One year on OF and then this Seamaster 2577 Chronometre as an "anniversary gift"

[Servius]

Awesome example, congrats!

I’m usually in the “engraving sucks” camp, but this one is something

 

[iamvr]

Peemacgee

this
And congratulations @iamvr , the Seamaster is quite extraordinary.

Many thanks, @Peemacgee. I lose focus at times and end up buying something else than a Constellation .

 

[MTROIS]

Drooling!!!!

 

[140dave]

Servius

I’m usually in the “engraving sucks” camp, but this one is something

Agree fully, "Merry Christmas from June to Ward" is a deal breaker for me but this one certainly adds to the piece. Nice!

 

[rbob99]

That is a spectacular watch. Congratulations!

 

[iamvr]

Still lots to learn, e.g. how to respond to several posts at the same time so the thread doesn't get bumped up every time I respond to someone individually and piss people off

MtV

What. A. Stunner.

Thanks, buddy. You'll get to see in when we meet later this month.

Caliber561

Holy smokes!
It's getting harder and harder to find these 1950s Seamaster Chronometres in such impeccable condition.

Enjoy your new piece and may you wear it in good health!

J jjen

Beautiful watch and great story!

qazwsx1

Nice one. Congrats!!

ConElPueblo

What a beautiful catch - congratulations!

wagudc

Well done! Congrats!

MTROIS

Drooling!!!!

rbob99

That is a spectacular watch. Congratulations!

Shabbaz

What a beauty!

Many thanks, guys!

Kapka

Amazing watch there and great progress in just a year .
Looking forward to see your watch box October 2022.

Thanks, my friend. But I think I need to take a break and enjoy what I have.

cristos71

Awesome example...you can stop looking for this ref now as you won't find better than that!

Many thanks, Chris. Though there's always room for a black hobnail dial, you're right, it doesn't have to be in this ref .

bardamu

Nice watch!
Well, OF is great, but you are definitely a good student

Thank you. My rather boring regular job certainly helped me speed up on the watch front .

Edited: Nov 2, 2021

 

[iamvr]

A quick update that's a bit of a bummer. I ordered an EotA, sort of as to "complete the story" and to my negative surprise, Omega refused to issue one with the following explanation:

"The available historical documentation associated with the movement you provided us leads to a different reference and model than stated in your order.
For this reason, and as the watch does not correspond to the model as produced and recorded within our production records, we ask for your comprehension that we cannot issue an extract."

Since it's the first time I've ordered an EotA I'm kindly asking the more experience members for advice here. My questions are:

A) Is this explanation specific to my request and as such the verdict final, i.e. the movement or at least the part with the serial number was replaced some time in the past? If that's the case, I have to accept it. Still love the watch as it is. Makes me wonder though when and by whom the swap might have happened. As stated above, I purchased the watch from the grandson of the original owner, and I'm 99.99% certain the seller didn't do anything to the watch. A clue might be the serial number, which struck me as quite peculiar with 3 pairs in a row (see picture of the movement below, apologies for the crappy quality due to poor light condition at my WM's shop). Either the presentation company or the original owner really wanted that serial number perhaps? But that's all pure speculation. Or do you see obvious clues of recent manipulations of the movement?



B) My last string of hope: Is the response by Omega a standard text for any refusal for any reasons, e.g. me putting in the information not in the format required. For instance, for the case reference I only put in the basis reference 2577 instead of C 2577-11 SC engraved in the inner case back. In the description field I put in "Vintage Seamaster Chronometre Officially Certified". Perhaps I should have left the field black?

Does Omega provide further information on request?

Thank you in advance for your help and insights.

 

[seekingseaquest]

I can’t speak to their extract process. All I will say is that if something was changed, such as the caseback or parts of the movement, they are “sympathetic” swaps that in no way impact the value of the watch because they are (#s aside) identical to what came on it when it was new.

 

[MtV]

seekingseaquest

I can’t speak to their extract process. All I will say is that if something was changed, such as the caseback or parts of the movement, they are “sympathetic” swaps that in no way impact the value of the watch because they are (#s aside) identical to what came on it when it was new.

I told him the exact opposite and recommended selling it to me for a very low amount. You’re kinda raining on my parade here Phil.

 

[Dr No]

iamvr

A quick update that's a bit of a bummer. I ordered an EotA, sort of as to "complete the story" and to my negative surprise, Omega refused to issue one with the following explanation:

"The available historical documentation associated with the movement you provided us leads to a different reference and model than stated in your order.
For this reason, and as the watch does not correspond to the model as produced and recorded within our production records, we ask for your comprehension that we cannot issue an extract."

Since it's the first time I've ordered an EotA I'm kindly asking the more experience members for advice here. My questions are:

A) Is this explanation specific to my request and as such the verdict final, i.e. the movement or at least the part with the serial number was replaced some time in the past? If that's the case, I have to accept it. Still love the watch as it is. Makes me wonder though when and by whom the swap might have happened. As stated above, I purchased the watch from the grandson of the original owner, and I'm 99.99% certain the seller didn't do anything to the watch. A clue might be the serial number, which struck me as quite peculiar with 3 pairs in a row (see picture of the movement below, apologies for the crappy quality due to poor light condition at my WM's shop). Either the presentation company or the original owner really wanted that serial number perhaps? But that's all pure speculation. Or do you see obvious clues of recent manipulations of the movement?



B) My last string of hope: Is the response by Omega a standard text for any refusal for any reasons, e.g. me putting in the information not in the format required. For instance, for the case reference I only put in the basis reference 2577 instead of C 2577-11 SC engraved in the inner case back. In the description field I put in "Vintage Seamaster Chronometre Officially Certified". Perhaps I should have left the field black?

Does Omega provide further information on request?

Thank you in advance for your help and insights.

Is there an OXG engraving visible anywhere on the movement?

Art

 

[iamvr]

seekingseaquest

I can’t speak to their extract process. All I will say is that if something was changed, such as the caseback or parts of the movement, they are “sympathetic” swaps that in no way impact the value of the watch because they are (#s aside) identical to what came on it when it was new.

Thanks for the reassurance. I definitely love the watch the same as before.

 

[iamvr]

Dr No

Is there an OXG engraving visible anywhere on the movement?

Art

Hi Art, no, I have not noticed any import marks, but did not check thoroughly. I would have to ask my watchmaker to open it again. I'm not touching that case back myself. May I ask what you're hinting at?

 

[Dr No]

iamvr

Hi Art, no, I have not noticed any import marks, but did not check thoroughly. I would have to ask my watchmaker to open it again. I'm not touching that case back myself. May I ask what you're hinting at?

If there's a market code like OXG engraved on a bridge then it's possible Omega doesn't have records.

 

[gatorcpa]

Dr No

If there's a market code like OXG engraved on a bridge then it's possible Omega doesn't have records.

Actually, that would make it easier for Omega. They would mark the extract as “delivered to the United States” and be done with it.

One clue I see is the box (although there is no way to know the true origin of that box). That looks like an older factory service return box. An original box would have been marked “Seamaster Automatic Chronometer”, or possibly been custom to the Saudi company that presented the watch. It could be that the prior owner had it serviced by Omega many years ago. The bridge with the serial number could have been replaced at the factory. This doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.

Another possible explanation could be centered around its status as a presentation watch. In the US, Norman Morris Co., the importer had a special division to serve the needs of corporations that gave out large numbers of presentation gifts like this. I’m not so sure such a thing existed in the Middle East in the 1950’s. The Saudi company could have purchased the watch direct from Omega in Switzerland or through an early grey market dealer in Saudi Arabia or even another country.

Inconsistencies like this could cause Omega to hesitate on issuing an extract, because it doesn’t make sense to them. There is a history here, it’s just a mystery without enough clues to solve.

In any case, it looks like a wonderfully preserved watch with a case sharp enough to shave with.

Wear in good health!
gatorcpa

 

[iamvr]

gatorcpa

Actually, that would make it easier for Omega. They would mark the extract as “delivered to the United States” and be done with it.

One clue I see is the box (although there is no way to know the true origin of that box). That looks like an older factory service return box. An original box would have been marked “Seamaster Automatic Chronometer”, or possibly been custom to the Saudi company that presented the watch. It could be that the prior owner had it serviced by Omega many years ago. The bridge with the serial number could have been replaced at the factory. This doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.

Another possible explanation could be centered around its status as a presentation watch. In the US, Norman Morris Co., the importer had a special division to serve the needs of corporations that gave out large numbers of presentation gifts like this. I’m not so sure such a thing existed in the Middle East in the 1950’s. The Saudi company could have purchased the watch direct from Omega in Switzerland or through an early grey market dealer in Saudi Arabia or even another country.

Inconsistencies like this could cause Omega to hesitate on issuing an extract, because it doesn’t make sense to them. There is a history here, it’s just a mystery without enough clues to solve.

In any case, it looks like a wonderfully preserved watch with a case sharp enough to shave with.

Wear in good health!
gatorcpa

Many thanks for sharing your insights, @gatorcpa. I may be short CHF 120 now, but gained way more knowledge than if Omega had issued the EotA. In that sense, it was a very good investment. I will always wonder about the history of this beautiful watch, but not all mysteries need to be solved.

 

[gatorcpa]

Just saw another, very similar watch on this forum:



When you get into the eBay listing, you can see that it’s the same reference and movement as yours:




At least you can get an idea of the date of sale from the above.

Frankly, I think that most of the time, the Omega Extracts are a waste of money and you can find out almost as much information with a little internet research.

You should ask for a refund.
gatorcpa

 

[ConElPueblo]

gatorcpa

You should ask for a refund.
gatorcpa

When a different watch comes up in the archives, you just lose the money. It's in the terms and conditions, so I don't think there's any luck there.

@iamvr, I had the same thing happening to me: https://omegaforums.net/threads/no-extract-available-how-much-less-is-it-worth.132473/

Your Chronometer is still outstandingly nice

 

[iamvr]

gatorcpa

Just saw another, very similar watch on this forum:



When you get into the eBay listing, you can see that it’s the same reference and movement as yours:




At least you can get an idea of the date of sale from the above.

Frankly, I think that most of the time, the Omega Extracts are a waste of money and you can find out almost as much information with a little internet research.

You should ask for a refund.
gatorcpa

Thank you for showing another example. Coincidentally, I also own one like this, bought here on OF


I generally agree with you, I don't usually care for a EotA as it just adds to costs with little extra value. Plus most of the vintage Omegas I own have passed through so many hands, chances are that something has been changed and the request for an extract leads to money lost.
In this case, having bought the watch from the heir of original owner, I assumed everything was original and wanted to round off the story with the EotA. No rational decision making here, I have to admit.

As for the refund, sadly as @ConElPueblo writes above, there won't be any. They already wrote in their refusal email, that the CHF120 cover their efforts of going through the archives, so won't get refunded even though an EotA cannot be issued.

 

[iamvr]

ConElPueblo

When a different watch comes up in the archives, you just lose the money. It's in the terms and conditions, so I don't think there's any luck there.

@iamvr, I had the same thing happening to me: https://omegaforums.net/threads/no-extract-available-how-much-less-is-it-worth.132473/

I remember reading your thread. Sorry, the same thing happened to you with regard to the EotA! Did you try asking Omega for more information, e.g. to which ref. the movement originally belonged, or wouldn't they share this information anyway?

ConElPueblo

Your Chronometer is still outstandingly nice

Thank you. I absolute love it all the same, with or without a piece of paper .

 

[ConElPueblo]

iamvr

I remember reading your thread. Sorry, the same thing happened to you with regard to the EotA! Did you try asking Omega for more information, e.g. to which ref. the movement originally belonged, or wouldn't they share this information anyway?


Thank you. I absolute love it all the same, with or without a piece of paper .

No, I didn't even think of that. Probably wouldn't be possible without better connections at Omega, I guess.