When it comes to the world of luxury watches, it can be a similar journey to the luxury handbag game. The “unobtanium” phenomenon, where highly desirable watches seem unattainable to all but a privileged few, fuels the discontent. Avid collectors often find themselves caught in a frustrating battle to acquire their desired timepieces. Many believe that building up a purchase history can improve a buyer’s chances of getting highly coveted watches at retail. Sounds all too familiar…The story of Patek Philippe collector Ali Rezaei and his lawsuit against Bay Area jeweler Shreve & Co. exemplifies the growing discontent among watch enthusiasts.
Patek Phillipe Nautilus 5980/1R-001 chronograph. Image courtesy: Time and Tide Watches
Rezaei, driven by his passion for collecting Patek Philippe watches, embarked on a mission to obtain the highly sought-after Nautilus 5980/1R-001 chronograph. The timepiece in question has a staggering retail price of $108,820. Upon visiting his local Patek Philipe authorized dealer to express interest in this prestigious timepiece, he was simply rejected. Aware that acquiring such a watch required more than just a casual interest, Rezaei was advised by the jeweler that he needed to build a substantial purchase history to secure the coveted watch.
According to the lawsuit filed in San Francisco County Superior Court, Rezaei claims he was told: “If he built up his ‘purchase history’ by buying a sufficient amount of other merchandise over time… they would offer the Promised Watch to him.”
Motivated by this promise, and with his eyes firmly on the price, Rezaei proceeded to purchase a staggering $220,000 worth of goods from Shreve & Co., including multiple Patek Philippe watches and other luxury items.
Ethan Baron of Silicon Valley News stated:
“Rezaei soon bought a different gold Patek Philippe watch from Shreve, for $71,000, his lawsuit claimed. Then he picked up another timepiece by the legendary Swiss watchmaker, this time a women’s model ringed with diamonds, for $50,000. Then he bought a third Patek Philippe from Shreve, for $47,000. Finally, after he shelled out $53,000 for a gold and diamond necklace in March last year, a shop salesman assured him Shreve “would offer him the Promised Watch that year”, the lawsuit alleged. That offer never came.
However, despite his significant investment and the assurance that the “promised watch” would be offered to him by the end of the year, Rezaei’s dream of owning the Nautilus chronograph was soon shattered. The allocated time period came and went, and the promised watch never materialized…
While watch manufacturers often underpromise and overdeliver, retailers are known for their more reserved approach. Typically, they reserve highly sought-after watches for their most loyal and high-spending clients. However, Shreve & Co. appears to have taken this practice to an extreme if the allegations made in the lawsuit hold true.
Image courtesy: Time and Tide Watches
The story doesn’t end there, however, there’s an interesting twist that comes to light. At some stage of Rezeai’s 18-month spending spree which cost US$220K, the company became aware that it would no longer be an authorized dealer for Patek Philippe. As early as November 2021, the jeweler allegedly knew it would not be able to fulfill his request for the Nautilus 5980/1R-001.
Ethan Baron explains:
“Shreve — which in 1887 became the second U.S. jeweler in the U.S. to represent Patek Philippe, according to the company — knew as early as November 2021 when it sold him the women’s watch that it was losing its status as a Patek Philippe dealer and would not be able to sell him the 5980/1R-001, the lawsuit claimed.”
Rezaei’s lawsuit against Shreve & Co. accuses the jeweler of fraud, false promise, breach of contract, and intentional and negligent misrepresentation. Seeking at least $500,000 in damages, Rezaei hopes to hold the jeweler accountable for the promised but undelivered timepiece.
While the outcome of the legal battle still remains uncertain, one thing is clear – the watch community stands firmly behind Rezai. This story serves as another reminder that even in the world of luxury watches, where craftsmanship and precious reign supreme – trust and transparency should never be compromised.
Although the legal battle’s outcome remains uncertain, it is evident that the watch community fully supports Rezai. This story serves as a reminder that in the world of luxury watches, where craftsmanship and precision are highly valued, trust and transparency should never be compromised.
- Anna McWhirter posted 10 months ago
- last edited 10 months ago
