Second extract is like the museum is implying it's a fake signature, the "Delivered to" however makes it obvious it can't be a fake signature.
Does it? Is there absolutely no scenario where this could have been added after the watch left the factory, just like some retailers added their name to the dial?
So you believe that this detail is in the archives but was intentionally withheld on the newer extract…why do you believe they would do this?
Here's an example
Old:
Petros:
Second extract is like the museum is implying it's a fake signature, the "Delivered to" however makes it obvious it can't be a fake signature.
My issue is with another extract, this time another leader signature that has no other example on Omega's - the extract dealer got didn't detail the signature either. I think potential buyers assumed it was fake, I shouldn't complain as I got it for 1/100 of what it would've been worth
I do hope they are going the Tissot route though, free extracts and free love
There are definitely NK signature models that do at least look like they have been done at the factory due to the applied omega furniture appearing being in a different location, then there are others that look very much like they were done after production like this cartouche variant, and others that could go either way. Even if they were done that way from new though there’s no reason to believe each order would have been recorded in detail, especially getting closer to the 80’s when Omega was becoming a bit of a basket case.
There 5 different Korean day indicators available from Omega…here’s one example…
72210201516T | DAY INDICATOR WHITE KOREAN
Do your trolling elsewhere, unless you have information on when those day disks were first available. And if you have a specific claim, make the claim, so the nature of your trolling is more clear.
I know those day disks are available today, are you claiming they were available in 1972?
It's not an after production "cartouche" variant - it's a 60th birthday watch he ordered and gifted. Many other examples and even a 70th birthday variant. It's an impossibility to me that these are not delivered like this from the factory
Also to my knowledge Omega didn't make these dials anyway, the case, the dial, the hands are all from other manufacturers.
The Korean day disks also are(were) exclusive to these watches. They are all around special made. So even after all this information if anyone is going to claim they are aftermarket modifications, it will be more obvious they are trolling.
Also let me note that my interest in North Korean watches are purely from an Omega enthusiast perspective.
He also had a 70th birthday variant made that had a C-Case delivered in 1982 that has a serial that dates to 1979
And if the validity of such obvious watches are in question even among enthusiasts, it proves my point that these later extracts actually hurt irregular watches, while the head of the museum was faking his own irregular watches
Do your trolling elsewhere, unless you have information on when those day disks were first available. And if you have a specific claim, make the claim, so the nature of your trolling is more clear.
I know those day disks are available today, are you claiming they were available in 1972?
Do your trolling elsewhere, unless you have information on when those day disks were first available. And if you have a specific claim, make the claim, so the nature of your trolling is more clear.
I know those day disks are available today, are you claiming they were available in 1972?
Anyone know of any more news on this?
I know what it is mate, and yes, dials were made by a variety of manufacturers. Dials were also changed often after being made, some by Omega, some by country specific importer, some by end users. When you see a cartouche covering up where the rivet holes from the Omega logo originally were, it’s pretty obvious that the dial had been made then changed prior to delivery.
This isn’t a personal attack on your investment, I never once said the watches were “invalid” at all, but rather that they could have had the dial text added at any one of several stages prior to being put on the wrist of the end-user, and there is zero firm evidence as to which stage it happened. It doesn’t actually matter a whole lot, Kim just wanted his name on the thing, it’s not like he would have cared who did it.
You have a discrepancy in the dates of sale. A discrepancy in the description.
I also have an exchange in the information with the Extract from the Archives.
I receive the first digitally, the second by mail.
The information is different in both.
The signature is of Petros Protopapas.
