"Only worn a few times"

[ElvisFreak 73]

First off: my respect to the late Gary!

Now, one phrase that has recently been used a ton in sales thread:

"Only worn a few times"

How much consideration should we give to this statement?

Obviously that is a heavily subjective statement: what is "near mint" to someone can be "lightly used" to someone else...

Should it be not about the actual wear and not the "amount of times" one wears a watch?

Should it be not about "how much contact against surfaces and objects" a watch has had ?

Let the  debate begin

 

[brang1 4,025]

here you go, covers all bases

TZ Grading System

This is a universally accepted grading system, and helps to provide clarity when assessing the condition of a timepiece. Please use this in conjunction with the photos on each listing to properly assess condition.

• LNIB A pre-owned watch that has been worn, yet is in perfect condition. Accompanied by the factory box(es), tags and documentation. No alterations from factory-delivered condition. The warranty papers must be stamped to establish the authenticity and validity of the watch. No bracelet resizing or marks of any kind. 100%
• Mint A pre-owned watch that is in very nearly perfect condition. Signs of wear are visible with a low powered loupe. May be a watch that is in LNIB condition but not accompanied by the factory box(es) or documentation. May refer to an older watch that has been restored, so long as the restoration returned the watch to very nearly perfect factory original condition. Working perfectly, keeping excellent time, needs nothing. 98-100%
• Near Mint Showing very light signs of wear. Faint scratches on the case, bezel, bracelet or buckle are visible to the naked eye. Completely original in every way. Strap shows light use - may be bent or lightly creased, but not stained. Bracelet may be resized. The watch is working perfectly, keeping very good time and needs nothing. 93-97%
• Excellent Evidence of use is visible to the unaided eye. Scratches are light, but more numerous than "near mint". If the watch has been restored, all original replacement parts have been used. Strap clearly used but no stains. No dents or dings are detectable, and the bracelet has little wear. Working perfectly, needs no repair or service. 88-92%
• Very Good The watch shows what might be considered normal wear by a careful owner who wore the watch regularly. Scratches are evident, but no nicks or dings. May have replacement parts and/or a high quality redial. Running and keeping good time, though may need minor regulation. A sound, attractive presentation overall. 83-87%
• Good Nothing fundamentally wrong with the watch, though it has quite obviously been used. Running and wearable, but may gain or lose a few minutes over 24 hours. Case may show a few dings, nicks, or deep scratches. May have a redial that is not up to high standards. May not have all original parts. 77-82%
• Fair Well used, may require service and/or restoration to be useable. May be running erratically. Dial, case, and other major components may not be original, but no pieces are missing. Even an untrained eye could tell the watch is worse for wear. Some might call it rough. 72-76%
• Poor Shows abuse, requires service and/or restoration. May have major cosmetic flaws, missing parts, may not run at all. A speculative piece - 'fixer-upper' would be too generous. Not junk, but requires lots of work to be made wearable. 66-71%
• Scrap / Parts A collection of parts that at one time may have been a functioning timekeeper. Now missing parts, may be rusted or corroded, not worth restoring. Most people would call it junk. 64% or worse. Your watch description must expressly state one of the grades set out above, or an intermediate grade. If your watch does not fall precisely into one of the grades, you may use an intermediate indication such as "Good +" and provide a description of why an intermediate grade was used, for example "cosmetically rough, but just received a full mechanical overhaul, new strap, and runs perfectly."

[Mystery Shopper 5,887]

 

[ElvisFreak 73]

@brang1

Good scale but not everybody follows it when they describe their watch.

As a comic book collector, we in that hobby follow a grading scale VERY strictly and people who use rather vague descriptors for their books usually do not have success in convincing collectors to buy. In the comics hobby and sports cards, we have chiefly the CGC to make a grading totally official.

Like my Spidey 1 for example: i grade it at a GOOD MINUS at best because of all the heavy wear and damage...I have not sent it to CGC but I would not be surprised if they graded even lower at POOR (0.5)

For watches, we do not go that far because they are not really considered "collectibles" in the same way a comic, a toy, a Mickey Mantel rookie or a vintage GI Joe would be considered.

Vintage cars: condition is everything then rarity.

In reps, who cares: wear the damn things but some people are fussy about condition even for knockoffs...

[Khronos 1,339]

It's difficult to be objective on this matter, as people have different standards. I don't pay attention to descriptions anymore and try to study the photos the best I can. I'm very careful with my watches and I'm often speechless when I see watches, that were worn "5 times", more banged up than a watch, I've been wearing nonstop for the past 2 years. My VSF Seamaster has 0 scratches, none whatsoever. It will probably catch a big one today, just because I wrote these words... 

[ElvisFreak 73]

1 hour ago, Khronos said:

It's difficult to be objective on this matter, as people have different standards. I don't pay attention to descriptions anymore and try to study the photos the best I can. I'm very careful with my watches and I'm often speechless when I see watches, that were worn "5 times", more banged up than a watch, I've been wearing nonstop for the past 2 years. My VSF Seamaster has 0 scratches, none whatsoever. It will probably catch a big one today, just because I wrote these words... 

yeah Murphy's law

good, agreeable post.

[RussP 22,335]

@brang1

You forgot the most important one:

F@rked  -  Watches worked on by SSteel 

[Member X 91]

4 hours ago, RussP said:

@brang1

You forgot the most important one:

F@rked  -  Watches worked on by SSteel 

I swear I saw a watch listed on RWI recently that had SSteel work on it listed as a benefit??  lol

[RussP 22,335]

8 hours ago, Member X said:

I swear I saw a watch listed on RWI recently that had SSteel work on it listed as a benefit??  lol

Yup..........they've achieved classic status amongst folk here 

[tribefan 6,768]

It's not so much the condition as the combo of condition and price. Someone offering a mint U1 gate watch for $50 is a lot different than a mint ZZF at full TD cost that has some obvious wear.

Like the system @brang1. I do think that is useful as both a buyer and a seller. Do those percentage equate to how it should be priced?

[deju 1,883]

Terms like; 

A couple 

A few 

Several 

Actually have meanings in the English language.  The subjective wiggle room isn’t that wide. 

Explanation from google: 

“A couple is generally around two, a few is more than that, but usually less than five, and several is around five or more, a number that can be severed into smaller groups.”

A used watch is a used watch, pictures will dictate the condition and the market will decide the price. 

[BadPickle 2,749]

[Del 4,463]

Thank god you didn’t say “catch and release”!  

As for descriptions, I’m with the guys above - a picture tells a thousand words. And if the pictures are crap, don’t buy the watch (unless you know the seller well and trust their description).

[ElvisFreak 73]

all very good, wise posts guys!

[Realism 72]

The description of used goods varies from countries, region and cultures...

Just to name one example, the Japanese vendors tend to understate the condition of their goods, ex. A listed "good" condition item is usually closer to "mint" in real life... Just the way the culture works...