Lads and lasses, welcome to yet another instalment of this little "watchdog" series, which, I assume, does not need an introduction. This week, we'll talk about fleecing, the inability to spot what's obvious, and unsavoury practices in journalism. This is your Bring a Brain!
First, the watches that our dear friends, who don't cease to provide me with rant-worthy content, have up for sale.
Let's start with this Universal Geneve:
First of all, it's dreadfully overpriced- by some 2400-2500 bucks. Second, no movement picture. Third, the UG serials are available online, but again, no one has even bothered to google them out... Fixed lug bars, OK, but on a NATO it's like wearing an Aloha shirt to a tuxedo.
Next, a Gigandet/Wakmann, and some truly spectacular powers of observation in action:
The price is disgusting, that's one thing. But the real fun starts here: "Lume: Tritium." Pardon me, my observant friends, but if that's tritium, then what are the "RA" markings for radium doing by the "Swiss" inscription? It's radium, for crying out loud! The "small nicks to screw openings on caseback" part is highly euphemistic, considering how deep these scratches are.
Now, some true madness- a Blancpain Fifty Fathoms:
I've got one question. How? How, by Jove, can one be selling a watch for $65K, and not even include a movement picture? How?!
An Omega Seamaster "Fleecing Fest":
Wildly overpriced. If it isn't a Flightmaster, it's not to be called Flightmaster, because it isn't one! Second, while the movement serial likely points to 1970, that movement comes from an earlier production run- since the ref. 166.090 has been introduced in 1971, so that's the earliest when this watch could have been made. That price is a joke, when we talk of cal. 1002- which, for one, was hardly Omega at its finest, and two- it's dirt common, with a total production of the calibres 1000 and 1002 being circa 370 000 units.
Also, there's one rather suspicious Eberhard:
The quality of the printing on the subdials looks slightly off, the paint appears to be creeping up the dial's applied features.
Now, let's move to something else. The unsavoury cooperation with TAG Heuer, on the recent limited edition reissue of the Heuer Skipper:
It is a pretty watch, I jest you not. Verily, it is. But I really don't like the cooperations between the "watch media" and manufacturers. Any cooperation between a news company (be it TV news, a radio station, a newspaper, or a watch website) and an entity that it reports on and the products of which it reviews, make any review questionable. Just as any journalist should not report on people or institutions, to whom or which they are connected through family or financial ties, Hoodwinkee should not do these cooperations. While it isn't illegal, it comes across as unsavoury, and reduces the credibility of their coverage of the company and its products to pretty much zero.
That's the second cooperation between Hoodwinkee and an LVMH-owned and JCB-run company, the previous one being the Zenith LE for Hoodwinkee. The hype constantly generated by Hoodwinkee for vintage Heuers and Zeniths is, in the light of that, very unsettling. Almost as if they were seeking to drive these brands out of the range of the average collector, in order to send him right into the welcoming arms of TAG Heuer and Zenith, who instead will offer a reissue at a lower price. That's of course just my hypothesis based on connecting the dots, but out of these dots connected, a rather sordid image emerges.
That's all for this instalment of Bring a Brain- I hope you have enjoyed the horror stories, and as always, Bring a Brain will return if necessary!