Aqua blue Seamaster?

Been on the hunt for a 60s Seamaster and come across an aqua blue one from 1962. Not come across one of these before. Are they rare or quite common?

It seems that I still have a lot to learn.. For me it's a nice looking watch even it has no "collector value" 😀

It is! I like the look of it but probably a bit pricey for me (it’s just short of £1.5k)

Was very curious with the blue dial as just very different to all of the others.

lovely color, original or not!

Based on it being a redial but also quite a stunning watch to look at, what do you think would be a fair price for it? Currently up for £1,450 which seems high to me.

I do think that we, the commentariat of Omega Forums, should develop a formula or theory for valuing such watches. It's really tricky.

On the one hand, it's not a piece that a hardcore collector would want. You say you're after a 1960s Seamaster, and I'm guessing that means you'd like a collectible watch that might hold value and be an heirloom piece that Omegaphiles will always deem worthy of a respectable collection. Whatever it says in the ad, this isn't that watch. Once the dial has been adulterated--no matter how attractively--it's lost its originality, and that tends to the be the highest standard for serious collectors. (There are even some among us who would prefer a badly scratched case that's never been polished to one that's been polished and looks brand new.)

On the other hand, it's still an Omega at its core, with the right movement inside, presumably working properly. And it's a good-looking watch, not one of those shoddily-re-dialed overpolished atrocities that are so common on eBay and Chrono24. I'm not a turquoise watch guy, but if I were, I'd wear that very happily. And 99% of the 1% of people who'd even notice my watch and see that it's an Omega wouldn't have any inkling that it didn't come from the factory looking just like that. (If such things even matter.)

I think valuing the watch comes down to a basic question: to what extent is this still an Omega? £1,450 is an Omega price---and a high-side one, seeing as 14763s sell from $500 USD up to about 2k, and that's for watches that haven't been modded.

Related to this, there's the twisty logic of how much the modification hurts the watch's Omega-value; likewise, if you think of this as a pretty blue watch, how much does the Omega-factor increase the value of what might otherwise be just a pretty blue watch?

---TL;DR---

Just my opinion: this is not a watch I'd still consider to be an Omega in any collectible sense, so I would not want to pay an Omega price for it---it's gone from being generally collectible to being a niche fashion piece, and I think the mod, as good as it looks, only hurts its monetary value (unlike some of the high-end, brand-name Bamford mods and the like that people do). I'd choose to see it now as a pretty blue watch that gains value from the vestigial Omega hardware and branding. Fossil makes something superficially similar for about $300. In my estimation, I'd say the Omega hardware and branding adds about $500 in physical and emotional value. $800 (about £620) is probably fair.

So, is this like an Omega Outlaw?

This is a hard pass for me… Luminous hour markers but the hands appear to have no luminous at all (so replaced or refilled). Not a good look, pretty blue redial notwithstanding 😀

get a Magnus Walker endorsement and this thing jumps to 20K 😜

I bought a similarly-colored Omega off eBay a couple of months ago, paid US$699. Mine is a 2888, cal 501, dated to 1958 by serial number. Although it wasn't advertised as a redial, I fully suspected it was, and I really didn't care. I loved the color and the design, so I bought it. Not as a collector piece, but a watch to wear and enjoy. It keeps great time.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/354754737435



For me, my vintage watches are like my collector cars. They may not be 100% original, but they look nice and operate well, and I enjoy them nonetheless.