The error might have occurred between the production card that holds date of delivery of the movement to Omega, as well as the actual assembly date of the watch and reference and the delivery books that state the reference- hand written - and the destinarion of delivery. No rule without exeption. I own a 105.012 which is a 145.012 in the books, but clearly a 105.012 on the production card. There you go..

 

I was being amusing.

It seems that what Omega now calls its archive was once just its pre-production planning record, and not consistently updated with actual production information.

Disappointing but good to know. Thank you @DLT222 !

 

Sorry, wrong. It was. Post-production for warrranty purposes. Having a bunch of references going astray doesn't render the wole thing void. People where noting down things hand written, errors occur. And 50+ years later someone researches it, with two sources. He might have gone for the books in this case instead of scrolling miles of microfiche. And someone might ave noted down the wrong reference back then. And I can tell you, this is not guess work, I know what I am talking about.

 

Point taken. Additional sources of errors.

A lot of money can be staked on the content of these extracts, without most people understanding how the materials that now constitute the archive were created by Omega or are currently researched by Omega.

 

I was beginning to suspect that with the new extract process omega was just issuing certificates for the refs that they have no records for, by using their spidey sense with the pics provided by the client. So now this new development adds more to my suspicion..

 

I don’t think this is a new development. Yes there are some holes in the records, and sometimes people write down numbers incorrectly, and sometimes the archivist makes a mistake looking up the extract. Movements also get swapped when it’s cheaper or easier than a repair. Life is imperfect.

 

Interesting. Last year I also bought a straight writing Speedy that the archive came back as Soccer Timer Seamaster movement....
I also discussed it with Charles but he never mentioned this:

 

Back in the day when you could just email John or Maria you'd get when the watch was completed and where it was originally sent for sale.

Tom

 

So anything official from Omega on this

as Charles at the Museum said so... is like blueberry bezeled Speedmasters

 

That is correct, but to verify that the movement belongs to the reference you needed an EoA

 

What are we hoping for? An official bulletin that the records at Omega contain some errors and we may not be able to confirm your watches provenance. Bad luck!

 

Surprisingly not. I described a watch to John and he said it was incorrect and assembled from parts.

Tom

 

So the next poor bloke or dodgy dealer that comes along with a Seamaster movement in a Speedmaster we just go, it’s possible.

Not expecting anything official just a little piece of credibility to the fact.

 

I think some extra provenance to suggest a mistake would be necessary to cast doubt on the EOA. A one owner unserviced watch, or the paperwork to support the movement number as correct.
If you are just putting it out there that your Seamaster movement could be a Speedmaster then no statement from Omega will make this more palatable.

 

I'm guessing we will see a lot more "one owner" watches that have the wrong movements in them coming out of the woodwork, claiming they came that way from the factory. I would personally take such claims with the largest grain of salt possible. Someone telling you they have owned a watch since new is not easy to verify in a real, tangible way. This sort of news is very beneficial to the people most prone to abuse it.

I can tell you from personal experience opening up "one owner unserviced watches" that often they have actually been serviced previously. Family history of older objects tends to be very shaky...

Cheers, Al

 

I tend to agree with this 100%. Whatever story is being told, the fact is that you will not be getting anything else from Omega than an Extract that confirms that this serial was originally intended to be a (or even produced as a) Seamaster. What does it change? Only the value. So if the buyer buys also the story, he will pay accordingly. If he doesn't he'll expect the price to reflect the mismatch. Who's mistake - who cares? It is what it is...

 

In all cases, are these 'serial on warranty' hand-written? Or printed by Omega?