So what is going on here? Was ‘the buyer’ Omega, who possibly didn’t have to pay as the item had been stolen (and what are the consequences for the parties involved)? As @WatchCor says, the plot thickens - and a good pickup @Caliber561

And why would Omega use this particular image of an 861? Surely they would have plenty of others hanging around that they could use...

 

I think Omega have read this thread, are laughing at us...and now trolling us...

Edit: do Omega movement screw heads always align the same way when tight? Because in those 2 pics the alignment of the heads is the same...

Edit Edit: if they took that movement out the watch, then most likely the movement is a legit prototype (that they got to snag for a deal, as nobody would buy it without an extract from them Chapeau...) and the rest of the watch is crap (because, well, it is...)

 

Pretty sure they don't. My 861s don't have the same screw alignment, and I suppose that if it were easy to keep orientation consistent from thread to thread, Omega wouldn't have had to develop the Naiad lock, and Rolex crowns would all have the correct orientation when screwed in, and a number of other things watch enthusiasts love to complain about would have never been brought up.

 

I was thinking the same thing, even the regulation screw is in the same spot, so who ever has/had it literally took it out and didn't touch it otherwise. Not even for a service.

 

This theory gets my vote. The movement I guess was never in question but the rest of it was.

 

I think the movement was called into question, maybe @kov can share further evidence?

https://omegaforums.net/threads/speedy-prototype-at-drcrott.103535/#post-1354377

I got an email from Dr Crott confirming Omega were the buyers of this watch. I do question their judgement on this purchase.

 

I'd be surprised if they put this on display. I think they bought it to take the movement out of circulation.

 

I think the same.

@simonsays I wrote that I’ve been offered with a batch of 0000 bridges for sale back in Q4’2019 so I wasn’t surprised to suddenly see a movement with one similar bridge on it, auctioned, some months later. No other evidences

 

Hmm, well taking the rest of the watch into account I think the movement is more likely to have a re engineered bridge than be a genuine prototype.
It makes no sense to spend €36,000 on it. Even if you believe in the movement it is way too much to spend. I know one thing for certain, Omega will never admit to a mistake.


Hmm

 

I like this prototype better...because it looks more legit...and... Rolex...

 

This is immensely confusing, I have almost no doubt that that thing was put together, but someone at Omega disagrees with all of us...

 

Just for fun...

I talked to Petros about that auction text, involving Omega Museum admittedly confirming that watch to be a prototype, before the auction starts. I remember him being very disappointed about that text and he clearly said his team would never make such a statement about that watch.

So either Petros was after that watch and played well with me or Stefan Muser didn’t tell the truth, twice.

We’ll probably never know, and honestly I don’t care...

 

Fantastic! Has the very rare mini-marshmallow lume...