Anyone else glad Omega's cost what they do

[Mathew J]

And hope that in their eternal quest for higher points in the status seeker market they don't price themselves into the stratosphere.

I was just sitting here today comparing the quality of the new Aqua Terra I got and also considering the Speedy that I had...and then thinking of the three Rolex watches I owned over the years, also considering the new Super seadweller they sell is going for a cool $13K on the secondary market...

I figure that I could pick up a nice Sapphire Sandwhich speedy, or even better a Hesalite Speedy and a Planet Ocean, and those three pieces will have cost me about the same money or a little less as a single new model sport Rolex (namely the GMT II Ceramic)

Don't know about you guys, but that is pretty profound in my eyes.

[hiro1963]

I was thinking about using that logic to convince my wife. - Hiro

[quatre_temps]

I was thinking about using that logic to convince my wife. - Hiro

I'd suggest you scope out a new place to sleep before you approach her with that tactic.

[teeritz]

As much as I would love to own a modern Omega watch with a fully in-house, Co-Axial movement, I somehow think that by the time Omega are back to in-house movement production, their watches will be too expensive for me to buy.
So I take comfort in the fact that I have a few modern, classic Omega watches plus a few vintage pieces that I plan to grow old with.
Here's a question for y'all- do you envy people who only own one wristwatch?
I look at my watches and contemplate selling some of them off...and then my 'inner watch nerd' materialises- "No way, man, ya can't sell the Bond SMP, you're a Bond fan! And you can't get rid of the Moonwatch, it's a classic '60s chronograph. The black dial AquaTerra has to stay, you know, in case you launch a take-over bid of Sony or something. Ya gotta look like a player, buddy. And don't even think of selling the Planet Ocean." And on and on.
I sometimes look at my collection and also begin to dread the ongoing costs associated with maintaining 17 watches.
So, in some ways, I'm kinda glad that Omega are getting more expensive 'cos it may be the only way that I'm gonna stop buying more Omegas. Unless I sell off one piece to fund the purchase of another.
Ahh, what do I know?:-so|

teeritz

[Hawaiian Tag]

To be honest, I used to have a Rolex Submariner date and I believe the Omega Seamaster 2254.50 I have now is a much better watch at 1/3 the price.

[acdelco]

you know what's cool about omegas ( aside from the relative value)?

as i mentioned in a previous post, they're high quality and great looking watches and they seem to me the least trendy/most down-to-earth of all the mainstream mid range luxury brands IMO. ( i.e. the breitlings, panerais, rolexes, tags)

[I Like Watches]

Like the old saying goes... you get what you paid for!! IMHO... I have four Omega Automatics and never had any problems with any of them. I think that Omegas are worth every penny!! Eveidently, everybody who buys an Omega thinks so too. If we/they didn't, the watches wouldn't sell at all. I once had an AD tell me that if you want a piece of jewelry, buy a Rolex. If you want a watch, buy an Omega.

[inlanding]

+1 ...

As it is with the Rolex, there is nothing about an Omega co-axial movement or the more expensive Bond style watches that moves me to give up the Speedy or SMP Chronometer anyway.

There is something for everyone, and if Omega is reaching to compete with Rolex by producing a more expensive watch - so be it.

It seems to me that something is no longer worth it when its price exceeds its value. :-!

Glen


http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii285/inlanding/OmegaSeaBlue/WristBlueSea.jpg

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii285/inlanding/OmegaSeaBlue/DSCN5287-1.jpg

[Neil(UK)]

I figure that I could pick up a nice Sapphire Sandwhich speedy, or even better a Hesalite Speedy and a Planet Ocean, and those three pieces will have cost me about the same money or a little less as a single new model sport Rolex (namely the GMT II Ceramic)

Don't know about you guys, but that is pretty profound in my eyes.

...Or you could buy 6-7 Sinns or about 20 Seikos. ;-)

People just buy what they want or can afford.

[Mathew J]

...Or you could buy 6-7 Sinns or about 20 Seikos. ;-)

People just buy what they want or can afford.

I would argue that it isn't quite the same Neil, with Omega you get a high quality luxury sports or dress watch, with Seiko or Sinn you're getting a good watch, but more utilitarian and less finished/refined from a workmanship standpoint (discounting grand Seiko of course).

I would have a hard time justifying a new Sea Dweller for upwards of 13K even if I could afford it when compared to other offerings, expecially when one considers a nice planet ocean is under 3K.

[moo]

Hi, I'm new here, but I can attest to the bargain that is Omega. I have four, now, and the more I survey the watch market, the more I think that those Omega's you have are going to hold their value and even appreciate in the years to come. The watch market is getting a little crazy, and Omega is somewhat underpriced, relative to the value and long term appeal of their designs and quality IMO.

I've travelled through several watch brands over the last three years but I'm stuck on Omega now. They're great watches.

[AAH]

Currently pretty happy with their pricing.. I just hope that in the future they do not get too expensive for me to purchase...

[Clint-O]

What's this about Omega increasing their prices?

I bought my first Omega about nine months ago (Speedmaster Professional) and I've been very happy with it. It looks great, has an amazing history and is such a sturdy timepiece. Whenever I take it off and wind it, I can't help but admire the machined clasp mechanism and how strong it is. "You and I are in it for the long haul," I think.

It was a big purchase for me. But I knew I was getting an heirloom quality piece that was going to hold its value, so it didn't feel like a waste at all, like a 7 night stay at an island resort for the same price would have -- to me, anyway. That'd be over and done with, but this watch I should have for many decades.

I think their prices are good. They're not so much that a young guy like myself can't get one - but they're expensive enough that your average person isn't going to buy one on a lark. So they're a bit exclusive in that way.

Rolexes are just too much, I think. I'd feel self-conscious about wearing one. I mean, it does pretty much exactly what my watch does, yet I'd be paying thousands and thousands more. They're fantastic watches with an amazing history, but a lot of it has to do with their reputation as "the best" and them being status symbols.

Omega... I nice mid range.

[23fengshui]

I figure that I could pick up a nice Sapphire Sandwhich speedy, or even better a Hesalite Speedy and a Planet Ocean, and those three pieces will have cost me about the same money or a little less as a single new model sport Rolex (namely the GMT II Ceramic)

Don't know about you guys, but that is pretty profound in my eyes.

Neurotic as it sounds, some Rolex fans like their watches precisely because they are much more expensive and dealers cannot/will not discount. The higher prices seem to reaffirm "how much better" their Rolexes are over Omegas (1 Rolex = 3 Omegas, in price AND value).

I guess people can delude themselves into believing whatever they want. :think:

I've been reading a book entitled "Deluxe" that investigates the fashion industry, its conglomerates and corporate-driven structure, and how these companies have positioned themselves to market to the middle-class instead of only the upper class, formerly. Basically the big joke is on all of us for "buying into the dream" of aspiration, with retail prices reflecting a 10-15 time mark-up. The book doesn't address watches but you can definitely see the parallels.

In the end we all get enjoyment and value out of our purchases. We are essentially buying happiness with these Omegas. If it costs us 1/3 the price of a Rolex, all the better!

[Mathew J]

Neurotic as it sounds, some Rolex fans like their watches precisely because they are much more expensive and dealers cannot/will not discount. The higher prices seem to reaffirm "how much better" their Rolexes are over Omegas (1 Rolex = 3 Omegas, in price AND value).

I guess people can delude themselves into believing whatever they want. :think:

I've been reading a book entitled "Deluxe" that investigates the fashion industry, its conglomerates and corporate-driven structure, and how these companies have positioned themselves to market to the middle-class instead of only the upper class, formerly. Basically the big joke is on all of us for "buying into the dream" of aspiration, with retail prices reflecting a 10-15 time mark-up. The book doesn't address watches but you can definitely see the parallels.

In the end we all get enjoyment and value out of our purchases. We are essentially buying happiness with these Omegas. If it costs us 1/3 the price of a Rolex, all the better!

I had heard of that book as well yet never got the inclination to buy it...is it good?

I drew a few parallels to the watch industry when reading the synopsis, too bad the book doesn't point them out.

As for the middle class target market, I think that is an interesting phenomenon that is occuring, I remember in the past there wasn't as much of a focus on luxury brands in my area, the highest end store in the mall was a Macys (At the time Jordan Marsh), now stores like Burberry and Louis Vuitton are common, guess it is to be expected as people save less now and spend more.

With the Rolex guys, I have talked with and met many who were just like that, enjoyed the watches/brand because they were expensive and they equated that with status...one more reason why I find myself drawn more and more to Omega as I prefer quality over that of perceptions of status.

[no_self_control]

i have a number of high end watches and i can honestly say i don't differentiate between a £50 casio and a £2500 breitling. if i'm blunt about it, apart from the obvious price differential, the casio gets more wrist time precisely because it's less expensive and therefore less important that i don't damage it in any way.

as far as i'm concerned, any watch that costs more than £200 is getting into the jewellery clasification. more than £500 and there's no doubt about it whatsoever.

sure, omega is better value for money than rolex (though i distinctly remember getting trashed over a thread i posted to explore this) but the bottom line is that both are completely over the top if one is just interested in telling the time.

at the end of the day, watches are one of the few areas of dress where men in particular can flout a bit without looking completely pretentious. i'm not saying that's all there is to it but it's certainly a factor. and not surprisingly, certain watch manufacturers like to take advantage of that factor.

i probably shouldn't mention quartz but if watches were just about telling the time as cheaply and accurately as possible the mechanical watch would be a museum piece by now for all but the most extreme activities (like EVAs).

[WIS_Chronomaster]

Even though Rolex are priced that way wont stop anyone from buying them lol :-d

Neurotic as it sounds, some Rolex fans like their watches precisely because they are much more expensive and dealers cannot/will not discount. The higher prices seem to reaffirm "how much better" their Rolexes are over Omegas (1 Rolex = 3 Omegas, in price AND value).

I guess people can delude themselves into believing whatever they want. :think:

I've been reading a book entitled "Deluxe" that investigates the fashion industry, its conglomerates and corporate-driven structure, and how these companies have positioned themselves to market to the middle-class instead of only the upper class, formerly. Basically the big joke is on all of us for "buying into the dream" of aspiration, with retail prices reflecting a 10-15 time mark-up. The book doesn't address watches but you can definitely see the parallels.

In the end we all get enjoyment and value out of our purchases. We are essentially buying happiness with these Omegas. If it costs us 1/3 the price of a Rolex, all the better!

[Neil(UK)]

Even though Rolex are priced that way wont stop anyone from buying them lol :-d

Of course not and that's the real nub of it.

As NSC said once you get over £500 you are into male jewellery.

I like all sorts of expensive watches and own quite a few but wouldn't buy any watch new personally.

At the price I pay I know if I get fed up with it I can get my money back easily.;-)

[23fengshui]

Yes I would highly recommend the book to anyone who likes "the finer things in life." It could have used better editing (15-20 typos total), but it is nice piece of investigative journalism to look behind the scenes. Beyond the synopsis, the main themes are:

1) The luxury apparel industry isn't about producing exclusive, skilled-labor items anymore but rather maximizing profits. This means that quality may or may not make a product stand out. Rather, it is all about supply and demand.

2) #1 is a consequence of corporate ownership of luxury houses, where profits for shareholders is the primary goal.

3) These companies produce an image into which consumers buy. It is the dream that we purchase, not the product. Like I said, we are simply buying happiness, not true luxury goods anymore.

4) These companies outsource most of their production, if not all, to the cheapest manufacturers that can still produce the minimum specified quality. I already knew that of course, but it gets worse. Even if something states it is "Made in Italy" it might be mostly manufactured in China, India, Mauritius, Vietnam, Bolivia, Romania, et al, and then sent to Italy for final assembly only.

I read somewhere else how JLC used to send separate parts to their holding company in the US, LeCoultre, who would then perform final assembly in the US to avoid tariffs. Same concept.

5) Only a small handful of companies maintain the old-world techniques of creating the most luxurious handbags, silk-woven (by hand) products, perfurmes (as opposed to eau de toilettes). These companies include Hermes (handbags), Pucci (scarves), and Chanel (perfumes).

6) The biggest, most fanatic luxury buyers today are the Japanese. And not the super rich ones, necessarily, but the middle class.

7) The next big consumers? China, Russia, and India of course.

Watches are slightly different from the fashion industry because the products aren't as flighty as clothing. We can also tell which watches required more labor and engineering, usually. I think the watch industry is thus limited to mixing highlighting the old world, labor-intensive techniques with modern marketing. Good for us I guess.


I had heard of that book as well yet never got the inclination to buy it...is it good?

I drew a few parallels to the watch industry when reading the synopsis, too bad the book doesn't point them out.

As for the middle class target market, I think that is an interesting phenomenon that is occuring, I remember in the past there wasn't as much of a focus on luxury brands in my area, the highest end store in the mall was a Macys (At the time Jordan Marsh), now stores like Burberry and Louis Vuitton are common, guess it is to be expected as people save less now and spend more.

With the Rolex guys, I have talked with and met many who were just like that, enjoyed the watches/brand because they were expensive and they equated that with status...one more reason why I find myself drawn more and more to Omega as I prefer quality over that of perceptions of status.

[hiro1963]

I'd suggest you scope out a new place to sleep before you approach her with that tactic.You got that right. :-d - Hiro

[Neil(UK)]

I read somewhere else how JLC used to send separate parts to their holding company in the US, LeCoultre, who would then perform final assembly in the US to avoid tariffs. Same concept.




The LeCoultre brand in the US was different to Euro JLC as the cases were American made. JLC would have just sent the movements.

Omega and Longines did this too with the cases being made by Star, Wadsworth etc.

[UltimaOnliner]

as far as i'm concerned, any watch that costs more than £200 is getting into the jewellery clasification. more than £500 and there's no doubt about it whatsoever.





I agree with you, but would say that anything above $30 is all for fashion or other reason than keeping time. You can get digital LCD watches for less than $6 and get ones that look decent for about $30.

One could even argue that anything that isn't free isn't necessary since most people carry pages and/or cellphones which keep accurate time.

[Trojan]

Morning Mathew, guess it's all relative. The guys with a dozen $5000 Rolexes probably say the same thing in relation to the next level up the price chain. Same thing with cars, boats, airplanes, etc. Don't know that a guy with a nice Ranger with a big Verado catches any more fish, just a matter of preference and means. And then there are a lot of people who live outside their means.
Fergie probably figures the guy with the Ranger gets laid more that the guy in the rowboat. And maybe he's right....b-)