I was last week in the Omega Museum in Biel. Don't get me wrong, all the strange and quirky pieces are valuable part of their history, and things I really enjoyed to see. However, I share the opinion, that they had some really entry-level pieces in the 1980-ties and 1990-ties. The image of Omega as exclusively luxury brand has been build in the new century over years, and now we practically complain about it.
I think that this is a very fair point. I still have great respect for Omega and they still make a great watch. I like that Omega is always working to improve its products and that it’s not afraid to take some chances - unlike that other big watch company that moves in glacial speed. What I miss from Omega, especially in the 1950’s and 1960’s, is that they were THE watch to have. Omega was just turning out hits and hits every year with beautiful designs and spectacularly good engineering. I’m afraid that those times will never return.
Enthusiasts still love the Sub, and the Speedmaster. These have been in their respective lines for years. I think the watch companies should follow suit with their other, classic watches: keep the timeless designs that everyone agrees is appealing, and just upgrade the materials, movement quality, etc.
Here’s an example where I think Omega got it right: classic design, bumped the diameter to 37mm, beautiful enamel dial.
I think that this is a very fair point. I still have great respect for Omega and they still make a great watch. I like that Omega is always working to improve its products and that it’s not afraid to take some chances - unlike that other big watch company that moves in glacial speed. What I miss from Omega, especially in the 1950’s and 1960’s, is that they were THE watch to have. Omega was just turning out hits and hits every year with beautiful designs and spectacularly good engineering. I’m afraid that those times will never return.
It’s a really tough, competitive market all around. Very hard to introduce something new and tasteful, design wise, that hasn’t been done before.
I think the Observatory line was a brave move, but the appeal is limited, at least for me, and the price point is way too ambitious.
Enthusiasts still love the Sub, and the Speedmaster. These have been in their respective lines for years. I think the watch companies should follow suit with their other, classic watches: keep the timeless designs that everyone agrees is appealing, and just upgrade the materials, movement quality, etc.
Here’s an example where I think Omega got it right: classic design, bumped the diameter to 37mm, beautiful enamel dial.
This is broadly what I was trying to get at earlier, I wish Omega took this approach with more of their lines. The Speedy is great, it's the same iconic watch but in a continually improved and refined format.
The antithesis of that approach is how they choose to handle the Railmaster. There's been four generations of that and each generation has been a partial or complete reinvention. It was an antimagnetic tool watch, then it was a tool oriented Aqua Terra with no antimagnetism, then it was a funky brushed/fauxtina dial with denim straps, and now it's back to being a quirky Aqua Terra with polished surfaces and gradient dials. If Omega had just stuck to the original intent and refined it, maybe it wouldn't have to keep being discontinued and reinvented over and over.
The dimensions of this are much better, the Observatory would have had a warmer reception in this size in my opinion. Price would still have been an issue. I also still think it's quite weird to not show the seconds on that product line, given the history.
I think the new Constellations are pretty great and wear well even on my 6.5in wrist. Too much mulah for me, but that’s how I feel about most brands at that tier and is more a reflection of my price sensitivity than Omega’s pricing strategy.
Go look at fan bases for other similar brands and you’ll hear the same complaints about pricing.
Slightly off topic, but has anyone noticed the excitement around the new Longines Hydroconquest? That watch seems to be a massive hit. Price, aesthetics, etc. The part that has me excited is the dimensions are smaller and thinner than the previous generation. Hopefully this rubs off on Omega with a similar change to the Diver 300M. And yes, I know not everyone wants a dive watch in the 39-40 mm range. Omega still has the larger dimensions covered.
I was last week in the Omega Museum in Biel. Don't get me wrong, all the strange and quirky pieces are valuable part of their history, and things I really enjoyed to see. However, I share the opinion, that they had some really entry-level pieces in the 1980-ties and 1990-ties. The image of Omega as exclusively luxury brand has been build in the new century over years, and now we practically complain about it.
I grew up in the USSR behind the Iron Curtain. The first luxury watch I ever heard of was in a 1970s Soviet satire piece. It mocked a desperate, broke capitalist trying to impress a greedy banker with a fake Omega just to get a loan.
