White gold version. Case back is hinged and has two serial numbers one outside, one inside. Inside case back is marked Bulova Quality. Not sure I've encountered a 10 AN without a serial number and a hand stamped only date code. Doubt the band is original but it certainly fits the era this watch was born of.
Added 12/28/2011 2/24/2013 Name Updated from "Trident" to "Lone Eagle" Photos Updated 5/31/2023
Adding outer case serial number: 282371
In reply to Another ad, from Sept. 1933. by bobbee
"I don't know gents.... I found the same ads Bob has.. the 1933 November Ad out of Oakland. But for those two ads.... I found 10-15 other ads showing the Lone Eagle to be the one skinny one we have. Also several ads show the Trident above and the skinny Lone Eagle in the same ads. I'm more inclined (at this point) anyway to think those few ads might be some ad company getting confused rather than negate the other 10 ads from throughout the country for both 1932 and 1933."
+1000!
The advertisements do not add up, this example would not be the first advertisers error found.
The 'price difference' quoted in several prior posts is easily attributed to the L.E. typeset (descriptive text) being used alongside the wrong image.
It's almost too obvious.
In reply to "I don't know gents.... I by FifthAvenueRes…
[quote=FifthAvenueRestorations]
"I don't know gents.... I found the same ads Bob has.. the 1933 November Ad out of Oakland. But for those two ads.... I found 10-15 other ads showing the Lone Eagle to be the one skinny one we have. Also several ads show the Trident above and the skinny Lone Eagle in the same ads. I'm more inclined (at this point) anyway to think those few ads might be some ad company getting confused rather than negate the other 10 ads from throughout the country for both 1932 and 1933."
+1000!
The advertisements do not add up, this example would not be the first advertisers error found.
The 'price difference' quoted in several prior posts is easily attributed to the L.E. typeset (descriptive text) being used alongside the wrong image.
It's almost too obvious.
[/quote]
What does "+1000" mean????
The ads do actually add up.
The "price difference" could not be changed in the 1932 ads, it is there in the actual image of the watch, as seen below.
Certainly looks like they got the price right, and put it next to the right name.
And lets just look at that L.E. descriptive text. "A new model, bearing Bulova's greatest name! Engraved white gold or natural gold filled Bulova quality case. Raised gold numerals, gold hands. Novel Hollywood link bracelet. Guaranteed, accurate 15 jewel Bulova movement."
The above quote from the ad below certainly seems to be describing the watch in the ad accurately.
Now, lets look at the description of the 1931 Lone Eagle, which some think is the model being described, and would be the only one until the 1934 variant was released. The quotation below is taken from a 1931 L.E. ad in the DB.
"This Mens' Watch is named in honour of Colonel Lindbergh, celebrated Aviator. Fine white permanent finish case, with flexible bracelet to match. 15 jewel guaranteed Bulova movement. Choice of Radium dial or raised gold numerals."
That describes a WHITE plated watch, with a choice of dial types. This variant IS ONLY found in white gold.
The new model comes in two different case colours, but only one dial type.
The old model came in one case colour (white), but had two dial types.
Certainly does not look like the descriptive text was used with the wrong image, as claimed above!
So, that certainly puts paid to the idea that the wrong picture is being used, now for the advert being a genuine Bulova ad.
The description in all four ads for the new MK4 L.E. follow exactly the picture of the watch.
The descriptions of all watches in these ads are correct, and all models known.
This whole ad is a Bulova-generated ad, as can be seen when you look at it properly.
Look at the pictures of the watches on the left, and the descriptions on the right. See how the black and white colouration is quartered, in a modern, Art Deco fashion? It all flows and matches, not "made up".
These ads used Bulova-generated Mats, and were ordered from Bulova using these cards:
The ads were paid for and placed by Bulova, and this is attested to by H.H. Taub in the full transcript of his 1930 after-dinner speech:
"The watch people had to convince the retailer that if he was to be successful, he must tie up his windows with the advertising being done for him in the papers and magazines".
The phrase to really latch onto is this: "the advertising being done for him in the papers and magazines"!
A quote from the thread with the advertising card above: http://www.mybulova.com/forums/1923-national-advertising-campaign-card
"The first card posted by Admin sure suggests Bulova had lots of ads available for dealers to use in their campaigns as far back as 1923"
Agreed Will,
Which is why We can't discredit Jeweler ads for identification purposes, as it appears they were produced and provided for "advertising campaigns" by Bulova themselves.
Bulova wouldn't get it wrong, would they?".
Not very often, and certainly not in this case.
I just happen to be wearing this watch today and was motivated into revisiting the model name discussion we had previously.
After years of searching I have finally found an alternate advert showing this watch as a different model.
Welcome the 1933 Bulova 'Bernard'. Note the black lines along the sides which I believe to be showing the side engravings.
It's not confirmed but at least now we have another name to search. It's also the first time we have come across this name. Not sure were the 'famous' bit comes from.
It's also worth noting that this print is very different from both the many 'Contest' and 'Trident' adverts we see.
The advert is dated December 17, 1933 and appearing in the Evening Star on Page B-6.
