The Breitling Watch Source Forums

semantic is a good keyword in this story here, because semantic also
is a theorie about the meaning from symbols and for sure is, that the
symbol/logo we see on the dial is the AOPA logo also without it says
AOPA on it. For example the AOPA Luxembourg uses the Logo without
written AOPA on the logo.

For me it is a kind of hairsplitting, that it is not "allowed" to call a watch
like this "AOPA". Also definatly there must have been a agreement about
using this logo on the watch with Breitling also on the dial between these
two companys.

Ok - perhaps this watch should be classified in a AOPA sub-category,
or Breitling sub-category, or better a sub from both - hairsplitting at it's best.

btw: no one answered to my reference link from Kurt - why?

OK - perhaps all members here think that there in his explanations he
really often also uses the "wrong, not allowed terms"

ore perhabs it was to stressful to read.

Stephan

-: its an outdated article , followed by the most recent www.kurt-b.com
-: different people have different view points and we agree to not always agree

_________________
"I spent most of my money on Booze, Breitling and Boats. The rest I wasted" - mostly Elmore Leonard

quote="Dracha"]

-: its an outdated article , followed by the most recent http://www.kurt-b.com
-: different people have different view points and we agree to not always agree[/quote]




i have no problem with different opinions/view points, but they should be allowed to have

and sometimes also a more actuell/ more recent article uses the same words, than an outdated:

"all black wide bezel AOPA Cosmonaute from 1962" (quotation Kurt from the new link from Rene) - and
look at the watch, please

or

"NOS 1962 Breitling AOPA Navitimer" (quotation Kurt) - look at the watch ...



so back to where we started:

What should be the wrongdoing from seller on chronotrader to call his watch
a AOPA? (not to use the term "the real" i agreed 100%)?

Stephan

I think using the word "real" really throws it off.

If I were listing my all-black 806 for sale, I wouldn't think twice about listing it with AOPA somewhere in the listing, even though it has the wings only and is signed Breitling. After all, they are the AOPA wings? Perhaps this is incorrect? But I wouldn't be representing it as actually being distributed by the AOPA.

However, to say it is the "real" AOPA implies that it was distributed and or sold by the AOPA.

Just like selling a civilian Zenith Cairelli as a "military" watch... For me would be acceptable. It was a watch designed for the military. But to list it as a REAL military watch, would imply that it was issued, and that would be misleading.

Kind of like selling a wide bezel cosmonaute as a Scott Carpenter watch Is acceptable even though he didn't wear it. but if I were to list it as the "real" Scott Carpenter watch, that would draw some scrutiny I think

In any event I don't think the seller was trying to be misleading, just a mistake.

First of all, I have built my collection up from the watches that actually have passed through my hands, help from very knowledged persons, from a few facts, and then used my common sense forward.

Don't refer to my timeline as if it is 100% correct. I have done it to the best of my knowledge, but I'm not perfect, use it as a guide, as we will never know the whole truth.

There's a few things we know for sure about AOPA / non AOPA, and a lot of things we don't know about it. What I have stated in my article, is my believe, and I could imagine some of it is wrong, just don't know which....

Quoting Jeff Stein "As I understand it, this one would have been distributed through the normal Breitling dealer network, and not through the AOPA, I am told that the true AOPA watches have no Breitling logo and have the AOPA letters inside the wings".

So what is this ?



I would call the above, and the watch in mention, a Breitling AOPA Navitimer, what others tend to call it is up to them.


I would call the below an AOPA Navitimer. (though IMO it's likely that they the above and this one, was both sold by AOPA)




I would call the below a Breitling Navitimer.



I would prefer to believe that any watch stamped AOPA inside the shield, was sold by AOPA, exclusively to members of AOPA, Breitlings name on the dial or not, but I can easily be wrong.

/ Kurt B http://www.kurt-b.com

yes, Kurt, as you say " any watch stamped AOPA inside the shield, was sold by AOPA, exclusively to members of AOPA, Breitlings name on the dial or not" - the watch on chronotrader is not.



so would you define this as AOPA, just to make sure I understand you correctly ?

I said "I would prefer to believe that any watch stamped AOPA inside the shield, was sold by AOPA, exclusively to members of AOPA, Breitlings name on the dial or not, but I can easily be wrong."

I would not mind including the name AOPA on a Navitimer that has the AOPA shield on the dial, signed or unsigned. but I would be sure to include the name "Breitling" as well.

/ Kurt B http://www.kurt-b.com

Fred,

One thing we know for sure, is the the Navitimer was created through a cooperation in-between Breitling and AOPA, hence they by nature they are Breitling AOPA Navitimers, that should be beyond discussion IMO.

I would define the watch in mention as "Breitling AOPA Navitimer", simply because it is.

I would call a Navitimer with only the wording "Navitimer", and a signed AOPA shield, an AOPA Navitimer, and list it as "the real deal".

There's also a premium to the price for the "real deal"..........

/ Kurt B http://www.kurt-b.com

well, the real premium would be on that exceedingly rare Navitimer without the wings you show above
might be the rarest of all - how many have you seen, Kurt ?

I might have seen a little handfull of each version over the years, and I have even seen 2 1954 "B" versions with Valjoux 72 mvt, I even had one of them in my hand some 8-9 years ago, and could have bought it for very little money.

I have only seen 1 of the below in 13 years of collectiog, it might be the only one out there.




We all live to learn......................


/ Kurt B http://www.kurt-b.com

Now this is hearsay , so please take it as its presented :

Was talking to an old french collector last month over the phone (long 2 / 3 hour conversation) and he mentioned that in the 50ies / 60ies (no exact date) there was an event at Air France where Breitling presented the pilots (50 or so) with all black Navitimers , the Navitimers however only had the 'B' 'Breitling' on the dial ?

I didnt know I had to ask if the dial had 'Navitimer' on it as well, I will ask him if he knows or not

Anyway , thats the story, Breitling presented all black 806's but they didnt have the wing but instead the 'B' 'Breitling'

HE also had some other interesting info about the pieces sold to LIP , more about that later

_________________
"I spent most of my money on Booze, Breitling and Boats. The rest I wasted" - mostly Elmore Leonard

Very very interesting all those variants.
Kurt, I saw on your website that there is also a version with applied B instead of painted one.
Both are with valjoux 72, no ref number and dated between 54-55?

From what René said, we might imagine that "B Breitling only" might be dedicated to France (or maybe more generally to all other countries than USA and thus than AOPA members?).
But this would mean that, instead of having been produced only for AOPA members during 54-55 (without any Breitling 806 reference), the Navitimer would have been produced jointly for the open market during those same years (without ref number?)?

Very interesting