Do you wish Omega took itself more seriously?

[Annapolis]

Thinking here about the new gimmicky DSotM, with the little rocket; also about the Snoopy watches and the MoonSwatch---also about the fact that a major dealer in the vintage market once told me he tends not to deal in Omega because he doesn't like/respect all the limited editions and special releases.

It strikes me that there are some brands, like Patek, say, that take themselves super-seriously. Lots of highhanded branding---this is a serious, grownup watch for serious, grownup people. Then there are other brands, like Omega, that aren't afraid to be gimmicky or cute or take risks, but that might sometimes go too far in that direction, to the point of cheapening their image (whatever that actually means). Rolex seems to be somewhere in the middle, maybe awkwardly at times, like with that weird balloon watch, or the puzzle one; they generally seem to hew more toward the Patek end of the spectrum, though.

I'm definitely with the majority here that questions the thought-process behind the new DSotM release. Stuff like this doesn't deepen my love for the brand. But I also like the fact that Omega isn't pretentiously self-serious. I guess I wish they did a better job finding the middle ground sometimes. Does that make sense?

Just wondering how others think and feel about this.

 

[NGO1]

I like where the big boys are heading. Lots of colors and fun design. It's not like they stopped producing legacy watches and only banging out instagram wrist blings. Why not serve both markets. I think they can.

Legacy watch brands are getting stale, old and boring. How many more round watch, black/blue dial do you need? Let's see something fun. I won't buy them, but I'd like to see it

My original DSoTM (avatar) cost $14k, 10 years ago, iirc. There several price drops over the years. Today release is $14k. Same same. Disappointed they didn't bring the case down to 42.

Since you brought up Patek. The hottest watch they produced in the last 20 years isn't any grand complication. It's the Tiffany 5711.

 

[noelekal]

I've long assumed that the cartoon Omega watches are for those who have more funds to spend on watches than I would spend. I've considered purchasing new Omega or else a Sub, but watches aren't the only hobby I pursue. i like stale, old, and boring ... understated watches that don't have the diameter of a wheel on the average city bus.

 

[gbesq]

I think that Omega takes itself seriously enough, but doesn't overdo it -- and that's a good thing in my opinion. The brand has been around since 1848. It's well known and respected. Omega is not Rolex (thank God, and no offense intended to Rolex owners) and it knows itself well enough to realize that it's not Patek, AP, VC or JLC either. Omega knows that it's a manufacturer of mid-tier mass produced luxury watches, but it also knows that it can produce a tourbillion when it wants to. It's an innovator and isn't afraid to take risks. Some pay off and some don't -- but nothing ventured, nothing gained. I generally like Omega's styling (maybe the Snoopy is a bit much, but it's certainly not palm fronds), build quality is very good, and value is excellent vis a vis most other luxury Swiss watch manufacturers. I'm more a collector of vintage Omega, but I owned a third generation SMPc for about 6 years and currently own a 300m Heritage -- and I thought that the SMPc was a great watch and I like the 300m even more. I do wish that Omega was more aggressive and, frankly, more sophisticated with its marketing. That's an area where it could learn a lot from Rolex. But overall, I think that the company strikes a good balance -- it's not cartoonish and it's not pretentious. It just makes nicely styled luxury watches with great build quality and an impressive pedigree that are both readily available and not outrageously expensive in their market segment. Nothing wrong with that.

Edited: Jan 16, 2024

 

[NORBY]

I think putting aside the Swatch stuff, it's perfectly fine. There are plenty of collectors who like the rare/gimicky products, and for the more traditional purchaser there are plenty of options available as well.

I think Omega struggle to cut through with their marketing, however, for me it works well, I kind of like it being a "if you know, you know" kind of product, rather than a Rolex which has a bit more "mainstream cool" factor

 

[Dsloan]

I like the variety. Everything from classic designs to snoopy-themed animated casebacks, to chiming chronographs.

Edit: but for the record, I do not like the little rocket on the new DSOTM. For me, it's about the execution, not that they dared to have fun.

Edited: Jan 16, 2024

 

[rebar]

gbesq

I think that Omega takes itself seriously enough, but doesn't overdo it -- and that's a good thing in my opinion. The brand has been around since 1848. It's well known and respected. Omega is not Rolex (thank God, and no offense intended to Rolex owners) and it knows itself well enough to realize that it's not Patek, AP, VC or JLC either. Omega knows that it's a manufacturer of mid-tier mass produced luxury watches, but it also knows that it can produce a tourbillion when it wants to. It's an innovator and isn't afraid take risks. Some pay off and some don't -- but nothing ventured, nothing gained. I generally like Omega's styling (maybe the Snoopy is a bit much, but it's certainly not palm fronds), build quality is very good, and value is excellent vis a vis most other luxury Swiss watch manufacturers. I'm more of a vintage collector of Omega, but I owned a third generation SMPc for about 6 years and currently own a 300m Heritage -- and I thought that the SMPc was a great watch and I like the 300m even more. I do wish that Omega was more aggressive and, frankly, more sophisticated with its marketing. That's an area where it could learn a lot from Rolex. But overall, I think that the company strikes a good balance -- it's not cartoonish and it's not pretentious. It just makes nicely styled luxury watches with great build quality and an impressive pedigree that are both readily available and not outrageously expensive in their market segment.

Agreed, with a slight correction: Omega produces entry-level luxury watches. Jokes.

At the risk of ruffling some feathers, I don’t think any of this is serious. These are luxury items that have a fraction of the functionality and durability of non-luxury comparables.

You may very well have to be a serious person in order to afford a Patek, but buying one does not make you anymore serious than someone that bought an Omega. I’d say the more serious person is the one that doesn’t treat themselves to status symbols and trinkets.

I like watches, nice watches. It’s fun. It’s not meant to be, nor should it be, serious.

 

[gbesq]

rebar

Agreed, with a slight correction: Omega produces entry-level luxury watches. Jokes.

Mr. O'Leary, is that you?

 

[PhilF]

A watch, especially once you get into $5000+ retail, for me needs to be either interesting, beautiful, unique or have some history. I've finally come to the realization that my Sapphire Sandwich Speedmaster is all of those things to me and it's the only timepiece I currently wear (almost 3 years continously). I've had various Breitling, Rolex, IWC and a few others, never really bonded with them. The only "other" watches that I, at this point (I'm 76!)find appealing enough to purchase are the Rolex Polar Explorer II and the Millgaus. I will admit that the Ed White is a thing of beauty, but that's just another step down the same road I'm already traveling. If the current Silver Snoopy had a simple display back rather than the animated cartoon, I might have been tempted. I do think Omega has a perspective of a proper timepiece, some of their novelty issues show a sensitivity to a changing market and that they have a sense of humor. I think that they strike a good balance.

 

[Larry S]

Sales/Marketing 101.. You have your standard line at a normal margin and then you have new products /new news at higher margins. Key is not to cannibalize your standard line by attracting new customers. Does it work? Sometimes. Most of the time it is churn.

 

[STANDY]

96% of the market views Omega through their website or at a boutique.

Only the 4% here and on Forums and the 2% listening to wanna be YouTube critics know the stories of the likes of the latest “Rocket man”

But basically 101 marketing is have people talk about you watches. TICK

Rolex is ostracising people hand over fist at the moment. When non watch people are talking about not being available to get or see one in a boutique.

For me the variety Omega has in a boutique is great. If you look at it as that, you’re seeing a vibrant brand with a few fun watches.

The whole Snoopy thing was just a case of 5x the amount of people wanting a hype watch and carrying on like a spoiled kid when they had to wait or couldn’t get one. That’s luxury goods 101

Funny how in the production folder knife world it’s exactly the same as the watch world. Major brands like your Benchmade and Spyderco (Rolex and Omega), your tier system just like the watch world.

 

[ErichPryde]

Annapolis

Thinking here about the new gimmicky DSotM, with the little rocket; also about the Snoopy watches and the MoonSwatch---also about the fact that a major dealer in the vintage market once told me he tends not to deal in Omega because he doesn't like/respect all the limited editions and special releases.

It strikes me that there are some brands, like Patek, say, that take themselves super-seriously. Lots of highhanded branding---this is a serious, grownup watch for serious, grownup people. Then there are other brands, like Omega, that aren't afraid to be gimmicky or cute or take risks, but that might sometimes go too far in that direction, to the point of cheapening their image (whatever that actually means). Rolex seems to be somewhere in the middle, maybe awkwardly at times, like with that weird balloon watch, or the puzzle one; they generally seem to hew more toward the Patek end of the spectrum, though.

I'm definitely with the majority here that questions the thought-process behind the new DSotM release. Stuff like this doesn't deepen my love for the brand. But I also like the fact that Omega isn't pretentiously self-serious. I guess I wish they did a better job finding the middle ground sometimes. Does that make sense?

Just wondering how others think and feel about this.

There's a new generation of kids out there looking at luxury watches, and they're looking at those watches *from* Tik-Tok. Some of them might even have managed to keep what they made in crypto.

and to add to this, NASA perhaps did not take itself that seriously when it chose Snoopy for an achievement award. I'm totally ok that NASA did it- and there's no reason Omega shouldn't be able to proudly display that on their dial, no matter how silly some may think it is.

As an edit: I'm not really a fan of the new A8 either.

 

[wagudc]

For me Snoopy belongs on a Timex or a Seiko 5, not a 5 figure watch. Also, modern Omegas are generally too big for my tastes. But I am not there target consumer. I think Omega has a pretty good business model, so more power to them.

 

[PandaSPUR]

Patek x Tiffany ...
AP x Marvel ...
Rolex 116598SACO ..........

 

[Dan S]

I think the cartoon-character dials are embarrassing novelty items. That said, I am obviously not the target market since I really don't find any modern watches appealing enough to buy.

 

[noelekal]

If I was heavy into Speedmaster collecting and possessed examples of regular Speedmasters, early 321s forward as well as a tasteful limited edition or two, then I might could see indulging in the whimsy of a cartoon or other more outrageous departure from the "standard" Speedmaster.

I'm not so invested in the Speedmaster though I appreciate mine. I'd rather gather in a selection of 1950s Constellations if I embark on an Omega collecting tangent.

 

[ErichPryde]

PandaSPUR

Patek x Tiffany ...
AP x Marvel ...
Rolex 116598SACO ..........

to be fair to Tiffany- it was once a highly respected jeweler. They essentially are responsible for the modern diamond ring, and were fairly integral in making Alexandrite a big deal in the early 1900s in addition to popularizing and using Tsavorite and Tanzanite- probably others. At one time they were "cutting edge" (excuse the pun).

 

[sheepdoll]

If I had funds to burn, I would love a Snoopy. The moonswatches look fun.

One of the reasons I fell in love with Omega is their sense of design. Even in the dark ages of the 1970s and 1980s they made some pretty interesting watches. At one time I thought a bit ugly. Now I can not touch such things for less that a couple hundred bucks.

There was a time when I would buy anything that said 'Omega.' It is pretty amazing that the company lasted this long.

Not sure I agree with some of the current trends, then again, I am not the market for anything more than a couple hundred bucks. The 1990s were great when one could pick up connies and seamasters for that.

Did have to pay a bit more than that for my speedy 30 years ago.

 

[PandaSPUR]

ErichPryde

to be fair to Tiffany- it was once a highly respected jeweler. They essentially are responsible for the modern diamond ring, and were fairly integral in making Alexandrite a big deal in the early 1900s in addition to popularizing and using Tsavorite and Tanzanite- probably others. At one time they were "cutting edge" (excuse the pun).

Out of the 3 examples I listed, I can accept the Patek x Tiffany collaboration the most. At least Tiffany & Co made watches at one point as well. But the timing and method of the release just screamed of hype exploitation and money grab.

 

[wagudc]

sheepdoll

One of the reasons I fell in love with Omega is their sense of design. Even in the dark ages of the 1970s and 1980s they made some pretty interesting watches. At one time I thought a bit ugly. Now I can not touch such things for less that a couple hundred bucks.

Agree 100%