It’s not an exact science, but mine (feb 2021) ends 974. Jakes from October 2021 ends 1900 ish. Extrapolate that across the year and you won’t be too far away from 2000 watches in 2021 - maybe more like 17/1800 assuming a linear rate of production across the year.
Perhaps; I most whole-heartedly agree that it’s far from a good way to extrapolate production rate.
I suspect the vast majority have been placed in the 321 steel since production of that model started.
This of course might be true, but I take this as a good example where it’s far from clear.
One advantage to not having a numbered LE is that Omega can throttle and allocate production variably, as is most convenient/profitable.
And, the profit on a platinum watch is - if I remember the data I’ve seen anywhere near correctly - something like 2-4X the profit realized on a stainless steel model.
So, if
I were Omega, I would be filling every platinum watch order before even contemplating reaching for a SS case.
So while I understand and to a degree intuit that Omega is casing *more* SS NEW321s than platinums, I would be completely unsurprised if it turned out - despite intuition - to not be the case. I certainly wouldn’t be surprised to find that that there are not a “vast majority” being cased.
Again, I hear you, and lean toward your same conclusion - but have a deep skepticism that my intuitions here are reliable, especially when a platinum watch is
typically far more profitable to Omega than a SS watch. (A NEW321 could be an exception, but only partially.)
Of course, none of us really know but I suspect that the production has ramped up in the last year in comparison to immediately post the 321 being initially announced.
Here, if we use the (again admittedly poor) data of OF reports of receipt directly from OB/AD, we might reach the opposite conclusion: in this past/second year there has been a relative dribble of receipts, compared to the first year of production. Based on that (imperfect) data, it does not seem that
more NEW321s are being produced, but instead
fewer.
Here again though, not to disagree with your otherwise reasonable inference, but to play devils advocate at just how wildly imperfect our inferences are.