Here's an odd one

Academy award-style curtain dial. . . in a 1953 case. . . with a 7AA movement marked originally 1949 (A9) then later stamped 1952 (L2).

Case has previously been ID'd as a Commuter, but without any documentation to support that conclusion.

 

 

 

bourg01
Posted January 12, 2012 - 4:49pm

Panel Member

I would concurr, very odd. The question here is " Did Bulova do this, or a watchmaker?"  Just doesn't ad up, AA movement and dial in a Commuter case, very odd indeed.

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 4:52pm

Maybe as simple as a leftover AA dial/movement that got recycled after the AAs were discontinued.  The two date stamps on the movement would support that theory.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:24pm

Maybe it's just a yet to be ID'd 'AA'...

Bulova variants start at 'A' and the 'ACADEMY AWARD' series appears to have variants to 'ZZ', that's a minimum of 52 varaints.

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:24pm

The dates don't bother you?

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:26pm

Movement Stamped 1952 in a '53 Case? nope...

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:28pm

I meant 52/53 being a bit late for the AAs. 

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:30pm

Why? We already visited that issue and there was no order for Bulova to stop producing, merely to stop their advertising tactic.

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:34pm

All true, but it seemed to me that the consensus remained that Bulova quit making the AAs after 1951.  I haven't revisited that discussion in a long time, but maybe it was because we started seeing the curtain dial in models with other names?

bourg01
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:43pm

Panel Member

It certainly bothers me. I wouldn't even consider the notion of this being an AA model, 52 and 53 are not condusive to the timeframe Bulova produced the AA's. Thrown together with old stock inventory I can believe, an AA variant, not even worth the thought. Bulova was ordered to cease using any conection to AMPAS and that would mean the discontinuance of the AA model name as well. JMO

As for 52 variants, maybe but at least a pile of those would also be woman's AA models. A and B were woman's for an example. Also there is nothing in print that would suggest they used every letter in the alphabet. I would believe they started at A with the ladies, perhaps Q for the men's but never used them all.

mybulova_admin
Posted January 13, 2012 - 1:40am

Club 5000Panel Member

We have a number of post 1951 adverts posted on this site showing both ladies and mens Academy Awatd models. So they are either incorrectly dated or Bulova continued to advertise them post 1951.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 5:58pm

...and all 'ACADEMY AWARD's' had "curtain Dials"

21 Jewel 7AA stamped L2 /  Case stamped L3.

currently an 'UNKNOWN'

bourg01
Posted January 12, 2012 - 6:23pm

Panel Member

Your point made and taken, we did used to believe that didn't we. I guess anything in the whole "AA" ratsnest is possible.

EILEENOGAL
Posted January 25, 2012 - 11:05pm

 This currently an 'UNKNOWN' watch is the exact match to the one I found in my dad's drawer,after he passed.  I remember him wearing it as a child.  Do you have any info on this paticular watch? I will be greatfull. I would like to have it cleaned, and possibly replace the crystal, and wear it as a momemto. 

NOVA
Posted January 25, 2012 - 11:17pm

Eileen - We do not know what this watch is for sure, but we believe that it may be one of the variants of the Academy Award models, of which there are many.  There's a great deal of information here on the site about the AAs, including a summary on the Home page.  You may want to check that out.

Also, feel free to post pictures of your watch so that can talk with you about it further.  Since my watch is the only one like this that we've seen, it would be great to have pics of yours as another example of this fine timepiece.

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 6:10pm

We really need to disabuse ourselves of the idea that Bulova was ordered to stop using the Academy Award name.  According to everything we found that is not what happened.  A full discussion of this issue can be found here:  http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1953-his-excellency-1669

Below is verbatim what the FTC stipulation called for in October 1952, and this is the only authoritative documentation we found regarding what Bulova could and could not do vis-a-vis use of "Academy Award", etc.  Whether Bulova in fact quit making the AAs at that time because of all the brouhaha is a matter of speculation.

“Bulova Watch Co., Inc entered into an agreement in connection with the offering for sale, sale and distribution, in commerce, of its “Academy Award Watches,” it will cease and desist from using the words “Academy Award” or the word “Oscar,” as a designation of or in the advertising for sale of its watches or other commodities unless, in direct connection with the use of such words, depictions or simulations it is clearly and adequately disclosed that the right to use such words, depictions or simulations is by virtue of a licensing agreement entered into by and between Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and Bulova Watch Co., Inc, and is not representative of any meritorious award made on the bases of comparative tests with other watches.”

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 6:30pm

How long was the length of term on the contract between Bulova and the Academy?

That contract would need to have been fulfilled, IMO.

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 6:32pm

The contract would have just given Bulova the right to use the words; it would not have mandated that they in fact use them for any particular length of time.

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 6:47pm

I just read back through the original thread (cited above) regarding the legalities and time frame for the Academy Award, and I agree that the subject watch could be an AA.  We have no evidence to support the conclusion that Bulova stopped making AAs after 1951. . . or 1952. . . or 1953. . . .

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 6:59pm

exactly, but shouldn't a contract have a start Date and an end Date? an open ended contract doesn't sound too savvy on either parties behalf...

NOVA
Posted January 12, 2012 - 7:17pm

Rumor has it that the contract ran through 1954.  That is, from my point of view, an unconfirmed rumor.  I'll see if I can find something official.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted January 12, 2012 - 7:20pm

1954 would fit nicely

mybulova_admin
Posted January 13, 2012 - 1:43am

Club 5000Panel Member

Yes it would as the other two adverts we have are date from 1952 and 1953.

Both Ladies mind you. Still it proves that they were still advertising the AAs post 1951.

NOVA
Posted January 15, 2012 - 9:25am

I didn't realize that we had 1952 and 1953 AA ads.  I think that changes the picture entirely.

shooter144's picture
shooter144
Posted January 15, 2012 - 9:24am

No matter what it is Lisa, whoever put it together had good taste, that dial and case are very well matched style wise...Really nice looking watch !!

NOVA
Posted January 15, 2012 - 9:26am

Thank you.  I like it also and will keep it with my other, confirmed AAs.

bourg01
Posted January 25, 2012 - 11:35pm

Panel Member

Easy Lisa, I will no longer comment with any certainty on what may or may not be AA models but until we have proof in a printed ad. This watch remains a 1 star " unconfirmed" in my opinion. The last year has opened the book for theories and speculation on several other " unknown" models on which all have the characteristics of AA's, but without the proof, we're still presenting theories and possibilities that are unsubstantiated. Love the watch but, IMO, not an AA model until there's more proof it could be.

 

NOVA
Posted January 25, 2012 - 11:53pm

I don't disagree with anything you said.  All I said was that I'm going to keep it with my AAs.  I've never thought it was anything other than a tentative ID.

P.S.  I re-posted this watch as an AA.  This thread was pretty much dead until Eileen revived it to ask about her identical watch (see above).  If you want to continue discussing this watch, probably better to do it in the actual DB listing.