Hi everyone,

"Soyuz and Apollo are shaking hands now! " this sentence was pronounced on July 17, 1975 by Commander Stafford of Apollo 18.

However, the story began a couple of years earlier, when the Russian crew of Soyuz 19 (Aleksey A.- Leonove Valery - N. Kubasov) visited the Johnson Space Center in Houston (USA) in 1973 to organize a unique space mission. After years of competition, in all sectors, this initiative was a real change of course for these two nations that opened the doors to an international space collaboration.

In conclusion, July 17th , 1975, 45 years ago, is remembered as an epochal turning point in the space race because it managed to bring the USA and the USSR together.

2020 will be remembered for Omega's little fans and collectors as the year when OMEGA decided to clarify, I hope not definitively, this long-standing issue that has upset many owners of Apollo Soyuz out of batch watches for years.

A-S out of batch watches have deserved a place in Omega's history for too long; firstly because the idea came from De Marchi's (Omega's authorized distrubutor) sales department to make this particular watch, and secondly because too many questions have not yet been answered. In my opinion it would have been fairer to pronounce only when some concrete answer had arrived and supported by documentation.

Now, after 45 years, it would be helpful to understand why OMEGA has decided to include this unexpected and important clarification about A-S out of batch watches in its new Archive Extracts; a clarification that has always been denied. Was it a ploy to cut through the rumors surrounding this watch or have important new discoveries emerged?

it makes no difference because we will never find out precisely.

Personal consideration: "it's as if the official A-S and the A-S out of batch have reached out their hands but the handshake is still a long way off".

The following clarification has satisfied many but not all collectors and enthusiasts, but this is proof that there was an agreement between OMEGA and the De Marchi distributor to make the Apollo-Soyuz out of batch.

I am sorry to say this but this statement, even though it comes 45 years later, is too hasty and I think it was approved by someone who denies the evidence.



If OMEGA had wondered how the F.lli De Marchi's were able to identify the case back numbers to make the missing engravings, it could never have fallen into such an inaccurate statement.

OMEGA contributors claims to have sent Apollo-Soyuz 400 Apollo-Soyuz to the Italian De Marchi Distributor, and it is clear that Omega, with the new statement pictured above, confirms that the De Marchi distributor has engraved the remaining case back numbers received from OMEGA CH, i.e. 400 to 500.

A small but important detail; OMEGA's Archive Extracts have revealed the authenticity of some of the Apollo Soyuz cases numbered 470 to 479 inclusive. Once again OMEGA contradicts itself.

In addition, the new indication, written in OMEGA's Exctract d'Archive, confirms that the De Marks were fortunate enough to fit into the "holes" left by mistake by OMEGA (specifically numbered 200-299 and others 400-500).

Is that really how it happened...?

Below is the jump in the numbers of the movements for the first 100 engravings



I hope my statements and the results of my research have not bored or offended anyone. I am open to any constructive criticism. I have no resentment either towards OMEGA or those collectors who accused me of being frustrated with buying the wrong Apollo-Soyuz.

The search for truth continues...

In Italy, "the limited edition watch" has always exceeded sales expectations and this was also clear to De Marchi's sales department, which proposed to OMEGA the creation of other watches for the Italian market only, such as two steel and gold Speedmasters with many special features. It was 1988.




OMEGA, for this special production reserved for the Italian market only, released an Archive Extract with the following specification: "Limited edition of xxx pieces for the Italian market".

Today, I would like to discuss in more detail the year of production and the initial equipment of the Apollo Soyuz.


· Year of Production

At official events and especially in the "VINTAGE" section of OMEGA's official website, 1975 is indicated as the year of birth of the Apollo-Soyuz watch.

Here are a few examples:








So OMEGA says that :

- The production of Apollo-Soyuz watches dates back to 1975

- All ARCHIVE EXTRACTS issued by Omega specify that the production of the official Apollo-Soyuz watches dates back to 1976.

- Apollo-Soyuz movements have serial numbers between 39,180,000 and 39,181,000.

it is clear that these three statements are inconsistent with each other.


The following Apollo-Soyuz watches, sold at Antiquorum auctions in 2004 and 2007, do NOT belong to a 1975 or 1976 production:

- Lot No. 247 Hotel Noga Hilton, Geneva, 24th April 2004 No. 32,006,960.

- Lot No. 234 Geneva, Mandarin Oriental Hotel Du Rhône, 15th April 2007 No. 45,585,460

- Lot No. 19 Geneva, Mandarin Oriental Hotel Du Rhône, 15th April 2007 No. 39,927,934


The watches sold at various online auctions and at Sotheby's and Christie's auctions since 2010 belong to a 1976 production; all OMEGA's Archive Extracts confirm this date.

The following is a summary of the date:

- Lot No. 367 Geneva, 8th May 2010 No. 39,181,098.

- Lot No. 28 New York, 15 Dec 2015 No. 39,181,098 (back plate No. 209)

- iCollector Auctions, 14 Dec 2014 No. 39,181,272 (case back No. 333)

- Lot 10 Sotheby's Londos, 25 Sept 2018 No. 39,181,251 (Caseback No. 342)

- Lot 1034 Fortuna Auctions, 2018 No. 39,181,034 (case back No. 305)


That said:

- Is it fair to go on saying that OMEGA Apollo-Soyuz watches are a 1975 production ?

- or is it more correct to confirm that the movements in the range 39,180,000 to 39,181,000 are a 1975 production and therefore the Omega Archive Extracts are incorrect because they indicate that they are a 1976 production ?

In my opinion, to continue to say that the production of the Apollo-Soyuz belongs to the year 1975 is further confusing as it is known that 1975 has always been associated (and confirmed by OMEGA's Archive Extracts) with the production of the Apollo-Soyuz Out of Batch.



· Initial Equipment


OMEGA is unable to clarify the simplest aspect; the equipment of Apollo-Soyuz watches.

The BECUCCI box factory in Bologna worked with several Swiss watch manufacturers and made several boxes for OMEGA watches, for example:

- Constellation (yellow or red cloth)

- Geneve (yellow or red cloth)

- De Ville (green cloth)

- Seamaster (blue/purple cloth)

Here are some photos:

( the photos are indicative; on the OMEGA website, in the Vintage section, photographs of these watches were not available )












It seems that Apollo-Soyuz inherited the watch box shown above, the only difference being that the inscriptions of the various models "Constellation", "Geneve" or "De Ville" were replaced by the inscription "OMEGA".



Apollo-Soyuz watches were delivered to customers in a transparent bakelite box produced by Scatolificio BECUCCI in Bologna.

The watch was accompanied by the usual OMEGA warranty card where the reference and movement number were indicated on the top. It appears that there were no other documents and/or patches relating to the mission.





It is not important whether the decision to assign the same box to five different watch models was made by the Italian De Marchi Distributor or OMEGA CH, the point is that this box was not exclusive to the Apollo-Soyuz model.

It is curious to note that some Apollo-Soyuz watches are contained in boxes with the name of a different watch, such as "Geneve".




I would like to thank Mr Petros Protopapas of OMEGA for not interrupting his research and goodwill in making this important statement; this watch is part of a batch transformed by OMEGA's authorized distributor into an APOLLO SOYUZ commemorative model.

I conclude by renewing the crux of the matter:

- It is curious that Omega has created such a unique watch and it has reserved a batch of specific movements for this model without matching them to the number engraved on the caseback

- OMEGA contributors has confirmed that there were 400 watches shipped to the Italian distributor De Marchi, but has not yet explained the existence of the official Apollo-Soyuz watches No. 006 and 477 accompanied by the Omega Archive Extract.

Friends and collectors had suggested that I spend my free time in other ways because OMEGA A-S was already clear to everyone and that OMEGA would never change its position. Some people called me a visionary, some people called me a liar, but after this last announcement, the total number of Apollo-Soyuz production parts on OMEGA's official website is still 500 and that basically means two things:

a) there is only one family of Apollo Soyuz recognized by the engraved case backs (001-500).

or

b) there are two families of Apollo Soyuz; the first with movements between 39.180.860 and 39.181.389. The second, on the other hand, has different series movements from those of the first series, but both families have progressive numerical engravings on the back that refer to the watch number (001-500).

https://www.omegawatches.com/planet-omega/60th-anniversary-speedmaster/apollo-soyuz-1975




Mr. Flavio Bertolina, a member of the staff of the De Marchi company between the 70s and 80s, says:

“OMEGA sent its assembled watches to the De Marchi Distributor in Turin and in the periods of greatest market demand, OMEGA sent also watches to be assembled.”

Mr. Flavio Bertolina does not remember if this activity concerned the Apollo-Soyuz watches.

Maybe during these high market request De Marchi Distributor didn't assambly correctly the watches; could be possible?

to posterity the arduous sentence


Thanks for your attention

 

Tribute w/ Speedyorite

 

Interesting reflections on what has been, the best looking Omega Speedmaster chronograph ever !
( it even didn't have " Speedmaster " on the dial )
Can't wait to see what Omega will bring out to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the ASTP - Apollo Soyuz Test Project

 

Fascinating research @Apollo-Soyuz , thank you for taking the time & effort to document it here on the Forum

Here's my tribute to the 45th Anniversary, with my 35th Anniversary Speedmaster. That's my bony wrist [and my watch] on the far left end, as found on Omega's web site in 2017.

 

very beautifull

 

Great information and a fun post to read! Thanks!

 

Interesting information. Thank you!

 

wow!
Omega 145022 42,5 mm proveniente da Italia, Montesilvano(pe) | Chrono24

maybe it's number 100 ...it's perfect, congratulations to the collector

 

The price is a joke ?...

 

Here we go again.

your agreeing the small pusher ones are not actually AS watches?

 

yet???

It is evident that there has been a mess with the mechanisms and that there are now two families of Apollo Soyuz. however, there is no concrete evidence confirming that the De Marchi Distributor has transformed some Apollo Soyuz watches, also because all the Apollo Soyuz watches produced have come out of OMEGA's Swiss laboratories. I know your position perfectly and you know mine. I think it is useless to continue the bickering, I propose a truce, please ... thank you

 

maybe it's not a joke ...
COVID has slowed down the production of new watches, the waiting lists to buy the new OMEGA and ROLEX have lengthened and at the same time collectors can't wait to buy ... result = increase in the price of Vintage

 

I think your cherry picking your information to make a point that is not supported by facts. At the end of the day no one denies De Marchi used spare service dials to make a second batch of watches.

These watches are missing the case and bracelet unique to the AS as they left the factory. They were not made by Omega and such should not be considered Official AS watches.

If I purchased 50 sets of Matsuoka dials and hands and put them into new cases and watches, then sold them through Matsuoka, that does not make them Matsuoka watches.

 

You are wrong and you keep making mistakes; it was my doubts that prompted OMEGA to better understand the presence of these anomalous Apollo-Soyuz. If OMEGA was sure of its claims, why did it carry out all this research and then continued to have the same great doubt that many collectors still have. I remind you that I had the honor of speaking with Mr. Bertolina, watchmaker technician at the Omega De Marchi distributor in those years, who confirmed to me that all OMEGA watches came from OMEGA CH ready to be distributed on the Italian market. What sense would it have made to assemble 70 o 100 watches ???

something happened that we will never know, however, remember, that the killers (the De Marchi) are not guilty without evidence or because you say so ...
I shared my evidence with everyone, you keep telling me that Jesus died for the cold ... and what's more ... I asked you for a respite ...
what can I tell you? think how you want ...

 

Well the fact that of the AS made later all are later or earlier Italian delivery, no mention of the AS dial on the extract ( except 1.) All are missing the special AS case, caseback, pushers, and bracelet. So what is your proof except for 1 extract which last time I checked has never been posted?

Logic, as well as Omega, dictates these are not AS watches but received the dial at some point, and knowing DeMarchi would have received spare dials for these watches it makes total sense as to how they where made.

 

Dear HATERAMA,

I never said that having an AS dial is enough to turn a Speedmaster into an Apollo-Soyuz, NEVER!

Please check everywhere because I’ve never said that!

Like you, if I find myself in front of an AS with a leather bracelet, no engraving on the caseback, a 5mm pusher and a movement that is not congruous, I immediately think that I am dealing with an "assembled watch", but the matter must be analyzed carefully and, in any case, we are talking about 2 or 3 cases in the world, not 100 watches.

No one has concrete proofs to accuse Omega or De Marchi. However, it is also true that all the evidences pointed out by Omega or people like you have never succeeded in attributing responsibility to the Italian Distributor De Marchi. Having said that, for me, it is my duty to understand what happened because AS out of batch watches are there for everyone to see and we CANNOT pretend not to see them.

The APOLLO-SOYUZ project envisaged, among other things, an engraving of 500 casebacks and a dedicated production of 529 or 1000 movements (the batch between 39,180,000 and 39,181,000 includes 1000 watches, while between 39,180,860 and 39,181,389 there are 529 watches).

At this point, I would like to know from you, where did the other movements that were to be inserted into the cases of the remaining Apollo Soyuz watches go?

In this limited edition, not only there is no relationship between the movement of the watch and the engraving number on the caseback, but also everyone is still wondering why OMEGA decided to put such an important watch in a Super Cheap Box and by the way already used by other watches in the past.

This alone is enough to think that something has gone wrong at Omega, don't you think?

If it was as you said, that Omega allowed the Italian Distributor to transform some AS watches, I ask you why Omega CH forgot to send the correct pushers and movements?

Do you think OMEGA only sent the dials, bracelets, end pieces, casebacks and not the pushers?

Do you think so?

And then, even if the De Marchi Distributor had received the complete supply anyway, what would be the point of poorly assembling the remaining AS watches?

You are too busy to just listen to what Omega says!

All Apollo Soyuz watches were manufactured in Switzerland by Omega and furthermore, the De Marchi Distributor could never have reassembled 100 watches because there is no concrete evidence of a shipment of AS spare parts from Omega to the De Marchi Distributor.

DO YOU, BY ANY CHANCE, have the DOCUMENT attesting to the delivery of the Apollo Soyuz spare parts to De Marchi?

If yes, please publish it!

If you rely only on the statements of Omega our discussion ends here ... Initially, I also thought that Omega knew all the answers to my questions but then, in the first contacts I had over 10 years ago, OMEGA initially denied the existence of these Out of Batch. Later, they said that these Out of Batch were the work of some local Italian dealers and, in the end, that the responsibility laid with the Italian distributor...

For some months now, as you may have seen, Omega has found a way to save the day, confirming that the Out of Batch ASs have been "transformed" by the Italian Distributor and signing it into the Extract d Archive.

The new change of direction of Omega is epochal and it is obvious that sooner or later it would happen ... I was right to take a position. I knew it would happen!

However, I remember that Mr Bertolina, a watchmaking technician at De Marchi from 1970 to 1985, confirmed that, during this period, watches were produced by Omega and delivered already assembled to the De Marchi distributor, who was responsible (ONLY) for distributing Omega watches in Italy.

This is a very important testimony and Mr. Bertolina has no interest in telling a falsehood, especially after almost 50 years from the marketing of the Apollo Soyuz.

Mr Bertolina told me that there was a technical laboratory at the De Marchi headquarters which, in addition to managing any repairs, was responsible for making prototypes to be submitted to Omega CH itself, in the hope that these prototypes could become watches produced on a large scale.

In your opinion, Omega, with this clear affirmation, confirms that the Omega Apollo Soyuz watches out of Batch were assembled by the Italian Distributor, correct?



How do you interpret this REMARK?

Maybe these are not original Omegas?
Maybe they are the result of an illegal production ?
Are they the brainchild of Omega Italia ?

None of the above!

As always, you only see one side of the question and therefore it is impossible for you to analyze the question in its entirety.

Let's assume that OMEGA is right, let's take this REMARKS as gold!

No distributor can move a single finger if the Company does not approve the work plan and, in any case, must be informed of everything... in all product sectors, in all countries of the world.

If, in addition to this statement by OMEGA, we also read the contractual agreements signed on 28th October 1970 between OMEGA and the De Marchi distributor, these new REMARKS would undoubtedly have a different meaning.

The Distribution Agreement, signed between Omega and De Marchi, also allowed the Italian Distributor to produce Omega watches (even if Mr Bertolina's testimony confirmed that this only happened for prototypes). However, with these specific agreements, every OMEGA watch produced by the Italian Distributor became a watch that had already been approved by the OMEGA company since this aspect had already been clarified in the contract.

Agreements between OMEGA and the Italian De Marchi Distributor (see Annex):

The Distributor is required to build up a permanent stock of the main models in OMEGA's collection and to organize a maintenance and repair service intended in particular to ensure the international warranty on OMEGA watches. The De Marchi Distributor is also responsible for manufacturing certain models of watch cases and bracelets to suit the tastes of Italian customers and for carrying out the operation of casing watch movements imported from Switzerland.

Do you understand?

Therefore, even if the Italian distributor had been able to assemble some Apollo Soyuz watches, it could have done so; the agreements did not prohibit this!

OMEGA's assertion that the AS out of Batch watches were transformed by OMEGA's authorized distributor De Marchi confirms that the series transformed by the Italian distributor still belongs to the Apollo Soyuz series, but with some differences.

My doubts are still many, however, with the information in my possession and thanks to the testimony of De Marchi employees (still alive) it seems that all (ALL) Apollo Soyuz watches were produced in Switzerland and shipped to the De Marchi Distributor. Furthermore, the De Marchi Distributor could never have transformed 100 watches as there is no record to date of a shipment of AS parts from Omega to the De Marchi Distributor.

Keep your idea, I don't want to convince anyone, but if you want to give your opinion, do so by showing me official documents in order to corroborate your "subjective perceptions".




thank you

 

1st. Is there proof that Omega sent spare dials to Demarchi? Yes in your own data that you just posted " This watch was part of a batch transformed by ..." Clearly, they were sent parts. Unless they magically grew dials as they were blessed by the glasnost fairy.

2nd. How do you not know the cases on a real AS are different, not just the pushers.

3rd. there is nothing wrong with Demarchi putting extra dials onto watches they have and selling them. They can do that as per the agreement you posted.

4th. Your agreeing with me, that there are AS watches with odd serial numbers that do not exhibit anything but the dial and delivered to Italy... what is your explanation for this, other then they put the extra dials into standard watches?

5th. Only one of these extracts according to you show AS on it for these odd ball ones, and we all know that extracts are sometimes influenced by the requestor and not by data in the archives.

6th I am not a hater, I prefer CorrectoRama as a name. I have no stake in this, you other the hand have 2 of these if I remember right and have a vested interest in your interpretation that seems to forget the bulk of data, and focus on only the small pieces data that seem to agree with your position.

 

Thanks to both of you for sharing your thoughts and analysis.

I am a little unclear on the different opinions. I think I read that there is agreement that an official AS watch should contain an AS dial, special case (for the larger pushers), larger pushers, a different caseback, a limited # of # etching on caseback.

The difference is the belief that there may be 2 to 3 watches that have AS dials but do not have all of the other elements.

Is this accurate?

I hope I am not adding any stress, discomfort or disrespect to the discussion. It is interesting and I appreciate the discussion.

 

there are more then 2-3 but yes.