This is a $6-7K dollar watch, it does nothing for me and is yet another re-edition flooded by Omega...well done, keep them coming and dilute your the storied brand.
I'll go for the real deal every single time at this price point, what a shame.
This is a $6-7K dollar watch, it does nothing for me and is yet another re-edition flooded by Omega...well done, keep them coming and dilute your the storied brand.
I'll go for the real deal every single time at this price point, what a shame.
Then go and buy the vintage one instead of spitting on a watch that probably has more sense to its money than many other Chrono in that range that you can't get at MSRP now or never.
Your statement it's just ridiculous.
i think this is a bit harsh given how hard the 321 is to make
i think there was a middle ground here. . big premium to existing speedmasters but it is just fantasy to price these above SS Daytonas or GMTs MSRP IMO
i disagree. i think what omega has done in the last 5 years (basically ever since the snoopy and alaska LE speedmaster) have seriously de-rated the brand. the 57 LEs were a complete debacle and now sit at crazy discounts everywhere with gray market dealers
i put omega now with tudor. . but even tudor don't just copy old watches they take inspiration from historical watches and make new watches
no one will ever mistake a bb58 for a gilt tudor sub but both are spectacular watches and look at the bb58 value for money vs. this ed white re-issue nonsense
i think omega have completely and utterly run out of new ideas and this 321 proves it
did patek ever re-issue a vintage piece ? come on. . no chance
Almost every brand on the planet reissue model and comparing Omega to Patek won't help.
Yes Omega have done tons of LE and you know what, they are right because they sell them, all of them. And they are doing right to re issue the ed white because it's a splendid watch and the normal user don't know and don't care of Omega history and you know what, they are right!
And since they want to push the Omega image higher than what it is the common perception they are right to put out a Chrono at 13k that at least, at least have a refine movement at that you will probably be able to buy at MSRP unlike a Daytona ( what a coincidence that the parice of the new Ed White it's so close to the Daytona MSRP isnt'it?)
Omega have to sell watch and making money, not making an handful of collector and hardcore watch lover happy.
are you a shareholder ? or a watch collector/enthusiast ? because your note reads like you are a shareholder ? i thought OF was a message board for watch enthusiasts and collectors ?
SWATCH owns omega. SWATCH is a mass market brand. compare the brands that SWATCH owns vs. the portfolio of a company like Richemont owns and what that means as a collector / enthusiast.
the answer is absolutely lit up in neon and staring you in the face. . and by the way, from the shareholder perspective, swatch underperforms every other luxury watch co and luxury brand co in both down and up markets . ..because. . they aren't one
your post references daytonas twice. . they put the price to be equal to daytona. . but they use a mass market brand strategy
i cannot wait to see these trading at a 30% discount to retail in 2 years like every other omega watch they've ever made except the snoopy and alaska LEs which i am now convinced they basically lucked into
are you a shareholder ?
It's very nice indeed. But at 2x the price of a 60th anniversary and 3x the price of a FOIS, I prefer these last 2 options. Maybe it's due to the fact that I don't get the appeal of the 321 vs. 1861.
I wish.
I'm just and harsh realist collector, i don't live in the world of fantasy when we talk of brand new watch.
And not, you are not probably going to see this at discount because at 2000 piece yearly it's extremely low production compare to Omega number and probably low in general compare to other manufacture in the same range.
Yes, Aldrin wore a 105.012, making it the first watch worn on an EVA on the moon as Neil’s 105.012 stayed in the LEM. Cernan took TWO watches with him on Apollo 17: a 105.003 on a JB which stayed in the LEM at all times as the JB was not suitable for the EVA and a 105.012 which is seen on all the EVA photographs of him during the extended moon stay of Apollo 17. So the only known EVA moon references are 105.012 and 145.012.
Coming from a vintage collector... Faux vintage lume and expo case back ruin it, sapphire crystal doesn't help either. I'd rather see the 321 in a modern case, full steel back, normal lume. Heuer has been doing similar 'glory days' models and it looks weak. Too much pandering to some hybrid market that wants brand new versions of old watches. Looks nice but it's not an honest watch. It's trying to cash in on a collectible trend and that's not appealing IMO. Omega was looking forward with the original Speedmaster, not back. I'd spend my $ on a vintage 321 instead.
