Need help obtaining provenance from Omega for Speedmaster

Posts
4
Likes
0
I have a Speedmaster that I bought in 1973, Ref. # ST 145.022, Ser. #328xxxxx. I requested an extract from the Omega archives in 2017. After two months I finally received an email from Swatch Group telling me that archival records for my watch were “unreadable” or “missing”. Upon rethinking their notification I have decided to come to this forum because of the possibility that others may have received the same reply from Omega. Is this a common occurrence? Is there any way I can do anything else to authenticate the provenance of my watch?

My watch is in pristine condition. I have the bill of sale, and the original box with accompanying paperwork. I will not tell you what I paid for the watch because I don’t want to make any of you sick! Suffice it to say that appreciation has made it a very good investment!

Any help will be greatly appreciated.
 
Posts
5,245
Likes
24,162
Welcome, pics would be helpful. Are you first owner, if not could be a movement form another Omega or could be the data from the archives didn't survive the fire sometime ago.
 
Posts
1,945
Likes
3,551
Sometimes records are not available as you have seen. Most of my requests have generated an Extract of the Archives but two received the same response as you. Since you have all the original documents an extract is of little extra value. Sounds like you have a real beauty of a time piece. You should post a pic or two.
The appreciation is not as great as you think. If you had put your original investment into a mutual fund in the early seventies you ROI would be north of 6500%
 
Posts
318
Likes
277
I don't see the point of having an archive extract if you are its first owner and you have kept the original invoice.
the only information that the archive extract could give you would be the date of production (this may vary by several months or even years from the date of purchase).
 
Posts
9,931
Likes
15,596
I have a Speedmaster that I bought in 1973, Ref. # ST 145.022, Ser. #328xxxxx. I requested an extract from the Omega archives in 2017. After two months I finally received an email from Swatch Group telling me that archival records for my watch were “unreadable” or “missing”. Upon rethinking their notification I have decided to come to this forum because of the possibility that others may have received the same reply from Omega. Is this a common occurrence? Is there any way I can do anything else to authenticate the provenance of my watch?

My watch is in pristine condition. I have the bill of sale, and the original box with accompanying paperwork. I will not tell you what I paid for the watch because I don’t want to make any of you sick! Suffice it to say that appreciation has made it a very good investment!

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Omega will refuse to issue an extract when something doesn't match between serial and model. Does the number on your warranty paperwork match that on the watch movement? Are you sure you gave them the correct number, it may be worth checking. If they don't match, it may mean there was an error in recording it and you can get your extract by giving the correct one, or it may mean that the movement was swapped during a service for one from another model, hence Omega wont issue the extract. There are genuine holes in the data in the records, but they are usually for watches made in the 1950s or before.
 
Posts
21,616
Likes
48,974
If you have all the original paperwork and it is authentic and matches the watch, then I am wondering why you would feel it necessary to pay for an Extract from Omega. Is there something questionable about the paperwork?
 
Posts
1,945
Likes
3,551
If you have all the original paperwork and it is authentic and matches the watch, then I am wondering why you would feel it necessary to pay for an Extract from Omega. Is there something questionable about the paperwork?
He states he is the original owner so I too cannot see what value an EOA would provide.
[
 
Posts
1,945
Likes
3,551
YY77 has requested pics. Attached. Yes, I am the first and only owner. I wore the watch sparingly after first getting it. It has resided in my safe, with only occasional use, for the last 40 years. OneDrive link here: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AmxMl_OTkenBgZ9_bVtAjsx_w1NMxQ?e=8RWQHP
That’s a real beauty. Pretty cool you were able to pick up a pre-moon in 73. 👍
 
Posts
1,506
Likes
1,939
Many seamaster 120,600 &1000 have holes in the archives (early 70,s) can be a problem , you know your watch is genuine and looks like perfect no worries , but of course if you plan to sell it the EAO can be an advantage or not in your case , but with papers should be enough to prove,
 
Posts
11,967
Likes
20,808
So does the movement number definitely match the number on the warranty card?
 
Posts
1,881
Likes
9,178
Assuming this is a yes 👍
Save the email/paperwork you received from Omega saying you filed for an EOA and they don’t have the records and include that in any potential sale. It won’t confirm a date of manufacture but is way better than a rejected extract. It will complete and validate the other paperwork better than not.
 
Posts
7,050
Likes
13,156
The appreciation is not as great as you think. If you had put your original investment into a mutual fund in the early seventies you ROI would be north of 6500%

A Speedmaster in 1973 was about $200 after a discount from an AD. $200 invested in an S&P 500 index fund would be worth about $27,750 today, or an avg of ~10.5% a year.

OP has a great, mint condition watch. It's worth some nice money, but it wasn't a stellar investment. Watches are almost always a money losing proposition, the real ROI is the pleasure obtained from owning and wearing it.
Edited:
 
Posts
4
Likes
0
I don’t recall saying it was the “best” of investments—only that it was “very good”. Obviously you have dug deeper into financial comparisons than I have found it important to do. I still think that 5,000% appreciation is very good. And, as you point out, the owning and wearing are pleasures that numbers in a portfolio can't provide.
 
Posts
360
Likes
592
A Speedmaster 145.022 from 1973 with a pre moon case back?
Did I miss something?
Could you please let us know the date stamped on the band's clasp.
Do you have a picture of the inside of the case back?
An EoA would add just a little value to your watch, but as far as I know the data
from the ref. 145.022 should be still available.

Thank you
 
Posts
9,595
Likes
27,671
Omega will refuse to issue an extract when something doesn't match between serial and model. Does the number on your warranty paperwork match that on the watch movement? Are you sure you gave them the correct number, it may be worth checking. If they don't match, it may mean there was an error in recording it and you can get your extract by giving the correct one, or it may mean that the movement was swapped during a service for one from another model, hence Omega wont issue the extract. There are genuine holes in the data in the records, but they are usually for watches made in the 1950s or before.

The OP gave a different reason for the rejected Extract though:

...archival records for my watch were “unreadable” or “missing”...

If the serial doesn't match the reference, they will say so and then keep the fee.
 
Posts
2,524
Likes
3,571
And, as you point out, the owning and wearing are pleasures that numbers in a portfolio can't provide.
I wore the watch sparingly after first getting it. It has resided in my safe, with only occasional use, for the last 40 years.
Doesn’t sound like much “wearing” pleasure to me. But Great looking watch!!
 
Posts
2,528
Likes
3,391
A Speedmaster 145.022 from 1973 with a pre moon case back?
Did I miss something?
Could you please let us know the date stamped on the band's clasp.
Do you have a picture of the inside of the case back?
An EoA would add just a little value to your watch, but as far as I know the data
from the ref. 145.022 should be still available.

Thank you

I find it easy to believe a 1969 watch was purchased in 1973 — there was no grey market at the time so if stock didn’t sell it just sat in showrooms until it did. And after the moon landing, I bet a lot of buyers wanted the “new” version with the writing on the caseback — not the old one. Since the OP was the original buyer and has all the paperwork from the purchase, I have no doubt that the inside of the caseback will be marked 145.022-69.
 
Posts
4
Likes
0
A Speedmaster 145.022 from 1973 with a pre moon case back?
Did I miss something?
Could you please let us know the date stamped on the band's clasp.
Do you have a picture of the inside of the case back?
An EoA would add just a little value to your watch, but as far as I know the data
from the ref. 145.022 should be still available.

Thank you
Interesting! I never realized the meaning of some of the numbers stamped on the clasp before. On the right end, next to "SWISS MADE", is the number "4", and under it the number "70". Does this mean 1970?