In H2 of 2025, Bezel rejected 38% of the watches attempted to be sold through the platform at an average order value just north of $10K.
Every watch ships to our HQ for in-house authentication testing and the watch will fail if any aspect does not match our rigorous standards. At a high-level the tests include an authentication check of all aspects of the watch (and the associated accessories), a diagnostic/performance check to ensure the watch is performing the way that it should be (timing, pressure, any complications, etc), condition testing (to make sure it matches the listing description), and a check to make sure it was never reported stolen.
I chatted with The New York Times last year about counterfeit watches and how scary super fakes are getting for an article that came out last week. Perhaps the most interesting part of our contribution to the article is that it leverages our 27% rejection rate from H1 2025 and, since then, we've announced a 38% rejection rate for H2.
This acceleration certainly comes from more "fakes" in the market but I believe it was largely driven by tariff conditions forcing sellers to work with the limited inventory they had in the US. In the back half of 2025, it became more difficult/expensive to get watches into the US, pricing increased in the primary market, and it incentivized bad actors to swap dials, list polished pre-owned watches as unworn, look the other way if a serial was re-engraved, and other "creative" ways to get the most value out of the inventory they had.
I'm not writing this post to stoke fear, but just to illuminate the fact that this issue is so much more complicated than real vs fake. There are so many elements to a watch that affect the value, so I always encourage collectors to make sure they're buying from a trusted source and that they're asking the right questions before purchasing.
Thanks for including us, The New York Times:
https://lnkd.in/gMZsFFJY
