OMEGA APOLLO SOYUZ: Happy 45th birthday

pdxleaf

The following could explain some watches with serial numbers that are not in the correct range. The entire movement could have been replaced. According to this post, Omega had a policy in the 70's to replace entire movements. So finding a few watches with odd serial numbers could simply mean that the movement was replaced.

This isn't a statement about what took place with any AS model. It simply illustrates the wide range of possibilities. It reinforces for me that it is interesting to conjecture about possible scenarios, but absent facts, they are simply conjecture.

_____________

Vintagewtchzilla

after all .... useless discussion with no prove of anything and the only outcome is potential buyers are so uncertain about right and wrong and nonsense so they will go and buy something different. bummm price drop..... well done OF

luckily i don't have to care as i am not in the AS game

pdxleaf

Respectfully, I think he has shared his opinion several times, which is that there simply isn't enough solid information to say what happened.

Perhaps it is because Archer is a watchmaker and an engineer, which gives him training in a systematic approach and a great deal of knowledge about watches. Unlike myself, who absent that knowledge and training am more willing to speculate.

In the end, i would place more value on his reluctance to offer an hypothesis than any hypothesis of mine, simply because his lack of comment comes from a place of greater knowledge.

Also, based on the time that he has taken to read and respond, I suspect that like all of us, he is just as engaged and intrigued, if not more so. He simply has more knowledge about the watchmaking world that shows that some suggested conclusions should not be considered conclusive. This should not be received as ill-intent, if in fact you perceive it thay way.

Of course, he can speak for himself.

Cheers,

Dave

Reality check:

pdxleaf

Respectfully, I think he has shared his opinion several times, which is that there simply isn't enough solid information to say what happened.

Perhaps it is because Archer is a watchmaker and an engineer, which gives him training in a systematic approach and a great deal of knowledge about watches. Unlike myself, who absent that knowledge and training am more willing to speculate.

In the end, i would place more value on his reluctance to offer an hypothesis than any hypothesis of mine, simply because his lack of comment comes from a place of greater knowledge.

Also, based on the time that he has taken to read and respond, I suspect that like all of us, he is just as engaged and intrigued, if not more so. He simply has more knowledge about the watchmaking world that shows that some suggested conclusions should not be considered conclusive. This should not be received as ill-intent, if in fact you perceive it thay way.

Of course, he can speak for himself.

Cheers,

Dave

Reality check:

pdxleaf

Your lack of civility grows tiresome, as does this thread.

Ciao.

Archer

If your goal here is to foster genuine discussions as you claim, this is not the way to do it.

pdxleaf

I truly wish we could have a coffee together. I think we have more in common than differences.

I wish I had not posted that last comment. It wasn't helpful. At times, some of your comments are received as attacking a person who doesn't agree with you. Perhaps that wasn't your intent, but that is how it comes across here. We would likely do better in person!

I understand that you may be frustrated with people such as myself who do not accept as fact some thoughts that you consider fact, especially as you have made a great effort at presenting your information. It isn't that I do not understand what you are saying or that I make any judgment of your intents or knowledge, it is simply that I for one do not consider all of your assumptions as facts. Feel free to disregard my opinion.