Guidlines for a correct watch ID?

This is a open form to get input from ALL MEMBERS on establishing a set of guidelines for what should be required to correctly give a posted watch a 3 "tick" rating.

As many of you have seen in the past few months, theory's and opinions seem to take precedence on the panel's rating of watches, and everyone has a different opinion. (you know the old saying about opinions) ; )  I am as guilty as others here of this.

Just what should we go by when we rate these watches? What do we think about variants?, does it need to have the same band as the ad? does it need to have the exact dial as the ad?

How about a posted watch with a hang tag? is it worth a 3 star rating?, what about a watch ID'd with crystal spec's? 

Do we give a watch a 3 check rating even if the info, supporting ad, or clear pictures are not provided.

I am sure that there are many other questions/requirements that should be addressed on this subject, and I welcome everyone to share their thoughts on this subject...and have asked Admin to pin this to the top of this form topic so it doesn't get buried by other posts.

Every ones input on this will help give the panel and those who would like to be on the panel guidelines on exactly what our votes should be based on.

I look forward to the responses and please keep it only to this subject.

Greg

JP
Posted June 15, 2012 - 10:12pm

Panel Member

If the watch does not match the advert it should not be recognized as three ticks.

There should be variants allowed by band  type  only.

 

OldTicker
Posted June 15, 2012 - 11:08pm

Do we have proof that the variant is determined by the band?

I am not belittling you John, the only example that I can think of is the Craftsman/Tuxedo, which is more of a name change than a variant.

We see ads that describe bracelet/strap, Charcoal/White dial, Rose/White/Yellow Gold case, but no variant.

Maybe the subject watch posted should have a exact match rating as well?

 
DarHin's picture
DarHin
Posted June 15, 2012 - 10:34pm

     "What do we think about variants?, does it need to have the same band as the ad?"

Only if there is an ad or ads that indicate that the bracelet/strap is the determining factor in the model name or variant. The Tuxedo/Craftsman comes to mind with ads specifying the bracelet/strap determines the model. I'm still green so I can't name a model where the bracelet/strap determines a variant of the same model name.

     "does it need to have the exact dial as the ad?"

Yes. If the dial is different then it could be a variant or completely different model.

     "How about a posted watch with a hang tag?"

Tentative id. There are too many marriages of watch and period correct box. The tag could have been found in the box.

     "what about a watch ID'd with crystal spec's?"

Tentative id. There are very few crystals deidicated to one model. Then there are variants for that model/case to consider.

     "Do we give a watch a 3 check rating even if the info, supporting ad, or clear pictures are not provided."

Tentative at best. Isn't there a statement somewhere that says blurry or unclear pictures will be deleted?

Darren

 

 

OldTicker
Posted June 15, 2012 - 11:24pm

Darren,

Agreed on the dial suggestion, some ads show different dial options.

Agreed on the hang tag suggestion, many "bay watches" with "original boxes" are wrong, as is the hang tag and/or box style.

Agreed on crystal spec's, 50/50 chance on those.

Agreed on Info to support the ID, I know Admin wants this site to be something that is fun, and not intimidating to the member, not everyone has a good camera, or the ability to remove the back to get to the movement, so the bad pictures slid, and the info is often overlooked, but it receives a 3 tick Id anyway, maybe it should just be a 2 tick??

Posting on this site takes a little bit to get used to as in other sites, but if the poster can't copy & paste the reference ad, usually another member will help out...that is the nice thing about this site...very helpful members.

DarHin's picture
DarHin
Posted June 15, 2012 - 11:54pm

Greg,

Blurry pics and missing info can eventually be remedied but untill it is the # of ticks should be based on the evidence presented. I'm more than willing to help out inexperienced/transiant members with my limited knowledge.

One of the major reasons why I've continued to be involved here is the archival aspect if this site, Stephen has done a wonderful job with the format. I'm a firm believer in easily accessed data and for the vintage watch community there is no better site. But, the data needs to be as accurate as possible based on the available evidence. By having a large group commenting on the watches and a knowledgable voting panel the wheat will get seperated from the chaff. 

OldTicker
Posted June 16, 2012 - 12:19am

I am in your camp Darren,

That is exactly why I started this post, but to get and keep a large group commenting and a fair & knowledgeable panel, guidelines need to be established, and goals need to be set.

The way it is now, IMO's & Theory's seem to take precedence over fact.

Another "question" that should be asked as this is just as important as guidelines,  maybe we should get rid of the panel and allow everyone to vote on the ID?? I am not trying to muddy the water, but, none of the 10 panel members are "Bulova Experts", and I think that intimidates the non-panel members to a certain degree.

This has been brought up before, and I was against it, but I am now rethinking my opinion.

 

vintagebulova.com's picture
vintagebulova.com
Posted June 16, 2012 - 12:16am

Club 5000

My criteria is pretty clear, the ID is either confirmed or it's not. Only 2 checks required.  I look for a reasonably exact match in a Bulova or major chain produced ad.  If a watch has a different case that's similar to an ad, as has come up with the Sky King, it is not confirmed.  If the dial is different from the ad it is not confirmed.  None of these "formal" dial variations that have no proof in an ad.  A hang tag alone or residence in a box is not confirmed.  For those of you about to call me out on my hang tag ID of the Westover be aware that the watch was obtained directly from Bulova by a realitive of mine who worked there at the time.   I would never confirm by crystal specs, just too much potential variation in size.  A tenth of a mm either way and the crystal could potentially fit.   I'm still mulling over the band issue.  With the majority of old bands not on the watches anymore it gets a bit tough to make an argument on this one.  If you've got the watch with the origibnal band and that band is clearly part of the description in the ad then its confirmed.  If there are different models that are differentiated by a band that is no longer there couldn't it be either one?  Like I said, I'm still thinking about that one.   Now what to do about a watch with a different set of hand than the ad?  Not sure what to do about that one.

Jay

http://vintagebulova.com™

OldTicker
Posted June 16, 2012 - 1:05am

Thanks Jay,

Hands are like bands, and even crystals, some ad's will describe a gabled crystal...Franklin comes to mind, What you are using is just plain old common sense, and as you and others that have been doing this for a long time, know that bands, crystals, hands, get replaced, dials have been refinished for decades, and movements have been swapped, so maybe we should be thinking as you do, add a star (tick) none= definitely not, 1= slight possibility, 2= tentative, 3= almost a match, 4= 100%, maybe original or as original as you can get.

What do you think about opening it up to every member?

Just thinking out loud...

vintagebulova.com's picture
vintagebulova.com
Posted June 16, 2012 - 5:10am

Club 5000

I don't think that opening up voting to every member is a good idea.  Those of us with the experience or time to research(or both) have enough trouble agreeing at times.  I believe that the more that you know the less likely you are to make an incorrect ID.  That being said a select experienced panel will probably positively ID less watches, but the quality of the IDs will be much better.  Speaking for myself I will not confrm a watch unless I am very sure of it's ID and as I said before there are no tentitves. 

I'd like to see less stars, not more.  Perhaps just one confirmed icon which gets turned on when a majority of the panel  agrees on the ID. 

Jay

http://vintagebulova.com™

bourg01
Posted June 16, 2012 - 7:55am

Panel Member

For the most part I'm in complete agreement with Darren.

  "does it need to have the exact dial as the ad?"

Yes. If the dial is different then it could be a variant or completely different model.

     "How about a posted watch with a hang tag?"

Tentative id. There are too many marriages of watch and period correct box. The tag could have been found in the box.

     "what about a watch ID'd with crystal spec's?"

Tentative id. There are very few crystals deidicated to one model. Then there are variants for that model/case to consider.

     "Do we give a watch a 3 check rating even if the info, supporting ad, or clear pictures are not provided."

Tentative at best. Isn't there a statement somewhere that says blurry or unclear pictures will be deleted?

 

 I like Jay's idea of a single  "confirmed" Icon that gets turned on with a majority vote. OT has a good idea on the table as well, adding a Icon for an "exact match".

Last is opening the voting up to all members, though none of the panel members are " Bulova Experts" we are far more knowledgeable than the members who come here looking to find out more about their Dad's, Mom's, Grandmom or Granddad"s watches. I don't think we should open up the voting to all members.

JP
Posted June 16, 2012 - 10:28am

Panel Member

Dotto Bourg01 on that as well as Jay's last comment. Being a novice at this, I rely on the help, data and photos that are easily seen and read.

JP

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted June 16, 2012 - 3:04pm

Club 5000Panel Member

I have lots of ideas, but no time now.  I can either post stuff here or take my young boys to a fishing derby.  I'll be back on-line Sunday PM or Monday.  This is good stuff, I just chose to go fishing right now....:)

timerestoration's picture
timerestoration
Posted June 16, 2012 - 3:23pm

Yes, this is good stuff, but glad to see you have your priorities straight Will...

GOOD LUCK!

Geoff Baker
Posted June 17, 2012 - 6:14am

Club 5000Panel Member

First of all - Variants

Must be a dead match to ad's, if not they should go in as generic model ID

"does it need to have the exact dial as the ad?"

Normally - but this does bring some of the really old watches into question and could make some of them unknowns

"How about a posted watch with a hang tag?"

Depends. Hang tags attached to watches are, in my experience, quite reliable. Tags in boxes should be suspect.

"what about a watch ID'd with crystal spec's?"

I never did buy into the reliability of third party ID.

"Do we give a watch a 3 check rating even if the info, supporting ad, or clear pictures are not provided."

That's really three questions. I don't think an ad needs to be inserted into every watch posting, it's just too big a hassle for most people - it's hard enough getting watch PHOTOS in. I can live without Ansel Adams taking your watch photos. Face it we BUY these buggers based on bad photos, don't we? many of us have become better photographers because we learned HERE ( valuable secondary benefit ). Regarding info - I say give us what you can,  we should be slightly forgiving in this area. I will not take the back off a screw down to get a movement #. I don't have the tools and will not take the chance on my NOS's. Get over it.

It really is the whole package, these are among the criteria that panel members should use to judge. A fuzzy photo of a '28 LE with a hang tag, little info and no ad is getting three ticks - always. I'm going to post a "Captain" model soon, NOS with a hang tag, could be the original box but I don't know. I don't think we have an ad and I expect some panel members to challenge my ID, as well they should.

OH - almost forgot - Three stars, three checks, three happy faces? I like the yes, no, maybe rating system in place today. We need a middle of the road. Keep it the way it is.

Happy Fathers day to all Father's on the board today.