Bulova 1953 Academy Award "ZZ"

5/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
3
Variant: 
ZZ
Manufacture Year: 
1953
Movement Model: 
7AA
Movement Jewels: 
21
Movement Serial No.: 
None
Case Serial No.: 
8053103
Case shape: 
Rectangle
Crystal Details: 
21.9mm L 17.7mm W Concave Glass
Gender: 
Men's
Additional Information: 

This watch was originally thought to be a possible Academy Award model. However, there is no proof. There is a color picture of 7 Academy Award models that confused me & most of our members that made the comments below.

Lessons Learned:

One picture is worth a thousand words, one erroneous picture can mislead thousands of people.

Not For Sale
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
OldTicker
Posted April 12, 2011 - 8:38pm

Yes Lisa,

I was thinking the same thing, Acadmey Award Products was a sham company with nothing to stand on and yet it seems they got what they wanted.

P.S. Thanks for the layman's interpretation, my dictionary was getting a workout and I wasn't even done with the first paragraph....

NOVA
Posted April 12, 2011 - 8:39pm

My theory is that after the FTC went after them--most likely at the suggestion of the Academy and, apparently, with its full cooperation--Bulova decided it wasn't worth it to keep making the watch.  Lawsuits and FTC investigations are a royal pain, and they would have had to change all their ad campaigns pertaining to the AAs.  Plus, why would they, at that point, want to give the Academy free advertising?

OldTicker
Posted April 12, 2011 - 8:47pm

No doubt,

This info does give us a nice heads up because now we know that there were AA's made from 1949-53, and I would bet that the dial changed with every model year plus they also added many other AA models while they had the chance, They had to recoup their investment somehow.

plainsmen
Posted April 12, 2011 - 8:43pm

Club 5000Panel Member

I have a gut feeling this is a AA.... I can't prove it yet... but here's a few instances where this has been refurred to as such.. buy vastly different sources... we'll see...

NOVA
Posted April 12, 2011 - 8:48pm

I suspect you are correct (don't tell Fifth I said that), but I do think we need some proof beyond a box.  We've been pretty good about holding out for hard evidence, and I think it would be a shame to give up on that now.  I bet the proof will come along soon.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted April 12, 2011 - 9:03pm

...I heard that.

Many a person have been found guilty on circumstantial evidence - I beleive We're making headway into the 'it can't be an AA because' theory here.

NOVA
Posted April 12, 2011 - 9:12pm

Damn, busted!

No one should be convicted on circumstancial evidence alone, IMO.  But that's part of why I hated criminal law.

Anyway, I don't think we're saying "it can't be an AA because"--I really don't--rather that it may be an AA, but we don't know yet.  I don't think that's different from the standard we use for any other watch, i.e., if we don't have an ad or something significant showing what it is, then we label it "unknown".

Truth is, if the forum as a whole wants to call these AAs until proven otherwise, I won't argue against that.  What's the harm?  Someone may buy a watch thinking it's an AA, only to later find out it's not.  That's not such a huge deal really.  I just hate to see the database fill up with speculations with no way to distinguish those from the provens.

WatchCrystals.net's picture
WatchCrystals.net
Posted May 13, 2011 - 10:30pm

Now forward this thread to all the AMPUS timepiece collectors, and to Bulova...

So alas, I'm avanged!?  

:-)   Scott

 

P.S. We recently refurb'd and resold this nice AA "N" (BTW, I see no G?) for only $225.00!

 

At least I got $500.00  the price for Silver Curtain " T " model, w/the box: 

 

 

OldTicker
Posted April 12, 2011 - 8:48pm

I'm with you,

Hopefully its as nice as the seller said!

OldTicker
Posted April 12, 2011 - 9:00pm

Just a thought...

Maybe there should be a "Tentative Positive ID" area on this site, I know that I have a couple in the database that should be in there, That 1941 Ambassador "A" with the Lone Eagle ad that Jerin provided is one that I can think of.

Pending 2 positive forms of ID?, It would be a step up from "Unknown" ??