I feel as though Omega is really coming back and dominating the watch space with their new metas certified chronometers and watch designs. What do you guys think? Is omega on an equal playing field to rolex? Or will they always be #2?

Although Rolex watches are currently hard to get, it seems like everybody and their brother have submariners on if you take a walk around any major city. I feel like omegas are much rarer nowadays which makes them, to me, more desirable. I’m really interested to hear others thoughts on this!

Squan

 

As much as I love Omega's and I prefer them to Rolex's I'd say Rolex is still #1 in the luxury watch market in terms of demand. They have too much name recognition associated with their brand.

 

Yep, although Omega has tightened up and improved their line over the last few years, Rolex is still King of the Hill and will remain so. They are one of the real worldwide aspirational brands......Omega is not and probably never will be. That's just the way it is.

 

I find these Omega/Rolex comparisons tiresome. You like Omega more than Rolex? Than buy Omega.

 

+1

 

I dont know why you can make the conclusion that Omega is more rare than Rolex - they send limited edition out on the market every week (almost), and it´s not 1.000 pieces or 2.000 pieces. No - know they flod the market with 7.000 pieces at a time plus all the watches that they mass produce. I like Omega vintage, but Rolex will always be no. 1.

 

for as long as Rolex keeps telling people that they are No 1.

 

Yep. Both brands have huge differences in their approach to design and releases. Truthfully hard to compare apples and oranges anyways.

 

I am be pretty sure Seiko dominates Omega and Rolex. Who cares, anyway?

 

I’m not a fan of Rolex watches (gaudy, overpriced, innovation at a glacial pace, etc.), but I’m the first to admit that Rolex is SUPERB at marketing. I think that Omega’s quality is on par with Rolex, Omega’s styling is better than Rolex, Omega’s technology is better than Rolex and Omega offers better value then Rolex. That being said, when it comes to brand awareness, Rolex is king and Omega may always play second fiddle. Bottom line: buy what you like and don’t worry about who’s first and who’s second. Omega makes one hell of a nice watch and that’s good enough for me.

 

Rolex MSRP Overpriced? No. Omega ? Definitely. Better quality ? Again no. Omega styling better ? Please, no. Value ? Buy one of each and sell them the next day - then get back to me.


Except for a few classics, overall omega styling is meh and the women’s watches are terrible, while it’s hard to beat any lady’s date just. Rolex innovates slowly and that’s a good thing.


Don’t get me wrong, I have a few Omegas, all older seamasters, and they’re GREAT and a SM300 is hard to beat

but I like my Rolex’s more.

Gaudy ?

Yeah no.

Now if we’re talking about the people that wear them - that’s another story ;-)

 

Well, at least we agree that Rolex is number one for brand awareness.

 

As long as a company is profitable and the shareholders are happy, does it really matter is it number 1 or 2?

 

I was about write a post until I read yours . . . and you've said just about exactly what I was thinking. Surely one would be just opting for 'the obvious' if aspiring to a Rolex. As with things like Range Rovers, I'd guess they're bought on 'auto-pilot,' as something some people think they 'ought' to have.

 

omega will always struggle with such a diluted selection. Rolex is simple to understand and well executed. And while I believe there is a magic to a 105.012-65 or a 2998 that Rolex can't equal, the romance of a 1675 or vintage sub is still there. Rolex has a few incredibly well executed models and almost everyone understands them. A no date sub is a no date sub. Timeless. Omega would be wise to simplify their catalog. Why doesn't Apple release endless limited editions? You don't need to.

 

For a chrono the Speedmaster wins
For a diver the Sub wins

I have it even Stevens

For a dress watch I'm going up the ladder from both brands
(There are a lot more steps up the ladder from Rolex and Omega )

Edit: the above opinion is mine only and may be used by anyone that agree,s

 

The entire Rolex catalog is filled with timeless iconic classics. The Submariner, GMT, datejust, day-date, and Daytona have been worn by the most successful and powerful people in the world.

Can you say the same thing about Omega? With the exception of the Speedmaster, the answer is clearly no. I enjoy my vintage Omegas, but I will never purchase a modern one.

 

Two phenomenally successful brands in their own ways, Rolex is perhaps the one that people aspire to as they perceive that it is best thanks to a marketing department that has got the Rolex message delivered successfully at every level, but in reality there is little difference between the brands in terms of movements, and watches from either brand will outlive their owners with a bit of regular care and attention.

I have watches from both brands and like each watch I own, I cannot say that I prefer one brand over another, but I prefer the Speedmaster over the Daytona, and the Datejust over the Aqua Terra. On the diver front I have the Seamaster and love it but the pull of the no date Submariner is strong.

For me its not about brands its about how the watch feels on my wrist, at the moment I am wearing my late father's old Pulsar Quartz watch, nothing fancy but it fits nicely on my wrist on its new strap and with its clear and legible white baton dial it looks great.

 

I respectfully disagree. I love my 43 year old vintage Speedy Pro, but when it comes to modern Omega models, I’ll gladly put up my METAS certified Constellation Globemaster against anything in the Rolex catalog. Co-axial 8900 movement, pie pan dial, 15,000 gauss magnetic resistance and a tungsten carbide scratch proof bezel. It’s also quartz like accurate. If that’s not quality and engineering prowess at a price that Rolex can’t touch, I don’t know what is.

 

That alone is reason enough for me to avoid them. I really do not want to be in the same category as liars and thieves.