<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

The 5510 saga uncovers some interesting issues >>

December 15 2010 at 9:07 AM
Bob Gordon  (Login BobGordon1)
VRF Moderator
from IP address 129.44.180.164

Particularly, about how the world has changed.

I would say that years ago, say in the 1940's or 50's, I would bet that most, when first hearing about the 5510 story, would be inclined to believe it, with maybe a few doubters.

Now, the situation has flip-flopped:the cynics and sceptics are many, but can they be blamed? There are so many fakes, scammers, and no-goodniks out there looking for victims the one would be a fool not to have their radar working at full-tilt.

When we hear a story like this, it is heart-warming, but sadly infrequent. Can we ever return to a time when people mostly trust one another again?

Cheers,

Bob

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

Richard Carver
(Premier Login VintageRolexForum)
Owner
76.184.67.163

There's healthy skepticism and then there's sabotage...

December 15 2010, 9:23 AM 

...and we saw some of both on this watch. I don't understand the motivation to trash this watch and, as Vijay points out, it's owner. Jealousy? Trying to kill the value and buy it cheap? Simple meanness? I just don't get it.

The level of viciousness was off the charts, one poster even went so far as to knowingly post a falsehood about the movement being incorrect. That was caught but the big question remains, why would he do that? His loss of credibility is enormous. What was it about this deal that drove a couple of our Members so crazy?

.

 
 Respond to this message   

Kristian Hªªgen
(Login KristianHaagen)
VRF Member
217.157.183.209

Well spoken, Richard.

December 15 2010, 9:25 AM 

You have good points there. Greed is terrible, bad manners too. Now...these two together is plain nasty!

 
 Respond to this message   
tuscanyrose
(Login tuscanyrose)
VRF Contributing Member
24.187.41.224

you know something, this is not Disneyland...

December 15 2010, 10:01 AM 

quite frankly, there were people screaming from the rooftops that the watch was worth $80k. where were they when the hammer came down? nowhere close as we can see.
looking at the dial from Bob's (Ridleys) pictures I was surprised to see it was pristine, and the crystal was what was causing the dial to look bad. the case is another story.
What's at issue is what is "realistic" when looking at that particular watch in it's current condition. this watch was worn, and while it is charming that Bob owned this watch and wore it as a watch should be worn, IMO the money it brought was in the "higher end" ballpark for an end user.
Yes, I can hear the "auction watchers" getting ready to pounce, but we are looking once again at a "two tier" market.
I know all the "big watch" dealers and not one of them would put up that kind of money. Now, had they bought the watch cheap, would they sell it for less...well, your guess is as good as mine! lol

all I am saying is kind of what Bob Gordon is saying and that is we need to have this kind of skepticism, and I agree 100%. For every one of these deals that is correct and true, I can name plenty who have been drawn in by a story and been burned, including me.

as far as purposefully sabotaging, that is just not true. Viper not following up on someone else's investigation and story before posting, yes, that is correct. Bad move on his part, but to say it was on purpose is not fair. this is a guy who has saved many a member from buying fake crap, as we all do who care.
None of us could care less about the story. the watch has to stand on it's own merit. misinformation is not a good thing, but claiming this is an $80k watch just for shit's and giggles when you know not what you speak is not right either.
The market will dictate what something is worth to a particular buyer, as it did here.
To the new owner, many congratulations.

JB

 
 Respond to this message   

Richard Carver
(Premier Login VintageRolexForum)
Owner
76.184.67.163

You get your own opinion but not your own truth...

December 15 2010, 10:16 AM 

Since you used Arthur's name I will too. Arthur made a post stating there was a report of a 1570 movement in the watch knowing full well that "report" was a misprint, he knew it was a misprint because he's the one who pointed out to the publisher of the article it was a mistake. The publisher quickly made the correction but Arthur chose to repeat it here to further reduce the credibility of the 5510. The only thing that got reduced was Arthur's credibility.

.

 
 Respond to this message   

AAKVIPER
(Login aakviper)
64.12.116.138

Rich he posted his report on my forum first, I read the report..

December 15 2010, 10:56 AM 

as usual found the mistake and told him about it. He then edited the post to read a 1530 not a 1570 caliber a day later and it made it's way on VRF.

If I had not pointed out that a wrong caliber was in his article. Then the original report saying it had a 1570 caliber would have been posted a day later on VRF.

I did not know that it was mistake till the author of the article on my forum thanked me for catching it. As all the members assumed the author did his homework and was correct.

Rich I thought you and I straightened that out..When I repeated what was in the report on VRF, I had no idea that he corrected the mistake( which it turned out to be) that I found in his report.. But he actually thought it had a 1570 caliber in the 5510..He should done his homework before posting wrong info..

not sure what the flap is about?..Arthur

http://rolexnessreviews.blogspot.com/


    
This message has been edited by aakviper from IP address 64.12.116.138 on Dec 15, 2010 10:58 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
*Philip*
(Login dingomad)
82.124.94.61

JB there his a huge difference in between having "skepticism"

December 15 2010, 10:18 AM 

and running an unjustified lobbying campain against someone's watch.
An a lobbying campaign is what I saw.


 
 Respond to this message   
tuscanyrose
(Login tuscanyrose)
VRF Contributing Member
24.187.41.224

everyone is entitled to their own opinion...

December 15 2010, 10:20 AM 

all I said was it was in no way, shape or form an $80k watch. and in the end, it was not.

 
 Respond to this message   
Vijay
(Login YetiBiker)
VRF Member
68.213.171.217

So..you think the buyer overpaid for the 5510 sold on Christie's yesterday?

December 15 2010, 10:23 AM 


 
 Respond to this message   
tuscanyrose
(Login tuscanyrose)
VRF Contributing Member
24.187.41.224

maybe some here do not remember what happened in 2009...

December 15 2010, 10:33 AM 

when prices dropped 40%.
I hate seeing anyone pay for something and get stuck. markets are tricky and emotions can help/hinder a buy/sale.
I keep things very cut and dry with my people who come to me asking where they should be. some agreee with me, others think I am crazy.
as far as I can tell, there are not too many people out there who bought something from me and got stuck.

 
 Respond to this message   
Vijay
(Login YetiBiker)
VRF Member
68.213.171.217

I would be happy to be "stuck" a "30-40k "5510 purchased...

December 15 2010, 10:54 AM 

...from you, via your "keen" eyes wink.gif


    
This message has been edited by YetiBiker from IP address 68.213.171.217 on Dec 15, 2010 10:56 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
albertmctam
(Login albertmctam)
61.18.170.115

Re: The 5510 saga uncovers some interesting issues >>

December 15 2010, 9:31 AM 

Wholeheartedly agree. However it is a virtual community that we live in here, making it practically impossible to develop the same kind of social confidence as we would in the real world.

This virtual trust is built upon a platform so fragile, all it takes is someone (remember Jason Latif?) with a lesser mind who is into this game for personal gain, and exploit others for one's own benefit, then this whole platform would collapse, leaving us all hanging up high and dry.

To quote: VRF Membership is a social designation. It in no way implies the VRF has vetted a seller or approves of a seller. Always use due diligence prior to completing a transaction... or put it another way... you are on your own.

sad.gif

 
 Respond to this message   

AAKVIPER
(Login aakviper)
64.12.116.138

Bob I understand your point..but as a collector I feel that a

December 15 2010, 9:36 AM 

vintage watch should stand on it's own merit. Quality of the case, dial, hands, and if any papers are attached to it more love in the room.

But I still do not understand why a story backdrop was so forced onto the scene with this 5510? Maybe a big time celebrity ownership could be mentioned, but the watch should stand on it's own in my opinion.

Not to be a party crasher, but many nicer 5510's have been sold at auction over the years and with not much fanfare.

Just food for thought, Arthur

http://rolexnessreviews.blogspot.com/

 
 Respond to this message   
*Philip*
(Login dingomad)
82.124.94.61

I do not agree Arthur

December 15 2010, 9:59 AM 

To each his own. Some people like to dream and if I had to choose in
between 2 watches, one perfect and one almost perfect but with full pedigree
and a nice hguman story behind, I would choose the second one with no hesitation.

Collecting is not only about perfection it is also about emotion.

 
 Respond to this message   
tuscanyrose
(Login tuscanyrose)
VRF Contributing Member
24.187.41.224

yes, but you cannot advise people to shell out big money based on "emotion"...

December 15 2010, 10:03 AM 

not wise my friend...

 
 Respond to this message   
*Philip*
(Login dingomad)
82.124.94.61

I would just reply, pls just let them spend their money the way they want. nt

December 15 2010, 10:10 AM 

.


    
This message has been edited by dingomad from IP address 82.124.94.61 on Dec 15, 2010 10:36 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
tuscanyrose
(Login tuscanyrose)
VRF Contributing Member
24.187.41.224

I love when people "spend their money the way they want"...

December 15 2010, 10:27 AM 

especially when they spend it with me! llol
as a dealer I try to keep things objective and rational.
I see many scammers and look at all deals with a very keen "subjective" eye.

 
 Respond to this message   
Vijay
(Login YetiBiker)
VRF Member
68.213.171.217

You just don't give up do you? Not "fanfare" Arthur..

December 15 2010, 10:09 AM 

..just presenting the facts to refute the blatantly egregious falsehood perpetuated by you and few others. You are free to email me and we can discuss this in private.

 
 Respond to this message   

AAKVIPER
(Login aakviper)
64.12.116.138

it is a rare 5510 and the watch should sell on it's quality in my opinion

December 15 2010, 11:10 AM 

I have many action pictures of my PN and 6538 on my wrist racing cars, at parties and in social settings. Now will that help sell my watch in ten years with my personal photos? Or will quality and papers be a factor in the sale?

http://rolexnessreviews.blogspot.com/

 
 Respond to this message   
glen
(Login G.Betelman)
VRF Member
24.185.132.79

Arthur. As a collector you should feel that if the 5510 at Christie's

December 15 2010, 10:19 AM 

sold for almost $100K yesterday, the "bobble's" 5510 on e-bay should have sold for double that because it is in far superior condition then the example sold at Christie's. I'll go even further, having seen the Christie's watch in person on Monday, and seeing now the photos of the "bobble's" watch, I can unequivocally say they are not even in the same league! Bobble's watch is truly a spectacular example and the new owner got a bargain. Furthermore, I will admit I was one of the skeptics and I was truly humbled ( not easily accomplished with me) when I read Vijay's post. The only thing I feel bad about now is that I did not bid on "bobble's" watch.

 
 Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Contact

Vintage Rolex Forum and Vintage Rolex Market are not sponsored by, associated with and/or affiliated with Rolex, S.A. or Rolex USA or any respective subsidiaries or affiliates.  

Copyright The VRF, Inc. 2002 - 2017