- Posts
- 68
- Likes
- 60
Chubsmaster
·You're right. I focused on the transformation. Omega is clearly identifying these as AS commenorative. If Omega calls them AS commenorative then that's good enough for me.
Coming from the same lot as the lot that De Marchi received makes them seem to all have been likely to have been transformed by De Marchi into AS Demarchi watches. It doesn't make sense to me that only one extract says transformed by Demarchi and the other extracts would not, although I have only seen a copy of one of those besides your 468.
Here we don't agree. I am not definitively saying they are different. I am raising the question because i see differences when looking at the pictures. Of course, pictures at certain angles can make something appear to be different when there is no difference. But i see different sized continents. I was not aware that they been analyzed.
I only saw the one invoice, which is why I speculated about the low number. Are there copies of the other invoices, not including the normal speedmasters that were used to make the 46Xs?
Yes, i would not be surprised that De Marchi engraved the numbers. I would not expect Demarchi to have made the medallion with the spacecraft. It is possible, but seems more unlikely in the absence of evidence.
By parts, i don't mean a franken watch. Every watch comes from parts at the factory. I meant Omega could have taken parts from the bins and produced the 476. It's a postulate that attempts to explain the anamoly of one high numbered watch. There are a lot of postulates that are taken as established theories.
Mine are not theories. I am attempting to present a plausible alternative to test other hypothesis. There doesn't seem to be enough evidence to establish a theory. I am merely saying that given the scant evidence, this is what I as an objective reader have concluded thus far. I would expect to change my mind when more information becomes known. I certainly don't believe this is the final conclusion. Merely that at this point in time, this is what it appears to me.
The mitsukoshi was a poor example. They aren't the same but i was using it to illustrate my thoughts.
As I said, the 468 is a historically significant watch because it was transformed by a significant Italian dealer from original parts as authorized by Omega. Personally, it is not the same as the AS with the different cases. That is not the same as a mitsukoshi, for sure.
Cheers,
Dave
Thank you for the clarifications! I think we are mostly on the same page, and we both got a little lost with all the information (and the arguing of some!).
Regarding the AS 5.5 mm shipments from Bienne: I have only seen invoice 170, same as you. The others probably exist but they have not been made public. Watches have been documented from the two large shipments (200+170), not from the last two (20+10). Please don't eat me alive for this, but I have thought that the last two shipments (20+10) probably were used as spares, and maybe this is where the parts to transform the De Marchi's come from... Yes, it is pure speculation!
Watch #476 arrived in the 170 shipment. Attached is the extract, which has great detail, even the watch number, probably the result of a physical inspection.
I will try to convince the owners of #416, #461 and #469 to share their extract, if they have it.
I will send pictures of both AS's casebacks once I get #3xx.
I agree, the AS with 5.5mm pushers, the bigger case, is "pure and pristine". The AS De Marchi is "different", and with a complicated story, but still part of the family.
If De Marchi did the engraving then all 400 to 500 where somehow "finished" in Torino... I better run, I know a few that will fume if they read this, but sorry to say, it is possible.
Regards
