Stallone's Watches at Phillips.

cvalue13 · Dec 27, 2020

Foo2rama
if Stallone had not worn that watch in that Movie would Panari be around today?

no.

is Stallone saying this is the main screen worn one? Yes.

nothing else matters.

👎

For my personal clarification, is it only when a major auction house claims one thing (despite evidence to the contrary) that we’re not supposed to think for ourselves, or is it only when our man-crush Stallone talks that we are to turn off our brains and follow only our fluttering hearts?

📖

Now I see how auction houses continue to get away with these types of antics...

“You can’t be wise and in love at the same time.” - Bob Dylan

Foo2rama · Dec 27, 2020

cvalue13
👎

For my personal clarification, is it only when a major auction house claims one thing (despite evidence to the contrary) that we’re not supposed to think for ourselves, or is it only when our man-crush Stallone talks that we are to turn off our brains and follow only our fluttering hearts?

📖

Now I see how auction houses continue to get away with these types of antics...

“You can’t be wise and in love at the same time.” - Bob Dylan

What did the Auction House claim?

cvalue13 · Dec 27, 2020

Foo2rama
What did the Auction House claim?

😕 you haven’t read the article/claims being discussed... 🤪

Foo2rama · Dec 27, 2020

cvalue13
😕 you haven’t read the article/claims being discussed... 🤪

Stallone said it.

cvalue13 · Dec 27, 2020

Foo2rama
Stallone said it.

I’ll take that as a “no, I haven’t read the article/claims being discussed, but I am here refuting anyway.”

👍

Incidentally, since you don’t find important the verification of the purported history and resulting value of watches, I have several VERY important watches for sale, and I will offer you a very good price on them.

Archer · Dec 27, 2020

cvalue13
I’ll take that as a “no, I haven’t read the article/claims being discussed, but I am here refuting anyway.”

👍

Incidentally, since you don’t find important the verification of the purported history and resulting value of watches, I have several VERY important watches for sale, and I will offer you a very good price on them.

I don’t pretend to speak for Foo here, but I do believe his point is correct that this information, as good as the research might be, won’t really affect the value of this watch much.

Regardless of how Stallone came to be wearing this watch, he did wear it in the movie (that is not disputed), and for those who are fans of the brand that will be enough. I don’t think that even with these “revelations” that have been out there for some time, that anyone really can dispute that Stallone wearing these was a big factor in the popularity of the brand.

I don’t think anyone is saying this is right, but it’s not surprising in the watch world.

As for the auction house, I’m not quite sure what your point is there. If the consignor of the watch says this is the watch he wore in the movie, are they really going to go digging for evidence to the contrary? As much as I think they should be acting to higher standards generally, I’m not sure this is a realistic expectation given who is consigning this watch...you know, the guy that actually wore it.

Oh and nice to see some nice prints for sale at the end of that article...lots of people profiting from all this, including the “researcher”...

Nobel Prize · Dec 27, 2020

I don’t really know why anyone is having an issue with this. It’s pretty straight forward.

and why wouldn’t Stallone sell his watches? Just because you have money it doesn’t mean you should just throw money away, or only donate things. And btw, for all we know he donates millions to causes.

I think a lot of people that are selling even here don’t “need” the money desperately, but they still sell rather than give away.

is it the exact watch? Is it “one” of them? That doesn’t seem to matter as much when the PO Daniel Craig wore in a movie is out in a museum or for auction when, lo and behold, he is still in possession of it.....

oh yeah, there’s more than one!!

So what? If people place value on Newman’s Daytona or MacQueen 5512, why can’t they want to have Stallone’s Pam?

and why shouldn’t Panerai market that?

Why does anyone heave an issue here?

Foo2rama · Dec 27, 2020

Archer
I don’t pretend to speak for Foo here, but I do believe his point is correct that this information, as good as the research might be, won’t really affect the value of this watch much.

Regardless of how Stallone came to be wearing this watch, he did wear it in the movie (that is not disputed), and for those who are fans of the brand that will be enough. I don’t think that even with these “revelations” that have been out there for some time, that anyone really can dispute that Stallone wearing these was a big factor in the popularity of the brand.

I don’t think anyone is saying this is right, but it’s not surprising in the watch world.

As for the auction house, I’m not quite sure what your point is there. If the consignor of the watch says this is the watch he wore in the movie, are they really going to go digging for evidence to the contrary? As much as I think they should be acting to higher standards generally, I’m not sure this is a realistic expectation given who is consigning this watch...you know, the guy that actually wore it.

Oh and nice to see some nice prints for sale at the end of that article...lots of people profiting from all this, including the “researcher”...

Thank you, yes, that is how I see it. I am not as polite or eloquent these days you Canadians.

Dan S · Dec 27, 2020

Nobel Prize
Why does anyone heave an issue here?

Ohhh ... maybe just because it's deceptive and incredibly tacky. Not just the auction situation, but the whole sordid history. If the article didn't bother you at all, that's ok I guess. 🙄

And yes, as @Foo2rama and @Archer pointed out, regardless of the true history of the watch, the provenance is now "rock solid" from the perspective of value, based on Stallone's claims and the validation by the auction house. Too much money has been invested, it has momentum. And let's face it, at most, this is only mildly fraudulent. Much worse things have happened in the past, when celebrities (or family members) who were hard up for cash manufactured fake collectibles and sold them over and over again.

cvalue13 · Dec 27, 2020

To quote a great philosopher: “I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!”

Presumably the value of the following two watches is different:

Watch A: a Panerai that Stallone happened to find while traveling in Italy, buy, and fall in love with before ever landing a roll in the movie, then wore exclusively throughout the filming of the movie

Watch B: a Panerai that is one among 5 worn in the movie, and that came into Stallone’s possession because he was given them by the brand in order to market the watches

I never suggested that Watch B wasn’t valuable; to suggest otherwise would be silly (just as silly as attributing that view to me).

I was (I thought) more obviously pointing out that Watch A should be worth more than Watch B.

That Watch A is worth more than Watch B is, after all, one reason Stallone (and Phillips) may be *marketing* Watch A despite evidence it is instead Watch B

But, to each their own on whether they find anything of interest in Stallone and Phillips marketing Watch A despite it being Watch B! 👍

Foo2rama · Dec 27, 2020

cvalue13
To quote a great philosopher: “I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!”

Presumably the value of the following two watches is different:

Watch A: a Panerai that Stallone happened to find while traveling in Italy, buy, and fall in love with before ever landing a roll in the movie, then wore exclusively throughout the filming of the movie

Watch B: a Panerai that is one among 5 worn in the movie, and that came into Stallone’s possession because he was given them by the brand in order to market the watches

I never suggested that Watch B wasn’t valuable; to suggest otherwise would be silly (just as silly as attributing that view to me).

I was (I thought) more obviously pointing out that Watch A should be worth more than Watch B.

That Watch A is worth more than Watch B is, after all, one reason Stallone (and Phillips) may be *marketing* Watch A despite evidence it is instead Watch B

But, to each their own on whether they find anything of interest in Stallone and Phillips marketing Watch A despite it being Watch B! 👍

In this case A and B have the same value to people that would buy this at auction. I believe it went for 212,000 usd before premium.

Archer · Dec 27, 2020

cvalue13
Presumably the value of the following two watches is different:

I don’t presume as you do...

cvalue13
I never suggested that Watch B wasn’t valuable; to suggest otherwise would be silly (just as silly as attributing that view to me).

Can you please point out where someone in this thread has indicated that you believe this watch is not valuable, because I don’t believe anyone has.

cvalue13 · Dec 27, 2020

Archer
I don’t presume as you do...

That the rarity of an object tends to correlate with its value (especially with collectibles) doesn’t seem a principle needing defense.

And as a lesser matter, nor does it seem controversial that the quality of the romantic story around a collectible correlates with its value.

For these same reasons, Stallone chose to *market* the watch as being more rare and sentimental than reality supports 🙄

Archer
Can you please point out where someone in this thread has indicated that you believe this watch is not valuable, because I don’t believe anyone has.

😒 See e.g., etc.:

Foo2rama
... As such the watch has value...

Look, at this point people are arguing that rarity of a collectible and the veracity of its history are independent or (to them) unimportant to its value ...

Foo2rama
As it’s value is tied to being that watch, not veracity of the story that has nothing to do with the watch in this case. True or not the watches value does not change.

... which very unusual positions I might find interesting to explore, were the positions at this point not so palpably motivated by something other than genuine discourse.

Foo2rama · Dec 27, 2020

@cvalue13 perceived rarity not rarity.

if so why are 220 bezel errors not worth considerable more as they are the most rare bezel?

Pam collecting like corvette collectors have their own rules.

STANDY · Dec 27, 2020

The bidders on these type of watches aren’t going to be forum collectors anyway. They are generally rich collectors that pay the premium for bragging rights at their Red Bar get together over a few burgers cooked on their Hodinkee BBQ grill.

cvalue13 · Dec 28, 2020

Foo2rama
@cvalue13 perceived rarity not rarity.

if so why are 220 bezel errors not worth considerable more as they are the most rare bezel?

Pam collecting like corvette collectors have their own rules.

Stallone’s false story traded specifically on both rarity and sentiment, why, then? (That’s a rhetorical question.)

C’mon, someone come out, tell me I’m on candid camera, and then point to the cameras already ...

Foo2rama · Dec 28, 2020

cvalue13
Stallone’s false story traded specifically on both rarity and sentiment, why, then? (That’s a rhetorical question.)

C’mon, someone come out, tell me I’m on candid camera, and then point to the cameras already ...

The way you look at it is much different than the prospective buyers of the watch.

STANDY · Dec 28, 2020

cvalue13
Stallone’s false story traded specifically on both rarity and sentiment, why, then? (That’s a rhetorical question.)

cvalue13 · Dec 28, 2020

STANDY
The bidders on these type of watches aren’t going to be forum collectors anyway. They are generally rich collectors that pay the premium for bragging rights at their Red Bar get together over a few burgers cooked on their Hodinkee BBQ grill.

To these same folks, I think, having your watch/auction called into question by Jose is not the Red Bar discussion they’re looking for. Phillips itself occasionally uses him as their expert for verifying vintage Panerai, and he is more generally viewed as a vintage Panerai expert (who very vocally dislikes the Richemont company that now calls itself Panerai).

cvalue13 · Dec 28, 2020

Archer
Oh and nice to see some nice prints for sale at the end of that article...lots of people profiting from all this, including the “researcher”...

Weird dig, Al.

He is a graphic designer in his day job, made and offers the high res image for free (anyone can print it), but at one point in time (now 3+ years ago I think) had 50 prints he sold out quickly as they were “signed by Maria Teresa Panerai in Giuseppe Panerai’s very own laboratory at the historical site of the Villino Panerai (Panerai Villa) in Florence.”

He got those signatures because, as a “researcher” (to reuse your diminutive quotes) he’s well enough respected to hang with the Panerai family members.

If you look through his site, you’ll find the guy sells nothing else, and - as far as I can tell - is very much akin to the most seasoned of folks on this forum (or who have since left this forum) -and seemingly with 28 hrs in every day and an IV of Red Bull. As a hobbiest “researcher” he in 2018 caused Phillips to issue an apology and refund for a debunked Daytona it sold, but managed to do it so professionally enough that Phillips now uses him as recently as November 2020 as an “expert” to help verify certain vintage Panerai/Rolex... and here’s the thing... just a month before he then turned around and published his blog post calling Phillips into question for supporting Stallone’s story. Hardly seems the behavior of a shill.

That he once years ago offered Panerai nerds his own, impressive, limited run of 50 posters he had printed and signed by the Panerai family members (or instead let’s them download and print an unautographed version for free) hardly seems to alone discredit him in an off-hand quip.

Not to assume you have any interest, but this article about and interview with him by Ariel Adams at ABTW is an otherwise interesting read.

I don’t even follow Jose closely, and could not care less about vintage Panerai - but would find it un-OF like to not offer up some contrary view to your quip calling his integrity in question.