I seem to recall the grey dial Speedy as the one I lost to @Spacefruit at auction a couple years back...same bump on the dial between 10 and 11

 

@Jakemeister1000 great pics!! Thank you.

 

No 16 is mine. Bought it from the first owner. I don´t believe for a second that the dial has been relumed. I bothers me that Sotheby´s is writing an important piece of description that is pure speculation on their behalf. ”Appears to have been...” What kind of crap is that??

 

Great pictures, and do you also pictured the inscription on bracelet of lot 49

 

I don’t. Sorry about that!

 

Thanks anyway for the great pictures! I was wondering of the inscription was detoning on the bracelet or could be removed!

 

Chapeau @Spacefruit

 

Anyone else been to the preview? any more photos to share?
Cheers, Michael

 

Yes, though not many good enough to post.

I took group shots of the two 2915-1s and 2915-2. I thought I had more when the attendant held the tray for me, trying to find better light. But they must have been immediate fails. The light was tough.

Anyway, for obvious reasons, I focused on the early 2998s. Just a few shots.

Lot 3 2998-1



Lot 39 2998-2

Lovely bezel and quite nice overall. The scratches in the minute sub-dial were disclosed in the condition report but not visible in the catalog photo, I believe. Visible in these shots. And the few bezel flaws are more pronounced than in the catalog.





Both of these 2998s had Naiad crowns.



Cases both appeared to be honestly worn.



And the siblings together. Fewer than 30 serial numbers apart.



I didn't examine the bracelet closely.



I was tempted to stay for the auction Friday, which when I asked appeared to be easily open to walk-ins, but decided I needed to move on.

I asked about the archive extracts. How do they get manufacture dates when the best we can do is a delivery date and place? I didn't get a good answer other than they worked with Omega. (I subsequently met Nate but didn't ask him the same questions.) Is the manufacture date here actually the delivery date? They did not have the extracts available for inspection.

Edit: In case it's not apparent, the 2998-1 has a domed dial and the 2998-2 has the small step.

 

I think Nate said that Omega was going to probably provide the certificates just before the auction? I forget. All I remember was that he didn’t have them and was going to get them.

 

I went to the reception this evening (and met Apollo 9 LMP Rusty Schweickart!). Looked at and handled Lot 15 ( straight writing, Apollo XI). I don’t have your eye but overall in good shape but think the bezel is not original and the bracelet is in pretty bad shape. Winding the movement, it felt very smooth. Nice piece apart from those things. The Ed Whites estimates seem high IMO.

 

I received my hard copy catalog in the mail yesterday and found it interesting that with everything at their disposal for research these two made it into the catalog. I know it should not be used as a historical reference guide but maybe a little fact checking before sending it to print might have been in order.

From the auction experts....

Once....



...and twice

 

You referring to the fact that he wasn’t actually wearing the watch? It was left in the LM, supposedly? Aldrin was wearing his 145.012.

 

Wasn't it a 105.012?

 

Yep. Said the watches have been verified by omega but some kind of printer issue on their end has delayed the extracts.

 

Opinions differ on that for some reason. And the watch itself was “lost” on the way to the Smithsonian.

 

Are you referring to my post? If so, yes.

The first part I hightlight says Armstrong descended to the surface from the LM and on his wrist was a watch strapped. That is incorrect. There was not.

The second part I highlight says Armstrong set foot on the Moon with a Speedmaster on his wrist. That is incorrect. There was not.

Are my statements incorrect or are theirs?

It was thought for years Aldrin wore the 145.012. The newly identified 105.012 reference was corrected by James Ragan a couple of years ago with his original documentation.

Supposedly? Aldrin says this in his book and Armstrong confirms this in his official NASA oral history.

 

Should have done this ages ago : anybody care to flex their 'feel for the market' and guess the hammer prices? Always a fun task...

 

I propose we ask for two predictions:

1. Which lot gets Highest price achieved
2. Which lot Largest percentage over low estimate

 

And how about a sweepstake - how many lots unsold?