Had to replace cap jewel for 3 wheel. Very tiny jewel, was able to reuse original retainer.
Bobbee Arn't the two ads above from two different advertisers? I know these are snippets above, but the full ads always say which store is running the ad. Actually I think these two ads are not only a year apart, but from different newspapers too? Arn't they? Mistakes do happen, but it's harder to write off to a mistake when it's two different jewelers advertising in two different newspapers.....
Having said that, I repost this ad- showing a unengraved watch as the Lone Eagle. It's from August 30th, 1932, the San Jose News, ran by A Hirsh & Sons jewelers; 19 South Fifth Street.
The full ad for above is in the 1930's decades thread near the end of page 2.
A little further down in that decades thread, there are a couple other "conflicting" ads. The Miss Liberty. Two different watches, same newspaper and same date, but ran by two different jewelery stores.
Just checked, it's the same store, but it makes no difference.
I stand by my former statements, all the little things like lack of 1933 LE's in watch DB, All other watches in both ads are correctly named, so why just this one, twice in 15 months?
No engraved Trident ads, or mention of an engraved option.
Only White gold plain cased Trident, engraved is White AND yellow, as per the LE ads.
What about mainstream Trident ads? There are none.
Please explain your ideas of mainstream anyone, I think it means direct from Bulova?
What about the late 30's/1940 LE? There is only one Sears ad and all the rest are from newspapers.
I remember Jerin had trouble getting anyone to believe in that model, yet the ads have proved him right in the end.
In reply to Just checked, it's the same by bobbee
Same advertiser makes a big difference to me as it shows that only one person or store 'potentially' got it wrong and not multiple.
It's just my opinion which I'm entitled to of course, as is everyone else....but this one store/person 'may' have got it wrong.....may.
I'm not convinced that this is a LE model as released by Bulova. Not yet anyway.
As with most things Bulova and the irony of it.....time will tell if it isn't or is. And if it is guess who gets the cudos?? You Bobbee for all your wonderful hard work.
My comment about the CC LE relates to how this watch resembles that of the CC LE from the back, which is potentially were the mis-ID came from.
In reply to Moton submitted to reopen by Geoff Baker
I just happen to be wearing this watch today and was motivated into revisiting the model name discussion we had previously.
After years of searching I have finally found an alternate advert showing this watch as a different model.
Welcome the 1933 Bulova 'Bernard'. Note the black lines along the sides which I believe to be showing the side engravings.
It's not confirmed but at least now we have another name to search. It's also the first time we have come across this name. Not sure were the 'famous' bit comes from.
It's also worth noting that this print is very different from both the many 'Contest' and 'Trident' adverts we see.
The advert is dated December 17, 1933 and appearing in the Evening Star on Page B-6.
Ok another advert found confirming the side engraving.
