- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
Is my TAG Heuer Authentic? All questions here please
- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
jamesbizs
·Hey guys, what do you think of this ?
What intrique me is that the position of the running second is on top. I almost never seen anything like that. Usually normal 7750 will place the running second on the 9.
What you guys think ?
- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
jamesbizs
·Ugh, I'm getting attacked on the other forum, for providing links to the sellers pages.
I like you guys much better already. Thanks for making me feel welcome, despite being completely brand new.
I like you guys much better already. Thanks for making me feel welcome, despite being completely brand new.
Edited:
- Posts
- 69
- Likes
- 59
jonnyv
·Ugh, I'm getting attacked on the other forum, for providing links to the sellers pages. Bunch of self righteous know it alls, that believe they are better than me, because they've been posting longer?
I like you guys much better already. Thanks for making me feel welcome, despite being completely brand new.
I'm brand new too. And I've felt welcome.
So thanks from me too.
- Posts
- 22,673
- Likes
- 32,312
Aquagraph
·Ugh, I'm getting attacked on the other forum, for providing links to the sellers pages. Bunch of self righteous know it alls, that believe they are better than me, because they've been posting longer?
I like you guys much better already. Thanks for making me feel welcome, despite being completely brand new.
They are being 'dickish' to say the least.
- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
- Posts
- 11
- Likes
- 5
sugrue_stuff
·Hi from someone else new to the forum.
The usual red flag for me with earlier tags such as the 1000/1500 series is an engraved reference number on the caseback. Originals all seem to have this number stamped with a clean, well impressed number. A lot of the examples being questioned here have the numbers engraved ( as do some later TH's that use the letter references)
The usual red flag for me with earlier tags such as the 1000/1500 series is an engraved reference number on the caseback. Originals all seem to have this number stamped with a clean, well impressed number. A lot of the examples being questioned here have the numbers engraved ( as do some later TH's that use the letter references)
- Posts
- 22,673
- Likes
- 32,312
Aquagraph
·and thanks for coming to my defense. Something tells me that's the type of forum, that will suspend me very soon.
No problem, seems some people can't see the wood for the trees.
It's sad though, because I always thought one day I would pick up one of those white dial F1s cheap, but now I will always worry it's fake.
- Posts
- 290
- Likes
- 416
akong71
·Ugh, I'm getting attacked on the other forum, for providing links to the sellers pages. Bunch of self righteous know it alls, that believe they are better than me, because they've been posting longer?
I like you guys much better already. Thanks for making me feel welcome, despite being completely brand new.
@jamesbizs - I don't think you were being attacked on the other forum for providing links to the sellers' pages, nor do I believe other members were claiming to be "better than you". In fact, you've provided ample evidence and information that will be useful to the members. Your point has been made. I agree with you. I also don't think I know more than you. I'm pleased to admit you know much more about watches than me, considering your experience with parts and servicing.
My comment (as MorbidSalmon00) was directed to your comments towards another long standing contributing member (also on this forum) - your quote:
You can't be serious right now. Sorry to sound rude, but did you not see a single picture that I posted? If none of those pictures convinced you 100% that they are fake, then, no offense, but you know nothing about tag heuers.
Then you come on this forum and claim other members form that forum to be:
Bunch of self righteous know it alls
There's no need for comments like this.
@Aquagraph - I hope you don't see this view as being "dickish", and you may be referring to another member's comments. As I stated in the other forum, this place needs to be a safe environment where we can share our passion about watches and the brand without worrying about someone sniping you in the back.
Edited:
- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
jamesbizs
·@jamesbizs - I don't think you were not being attacked on the other forum for providing links to the sellers' pages, nor do I believe other members were claiming to be "better than you". In fact, you've provided ample evidence and information that will be useful to the members. Your point has been made. I agree with you. I also don't think I know more than you. I'm pleased to admit you know much more about watches than me, considering your experience with parts and servicing.
My comment (as MorbidSalmon00) was directed to your comments towards another long standing contributing member (also on this forum) - your quote:
You can't be serious right now. Sorry to sound rude, but did you not see a single picture that I posted? If none of those pictures convinced you 100% that they are fake, then, no offense, but you know nothing about tag heuers.
Then you come on this forum and claim other members form that forum to be:
Bunch of self righteous know it alls
There's no need for comments like this.
@Aquagraph - I hope you don't see this view as being "dickish", and you may be referring to another member's comments. As I stated in the other forum, this place needs to be a safe environment where we can share our passion about watches and the brand without worrying about someone sniping you in the back.
I presented very easy to understand evidence, about things that should be well known by anyone that likes tag heuer, let alone someone that likes them enough, to spend hours on a forum dedicated to it. I stand by my statement that he knows nothing about tag heuers, while admitting it was hyperbole. Being dismissed, after hours of work and presenting evidence, doesn't feel good. I set out to help people, and it was thrown right back into my face. I presented verifiable information. They, provided NOTHING but questioning my assertions, without even a shred of backing up their accusations, for the sake of "keeping an open mind". So yes, self righteous know it alls, is the apt descriptor after being treated like that, despite my claim of them knowing nothing about tag heuers.
And I was clearly being attacked for providing links to the sellers and throwing my newness to the forum, in my face, to dismiss my claims. That, and saying I provided no qualifications for my assertions, IS claiming they are better than me. How can you say I provided ample evidence, while defending their assertions that I provided no qualification for my claims?
Edited:
- Posts
- 22,673
- Likes
- 32,312
Aquagraph
·@jamesbizs - I don't think you were not being attacked on the other forum for providing links to the sellers' pages, nor do I believe other members were claiming to be "better than you". In fact, you've provided ample evidence and information that will be useful to the members. Your point has been made. I agree with you. I also don't think I know more than you. I'm pleased to admit you know much more about watches than me, considering your experience with parts and servicing.
My comment (as MorbidSalmon00) was directed to your comments towards another long standing contributing member (also on this forum) - your quote:
You can't be serious right now. Sorry to sound rude, but did you not see a single picture that I posted? If none of those pictures convinced you 100% that they are fake, then, no offense, but you know nothing about tag heuers.
Then you come on this forum and claim other members form that forum to be:
Bunch of self righteous know it alls
There's no need for comments like this.
@Aquagraph - I hope you don't see this view as being "dickish", and you may be referring to another member's comments. As I stated in the other forum, this place needs to be a safe environment where we can share our passion about watches and the brand without worrying about someone sniping you in the back.
I wasn't pointing that at anyone in particular, and I did read the posts very quickly... it just seemed like the tone of the thread was less than 100% appreciative of James' efforts and a bit snipey generally. But I get it, forum people can get like that at times and I can understand James' frustration. Regardless of the technical aspect, the fact that these sellers have unrealistic levels of stock of old watches can't be ignored and people should at least acknowledge that if nothing else. Indeed, that in itself, as James has subsequently pointed out is worthy of investigation leave alone anything else. To be honest I didn't see where James was being attacked for posting the links either...
- Posts
- 6,093
- Likes
- 7,365
imagwai
·Hopefully you guys appreciate my work more than WUS. Because apparently I haven't provided enough evidence after my hours of research and detailed qualifications for my assertions, pictures included, and I shouldn't call out these poor innocent sellers.
I never attacked you and I was courteous in my response. I simply stated my point of view politely (these are public forums where people are entitled to do that).
- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
jamesbizs
·I never said any of those things. Maybe you should read my response again.
I never attacked you and I was courteous in my response. I simply stated my point of view politely (these are public forums where people are entitled to do that).
. Then being told that my judgement doesn't count for much, because I'm new to the forum. Nothing I said, required me to be a long time contributing member.
I never asked for anyone to believe me or take my judgements as gospel. That's why I provided evidence, that didn't require anyone to trust or believe me. The evidence stood on it's own merits.
And now I'm being told I'm wrong for providing the accounts of these scammers, which is literally the most important aspect and main crux of this entire thing, and provides some of the most damning evidence.
So yeah, you can imagine where my defense starts to border on the emotional.
Edited:
- Posts
- 6,093
- Likes
- 7,365
imagwai
·Look I don't want to make an even bigger debate of this than necessary, but I do feel you've totally over-reacted here. I made a simple comment that I was still a bit undecided about all this, and you take it as a personal attack.
Completely wrong statement. I never said that at all! What I actually said was that the evidence was quite convincing! All I was meaning was I could not just take everything you were saying as 100% fact. Example, there was an implicit assumption that because one model looked like a fake, that all of the watches the seller was selling might be also. They may well be, or they may be cobbling them together with non-genuine parts, but I don't think that can be proved beyond doubt, just because they have a lot of them for instance.
I don't really care if you're "new" or not and I was certainly not attacking you for that. But on the internet, anybody can say anything they want, whenever they want and for whatever reason, hence it's often a good idea to be skeptical. You say you have 20 or 30 years in the business, and you may well do. But I have not seen you posting before now.
It does, and as I said, it's very convincing evidence, and I await with baited breath what Tag have to say about it.
This wasn't me, but WUS have quite strict rules about discussing or posting links to fake watches. I'm surprised some of your posts haven't been removed by the moderators to be honest, but they don't look at the Tag Heuer forum that much.
Wrong? About what exactly? I haven't come to a firm judgement about anything - although I believe you are probably right.
I provided a ton of evidence, and you come in to say nothing I've provided is worth you believing these are fakes.
Then being told that my judgement doesn't count for much, because I'm new to the forum. Nothing I said, required me to be a long time contributing member.
I never asked for anyone to believe me or take my judgements as gospel. That's why I provided evidence, that didn't require anyone to trust or believe me. The evidence stood on it's own merits.
And now I'm being told I'm wrong for providing the accounts of these scammers, which is literally the most important aspect and main crux of this entire thing, and provides some of the most damning evidence.
So yeah, you can imagine where my defense starts to border on the emotional. You're so wrong.
- Posts
- 22,673
- Likes
- 32,312
Aquagraph
·I am also keen to see what TAG have to say, but I am somewhat skeptical how much effort they will expend on what they probably consider a 'disposable' watch unless they know the context of why the watch has been sent back...
Imagwai, don't you think the quantity is important? If I said I had an extremely low mileage Peugeot 205GTI you might be interested, if I said I had twenty don't you think that would set alarm bells ringing?
Imagwai, don't you think the quantity is important? If I said I had an extremely low mileage Peugeot 205GTI you might be interested, if I said I had twenty don't you think that would set alarm bells ringing?
- Posts
- 6,093
- Likes
- 7,365
imagwai
·I am also keen to see what TAG have to say, but I am somewhat skeptical how much effort they will expend on what they probably consider a 'disposable' watch unless they know the context of why the watch has been sent back...
Imagwai, don't you think the quantity is important? If I said I had an extremely low mileage Peugeot 205GTI you might be interested, if I said I had twenty don't you think that would set alarm bells ringing?
- Posts
- 22,673
- Likes
- 32,312
Aquagraph
·Oh absolutely. It's definitely a red flag. And as I said, fairly convincing. Irrefutable proof? Not quite.
On it's own, maybe not. But what if I said, I'd already sold another 20 and actually there were other dealers like me in other countries who also had as many as you wanted to buy.
I'm not trying to pick an argument with you, but while I agree it's not irrefutable proof, I do think it's more than a 'red flag'. I certainly wouldn't consider buying any of those models in future.
- Posts
- 22,673
- Likes
- 32,312
Aquagraph
·Or maybe we could take the pragmatic approach, that since it's so good that no one will ever be able to tell we just enjoy the cheap watches.... 😗
- Posts
- 6,093
- Likes
- 7,365
imagwai
·Or maybe we could take the pragmatic approach, that since it's so good that no one will ever be able to tell we just enjoy the cheap watches.... 😗
- Posts
- 899
- Likes
- 391
jamesbizs
·Look I don't want to make an even bigger debate of this than necessary, but I do feel you've totally over-reacted here. I made a simple comment that I was still a bit undecided about all this, and you take it as a personal attack.
Completely wrong statement. I never said that at all! What I actually said was that the evidence was quite convincing! All I was meaning was I could not just take everything you were saying as 100% fact. Example, there was an implicit assumption that because one model looked like a fake, that all of the watches the seller was selling might be also. They may well be, or they may be cobbling them together with non-genuine parts, but I don't think that can be proved beyond doubt, just because they have a lot of them for instance.
I don't really care if you're "new" or not and I was certainly not attacking you for that. But on the internet, anybody can say anything they want, whenever they want and for whatever reason, hence it's often a good idea to be skeptical. You say you have 20 or 30 years in the business, and you may well do. But I have not seen you posting before now.
It does, and as I said, it's very convincing evidence, and I await with baited breath what Tag have to say about it.
This wasn't me, but WUS have quite strict rules about discussing or posting links to fake watches. I'm surprised some of your posts haven't been removed by the moderators to be honest, but they don't look at the Tag Heuer forum that much.
Wrong? About what exactly? I haven't come to a firm judgement about anything - although I believe you are probably right.
I'm not entirely sure what that last comment was. I didn't write " you're so wrong". I can't prove that, as I did edit the post... but I honestly have no clue what that is.
I said I was over reacting and emotional about it, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong. I've had people private message me to tell me so, that are apparently too scared to openly voice their opinion. So i'm not just making it up out of the blue. Spend 5 hours doing work, be 100% certain, present your evidence, and be told it's not enough. If you don't react, you're a bigger man than I am.
And as I said in my comments. The watch doesn't look fake. it is 100%. And that a seller that is selling 30% fake watches, is probably selling the rest of the 70%. BUT, that I could be wrong, and I said as much in my posts. The 30% is more than enough justification to shut him down tho. 1 out of 100, I'll give you benefit of the doubt. 30 out of 100? You're willfully scamming people. Literally the only real part of the watch, is the movement, which is just ETA and can be bought cheap. So not cobbled together from anything, which can be proven beyond ANY doubt.
And as Aquagraph said. Having too much of a watch literally no one on this planet has too much off, in seemingly unlimited quantities, can't be proven, no. On it's own. But with everything else? This quacks like a duck. Flies like a duck. Looks like a duck. and hell, it even smells like a duck.
As far as me being new. I could have just posted pictures, and literally said nothing, and it would still show how fake the watches are. I guess I could have posted fake pics tho?
Edited:
Similar threads
- Posts
- 564
- Views
- 203K