Hope I'm not asking to much if someone could verify if this 1950's Omega Cioccolatone jumbo looks genuine.
It's being sold as 18K gold but noticed the inside back cover is stamped 14K, which concerns me and makes me even more worried about the validity of the more important movement/other numbers.
The seller has a shop and laboratory in Switzerland (I have checked out their web site which looks lagit) and was asking £5k for the watch but accepted my first offer of £3k, which concerns me a little. That's a big drop and I'm now wondering if I've offered to much. I have seen others around with fairly wide variations in price from around £1200 to £2600 so I've no idea how much it's worth, I'm being driven by my own desireability
The seller appears to be genuine, and all communications seem genuine but then what do I know, it's all I can do to figure out how to wind them up.

 

http://naligazone.com/index.php/data-watch/omega/13-watch/omega/297 This may give you some piece of mind. That case was also available in 14k so it may have been a typo. I think the price is too high, from what I've seen.

 

I had thought the back may have been swapped. Thanks for your contribution!

 

That's possible but so is a typo.

 

Am I the only one that thinks this is a redial (not the best one either) ?
I've seen a few of these textured dials before, most redials sadly... Looked just like this one... Notice how it only says swiss (and not very readable either) beneath 6 o'clock.
Why do you think they accepted your "small" offer ? :s

 

No, you're not!

 

I don't want to scare you or be rude but. I would turn back from this watch, ASAP. High chance of redial AND a caseback that misrepresents the actual quantity of gold...

Oh and the font writting on the dial that says OMEGA and Automatic is wrong I think, and not perfectly straight I believe.

The crown is not aligned perfectly and, also, the 10 o'clock hour marker's tip is not attached to the dial but it is "in air" (not sure how to say it). Clearly it wasn't glued/attached as it should have. Or maybe there's something wrong with the dial's texture itself.

Definite NO to this one in my opinion.

 

@cicindela, is the dial wear on this model different from others? If so, why?

 

Is it harder to maintain seal integrity on all square cases or just this one?

 

Interesting. Thanks.

 

Wow I really didn't expect so much help on this and I really appreciate it. I love watches, although to a hobbyist and would have bought loads over the years had I the money. Now I'm retired I've decided to splash out (within my tight budget) and treat myself.
I've learnt a lot reading posts on this forum and appreciate all the input you guys have provided.
Mr DX009....regarding accepting the much lower offer. This did worry me, given£2k drop is a lot. It made me wonder if either, they're cock a hoop at finding a mug like me who will buy a fake (if that's what it is) or the watch is worth much less and £3k is steal for them. It's a mine field out there !
PS: a forum member, "Ianierdams" was selling the same watch in May 2014. I emailed him to see if it's still for sale, but no reply as yet. If anyone knows him I would appreciate giving him the heads up. Thanks.

 

Just for the sake of learning; what is it exact that you think this is a redail; could you elaborate on 'readable'? What are other signals that make you think so?
What exactly is wrong with the font of Omega, what with the 'automatic'?
The tip of the '5' is btw also not completely attached to the dail. Might that be because of the domed dail?
Is it always a red flag when it states only 'swiss' (answer: no) and why does that apply to this particular watch?
A typo (18 or 14) does not make it a Frankenwatch as a whole....

Just curious and try to keep from jumping to conclusions on 'a feel' rather than comparison with other -legit- examples.
These textured dials are very difficult to assess......

(I have no ties whatsoever with the buyer and/or seller, to be clear on that)

Cheers
W

 

Looks like a redial to me and just the way those hour markers have been sloppily lined up to the centre pinion of the hands is enough for me to give it a big no

 

I always want to know what 'looks like' means.....

 

To further help you out a bit by getting an idea about the "industry".

More knowledgeable people than I, call them, brick and mortar shops. Some are good, some are bad and as far as I can tell, unless you have connections on the inside (or the people there are really really nice) you will pay a lot more for a watch than it actually costs, or that it CAN cost by buying it from the internet (forums, ebay, etc.). While it's true that by looking at it, touching it, feeling it, you might be able o better study it, there are plenty of people selling legit and genuine items on the internet as well.

The aspect of brick and mortar shops that I want to talk about is the fact that their main target market, is people like you. People that meet 2 requirements: they don't know much about watches and they have the money.

Psychologically speaking they have an advantage of, almost always, being found trustworthy by potential customers. You'll say that they can;t possibly be scamming people in any way. They're giving out receipts, they (might) offer a warranty, they brag about having been on the market for decades, they present their watches in a very good manner with good pictures, nice words, they'll say that the watch has been serviced by their very experienced watchmaker, or that it has been repaired, reconditioned, etc.

All this appeals to the person that just wants to buy his first (real) watch, but, as I discovered, those that are collectors or dealers, or simply knowledgeable about watches will often times run away from these places and from the watches they sell.

Note that not everything that they sell will be like the watch you presented (there are plenty of exceptional time pieces that such stores can offer), BUT, everything they sell WILL be overpriced.

@Willem023 If you don't agree with what we've ALL just said it's OK. I'd rather not repeat everything I said again. You can read it and see for yourself what the issues are with the watch (and there are plenty of them).

 

In this case it means when I view it and compare it to others I have seen and stored in my databank ( read : brain ) it looks different and not convincing.

 

Well, that is not very friendly, is it?
I am not agreeing or disagreeing in any way with what you and a few posters are saying, I just ask to provide with some proof, apart from loosely attached hourmarkers (which I recognise) and the statement that 'a font is wrong'.
What is wrong then: is it the pointed 'A' in Omega or the lack thereoff? Is there reference material provided?

I am under the impression that this Forum is also about learning. Call me a 'purist' in any way, but I would like to see some reference material before you or others might convince me that 'it looks' like something one way or the other.
Actually, there are not that much people on this Forum, that have earned by in-depth study my appreciation on content, to 'believe' them on their account, Desmond being one of them, btw. And Cristos might also meander that way...

I will challenge everyone without providing proof or reference, to convince others on this forum on the subject of 'legit' or not.
Part of the fun is also IMO to be knowledgable on -a part of- the watches being shown and asked on.

And when asked for 'gosh, how's that' and reacted upon like: 'we ALL' and 'see for yourself', then to me, that is no proof of your stated opinion. It actually weakens it.


My 2 cnts
W