As above does anyone have the contact email for somone at the extract department?
My extract was canceled as they say some information is missing but I would like to clarify what information they do have. Thanks

 

Why don't you simply call them?

 

[email protected]

 

Did you get any information?

 

I sent an email a few days ago and they replied now stating they had sent me an incorrect Extract. They will send me a new one free of charge. Very happy with their rather polite email and service.

 

Do you know what was wrong?

 

what exactly was missing?

 

They wrote:
Due to the nature of vintage archives in certain cases information has not survived, is unreadable or even missing.
We regret to inform you that unfortunately the provided serial number (31.3XX.XXX) falls onto that category, so we are unable to issue an Extract of the Archives. Therefore we will issue a full refund of your payment.
We are sorry for the inconvenience.

 

They are being polite

I would say the probably know exactly what the movement number refers to - and it is not the case reference you gave them. Or to be more precise they know what the reference written in the archive is. That is not always 100% correct. Mistakes have happened, people make errors in data entry. Even in the 1970's Switzerland.

There are times when the extracts are missing, or wrong, but when its a 31m serial I am confident in saying that the movement you have started life in a seamaster or devillle case.

Could have been in one of these - which you could not give away a few years ago - has a perfect calibre 861 inside.

 

Not the best reply you can get from Omega, the movement might have started it's life in a different watch, most likely a Seamaster. A 31xx should actually still be available in the Archives.

 

You were quicker!

 

Thanks for your thoughts and explaining,- that might be a reason

 

Is it a Problem then when a movement number started ist life in an other case?

 

From a technical point, no. But when it comes to value and authenticity, yes.
Whoever did this was either very aware of it ( unethical) or it was done when the watch was probably not so much vintage ( kismet).
But as a matter of fact, the movement was not swapped at Omega but in "the wild" somewhen.

The main question is: what did you pay and how much would a put together piece bother you.

 

Possibly but here are two examples from my own experience where Omega didn't try to sugarcoat the mismatch...

1. I ordered an extract for my Big Blue ref. 176.004 in 2016 and the extract came back as being for a 176.007. So in that instance when the serial number is (according to their records) for a different watch than the request, they sent the extract anyway.

2. Earlier this summer I agreed to a price on and sent payment for a 105.012 from a prominent collector. As part of the deal he agreed to order the extract. Before he could even ship the watch the museum came back and told him directly that the SN was not from a Speedmaster, so I was given a refund.

Of course, there may be reasons why Omega handles this situation differently. Omega could have changed their procedures when this situation arises since my 2016 request, and the fact that the seller of the 105.012 has contacts at the museum may have resulted in a more direct response.

Either way, I hope there is no significant gap in the records for the 31 million range, as I just ordered an extract for my 176.001 with SN 3164XXXX.

 

That is an interesting information Andy, thanks for that! That "proves" that Omega is replying to mismatches, either way.
I have a contact at ETA (part of swatch group now) who talked to an Omega guy about my "not survived" exctract. He said, that due to the circumstance that these information are on mircofilm, it can happen that certain areas on that film are destroyed. It seems to be common.

Nico

 

This explanation of politeness sounds a little strange to me. I once had a 165.024 SM300 and sent off for an Extract, when I after a few weeks received the Extract the news was bad, the movement had originally started out in another reference case, also as it happens a Seamaster, but a dress watch and not a diver. I did however receive the Extract and I had filled in 165.024 on the submission form.

Has protocol now changed to soften the considerable pain of a mis-match? Not a good idea in my mind as if the watch has just been sold as 'all original' the buyer has in this way no recourse to return it. The truth sometimes hurts but being left in limbo is IMHO far worse

 

I agree it would be bad to be polite and tell you they don't have records if the watch doesn't match up, and I do have a hard time believing Omega would tell you they don't have records if they actually do. But stranger things have happened I guess.

I recently ordered an extract in the hopes of confirming if the movement started out in the watch it was in, so I guess we'll see what they say. I was hoping I only had to include the serial number, and not the case reference, but the form said filling in the case reference was mandatory.

Really they should just tell you what the serial number pulls up, if it matches the case you provided or not...

 

Yup, I agree fully with these statements...Yes it stung that my Big Blue is a mismatch, but I'm glad I know and would be mortified if I had sold it and later found out about the mismatch from an unhappy buyer. So it is now either a keeper or something I can disclose upfront, along with written proof from Omega in case I ever do sell.

 

We have two strains running through this thread:

1. What we would like Omega to do...(tell us the case reference that matches a number)
2. What they actually do in 2017

There is also the slight curve ball in that historically the policies have been different - and less reliable as the (truly fine) people who were responding to archive information in Omega circa fifteen years ago would take on trust a case reference serial combination if they did not have the facts - and issue a paper showing the customers supplied information. Hence I do not trust any extract from pre 2010 and ask for a re-issue if it is important to me. We see no recent extracts for 2998's for example as the records do not exist apparently. (Unless you are Christies but that's another debate).

The records are physical and on at least three types of media - including leather bound volumes, loose paper and microfilm. To check the history of a watch the record has to be inspected. In addition I suspect those doing this work have other things to do - sometimes I get a confirmation in a few days, and sometimes (during the Basel show run up and the show itself) I don't hear for several weeks.

When a serial does not match a case reference I get the "records damaged' statement on an email.

It is conceivable that, for example, 25m serials are on media such as to allow part of it to be damaged, and so we can see two serials a few hundred apart get different results. In my case I made two requests very close serials, and one got an extract and one a records missing. However In this case I made a genuine mistake in requesting extracts and sent off for the wrong case reference - a 105.012. This came back no record found. So I re submitted the request for the same serial and got an extract for the 150.003 that I should have asked for in the first place.

"no records found" is a polite way of saying that they can find no record of a particular serial in a particular reference.

I think the Omega museum and its staff are probably the most accessible and friendly institution of any brand - I have a nasty feeling The Suits don't quite realise what is going on - Suits don't like staff members interacting with the public on an autonomous basis. Certainly they don't like anything that might cause controvosy - like this very debate - or anything that might expose anything other than flawless organisation.

I think they are wise to withhold the case reference information until the owner provides it, when they can confirm it.

All this reinforces my belief that we are heading to a two tier market, certainly for speedmasters where the records are available, those with extracts and those without.