Hello Folks

Recently purchased an Ed White 105.003-65 that came with some papers. The papers state:

MOV. NO scratched out UNKNOWN (looks like 3151714
METAL St. SEEL
REF ST145003
SOLD TO Mr. B EMSLEY
JEWELLER Collingwood
Sales Person B. M. Leuela
DATE none



@speedy4ever states "Sorry, 145.003 is NOT mythical, this is simply the new name for the 105.003 after summer 1967

I also have a warranty paper of a 145.003, sold in 1969 (unfortunately, not the watch itself).

In summary, ST 145.003 is nothing else than a 105.003 produced after summer 1967.
- "145.003" was indicated in the catalogs
- "145.003" is indicated in Omega archives, but strangely, consecutive batches can be either noted as 105.003 or 145.003
- Most of the time, ST 145.003 are engraved "105.003-65" on the caseback, with the exception illustrated above"

This makes sense as the date on my extract states REF ST-105.003 January 12, 1968 and delivered to the United Kingdom.

Collingwood of Conduit St. was a jeweller in London famous for being the jeweller to Prince Charles and Diana.



There is another joint called Collingwood the Jeweller in Sunderland however which does appear to have sold Omega as well.





There is a photo of a similar set of papers but it actually has a movement number my movement number is similar.
24.957.XXX

"ColinT's watch papers, from Chuck Maddox' website:"



Another similar set of papers


and here's a found photo of a 145.003 hang tag.



Just curious if these papers would be married to the watch.. I guess it is all just speculation without the number being written which is in itself rather odd.

 

Those papers are next to useless unfortunately. The scratched out number is way out of range for an Ed White and there is no date meaning it confirms nothing really. They might just be genuine I guess, the shop assistant was having a bad day for instance but there is also a likelihood some or all of the info has been massaged at some point and they started life with another watch, or blank.

 

Yes the lack of a movement number and date is certainly problematic!

I had largely written it off as such but then started exploring the 145.003 rabbit hole and thought maybe they did come with the watch after all. The ink is quite old.

 

Well yours is certainly a late EW so the date at least fits. The extract date is usually the date of production, EW sales slowed cosiderably in the late 1960s so yours may have been sold even later, 1969 for instance like the one you show above with a similar serial.

 

yes I would suspect as much myself. The You and Your Omega booklet mentions the moon walk so it would seem these papers came from after July 1969.

This and the model number had me convinced the papers were just a random souvenir but the research made me think it was a possibility they were genuine. Who knows!