Bulova 1948 Broker

8/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
Manufacture Year: 
Movement Symbol: 
Movement Model: 
Movement Jewels: 
Case Serial No.: 
Case shape: 
Crystal Details: 
3/4" W x 7/8" L
Additional Information: 

I'm trying to find out some information about it's value.

This watch has been passed down through geneartions and I was informed that it is a nice watch by a local jeweler.  It is all original and in working condition.  It is rose colored gold filled.  The chrystal is a little scrathed up and case needs a little bit of shining, but other than that and a new strap, it's very nice.

The movement is dated 1947 so it is assumed it has been replaced.

Not For Sale
41 Director-07202011
Bulova watch
FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted July 26, 2011 - 6:24pm

I own the 'BROKER' and 'DIRECTOR' and will compare the Two.

OP's Watch is the 'DIRECTOR' as shown/named in the 1941 ad, there's no doubt.

Posted July 26, 2011 - 6:39pm

I thought we already had this conversation and came to the conclusion that we couldn't ID it as a Director as this dates to '47 (my NOS is a '48) and we have no ads to confirm??? Did I miss something?

Posted July 27, 2011 - 2:11am

Club 5000Panel Member

The case and dial are the telling factor. Movement may have been replaced.

I'm still calling Director.

RobHas, can you please confirm the movement date code or symbol.

Posted August 4, 2011 - 11:35am

Admin, Mine was NOS when purchased which tells me there was NO movement replacement? Mine is clearly marked 8AD/ 48 orig. band, NO wear marks anywhere! Mine is Rose Gold 14K. SS back 17 jewel, same two toned dial and matches RobHas exactly.  I still think my original guess about Bulova cranking these out long past the early 40's is closer to reality than a "Movement Replacement" but without Ad confirmation were still guessing!

Posted August 4, 2011 - 9:53am

It definatley has 47 on the movement.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted August 4, 2011 - 11:24am

Possibly assembled post 1947 using new old stock Case, Dial and Hands.

Based on the information We have the Watch is a 'DIRECTOR' but is not what the 'DIRECTOR' looked like in 1947, if that makes any sense.

Posted August 4, 2011 - 11:40am

If I read you right Mark, your saying somewhat what I said in earlier post about Bulova kept cranking them out long past them running ads for this particular watch? Same name as earlier version but not like the later version? It's clear as mud ;-)

Wayne Hanley's picture
Wayne Hanley
Posted August 5, 2011 - 2:09pm

The watch on the left is a picture of what is said to be a1948 Commodore. 14k Rose RGP 1948 movement 8AD 17j, Case No 0140918. The watch on the right is a picture of RobHas subject watch That I contend is a 1947 Commodore with 1947 17j 8AH movement. I  also contend that these two vatches have an identical case.                                                                                                     

Fifth, If you would be so kind as to upload a picture of the 1941 Director that you say matches RobHas watch it may clear up a few details. Thanks Wayne




FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted August 5, 2011 - 6:19pm


A little closer scrutiny of both Watch Cases will reveal the Watch on the left has a rounded lug, the Watch on the right has lugs that are squared off - matching the 1941 ad for the 'DIRECTOR'..

The Bezel horizontals of the Watch on the Left are much wider than those of the Watch on the Right also. Similar, but very different.

For future reference:

My only other suggestion would be the 'BROKER', variant unknown:


As identified through Crystal specs and a process of elimination (no visual proof) and may I add, a 'BROKER' (of unknown variant) identification would jive with the production dates of the Movements on both this Watch and the N.O.S. belonging to simpletreasures (Case and Crystal dimensions would confirm).

discussed here: http://www.mybulova.com/node/1260

exausting no?

: )



Wayne Hanley's picture
Wayne Hanley
Posted August 5, 2011 - 7:08pm

My problem is due to the movement date of 1947 indicates to me that RobHas case is most probably 1947 also. When Rob put the date of 1941 for lack of a better date. When the movement turned out to be a 1947 someone said it had to be a replaced movement because the watch is dated 1941 in the title. And things went downhill from there. Think about it. In 1947 Bulova did not advertise a Director. In fact in 1947 the case was renamed the Excellency SS. I will also stand with my so called Commadore of 1948. RobHas and my watch case are the same and not Director cases. If you will post a front view of your 1940-41 Director you are using as a reference but have never shown, I can indicate the differences for you. It might be a good idea to leave Bobs 1948 Commodore out of it also. Then make a case comparison between RobHas 1947 watch & your 1940 Director. By the way, what year is the Commadore in the ad? I've seen it before somewhere. I also read your link string and it does not seem to prove anything, except confusion.