Seems to me it doesn`t really mean anything nowadays.Over on that auction site,the term is used on pretty much all watches that I would consider moderately to lightly worn.It apparently also justifies a price increase double the actual value of an item.

This doesn`t do anybody any good,except ofcourse for the fraudsters who continously perpetrate this type of false marketing.
Buyers are made to pay more for less,and the few sellers who are lucky enough to have true NOS items for sale will have their integrity and honesty questioned,and see their extremely rare items disappear among the refurbs and nearmint items falsely marketed as NOS.

It`s a shame,but as long as there`s money to be made...

Something that seems like a good idea,which some collectors forums already use,is to have a common system or scale to determine conditions.
This leads to a certain degree of inner justice,and probably makes it a tiny bit harder for those who misrepresent their FS-items,to be able to do so repeatedly.

In the end,it all comes down to the buyer doing his homework though..
For my own part,I`m way to impatient and hotheaded,its actually a miracle I haven`t been royally screwed over yet ; )

Cheers!

: Being a vintage car racer and an enthusiastic sports watch
: collector and as the term NOS applies very well in this matters
: I would say it should only be used when the item was never used.
: Terms like near NOS are not correct and they add confusion.... if
: it was wear once or twice is used not as NOS.
: thanks