Good lad!

 

From my personal experience. The only reason I got into collecting military watches was due to my own compulsory army conscription in Singapore. I served the army for two years as a sniper in a commando battalion. I wasn’t issued any watches during my tenure. Thus, I make it a habit of collecting military watches from around the world.

 

A sniper you say...

 

Commando sniper... isn't that a FPS game?

 

Not sure if CS stands for Counterstrike or Conmando Sniper..

 

I thought those photos were still classified...

 

That's a question I ask myself all the time... and then I remember that vast sums of money can buy you an awful lot of stupidity and laziness.

It's been said a million times, but no matter where/who you're buying from, caveat emptor.

 

So many valid points in this thread.
I've been collecting Seamaster 300's for 17 years now and have owned around 30 or so, still own 8, including military issued variants, and view any I see for sale with a keen interest, so I have a little experience with this model. However I am certainly no expert and learn something new from Kox every time he posts! But from my experience out of all Omega models the sm300's seem to have lived hard lives and it's very, very rare to find them in excellent condition and with all correct parts. I think you have to accept a lower standard of condition with these than you might for a Speedmaster for instance. I would go so far as to say that if you are looking at an example that has every part in good condition and correct for the year then you want to look even more closely at it and expect some components to have been exchanged. Of course that doesn't detract from the need to disclose any changes that are known about, just expect some parts to have been replaced on this model over the normal course of their life.

 

Back in the day we had a base CO (very high rank, probably = a General) who flew Meteors in the Korean War so he was well advanced in years (to be polite).

He liked to keep current, so once a month he'd come down to the flight line, suit up, take a piss, grab his helmet and climb into the cockpit of a Mirage III0 supersonic fighter.

Strapping him in, connecting all of his wires and tubes had to be done by an experienced techo. Starting the jet was done with TWO troops at the back in case he did a wet start (flooded it in car terms).

He taxied out OK (all other traffic was usually held) and off he went into the wide blue yonder.

Most times it was ok. A 30 minute trip over the local area and a fantastic landing (any one you walk away from was fantastic with Mirages) and back to the lines.

HOWEVER!

One day we got the equivalent of a "Code Red". About five knuckleheads (jet fighter pilots) came racing into the line office wanting jets ASAP! (ASAP in military terms is is an acronym for "RIGHT FUCKIN' NOW!").

We got them out to spare jets, buckled in, started and moving in less than three minutes.

It turned out that the "older gentleman" flying millions of dollars worth of Aussie jet fighter had forgotten where he was and was heading North with bingo fuel about five minutes away.

After being vectored in to the wayward jet by the fighter control unit, our intrepid rescuers politely comm'd the CO "Greetings Sir, fancy bumping into you, we're on our way back to base, we'd be honoured to escort if you like". (or facts something like that).

All ended happily and I don't remember the CO doing quals from that day on.

So ,"Generals" did fly jets in my day.

 

There are so many qustions still regarding this lot. To me there are three things that bothers me quite a bit.

1. Auction house research and presentation

Phillips is the leading auction house today and I can promise that they refuse many, many watches before a November auction in Geneva. Every piece will be checked carefully and reviewed by specialists using litterature, checking previous auctions, consulting experts etc. As a simple google search on the serial would show this watch in a completely different shape I am certain that they were aware of at least part of the history and that it obviously had a lot of changed parts.

The big issue is how they chose to present it.

"The present example is preserved in most attractive and original condition"

Phillips would never have sold this watch if it indeed was sold as it was. A put-together watch with nice parts. Secondly I am fairly certain that the seller wouldn't let Phillips sell it if they actually did call it that. So this is just a another example where people look away to make money. It is deceitful.

2. Questionable quality

I am by no means an expert on these watches but I think most people can see that this bezel is touched up at best. If this passes in the community I am sure we will see more and more refinished or even fake bezels being sold as original. Would this bezel have passed if a private individual listed it here? If this is indeed ok I guess it will need to be named mk-something for future references.

I have a ton of respect for Sacha and his brother but I am not very impressed by the replies regarding this watch. I can understand it is a tricky spot for them right now as they have sold the watch previously and that they have a relationship with auction houses as buyer/seller/expert to protect. Maybe also to the seller in this case.

3. The general opinion regarding restored watches

Where do we draw the line for what is acceptable? A changed bezel intert? New hands? Better dial? Even if watches get restored and it is declared when sold this is a tough subject. It is problematic as watches are resold and this information will eventually get lost.

Are we fine with project watches like this? They will sell for as much money as an unrestored watch in equal condition. At least if sold without declaring what have been done to it.

To me it is sad to see this. Not really because of this watch but more due to the fact that more and more questionable watches enter the market and get accepted. Last year we had this Patek and now we saw this Omega sell. Is this the direction we want to go collecting rare watches? There's big differencies between the two watches (Christies actually disclosed the issue with the Patek) but it is important to note that what once was a big no-no now seem to be kind of accepted. It would have been interesting to see if this Omega would have been pulled from the auction if this information was posted pre-auction.

Each to their own..

 

the only thing i can say to this is. . i think you are putting FAR too much faith in phillips. i think auctions are caveat emptor. . .

 

You forgot the responsibility of the owner/consignor to disclose, especially when he obviously prepared/massaged this watch before the last two sales.

 

Sure. I do however expect the auction house to protect me as a buyer. If they had done their research (which I think they have) they would know that the watch is altered. It's really no news that watches get prepared for auction but normally it is not as easy to trace and see what happened. Phillips are not the one that did this but they are the ones that have now authenticated and sold the watch and they will have to stand by it in the future. This is the main issue every time an auction house sells something dodgy.

I can't say if it was the owner/consignor that restored the watch. Maybe he bought it looking like that? It is however easy to say that Phillips either failed miserably in their research or that they chose not to mention the flaws. Not sure what is worse in this case as it didn't require a genious to find it at least once on the internet in a very different shape. Overall it is quite unfortunate.

 

I meant in addition to your point on the auction house, the owner/consignor also has the responsibility to disclose. Based on the defence of the consignor here, he is not a newbie or inexperienced collector to have bought it like that.

 

It reminds me of the fully repainted IWC they offered last year. Everybody was screaming and they only removed it at the last minute. Many of us were waiting with pop corn to see where it would end up

Seriously, any so called "watch expert" should have spotted this one from miles away...


.
.
.

 

Well - opinion is divided - there's mine and everyone elses !

Very briefly, my two penneth.

Full disclosure is is important, but it is unlikely that the staff of any auction house will be as knowledgeable as true collectors and afficionados. The same can be said of many dealers and indeed owners of 'special' watches.

I would challenge anyone on this forum to be a 100% expert in all the major collectable brands - and that's without specifying models. So how can we expect and demand that the auction house staff be an ultimate authority.

Consequently, it's very definitely up to the buyer to ascertain (by whatever means) the true provenance of anything he intends to purchase.

The above aside - personally, I have no problem with a watch that has been 'improved' in both aesthetics and value by the addition of original or correctly restored parts.
After all, digging below the surface of the dial and bezel - how many of us know what mechanical repairs the movement may have had in it's life ? Have components been replaced with factory spares, or generic, or have they made on a watchmakers lathe ?? This may not have as much impact as a dial or bezel, but it still detracts from total 'originality'.

Clearly, any replacement or restored components should be openly revealed (where known) and the buyer will decide his maximum price accordingly, but not without considerable research.

I would also suggest that as the supply of perfect examples of 'grail' pieces becomes more scarce - the less perfect versions including re-done dials and bezels will climb in price to fill the demand 'void'.

I suspect that if we were to revisit the example at the centre of this thread in a couple of years - it will seem a very good buy indeed.

Anyway - as I said - this is just my own opinion.

 

Wow, I can't believe how easy it was for some members to swallow Sacha Davidoff's story, or was it a story?
I saw a lot of smoke there for a big big cover up...

So Sacha comes up almost immidiatelly to the thread to chime in... Although he is not "involved". Hmmm. That's very strange because it seems "indirectly" this watch was brought to Philips by S. Davidoff. In fact, if you look at the chronology of events, Sacha Davidoff had this very watch in his stock right after it was sold on OF... Pity we can't see his photos, and some how he says he doesn't have any! How... convinient? I guess we can never know for sure who "touched up" this watch in the mean time. All we know is there was a very original poor condition SM300 sold on OF, got to Sacha Davidoff..and than it became "all original and authentic condition"

This is what happens when dealers have vested interest and auction houses take on the game. It's less risky than money laundering.

I'm sure Sacha will throw another coctail party for his buddies from Hodinkee... Who are nowhere to report this story?

 

Courtesy & good manners, are the mark of a 'Gentleman'......

What are the libel laws like, in your part of the World ?

 

Join OF, make first post full of insinuation and innuendo bordering on libel,and also have a dig at some member's ability to think rationally. Way to go