HELP on this 16750 I would like to buy, please!

[Filipão]

Dear distinguished Members, experts from all over the world,

Please help me, I'd like to acquire this 16750 and your thoughts and insights are very much appreciate. Don't spare your criticisms!

Thank you so much, safe 2021,

Filipe

[Dan S]

There's obviously a lot to like about the watch, I can definitely see why it appeals to you. Has the seller said anything about the lume in the hands? It could just be the photos, but looks a bit unusual.

[MrChamfers]

Looks like a lot of spotting on the dial.

[JustinK]

The spotting on the dial would be a deal breaker for me. Hands are possibly color matched and the band is put together.

Depends on the price and how much premium you put on papers.

[athom]

Relume hands no?

Both patinas do not please me...

[Jackie Daytona]

It may be just me, but the cyclops looks a bit wrong I think.

[offrdmania]

Originally Posted by Dontknow

It may be just me, but the cyclops looks a bit wrong I think.

Thats what happens when you polish it with a polishing wheel

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by offrdmania

Thats what happens when you polish it with a polishing wheel

Not so much the distortedness, I understand that bit as mine is slight off too, but more so that the cyclops looks unusually large to me in terms of the surface area and then the magnification a bit off outside of the distordedness. I may be mistaken though.

[Filipão]

Thank you so much for all your help.

I am enclosing some more pictures to make assessment easier.

Again thanks for all your valuable inputs!

[Rafabond]

the deployant or closure does not correspond to the bracelet. 725xxxx corresponds to 1982, it is normal for the warranty to be dated 1983, what is not normal is that it comes with a 1980 calendar.

[Kingface66]

I dunno, Filipe. Between the, what appear to be small oil spots all over the black of the dial, and the dirty smudges on some of the markers, not to mention the lume shade on the hands not matching that of the lume on the markers, I was pass on this without a second thought. I would never be able to look at it and see only blemishes. I’d rather pay a few thousand more for something in much better shape.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Rafabond

the deployant or closure does not correspond to the bracelet. 725xxxx corresponds to 1982, it is normal for the warranty to be dated 1983, what is not normal is that it comes with a 1980 calendar.

As you noted, the calendar, as well as the vinyl folio, are not period correct.

[springer]

There are very few GMT 16750 mattes being offered for sale, and from those, not hardly any that are very nice.

What is the asking price for this beater?

[TimeToGo]

LOL

Indeed a beater. Made up of parts... Seller can't even create a good full set out of it..
Hopefully it was described as such..

Come on Filipe, why are you wasting your time on this...

You are buying a redone case and papers..

[Filipão]

Thanks so much Guys.

Done. Forgotten.

On the hunt again!

[Filipão]

TBH, my problem is I'm stuck within the European Union and this one was at a "handy" place.

Wish I could have access to the US market, but the import taxes (36.9%) plus the hassle it too much to handle.

Again, I do thank every contribution and the fact that you've brought me back down to earth.

Sincere thanks, Filipe

[TimeToGo]

As the wise man said:
.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Filipão

TBH, my problem is I'm stuck within the European Union and this one was at a "handy" place.

Wish I could have access to the US market, but the import taxes (36.9%) plus the hassle it too much to handle.

Again, I do thank every contribution and the fact that you've brought me back down to earth.

Sincere thanks, Filipe

Handy, dandy or handy dandy - the price for a nice GMT 16750 set starts in the $20,000 plus range and up. I haven't seen any sets that were nice and correct for under $20,000 for quite a while.

If you scored a nice set for under $20,000, you hit a home run. Most sets for sale under $20,000 have issues with the watch and/or are cobbled together.

Good luck.