Philosophical Musings on the Concept of "Authenticity"

[TheRealHowardJohnson]

I have a philosophical question about the concept of "authenticity" of vintage watchs.

I recently bought a vintage Tudor ranger. While researching the piece I came across a number of posts/articles stating that "all Tudor rangers with red lettering were 'fake'."

Mine has red lettering.

However, I asked the seller about it, and he explained that the movement, case, bezel, and dial comprised an authentic ranger, but that the dial, which is original, was repainted at some point, which was apparently common with these models.

So here's my question: if the whole damn watch is authentic why does a repainted dial make it "fake"? Frankly I like vintage watches with cleaned dials.

Also...

Do I understand this issue correctly? If a dial is refinished is the watch considered fake? Why do people who collect vintage watchs believe that restoration of one aspect of the watch invalidates the authenticity of the whole darn watch? What constitutes "restoration" significant enough to make the watch "fake"? If I like the ranger with it's tidy dial should I keep it or ask for a refund?

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

[jimcon11]

I think the idea is that if a watch is valuable beyond its utility, that value is derived from the artistry and execution of its design; thus many brands and builders have built a reputation for taste, forward thinking, and cultural relevance in their watch design. For a watch to carry this brand capital, it needs to remain true to the maker's vision for it. Even a very well done redial adds in decisions by a third party, and the watch strays from being a token of brand capital.

From a different perspective, original condition effectively increases the rarity of often already-rare watches, and is the perfect illusion for the dealers and auctioneers who comprise the "watch market" to use to artificially inflate the value of their wares. A watch doesn't have to be in original condition, it just has to be perceived as if it is. Flippers create a world of coveted details that build up an aura of desirability, allowing them to sell watches for far more than they paid to buy them. In this world, any modification other than servicing the movement and replacement of minor parts like screws or gaskets is supposed to detract from the watch's value. The vast majority of redials were done before the illusion of originality had been encoded into the collector consciousness, and people were quite happy with them.

I think a rational view is somewhere in between. I'd prefer a watch have its unrestored dial, but often times a well-done redial is much nicer than a badly worn or damaged original dial. Most "tropical" dials actually look like garbage, and the lust after "patina" is in my view some kind of illness. I've seen great artistry in redials, especially vintage Rolex and Tudor, that often meets or surpasses the look of the original.

If you like the look of your Ranger, that's all that matters. However, you do have a case to get a discount or refund from the seller if they didn't indicate it was a redial during the sale. Market value exists regardless of your inclination, and redial watches usually sell for 25-50% less than original, from what I've seen, all else being equal.


​​​​​​

 

[CycleBuyer]

The Ship of Theseus is the issue.

 

[ShovelnTC]

I spent years restoring various cars and motorcycles but have since given up on all things "classic", "rare" or "collectable" as my findings are that virtually everything in those categories are miss represented as far as claims of originality or the "genuine" components are concerned.

More importantly is opinion of others as when it comes time to sell there is always an "expert" ready top call you a liar or cheat and I simply have no desire to deal with those people and all enthusiast groups be it watches or cars have that element of self appointed experts.

If you bought your Ranger as an investment and the seller indicated that it was "original" then I'd try to return it but if you bought it because you love it then keep it, enjoy it and don't be concerned what you may or may not get for it come time to sell.

The reality is that if anything is particularly valuable due to rarity or age then there's busloads of people counterfeiting it so without a filing cabinet of documentary evidence It's never a good idea to assume it's authentic.

Oh and my last word is never take the word of a salesman.

 

[TheRealHowardJohnson]

Thank you all!

Wonderful advice, and I love the Theseus reference. I think I'm understanding all this correctly, and if I'm correct, it's really only a issue of resale value. All original = more valuable, restoration = fake in the mind of picky vintage purists so must be discounted accordingly.

I don't care about value, I own replicas, frankens, and authentic vintage pieces, all of which I love for what they are (I find myself staring at my wrists quite often) and not what I'll be able to sell them for later on down the line.

Honestly I think the benefit of collecting replicas or franken vintage watches is that you can take the whole (toxic) investment aspect of the hobby out of the equation and collect based on taste alone. Coming off a serious art collecting addiction, which was heavily routed in "investment', I cherish the fact that I buy watches for me and me alone.

I think my real issue is with the term "fake". For example, the articles I read more or less stated "all red rangers are fake." To me, that's incorrect as it suggests that they are replicas, when in fact the reality is that most are frankens and a good many are totally original with redone dials.

Silly and pretentious.

Anyways, thank you all for your help!

 

[tripdog]

I have a philosophical question about the concept of "authenticity" of vintage watchs.

I recently bought a vintage Tudor ranger. While researching the piece I came across a number of posts/articles stating that "all Tudor rangers with red lettering were 'fake'."

Mine has red lettering.

However, I asked the seller about it, and he explained that the movement, case, bezel, and dial comprised an authentic ranger, but that the dial, which is original, was repainted at some point, which was apparently common with these models.

So here's my question: if the whole damn watch is authentic why does a repainted dial make it "fake"? Frankly I like vintage watches with cleaned dials.

Also...

Do I understand this issue correctly? If a dial is refinished is the watch considered fake? Why do people who collect vintage watchs believe that restoration of one aspect of the watch invalidates the authenticity of the whole darn watch? What constitutes "restoration" significant enough to make the watch "fake"? If I like the ranger with it's tidy dial should I keep it or ask for a refund?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Tudor made a small run of Rangers with the name printed in red - a small run means limited numbers, means rarity, means higher value - especially to collectors.

If you have been sold a Tudor Ranger that originally had white printing and it now has red printing, then it means you have a fake 'Red Ranger'.

If a Red Ranger is worth double that of a normal 'white Ranger' then it obviously becomes very interesting for scammers to take advantage of this.

If you bought a Red Ranger, believing it was a Red Ranger because it as described as an authentic Red Ranger, and you paid the current market price for Red Ranger, and what you in fact received is a white Ranger, then you've been scammed - it was fraud committed by the seller.

As to the explanation given by your seller that altering Ranger dials so that they look to be rare and therefore valuable Red dials is quite ridiculous - it is quite common amongst scammers to alter, lie, deceive and cheat - and if he was the one who had the dial refinished, then he is a scammer.

Selling rep/aftermarket parts as genuine parts, be it on eBay, TRF or RWI, is fraud.

Selling a common and easily available watch disguised as a rare and valuable piece is fraud. Depending on the wording in the ad then you would be entitled to demand your money back//demand a partial refund covering the difference in value of what you paid for your fake Red Ranger and a normal, commonly found white Ranger.

 

[TheRealHowardJohnson]

Perfect explanation. Thank you. So it's a fake "red ranger" not a "fake" in the general sense. All proper disclosures were made and I don't mind the painted dial. So there's no issue!

Thanks again, I'm way more excited for this now as I was worried I'd have to make a fuss about the authticity issue.

 

[Danster]

Can we see a pic of your Red Ranger?