This article is worth a read: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/04/fashion/watches-omega-swatch-group-speedmaster.html?mcubz=3

A few things I wasn't aware of, such as the new HQ and museum are now apparently delayed until 2018. Also of note, Aeschlimann considers the success of the ST the greatest surprise of his tenure thus far, they are considering additional online sales but remain committed to the boutique model, and it appears that the Constellation is in fact the best selling Omega in China - a bit I've been hearing for years but without any credible source in print.

 

It would be nice if that Speedmaster Exhibition travelled around to other OB's world-wide

 

I saw the Speedmaster exhibition at Somerset Mall about two months ago. Really cool! They had some really rare pieces on display. And a security guard. For good reason.

 

I saw a selection of the museum's Speedmasters at an event at a boutique last year. There were some fantastic examples but this 2915 was a bit of a letdown in person:


I don't know if it was just the lighting or what but the dial looked "washed" to me. I was expecting to be blown away by seeing a 2915 in real life, but it wasn't the case at all.This encounter is why I am personally glad they went with vintage-looking lume on the 60th Anniversary Speedy.

 

Strange introduction to an article about new facilities and architecture.

Am I missing something or do they never mention where the factory is?

"When he welcomed a guest to his office for a tour of the company’s new production building here early last month, the 47-year-old chief executive was clearly unhappy."

Here where? Bienne?

 

Biel/Bienne.

 

So "by 2020, Omega said, most of its watches will be certified by Metas". Hmm. The Omega Lifetime mag (always a good "bathroom" read) from a couple of years back said that they were aiming to convert the entire catalogue to MC by 2018. So much for Swiss timekeeping.

 

The Speedmaster Professional will never be METAS- certified though, hence the "most" - I'd guess the Lifetime issue went to press before the details were known

 

Yes, sorry, the piece did say the entire catalogue BAR the Moonwatch. Obviously. I had been looking forward to a SMP MC next year, as I said in another thread.

 

Kudos to whoever built that model. Wow

 

Thanks for sharing the link to the article. Great read.

 

Thanks for sharing, good read during a coffee break

 

Why won't the Speedmaster be METAS certified?

 

Would you mess with.

flight qualified by NASA for all manned space missions.

Ask someone at work who NASA is and then who METAS is ( METAS who )

 

Because (mainly) of the movement currently used. It is a Lemania ebauche, so they have to really change its construction and parts to make it a Master Chronometer (and can withstand 15,000 gauss for example). Also, the watch needs a certain level of water resistance.

During the introduction of METAS in December 2014 (the first Master Chronometer watches were the Globemasters), they never talked about 100% METAS/Master Chronometer. Then, in October 2015, there was the official 'launch' of the first Globemaster with Master Chronometer rating. Omega showed us around in their labs and production facility. Here is a write-up I did at the time:

https://www.fratellowatches.com/master-chronometer-explained-new-standards-by-omega/

 

Yeah, very nice! The journalist approached me as well, to verify some things about Speedy Tuesday. I didn't exactly know what it was for to be honest (yeah, NYT, but they didn't tell me the 'bigger picture' of the article).

 

Please keep in mind that METAS is a body that certifies that your product meets the specs that you set out for it. It is not an "objective" 3rd party standard like COSC is.

In that respect it reminds me of when ISO 9000 first came in years ago (in the automotive production industry, where my former life as an engineer was), which basically said that you need to say what you do, and do what you say you do. It is no measure of objective quality on it's own, as that really depends on the standards that the brand sets. If the standard is set to accept junk, the watches will be junk. If the standard is set to accept quality watches, the watches will be of good quality.

As an aside we were all lead to believe that ISO 9000 would be the last standard we had to adhere to, until the next one came along, then the next...

Omega could very well make a standard that the current Speedmaster falls into, and have METAS certify the watches to that standard, and it would be METAS certified. Omega won't do this, because that would cheapen the current METAS cachet, because people do assume it is some objective standard set by an outside party if they don't really look into what it is very deeply.

The current METAS standard is mostly about magnetism in my personal view. Yes the timing specs are tighter than COSC, but Omega specs were already tighter for COSC watches than the COSC average rate numbers, something that bloggers often miss. So -4/+6 average daily rate with COSC specs was not what Omega chronometer watches were required to meet. They were actually from -1/+6, so the move to 0/+5 with METAS is pretty marginal in reality, shaving off a second on either end of the daily rate, leaving many other tolerances the same as they were before (Delta). It's a case of "setting standard that we already know we can meet" sort of thing.

It's primarily a marketing tool.

Cheers, Al