105.003 and 105.012 running neck and neck. Why?

Posts
7,111
Likes
23,094
On William’s well-researched and invaluable site, Speedmaster101, we see that the value of Ed Whites in the highest collector segment is only $1000 USD difference from 105.012, $22,000 vs. $21,000 for the latter. Interesting particularly since the 105.012 had a roughly 50% higher production run, so is quite a bit more common.

Did the New Ed White dampen the interest in the vintage models? Has interest in the 105.012 climbed precipitously as of recent? What are your thoughts?
 
Posts
5,507
Likes
52,865
Check your thread title, as it refers to the ultra-ultra-rare 105.013
 
Posts
5,507
Likes
52,865
Getting to your question (and I am among the most un-expert regarding vintage Speedmasters) maybe the prevalence of 105.012s used by Apollo moon-walking astronauts drives people (and the market) to seek out actual Moonwatch references? Just a thought.
 
Posts
10,310
Likes
16,138
Getting to your question (and I am among the most un-expert regarding vintage Speedmasters) maybe the prevalence of 105.012s used by Apollo moon-walking astronauts drives people (and the market) to seek out actual Moonwatch references? Just a thought.
Both were worn on the moon. Both are 'actual Moonwatch references' as you put it.
 
Posts
5,507
Likes
52,865
Both were worn on the moon. Both are 'actual Moonwatch references' as you put it.

Understood. I just thought there were more 105.012s, including Armstrong & Aldrin's watches, which were the first on the Moon.
 
Posts
10,310
Likes
16,138
Understood. I just thought there were more 105.012s, including Armstrong & Aldrin's watches, which were the first on the Moon.
Agreed but the way you first put it suggested the Ed wasn’t a Moonwatch. It certainly was.
 
Posts
5,507
Likes
52,865
Agreed but the way you first put it suggested the Ed wasn’t a Moonwatch. It certainly was.

Yeah, I see how that came across. My bad.

Getting back to @M'Bob 's question, I guess I'm trying to get into the head of the casual collector to try to figure out why a surprisingly high value (compared to the Ed White) could be placed on a more recent, and more abundant Speedmaster reference, so I'm thinking "first on the Moon"?
 
Posts
12,967
Likes
22,493
I’d say over the last 12-24 months there have been less ‘good’ 105.012’s than 105.003’s so I can see why they’re trading at broadly the same level.
 
Posts
970
Likes
1,508
On William’s well-researched and invaluable site, Speedmaster101, we see that the value of Ed Whites in the highest collector segment is only $1000 USD difference from 105.012, $22,000 vs. $21,000 for the latter. Interesting particularly since the 105.012 had a roughly 50% higher production run, so is quite a bit more common.

Did the New Ed White dampen the interest in the vintage models? Has interest in the 105.012 climbed precipitously as of recent? What are your thoughts?
Is this definitely a new development? I can't recall what William's charts said, say, 5 years ago, can you?

If it is a new development, it is an interesting question. It could be that as the collector population ages, the "younger" watches become more attractive to the people who they resonate more with (ie, "younger" people)? I know I am drawn more to the watches of the mid- to late-60s and up, probably because they align with my lifespan. Older watches look too... antique. Not a hard and fast rule, of course, but a general one...
 
Posts
23,497
Likes
52,233
In general, the vintage Speedmaster market has been extremely volatile for the last decade, and generally falling for the last few years, so understanding the valuations of particular references at any given moment in time would seem to be a fool's errand. Currently, I guess those two references are equally appealing to collectors.
 
Posts
7,111
Likes
23,094
Is this definitely a new development? I can't recall what William's charts said, say, 5 years ago, can you?

If it is a new development, it is an interesting question. It could be that as the collector population ages, the "younger" watches become more attractive to the people who they resonate more with (ie, "younger" people)? I know I am drawn more to the watches of the mid- to late-60s and up, probably because they align with my lifespan. Older watches look too... antique. Not a hard and fast rule, of course, but a general one...

These two references are really close in age. I would think they might attract a similar collector group.
 
Posts
970
Likes
1,508
Although they overlap some, I would say they definitely are not "close in age" in spirit, at least for me. The .003 case shape goes way back, whereas the .012 starts in the 60s.
 
Posts
2,168
Likes
5,715
Good morning @M'Bob.

If we look carefully at the detail of the chart that @Spacefruit has put together we see some very specific price differences that depend upon condition.

The "Good" and "Very Good" price columns show a wider range of prices, between these references. As much as $4000 and $4500 depending on the year.

The "Poor" and "Fair" columns show show a price range difference from
$0 to $1500.


Also it seems that a top quality, or "Excellent" 105.012 will sell at a strong price.

(2 Quotes from Speedmaster 101 Price Chart)
"Top Speedmasters still sell for top money. The lower end is selling for less than before."

"Excellent - Very, very few watches are in this condition. Very little wear and without any damage. Perhaps very minor marks from very light wear No damage or degredation to dial, case or bezel, all parts correct and original. This is the highest price I would expect a Speedmaster to fetch unless it is New Old Stock and absolutely unworn ever - this is another step up in value."
(End of Speedmaster 101 quotes)

So, a 105.012-65 would have to be absolutely top quality or have a gorgeous dial to get into the $21,000 price bracket.

I can see why William says, the "Top money" is for" Top Speedmasters"! Great condition and the watch being absolutely correct is essential for it to be classed as "Excellent". That's a tough call after 55 years, but then those are the watches that will attract the top money.

For example: Nobody is going to pay $21,000, $15,000 or even $10,000 for my Dad's dear old 105.012-65. Lots of real life character, but, too much wear and tear.....
( Bollocks!🙁)


Having said all that; The "Poor" column, in the price chart, is Interesting. It's heart warming to know that as long as an Omega Speedmaster has a 321 knocking about inside it's going to fetch at least $4000 to $5000.😲

P.S. This thread needed some pictures.
Edited:
 
Posts
25
Likes
14
If you think no one would pay $10k for your dad's lovely "Good" condition, tropical, all-original 105.012....my PM box is open.
 
Posts
23,497
Likes
52,233
With the exception of a few rare examples, I think that very few Speedmasters purchased in the past 3-4 years are still worth what we paid for them. 🙁 And don't get me started on DON bezels, that market has apparently gone the way of tulips. But the same is true of various collectible vintage watches, including many Rolex references.

So hopefully we are all happy with our watches and enjoying them, regardless of value.