zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

I was just corrected by James Dowling, Mr. Rolex, on an incorrect presumption that I had about the Omegamania auction in a TZ Public Forum post.

Poring over the catalog, I had noted 10 items from the Omega Musuem and 146 from collectors. Thus, there were 156 with a source stated.

There were 4 prototypes and 140 items with no source noted, or a total of 144. This totaled the 300 lots in the auction.

I have assumed these 144 "unattributed" lots must have come from Omega. Mr. Dowling tells me that no, these come from 'the trade'.

[quote]

I see the cause of your confusion; you are assuming that watches not described as the 'Property of a collector' were in fact supplied by Omega.

Nope, Antiquorum specified when watches came from Omega and when they came from significant collectiors; the rest, the unspecified lots were not from Omega.......they were from the trade, that is watch dealers.

[/quote]

I suspect Mr. Dowling is correct, the majority of these 144 pieces did come from 'the trade'. He is far more knowledgable than I ever hope to be.

Having had my presumption corrected, I hope Mr. Dowling will not mind my examining his statement. There are a few things that don't seem to make sense to me. My apparently incorrect presumption was based on more than the mere absence of a source in the lot listing.

Included in these 144 unattributed pieces were the following from the last day of the auction:

233 “LAST MAN ON THE MOON, NO. 1”

277 “HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY LIMITED EDITION, SET NO. 70”

278 “1894, JAPAN SET”

279 “OMEGA MUSEUM COLLECTION SET”

280 “1932 MARINE UNIQUE MASTERPIECE” NO. 1

282 “MICHAEL SCHUMACHER SPEEDMASTER SET”

283 “APOLLO-SOYUZ 2000”

284 “APOLLO 15 – SCOTT WORDEN IRWIN NO. 1”

285 “PLATINUM SKELETONIZED SPEEDYMOON”

286 SET OF 3 “OBSERVATORY DIAL” CONSTELLATIONS

287 PLATINUM “CO-AXIAL CHRONOMETER”

288 “BIG DATE SET - NO. 1”

289 “DE VILLE RATTRAPANTE”

290 “CO-AXIAL CENTRAL TOURBILLON” No. 1

291 “SKELETONIZED SPLITSECONDS CHRONOGRAPH”

292 PLATINUM “DELUXE SPLIT-SECONDS CHRONOGRAPH”

293 “TORINO 2006 SET” No. 1

294 “POCKETWATCH 1932, SET NO. 8”

295 “50TH ANNIVERSARY SKELETONIZED OMEGA SEAMASTER”

296 “PLANET OCEAN - CASINO ROYALE NO. 1”

297 “SEAMASTER – 007, NO. 1”

300 "THE “CASINO ROYALE PLANET OCEAN” - ACTUALWATCH WORN BY DANIEL CRAIG DURING THE FILMING - "

Is it possible that Antiquorum managed to put together this impressive collection of items from 'the trade'?

The last three items were supplied by Omega for James Bond movies. When these items are supplied, doe Omega give them away and thus no longer have ownership? I imagined Omega still owned them.

I count eight "no. 1" or first in series in these items (including the two Bond watches), including two manufactured in 2007, which I had imagined Omega might still own.

If these were indeed accumulated from 'the trade', I am truly impressed by Antiquorum's ability to accumulate highly desirable and auctionable items.

But you understand why I presumed Omega supplied some of the "unattributed" lots when examining the auction catalog and noting the nature of the pieces included.

Is it possible that another Swatch Group company, such as the owner and operator of the Omega Boutiques, might have supplied the "No. 1"s and thus not be "Omega" for purposes of the auction listing?

Or another branch of Swatch Group might actually own the Bond watches and supplied them to the moviemakers and then sold them at this auction?

I suggested that Antiquorum supply a listing of the anonymous paddle number of the winner of each lot, which might quiet some of the speculation going on. I realize this would be an extraordinary and precedent setting step.

What say you?