Community Stories

Is Omega Losing Its Way? Price Hikes and Brand Criticism

ErichPryde
Posts
3,916
Likes
8,465
DoctorEvil DoctorEvil
Isn't this what happened with the Rolex Sub, except they increased it by 1mm? 🤣
Doesn't appear to have hurt them though. People still go on about how much better they feel on the wrist compared to the SMP.

I prefer the 42mm SMP. Genuinely.
 
DoctorEvil
Posts
1,743
Likes
3,400
ErichPryde ErichPryde
I prefer the 42mm SMP. Genuinely.
That's good for you. Unfortunately, with my small wrists I do wish that Omega would bring out a midsize option like Longines has done with their Hydroconquest and Spirit Zulu Time (42mm and 39mm options). I tried on a 39mm Zulu Time on the weekend and it was perfection!
 
ErichPryde
Posts
3,916
Likes
8,465
DoctorEvil DoctorEvil
That's good for you. Unfortunately, with my small wrists I do wish that Omega would bring out a midsize option like Longines has done with their Hydroconquest and Spirit Zulu Time (42mm and 39mm options). I tried on a 39mm Zulu Time on the weekend and it was perfection!

I'm with you, I think a 38 or 39 mm Seamaster professional would be something a lot of people would enjoy.
 
pdxleaf
Posts
6,225
Likes
21,297
nlogax nlogax
Sadly, modern Omega designs are trash - chasing the chav segment
New to me slang. I like it, very distinctive. AI said young white men in track suits but I picture old white men with gray haired chests and gold chains in track suits.

I'm surprised you think modern Omega is the choice of chav. Not to be argumentative, but I thought it just the opposite, that Omega would appeal to more cerebral watch fans. Could just be it's different around the world. I think of Rolex as being the go-to chav watch, especially the Daytona and gold day- date, although these are more likely to be replicas due to the expense.
 
Archer
Posts
29,757
Likes
77,036
DoctorEvil DoctorEvil
Isn't this what happened with the Rolex Sub, except they increased it by 1mm? 🤣
Really? I wasn't aware...😉
 
njlam
Posts
151
Likes
129
ErichPryde ErichPryde
With respect, this is a specious statement in how it applies to Omega. The current 38mm aqua terra contains an 8800 caliber co-axial and is 12.2mm thick. This size/thickness debate has been discussed over and over and over- Omega can make thinner, smaller watches and accommodate the current co-axial calibers.

They've made much, much thinner watches in the past as well- and as @josiahg52 pointed out a lot of the thickness comes from materials (and caseback). @Archer has discussed this many times as well...
You are welcome to take my comments in the spirit they are offered.

I am sure Omega can make thinner/smaller watches. They choose not to.

Hence the negativity.
 
ErichPryde
Posts
3,916
Likes
8,465
njlam njlam
You are welcome to take my comments in the spirit they are offered.

I am sure Omega can make thinner/smaller watches. They choose not to.

Hence the negativity.

Fair enough, I respect your feelings.
 
Jakeys
Posts
662
Likes
1,580
ErichPryde ErichPryde
I'm with you, I think a 38 or 39 mm Seamaster professional would be something a lot of people would enjoy.

I'd have to think this would sell really well. As much as I like 36mm watches, I'm not so sure about 36mm divers. But a 38-39mm diver, yeah sign me up!

I'd also welcome closed casebacks on the divers if it got them thinner. Okay the thinness thing is a dead horse but just throwing that out there as it was commented on a previous page. Frankly I'd also prefer dropping the ceramic dials as well, but I wouldn't go as far as the bezel.
 
zatropolis
Posts
35
Likes
19
njlam njlam
I currently have 3 Omegas, but nothing else in their current catalog appeals to me.

Conversely, while I have 4 Rolexes, there are 2-6 configurations in their current catalog I would buy if offered. Similarly, I only have 1 Patek, but there are 2-4 models in their current catalog I would buy is offered.

Omega needs more more attractive watches. Some are close, but not close enough.

Smaller, thinner are good places to start. Better bracelets...a pure GMT....is anyone listening?
this is exactly how I feel about Rolex and omega (except I don't really mind the size or thickness at all)
 
josiahg52
Posts
1,501
Likes
3,054
njlam njlam
You are welcome to take my comments in the spirit they are offered.

I am sure Omega can make thinner/smaller watches. They choose not to.

Hence the negativity.
How much thinner do you want? Again, it's fractions of a millimeter larger in some respects, a mm or so at most. People who complain about these fractions of a mm and claim about the size of the SMP want an entirely different watch. The Seamaster wears large because of its design, not because it's a gigantic outlier of a watch. If you want to get back to earlier watch proportions, then an advance in materials will have to occur or they need to go back to basics. Can Omega do that? Certainly. Have they recently? Kind of, but there isn't a new generation/design SMP yet. Does the market actually want that? I don't think so despite the endless lamentations here and elsewhere, but the new "aluminum" SMP is maybe a test case.
 
Jonezy13
Posts
35
Likes
25
Omega has such an incredible catalogue of vintage watches. I like the new Planet Ocean -particularly, the Ploprof inspiration and flat link bracelet. I want to see more of this, and a return to vintage watch thicknesses, sizes and PRICES.

I think most people would LOVE something similar to the 1957 trilogy re-issue, but perhaps some more models - ranchero, seamaster 300? I want them to "get back to the roots", but equally, perhaps we are not the main commercial target, as they seem to try and compete with modern rolex buyers.
 
foxtrot
Posts
237
Likes
697
Jonezy13 Jonezy13
Omega has such an incredible catalogue of vintage watches. I like the new Planet Ocean -particularly, the Ploprof inspiration and flat link bracelet. I want to see more of this, and a return to vintage watch thicknesses, sizes and PRICES.

I think most people would LOVE something similar to the 1957 trilogy re-issue, but perhaps some more models - ranchero, seamaster 300? I want them to "get back to the roots", but equally, perhaps we are not the main commercial target, as they seem to try and compete with modern rolex buyers.
un updated version of this one, can end this thread in seconds...

proxyp.webp
 
pdxleaf
Posts
6,225
Likes
21,297
foxtrot foxtrot
un updated version of this one, can end this thread in seconds...

proxyp.webp
First, agree that's a fabulous watch.

If it was reissued, we'd probably respond in one of two ways.

We'd dislike it because "it's exactly like the original, with no new ideas from Omega."

Or we'd nit-pick it to death because it has a slightly bigger/smaller case or the lugs are too twisted/not twisted enough, or the hands are too fat/not fat enough. God forbid they use a ceramic bezel.

And last thing, it'll cost six times as much as the original.
 
Raskolnikov
Posts
151
Likes
161
Yeah the 165.024 will have something special (like the ed white 321 reissue) and cost around 12 - 15k by then. Would you buy it? Why do you want Omega to bring this back? Sure for 5k, but you know those days are gone. There is already the watchCo version, isn’t that the re-edition you are waiting for?
Why not just go vintage and be done?
 
Vinz Clortho
Posts
593
Likes
1,445
Raskolnikov Raskolnikov
Yeah the 165.024 will have something special (like the ed white 321 reissue) and cost around 12 - 15k by then. Would you buy it? Why do you want Omega to bring this back? Sure for 5k, but you know those days are gone. There is already the watchCo version, isn’t that the re-edition you are waiting for?
Why not just go vintage and be done?
There's something to be said about vintage, but a lot goes into it to find a quality piece. Price being big factor. With re-issues/re-editions, they're worry free when it comes to wearing it, waterproof, and get a vintage feel with updated materials.

The one watch which peaked my interest was the most recent FOIS. Couple reasons haven't gotten one yet: not a fan of the fauxtina (colored lume) and was going to need to sell one of my other Speedy's for it. But Omega did a great job of doing a one-to-one reissue, albeit at a higher price but great value for what you're getting.

Recently found an original Ck2998-5 in excellent condition so that itch has been scratched, but the price was much higher than the re-issue. Was it worth it, IMO definitely, but it took years to find it versus walking in and picking one up.
 
josiahg52
Posts
1,501
Likes
3,054
pdxleaf pdxleaf
First, agree that's a fabulous watch.

If it was reissued, we'd probably respond in one of two ways.

We'd dislike it because "it's exactly like the original, with no new ideas from Omega."

Or we'd nit-pick it to death because it has a slightly bigger/smaller case or the lugs are too twisted/not twisted enough, or the hands are too fat/not fat enough. God forbid they use a ceramic bezel.

And last thing, it'll cost six times as much as the original.
Yes. I wish I could like this 100 times because it's exactly what would happen.

Let's be honest, it wouldn't end anything.

A “perfect” modern 166.024-style Seamaster wouldn't end the discussion, it would just move it.

If Omega released something very close to the vintage proportions, you’d probably see a mix of reactions like:

  • “It’s not exactly the same size” - even if it’s within a millimeter
  • “They cheaped out on materials” - if it uses aluminum, a traditional dial, solid caseback, etc.
  • “There’s no innovation here” - if it leans too heavily on vintage construction
  • “Why is it so expensive for what it is” - especially if it looks simple but still carries a modern Omega price
  • “They should have used ceramic / display back / modern features” - from the other side of the market (make it "premium feeling")
  • “It’s just a reissue” - if it stays too close visually
  • “They changed too much” - if they modernize any detail

And if they went further and designed a movement specifically to keep the proportions tight, then you’d get:

  • “They spent all that effort and it’s still not exactly like the original”
  • “Why does this cost more than the standard Seamaster?”

So instead of ending the debate, you’d just end up with two camps:

  • People who want vintage proportions and simplicity
  • People who want modern materials and features

And those two goals don’t always coexist in the same watch without trade-offs.

That’s basically the situation now, just separated by a decade or two instead of half a century.
 
Vinz Clortho
Posts
593
Likes
1,445
Believe we all want Omega to succeed and with the recent large price hikes and some decent/other not so much releases, along with the recent reports of declining sales (little murky on where they're at) has everyone scratching their heads.

The biggest thing are the recent stiff price increases with Omega which brings with it the increased scrutiny on their offerings in the market compared to the competitors. They've been pushing higher to compete directly with Rolex (they always did to an extent but they were more affordable then)

When you're going to be paying those kinds of prices, you better stack up and have a clear direction. Do they stack up, tough to make the case for that currently. What direction are they going in, tough to say what direction they're going in.

This is the most frustrating thing as I see it. We know what we want, but we don't know what Omega wants.
 
Archer
Posts
29,757
Likes
77,036
Vinz Clortho Vinz Clortho
There's something to be said about vintage, but a lot goes into it to find a quality piece. Price being big factor. With re-issues/re-editions, they're worry free when it comes to wearing it, waterproof, and get a vintage feel with updated materials.
I already have a Watchco but if I didn't and wanted the SM300, I would but the absolute worst vintage example I could find, as cheaply as possible. I would then exchange the case with Omega, get a new dial and hands, and service the movement. This would give me a perfectly water resistant and capable watch, that can be serviced by anyone (not co-axial).

Of course for everyone else you can get your local Omega certified watchmaker to do all this once you have the vintage piece.
 
njlam
Posts
151
Likes
129
josiahg52 josiahg52
How much thinner do you want? Again, it's fractions of a millimeter larger in some respects, a mm or so at most. People who complain about these fractions of a mm and claim about the size of the SMP want an entirely different watch. The Seamaster wears large because of its design, not because it's a gigantic outlier of a watch. If you want to get back to earlier watch proportions, then an advance in materials will have to occur or they need to go back to basics. Can Omega do that? Certainly. Have they recently? Kind of, but there isn't a new generation/design SMP yet. Does the market actually want that? I don't think so despite the endless lamentations here and elsewhere, but the new "aluminum" SMP is maybe a test case.
Have you tried on the new Observatory?
 
3 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...