Community Stories

What is “rare” (aka, “scarce”) in vintage Omegas?

Locked
Vintagewtchzilla
Posts
946
Likes
2,077
ok i see a lack on the very first step

1) define a rule set for "rare" that is accepted by 90% of the collectors
2) based on that rule u can look for watches that fit
3) and there will always be an exception to 1)
 
tyrantlizardrex
Posts
8,890
Likes
28,361
fnzeee fnzeee
You have already made your point, and I have asked you to stop posting it here repeatedly now several times. Your opinion is not the only one that matters. I can see you are used to getting your way or beating others into submission if you don't. What you call leeching, I see as compiling something of value that incorporates from members' experience. You are correct, I did join in May, and like many others I have asked for guidance in the forums. My objective in starting this thread was to give something back to the forum that I thought would be useful and of interest to members. I thought volunteering to compile from the input of others would result in a valuable reference for use by all. Why can you not just walk away from this thread if you do not agree with it? I have a right to post it, even with your attempt to "pull rank" / discredit me by suggesting I am new and just leeching. Can you please just stand down?

This is what's called a discussion... you've had one of those before right?

You talk, others talk, you don't have to agree, but you don't get to kick people out just because they ask questions, or make points you don't like.

Again, you asked for a place to start, I have now suggested twice that you look at A Journey Through Time, is this a book that you've taken a look at?
 
tyrantlizardrex
Posts
8,890
Likes
28,361
Vintagewtchzilla Vintagewtchzilla
ok i see a lack on the very first step

1) define a rule set for "rare" that is accepted by 90% of the collectors
2) based on that rule u can look for watches that fit
3) and there will always be an exception to 1)

It's tough right?

Because for part 1 there's:

1) Watches that were produced in very small numbers to begin with.
2) As @Edward53 says, watches that were once common, and now lost (I guess this would be very early 20th century stuff? Outside of Omega, I'm thinking Harwood self winders...)
3) Again as per @Edward53 - relatively common watches, in uncommon condition.
4) Stuff that there's a reasonable amount of in existence, but is not being traded... a few folks here are helping with the rarity factor of this category I think. 😁

And then you get on to your second two points. 🙄
 
fnzeee
Posts
87
Likes
60
@@tyrantlizardrex - You are correct there is no rule set that is accepted by 90% of collectors. The point here was to brainstorm nuances, not to define a precise mathematical model for scarcity. But I give up. This was supposed to be fun, but I can see you are not going to let that happen.
 
cristos71
Posts
7,446
Likes
34,287
Edward53 Edward53
Sometimes a watch is rare, sometimes the same watch isn't. Early Constellations aren't rare, but they are when they come in genuine NOS condition with box and papers.

I wouldn't tar all Constellations with the same brush, there are quite a few rare dial variations out there on the earliest references....plank dials, two tone half guilloche dials, cloissone enamel dials, black hobnail dials...

The references may not be rare but these dial variations certainly are and that's what keeps me hunting 😀
 
Longbow
Posts
1,813
Likes
9,384
I prefer the French culinary approach:-

Bien cuit: well cooked, as in seen its fair share of the polishing wheel

À point: or on point, or has been serviced sympathetically over the years

Saignant: bloody, as in "it took me ages to find this bloody thing!"

Bleu: or "Sacrebleu! That looks just like @styggpyggeno1 NOS Sparkle Seamaster but in white gold."

If you still use the term rare then your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Adieu !
 
M
Posts
77
Likes
72
372 28 SCS PC AM RG 17 à seconde sautante Synchrobeat - 1'000 pièces, dont 17 commercialisées

InkedCaliber_372_Werk_Seriennummer.jpg


Is that rare enough?
 
cristos71
Posts
7,446
Likes
34,287
M Magic_Omega
372 28 SCS PC AM RG 17 à seconde sautante Synchrobeat - 1'000 pièces, dont 17 commercialisées

InkedCaliber_372_Werk_Seriennummer.jpg


Is that rare enough?

Yup, that's definitely up there 😀 How about some more pictures....or even better, its own thread?
 
ConElPueblo
Posts
9,595
Likes
27,660
fnzeee fnzeee
@@tyrantlizardrex - You are correct there is no rule set that is accepted by 90% of collectors. The point here was to brainstorm nuances, not to define a precise mathematical model for scarcity. But I give up. This was supposed to be fun, but I can see you are not going to let that happen.

What I usually suggest new (and old for that sake) members should do is to start at the last page of the "Vintage Omega Watches" subforum and work your way to the newest post from there. At the moment this means going through 443 pages of fantastically varied threads, including some key points on how to spot really uncommon Omegas at just a passing glance, others educating you on a number of references you've never even heard of, but suddenly find you cannot live without 😁

You'll realise that this forum has had members who are no longer contributing who own massive collections and are willing to share their knowledge with others, you need only sit down and read. You will marvel at the cost of Speedmasters on auction 5-6 years ago and you'll wince at the sight of redialed horrors! You will also read posts from veteran members staunchly defend a collector's determined viewpoint and see how he over the years will soften up and slowly end up accepting other members views and experiences on line with his own...

If you pay attention, you will also see a number of posts like this one; a new member coming along with a grand idea of building some sort of database, be it over Seamaster indices or certain odd Constellation references only for that thread to fade away into relative obscurity along with the poster, who ended up being a Mayfly of internet forums.

If your (current) post count of 64 translate into a collector's experience relative to that, then I would definitely suggest that you start out your collecting experience in a different manner - otherwise you'll either fade out of the hobby or you will end up failing at this endeavour and feeling guilty about wasting other people's time. I hope you'll stick around 👍
 
fnzeee
Posts
87
Likes
60
ConElPueblo ConElPueblo
What I usually suggest new (and old for that sake) members should do is to start at the last page of the "Vintage Omega Watches" subforum and work your way to the newest post from there. At the moment this means going through 443 pages of fantastically varied threads, including some key points on how to spot really uncommon Omegas at just a passing glance, others educating you on a number of references you've never even heard of, but suddenly find you cannot live without 😁

You'll realise that this forum has had members who are no longer contributing who own massive collections and are willing to share their knowledge with others, you need only sit down and read. You will marvel at the cost of Speedmasters on auction 5-6 years ago and you'll wince at the sight of redialed horrors! You will also read posts from veteran members staunchly defend a collector's determined viewpoint and see how he over the years will soften up and slowly end up accepting other members views and experiences on line with his own...

If you pay attention, you will also see a number of posts like this one; a new member coming along with a grand idea of building some sort of database, be it over Seamaster indices or certain odd Constellation references only for that thread to fade away into relative obscurity along with the poster, who ended up being a Mayfly of internet forums.

If your (current) post count of 64 translate into a collector's experience relative to that, then I would definitely suggest that you start out your collecting experience in a different manner - otherwise you'll either fade out of the hobby or you will end up failing at this endeavour and feeling guilty about wasting other people's time. I hope you'll stick around 👍

I can certainly appreciate this, as it is no different in any forum...same norms, same issues. I have collected watches since the 1980’s, but took my time coming around to adding Omegas to my collection. Up until recently my professional career outside of watch collecting demanded much of my time. As such, my post count here does not reflect my experience, just my newfound time to spend online in a predominantly Omega-oriented forum. I may wind up beimg a Mayfly of forums, in part because of experiences like the one in this thread...time will tell. I have spent a sizable amount of time purusing the threads here and reading up on great history of Omega. Regardless of the vast amount of information available, I do not see the harm in allowing a thread such as this one to develop. At worst, it fails to go very far and fades away as you state above. Hopefully some members will enjoy contributing their views about uniquities in the Omega world and take no issue with an honest attempt to compile into a reference to benefit newcomers...who may not have years to spend studying and pouring over the vast sprawling sources of content. I certainly did not expect a senior member of the community here to challenge, then actively attempt to discredit the effort or me personally. As the OP, it was my expectation that the rules of the community would grant me the authority to steer the content of my own thread and not be bullied by one member who takes issue with it. Look, we all see threads we do not agree with or do not have interest in...and we have the right to stay out of them. What we should not be doing is jumping into them to pester and discredit the OP. That is disrespectful, rude and does not foster a community inclusive of new ideas and perspectives. To be clear, I am not speaking of you. But now instead of a thread filled with people’s ideas on the topic framed by the OP, I have one littered with back and forth about the merits of the undertaking, two statements of my post count and number of days at OF, personal insults...exactly the things that undermine searchability and quality of content and keep most sane people from wanting to pour through 443+ pages or continue to post original threads beyond the “look at my watch” ones. I hope that you and others here can appreciate my viewpoint.
 
tyrantlizardrex
Posts
8,890
Likes
28,361
@fnzeee you posted a partially baked concept on the internet, and when asked questions threw your toys out of the pram.

And then again when the person asking you questions (me) wouldn’t go away.

I mean how dare I post on “your thread”?

Frankly, if you put as much effort into researching,
as you are into complaining, you might have achieved something by now.

Have fun with yourself.

Out.
Edited:
 
Syrte
Posts
7,611
Likes
21,830
fnzeee fnzeee
It is truly unfortunate that is the response to someone trying to compile a reference to give back to the community.
Hi there, welcome to OF.
I think the point people are trying to make is that you're not really giving back anything if you're asking the community to supply all the knowledge to begin with..... and you're asking for a serious brain dump from the get go.
The point is for people to discuss matters of common interest -- and to enjoy themselves doing so -- not necessarily to give away all of their hard won knowledge to the first person who comes along.
However, the forum is quite generous at helping people who help themselves.
Best regards
 
Bill Sohne
Posts
4,176
Likes
9,241
"rare" ??? are you ordering a steak??


a caliber 372 I would call " rare and desirable"..... keep in mind rare is not always desirable.....


Welcome to the forum and good hunting

Bill
 
Raymondo5508
Posts
729
Likes
4,632
Omega Thin Arrow Military watch 6b/542 57 issue and RNZAF 56 issue. Have never come across a 57 issue or even seen a picture of one. So in my eyes it's extremely rare.
Cheers Russell.
20161119_102847.jpg 20161120_154132.jpg
 
41 More Posts...