I think you hit the right point - Latest vs. old production
Hello, in the light of the complaints we have heard about Omegas I think Jeff's point is very sensible.
In fact it is very rare (if it ever happens at all) to hear anything bad about older watches by Omega, no matter what line or collection they come from.
This is especially true of watches from the 60's to '80's, which are probably the most widespread among collectors right now, and for which a reliable opinion base is thus available.
They all seem to behave well, at least from the lack of complaints. When taken to restoration to expert watchmakers they do not seem to create specific issues, and Omega themselves both in Bienne and in the local repair centres do superb restoration work.
As an owner of a couple of vintage Omegas myself, the only issue I've ever found is the relative scarcity of some spare parts, which may sometimes delay the whole job or cause a slightly different (but equivalent in terms of form, fit & function) piece to be installed.
On the other hand, with reference to newer production we seem to get a fairly large number of people annoyed either with the product or with the service or both.
Let's just also think about Chuck's own perplexities and recall to mind at least the following:
1. The date issue of the older automatic triple calendar Speedmaster automatic.
2. The brushed finish of the titanium Seamaster 300 (last-but-one version), so delicate in what should have been the toughest of watches.
3. The vicissitudes of the first version of the coaxial chronograph movement.
All of these on top of a strategy of pushing up prices also for models where no major improvements have been carried out...
Don't get me wrong, I am not bashing Omega, I love their late '60's to mid-80's stuff and the Moonwatch is a work of art, the watch if one should have to have one watch only. Still I cannot blame people who spend thousands of bucks or euros and end up dissatisfied a few months later.
Cheers.
Fabrizio
