Bulova 1956 President

Manufacture Year

1956

Movement Model

11AC

Movement Jewels

Case Serial No.

B724658

Case shape

Round

Case color

Yellow

Case Manufacturer

Bulova

Gender

Mens

Watch Description

Case measures 38mm lug to lug x 34mm non inclusive of the Crown using Calipers. Butler finish Dial shows applied Gilt Hour markers, Bulova signature is printed in Black Hour and Minute Hands are Gilt Index style abd a Gilt Index style Seconds Hand appears on a Sub Dial at the 6 O'Clock position. Crown is N.O.S. and correct. Snap fit Caseback is Gold and stamped as shown. * vintage display ad is Dated 1956.

William Smith

Posted June 14, 2012 - 3:55pm

what year was that ad? I see the 3,6,9,12 dial in this ad.

FifthAvenueRes…

Posted June 14, 2012 - 4:15pm

Will,

The ad announces the new 'PRESIDENT' as in the 1956 display ad, 1956?

Comparing the illustration to that of the 'PRESIDENT' "C" ad from 1958 I'd say they are one and the same Watch, both matching the subject Watch, which is Dated 1956.

bourg01

Posted June 14, 2012 - 4:59pm

Ads not in the database and shows nothing to substantiate the date of 1956. Mark This is something you continue to do, produce new data , ads, etc without any proof. So you found an ad that matches the watch but you haven't proven the ad to 1956. If your going to continue popping up info, you'd best provide the provinence to support the the ad is from 1956 and you'd best submitt it to Stephen to be added to the database. But that won't happen, will it? Not to mention I don't see reference to the "el Presidente"

bobbee

Posted June 14, 2012 - 5:40pm

I have to agree with Shawn on this, to suddenly bring on this ad, which is undated, seems like a set-up. Data like this should be used for the good of the site, not used as a "secret weapon".

I'm very disappointed with the way this whole post has turned, so won't be viewing it anymore.

Bob.

bourg01

Posted June 14, 2012 - 6:01pm

Hey Bob, Never give up, that's how erroneous data gets excepted. If we continue to question the legitacemy of data produced, we find answers. I for one will always challenge unsubstantiated data. I have noticed cruising through the ads that Mark has donated very little to this site and I can only assume it's because he cannot date his material with proof of publifacation dates. That's just my opinion though.

DreamWeaver

Posted June 14, 2012 - 7:05pm

Just adding my two bits worth...Mark-Fifth seems to be the first one to challenge every watch ID over some minor nuiance...but he doesn't take criticism on his own watch IDs very well. When there is no doubt as to a watch's ID, and no matter how nice it is, he normally refrains from any complimenary comment. It is a bad game being played if you ask me. This post has become somewhat nausiating. The "one-upping" violations should be flagged for unsportman-like conduct.