Looking for a Patek Philippe 5416J REP!!

[enderblair]

Hello everyone! New member, long-time watch lover here! I love the site so far, but i haven't been able to find what I'm looking for. I've spent hours browsing the trusted dealers and searching the forum posts for the watch I'd like, with no luck yet. So I come to you, the experts, to help me out.

I'm very interested in owning a near-replica of the Patek Philippe 5146J model. Here is a URL of a page that has pictures of it. I want the gold case version.

http://www.haroldfreemanjewelers.com/blogs/2009/04/patek-philippe-annual-calendar-ref-5146

I love this classic look! I'm willing to accept variations on this theme, but it must have a working moon phase window and working date window. Day dial/window would be nice, but not necessary. Month window/dial would also be nice, but not necessary. I'm only out to impress myself, so I don't care if it has a brand logo on it or not. I'd like the dial to be white or vintage off-white. I have small wrists, so the case MUST be at least 40mm or smaller, preferably 38mm or smaller. The case height must be 10mm or slimmer, preferably 8mm or slimmer. I don't like bulky heavy watches, which easily happens on my small wrist.

I'd like the movement to be quartz, not automatic, and not manual-winding. I like the simplicity and accuracy of quartz. I don't want to have to worry about maintenance, inaccuracy, or winding. Plus, quartz models tend to be slimmer. If there are absolutely no quartz models for what I want, I will accept automatic/winding movements. I'd like to spend under $200, but will pay up to $300 if it's perfect.

Well I hope this is neurotic enough for you!
So if you know of a trustworthy dealer who has or is willing to make this for me, please post on this thread or PM me! Thanks in advance!

 

[Dr.Verylong]

Send the dealers this picture, maybe they can offer something.

 

[Gaspard]

No experience with the supplier but

try to look here:
http://www.watll.com/WATLL_PAIEK_PHILTPPE-COMPLICATED-26007.html

[MOD EDIT] [BLINK] Not a Trusted RWI Dealer [/BLINK][MOD EDIT]

Wooo let's advertise for the Scamming site, hells yeah!

 

[guanaco]

Sorry mate but there won't be a rep of this with a Working Moonphase nor a decent one.

 

[mbjoer]

try to look here:
http://www.watll.com/WATLL_PAIEK_PHILTPPE-COMPLICATED-26007.html

[MOD EDIT] [BLINK] Not a Trusted RWI Dealer [/BLINK][MOD EDIT]

Hi Guanaco

I know you have the best intentions when you cencor the postings. But please do not nanny us!!

If you want to help us you can make the point that the dealer is not trusted here (VERY helpful) but not remove a link (Interfering and condesenting).

The tusted dealer list is a great help but leave it as a recommendation. Members can make up their own minds and cencorship is not a great thing anywhere.

 

[guanaco]

Woooooo! Drama!

Who's censoring who? I removed it because it's a damn scam site and I hate their site plastered here, no one is nannying anyone. But you know what, screw it, go buy from them all you want or browse the same site you would find with several different URL's. "oh look a scam site... with PICTURES of the GENS!!! let's browse that! yada yada"... bleh bleh... nah I'm just kidding. But don't get offended by something not even remotely concerning you, it's not like I did it to piss you off personally.... or maybe I did. You will never know!

Oh and Nannying? No. It's called moderating.

 

[mydnytrydr]

No watch (NO WATCH) is worth the risk of buying from a scam site ... One of the reasons I continue to be an active member of RWI is because I know I can find trusted dealers and watchsmiths recommended on here, and for the record, I haven't been dissapointed yet. Moderators, please don't change a thing that you are doing and keep up the GREAT job ......

 

[guanaco]

Thank you mydnytrydr! Well said about the risk involved in buying a watch from another site and that's exactly what I want to tackle when it comes to these sites, it's not frequent but the random new guy will say "screw it, for $68 I'll take the risk! They have the watch I want!"... I mean come on, it's been like 10 times that has happened, and every time it has been a disappointment for said person, I don't want to see another thread saying "I got scammed", period.

 

[mbjoer]

Thank you mydnytrydr! Well said about the risk involved in buying a watch from another site and that's exactly what I want to tackle when it comes to these sites, it's not frequent but the random new guy will say "screw it, for $68 I'll take the risk! They have the watch I want!"... I mean come on, it's been like 10 times that has happened, and every time it has been a disappointment for said person, I don't want to see another thread saying "I got scammed", period.

I appriciate that. I also appreciate the careful process behind the selection of the Trusted Dealers.

What I do not like is when posts are cencored, however well intended. I for one feel quite capable of making up my own mind. After all it can never be your responsibility when someone does not follow your advice.

I may be a minority of one in this matter, but I do wonder if you (and the mods in general) ever asked the membership their opinion on cencorship?

 

[guanaco]

I appriciate that. I also appreciate the careful process behind the selection of the Trusted Dealers.

What I do not like is when posts are cencored, however well intended. I for one feel quite capable of making up my own mind. After all it can never be your responsibility when someone does not follow your advice.

I may be a minority of one in this matter, but I do wonder if you (and the mods in general) ever asked the membership their opinion on cencorship?

Mbjoer I know you don't mean ill intent, however there are guidelines we have to follow, and it's not censorship when it comes to harmful sites nor if it's regarding rule breaking [i.e. pornography, shock & awe sites, etc], it's very simple, we protect the new membership, old members will not be asking if "X" site is legit, but some of the new ones, they will buy sometimes from any site due to the fact they seem to carry the watch they want, even if the other dealers don't have it... aka Scam. This is what I want to avoid, as a moderator I feel responsible if something goes to hell knowing it could be avoided, I'll repeat it for the heck of it, it's not the older members I worry about regarding scam sites, it's the newer crowds, and while you can say "common sense" will prevail it's not always the case.

 

[mbjoer]

For better or worse, censorship it is.

In extreme cases it may be justified too. But is this one such a case?

I partly ask because a much more blatant one seems to float freely in the General Discussion forum. And that one has provided excellent and sensible responses, but the censorship tool has not been used.

http://forum.replica-watch.info/vb/showthread.php/watchesspace-net-scam-do-they-65005

To me censorship should be used VERY carefully and almost always avoided.
Given the nature of this forum it makes sense to expose scam sites, but to do so openly.

I know that I have no need to do so in this case, but when other people start to think for me, I worry if they have hidden motives. You may know how to draw the limit, but the next mod may not.

In my book, openness is preferable.

 

[guanaco]

To me.

Exactly.

P.S. It's not censorship.

 

[tommy_boy]

I don't exactly have a dog in this hunt but will chip in regardless:

Maybe it's a language thing. What guanaco did here, and what other mods do from time to time when they remove the link to a known scam site, may be censorship in the strictest definitive terms, but I don't refer to it as such. No matter what term is used for the practice (moderating, censorship, editing, policy) most of the membership supports it.

If the members want to troll known scam sites for some reason, they can do that. We even provide a list for them.

Now, if somebody innocently posts the url for a site not yet categorized, and it's promptly removed, that's going to generate another and very different discussion that we have had and should have. After all, the excellent staff here can't vet a site that they don't know about.

Just my $0.02 USD.

 

[JC7]

if you're so concerned about the site and it's well being than at least upgrade to VIP.

 

[automatics]

For better or worse, censorship it is.

In extreme cases it may be justified too. But is this one such a case?

I'm an independent observer.
Yes, this was one such case where such an action was justified.

Some random member called "Gaspard" chimes in.
Just joined in Dec 2010
With just ONE post.
His first post - a direct link to a unmoderated site, possibly recognised scam site.

You don't need to be a moderator to smell a fish.
It's amazing they didn't outright ban that member & his IP.

Unfortunately, commonsense doesn't always prevail.
So sometimes, it is helpful to have a nanny for those who might need it.
Even if you in your awareness doesn't see the need.

No censorship has taken place here.
Just the cutting of thorns in case someone gets pricked.
Let's be glad someone is helping to prune the bushes.
So we can enjoy the roses with less worry.
And let's not fly the flag of freedom for it's own sake.

 

[deloreandmc]

"To me censorship should be used VERY carefully and almost always avoided."

May I just point out, who is the experienced moderator here?

Gaunaco, or you?

 

[WatchnScotch]

Who cares if this is censorship... it is a privately owned web page with rules and regulations. The owners and moderators have chosen to remove links from sites they feel will be harmful to the community at large. Many new members might see the link, click on it, buy a watch and then complain to the mods when they got ripped off.

And while I agree that you are an adult and can make your own decisions, you aren't protecting others on the forums and that is the job of the moderators.