He changed it to a good repro bezel in the end before selling at Phillips.

 

ah, I missed that...but for 60k the bezel should be original.

 

Yes it should!

 

That is absolutely crazy!!

When they say original condition they probably thought original parts! Except the bezel in this case...but 60k€!

I believe that the fault is on the auctioneer as he is responsible of what offered to bidders and seems that they have not retraced the history watch (from previous owners) => Did the last seller had not mentionned that he bought the watch from chrono24? Did he ‘story told’ about it ?

Great work @kox

 

That small pond is too shallow for the two of us.

#ThereCanBeOnlyOne #Highlander

 

I salute you @kox !

 

Great detective work! This is an excellent example of how we can hardly ever be sure what has happened in the past to the watches we buy.

I'm OK with parts replaced PROVIDED all parts are genuine, period-correct parts and the price is OK. On both counts this was a huge fail!!!

EDIT: it seems all parts were genuine and period-correct, so it‘s not a Franken but a „restored“ watch.

 

Well done! Great work!

 

Absolut excellent work. Humour is overrated, I mainly like this place because of people like you.

 

Hello OF,

Sacha Davidoff here. I do not usually chime in to most of the critical posts unless I really see something I disagree with. I have already discussed with several members privately, but also said I would post my observations today. I think a lot of others would be afraid to get caught in the crossfire, but I think that's what makes open forums fair.
I do want to clarify certain points as I am living here in Geneva and inspected the watch myself:

1) BEZEL: The bezel is original and tested for original bakelite by UV and also checked under a microscope for original printing. It is not fake and saying so is unjust (nothing showing what you think is fake or redone). Just because its different from the pictures, doesn't mean jumping to conclusions is acceptable. "Was the bezel switched with a correct one?" would be a more wise direction to go here and you can then imagine how much that must have cost. Recently an original bezel with a chip, not as nice as the one in the sale, was being sold with an asking price of $9,000.

2) CALIBER & ARCHIVES: The caliber is a 501 on the watch, so I don't understand the comment on this as it is correct. Also it was archived as Peruvian Air Force recently in accordance with the Omega Museum policy of seeing the watch. They will only mention Peru if they don't see the watch and if they see it will then mention Peruvian Air Force. The same thing goes for British Navy military SM300. We also have discussed this in the Ultraman discussion recently as well and happy to help anyone who needs it.

3) SPARE PART UPGRADES: There is an entire section on Omega Forums dedicate to the sale of Spare Parts including every part imaginable for Omega watches. We have sold a few things on there hoping to help some fellow members out and it was a great experience. We are all happy when a collector can buy parts and bring his watch back to original. There is a big difference in my view between a collector taking the time to upgrade or bring back to original his watch over time vs a Franken, which is a mix of incoherent parts that do not match are from different models or configuration result is incorrect. Not the same thing in my personal view and I think Franken is a bit harsh in this case.

4) TIMING: It seems that there has been a lot of research done, which I highly respect and admire, of this watch. However, some of the conclusions drawn seem incorrect and spiteful. In scientific method, good research doesn't always mean the conclusions drawn are correct if not all variables are identified or have been ignored to push the outcome you desire. My concern is that this post came after the sale and not before meaning it was more based on waiting to see what the result was in order to get more attention for the post then actually debating the watch before the auction.

5) RESULT: The auction house did have a low estimate of 15K, meaning the owner was willing to accept that much for it. Phillips can not be held liable for a higher result, its a free world. When an Omega reaches a high price, it does give a positive feeling to all of the Omega collectors, including my brother and I, around the world whom have been loyal to Omega for decades. For example, I was at the auction and seeing the prototype tourbillon reach over 1 million result was truly an important moment for me. Could not be more proud.

These are my observations and opinions drawn from the knowledge I have gained over the years of having the privilege of holding many beautiful Omega wristwatches in my hands, especially Seamaster 300 and Speedmasters, and taking a close look every time I get the chance. I hope we all keep a more positive attitude and try not to always jump on the tomato throwing bandwagon. Stay fair and Forums are meant for sharing opinions and thinking together through debate.

Humbly from an Omega collector and watch dealer who is not lurking in the shadows,

Sacha Davidoff

 

Thanks for responding to this post. I agree especially with this part above! I think everybody gets very excited if parts have been replaced BUT we hardly ever know in watches of this age! It is highly exceptional to really have a one-owner watch AND an honest one at that who would disclose all changed parts. That's why I want the correct period-parts which must be original but am not too worried if they have been replaced. Franken should be reserved for mis-matched parts.

 

quite a post. always better when facts and analysis rule the day

i think the truth is somewhere in the middle. . .for example if the bezel is correct then the bezel is correct and it is not fair to say it is wrong. there is a huge difference between a franken watch and a watch brought back to its original state. i hear a lot of talk about "put together watches" and those, if all original parts but not born together, probably are somewhere in the middle

in this particular case. . .given that there is clear evidence (very well done in finding it) that this watch has undergone major changes over recent history, and it comes with an archive extract (i am sure i let down my analytical guard when i see an extract, although clearly one should not), and phillips clearly states

From the phillips auction text: ” The present example is preserved in most attractive and original condition “

then to me the watch was mis-represented. it one thing to replace a bezel with a NOS one, or replace an incorrect hand with a historically correct one, but if the dial was swapped here and it is easy to figure this out, then to state original condition is just flat out wrong and a misrepresentation, if not legally, then ethically.

its a beautiful looking watch, but i for one would be very disappointed having bought it. with is certainly a point in favor of buying from a trusted dealer like sacha with a return policy who really knows their stuff!

my 2 cents

 

Lurking in the Shadows???
@DB1983 perhaps you need to follow OF posts more closely.
@kox has hundred of OF posts regarding vintage SM300 references 2913, 14755 and 165/166.
I can think of no other OF member who is as learned, and willing to share his extensive knowledge, regarding vintage Seamaster divers.

Regarding an upcoming action piece, no member is under any obligation to post their opinions pre auction. If fact, there is amble reason to refrain from doing so as recently a member was "threatened" by a house for doing just that. The obvious question I have is if @DB1983 thought the watch so special, why not tell us before the auction?

 

The question is not whether it was misrepresented but whether it was intentionally misrepresented. If it was unintentional the question is how much research should be done not only about authenticity but also history prior to a sale.

 

I don't know this user and am a relative newbie and have no dog in this fight

But on the facts... The bezel is clearly not original to the watch, but it is either redone or it is not

Sacha examined the watch under uv and with a microscope and concluded the bezel was not redone and correct

Where is the evidence to the contrary from the original poster?

It would seem no one is disputing that the watch was changed significantly along the way and the initial post was of tremendous investigative value and shines a bright light on the darker corners of the auction world

 

I am at a loss to see how it materially matters, if a part is original for a watch, vs. to a watch, if the wear is commensurate with the rest of the piece internally, and externally (adding aesthetic wear similarity considerations.)

 

Hi there,

Thank you for your comments. I am not accusing anyone of lurking in the shadows, but rather saying that I wasn't with a touch of humor. There was a mention of dark corners of vintage world, but some of us are happy to discuss openly. I also praised the research, but was in disagreement with the conclusions. Are we debating the facts or the people? Are we debating watches or results? If this watch sold at some small auction in the middle of nowhere for the same amount, would this be the same discussion? It is interesting to discuss.
I follow Omega Forums and its users, but happen to also have experience with watches themselves because photos don't always give the whole story.

When I went to their viewing in London, WOK auction house also told me I couldn't post any photos on my IG of their watches, even to say I like it, but Phillips has no problem with it.

I wrote an article on Fratellowatches in preview to the auctions and chose to cover the Omega tourbillon prototype as the most important Omega to ever be auctioned.

Hope I answered your questions. Clearly, as a dealer, I have to overcome some bias on the OF, but I guess that comes with the territory. Happy to answer any questions or concerns on the OF, while most dealers don't really get involved.

Sincerely,

Sacha

 

Sacha, by chance did you take any macro shots of this bezel?

 

to me this is a personal question. . where is the line. i have many zeniths with the crown was replaced by zenith along the way. or the chrono hands broke and zenith put in a new one. are they original to the watch ? no. are they correct? yes. why should the expectation be that a mechanical machine from 60 years ago has no parts that haven't been changed ? that expectation doesn't exist in vintage autos

for me there is a line. . .what i am not interested in is a "put together" watch where a dial, a case, and hands and a movement that never were together are put together for a sale. an all too common phenomenon! but if i get a watch with incorrect hands and can put the historically correct hands on the watch. . will i do it ? yes, and i do not think it detracts from the originality of the piece