoshop to try and highlight the S/N . . . and almost succeeded, but there is not quite enough there to see the first significant digits!
Attachments
Last edited: