Bulova 1949 Academy Award

Submitted by Geoff Baker on November 28, 2011 - 2:17pm
T
Manufacture Year
1949
Movement Model
7AK
Movement Date Code
49 (A9)
Movement Jewels
21
Movement Serial No.
-
Case Serial No.
1273753
Case shape
Rectangle
Gender
Men's
Additional Information

Nice Academy Award "T" in original clam shell case with period 'Velvet Grip' scissors band. Movement and case both carry A9 date code.

Added 11/28/2011

False
1949 Bulova Academy Award watch Geoffrey Baker 11 28 2011 GLB
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
William Smith
Posted March 15, 2012 - 10:18pm

should this guy be a 1950? 

William Smith
Posted September 7, 2012 - 2:01pm

....does the first digit of case serial number suggest 1951 vintage?

bobbee
Posted September 7, 2012 - 2:24pm

Geoff says "A9 date code on both case and movement" at the top of the page, Will. 1951 ad.

DarHin
Posted September 7, 2012 - 2:34pm

Would like to see a movement pic but 3 ticks '49 AA T.

FifthAvenueRes…
Posted September 7, 2012 - 2:36pm

These were produced in 1949?

William Smith
Posted September 7, 2012 - 3:09pm

Just saw the general discription text for the AA's in ad above. "New ridged dial improves readability".
I'm guessing it means "new" to the AA line, beginning at inception (Late 49?), or does it mean new to the later variants seen in the 1951 ad, possibly not availabe in the very early AA's.  If AA's came out in late 1949, would an "T" variant have come out that quickly to be also released in 1949?  Just thinking and reading...
Sure looks like an "T" to me.  If this bezel/movement combo had a different dial - any different dial- could it be another model in 1949- maybe an Excellency of some type? 

EDIT:  I said "F" above, but meant "T", changing now.

William Smith
Posted September 7, 2012 - 4:53pm

After thinking... Bulova could have made a bunch of these variant watches in 1949, in anticipation of the signed contract allowing them to name them AA's.  They most likely could have produced the darned displays before signing of the contract, as it's most likely not illegal to "make" these boxes precontract, but only to sell or distribute.  They got a bunch of these ready, and upon signing of the contract released them.  If the contract didn't go through, they were only "required" to destroy teh display boxes, and may have "named" the AA's watches we see some variant of His Excellency or Excellency.
We propose a similar idea with the 1926 "first 5000" conqueror made in 1926 but not named till 1927.  The Conqueror/Lone Eagle example doesn't include legal trademark issues associated w/ the AA sales, but you get the idea.

bobbee
Posted September 7, 2012 - 6:42pm

So if there is a precedent with the first LE's, then it is entirely plausible that that is what probably happened.

EDIT:- Beautiful watch, by the way!

William Smith
Posted September 7, 2012 - 6:41pm

I am really starting to like this watch.  It sure looks like a AA "T" to me.  ...and if Bulova "produced" these in anticipation of a signed contract, it makes this 1949 example more scarce than those produced in 1950/51.  Early in production (or low production numbers) add not only to desirability, but to other values as well, both intrinsic and monetary.  I'm not quite changing my ticks from two to three yet, but this is one cool watch Mr Baker!