Nothing for me either.

 

Spoken to my Omega/Rolex AD today and confirmed that Im in the list, and Im first in line
They didnt have any further info but expected 1 or 2 pieces PRO year delivered.

 

I contacted my local Boutique and was not given a new timeline, told just a delay getting these out. IIRC at time of deposit I was told Q1 or Q2 2021.

Would still love one, happy to wait patiently and no thoughts of rescinding my deposit. The longer I wait it just means more time to think about another watch purchase in the interim

 

Putting this here before the list pricing evaporates from the internet (surprised it’s still there at all now that showing “out of stock”):

 

Stop it, just stop it... I'm working out if I can scrape enough together to get a Globemaster towards the end of the year as well as the Snoopy

I really think SWMBO would divorce me if she knew the list I've drawn up, I've heavily cut the modern want list to four, actually... possibly five

 

#3

 

Spoke to my OB rep today, and it was interesting.

They're a rather large OB in the U.S., and have to date only received 1 Snoopy (around Christmas). It went to a V-VIP with a purported annual spend >$100K; and it did not go to the OB's most V-V-VIP, who is still awaiting the 2nd piece to be received (apparently the V-VIP got his name down before the V-V-VIP). The OB rep expressed being frustrated at not yet being able to assist their V-V-VIP.

More interesting: it is rumored that at least at the moment and this early, Nick Hayek Jr. himself (CEO of Swatch Group) is reviewing the Snoopy waitlist and making decisions about where watches are allocated, or reordering allocations to certain individuals; further, he's having lists combed and cross-compared for individuals that have been "blacklisted" by other brands. (The OB rep stated this sort of as known fact, but I'd think it fair to insert the word "rumor" on their behalf.)

Palace intrigue aside, I found the OB rep to be genuinely seeped in a desire to get watches to people that actually want to wear them, and that this is also how they viewed corporate's efforts. Of course, genuine belief makes for the best OB reps, if one's skeptical.

 

My OB in NYC is a really nice guy, just wants to ship product to happy customers and I've enjoyed my interactions with him. Admittedly this is my first purchase experience with Omega and I picked a pretty dumb entry point to the brand lol!

The whole 'reviewing lists' '100% deposit' and 'unspecified wait' thing isn't exactly what I signed up for but I totally get why they're doing it, it's just a shame it's necessary.

One thing they could improve is 'official communication' - it's a longstanding truth that happiness is the difference between expectations & reality and it's the lack of 'official comms' to set those expectations that has left me feeling like a V.V.V. Unimportant P.

This forum has been super useful though and I will stay put wherever I am on their list of lists - will be a great day when it arrives.

 

Sent my OB an email, they said they have no idea, could take a year, but it is a beautiful watch and worth the wait. Geez

 

BTW - This is actually no simple task. I do a fair amount of data scrubbing for my job and it can definitely be overwhelming. You need data standardization. Are they using emails, names, phone numbers or addresses as the unique identifier? Then, to flag an identifier, you will generally need an exact match - meaning if you have an extra space, period, abbreviation, etc., there will be no match. On top of that, the standardization needs to be the same across all lists (including the ones you are comparing to). Consider the sheer volume of names being compared across the world and in many languages. Have you ever had an Excel file open with 15,000+ rows and multiple columns and tabs? It's not easy!

 

Omega has 160 boutiques around the world. Each of those boutiques has repeat customers who have bought multiple watches and are known to the staff. I don't actually think the list of names is really that large, 50 names submitted by each boutique would be about 8000 watches. If you buy from a boutique, Switzerland knows your purchase history. Nobody knows how many they are making, but the rumours from some reputable people are maybe 2000 per year. Maybe some ADs will get allocated some based on their total sales performance and they can choose who to sell too , but for boutique clients, the headquarters knows and is allocating these watches by name.

 

this was what OB rep reported

 

This is exactly why I take some of this with a pinch of salt. I’m sure there’s some vetting going on - that much is obvious but like much of the conversation on this watch it seems to get exaggerated. The vast majority is hearsay in any case from OB assistants who in many cases know less about what’s going on that us.

 

Well, it has been said the US has 1000 paid deposits and with some extrapolating, that would be about 20k globally. The US has historically accounted for around 5% of Omega sales. I was told this based on gold 50th allocations - the US received 50 out of just over 1000 and was told that was based on global sales. Could be wrong...

I think in some countries the list is not based on paid deposits so it could be much higher? Just anecdotally, we have heard from Wei Koh that in Singapore the waitlist was like 2000+. I don't know what names are getting on the list that is being reviewed. That is the Snoopy list. Then you have these so called "black lists" that the names are being compared to. Anyway, like me, I am sure a lot of people have bought watches from multiple boutiques and multiple address (I've moved 3-4x). Who knows what is tied together in their CRM. It is not always so simple. CRMs can be a mess.

Even if it is only 8000 names, that is still a lot of names. Nobody has all of this information in their head so I'd imagine something like VLOOKUP or equivalent must be used to create a flag for further review. I don't know.

In any event, it does not sound like an "eyeball" job.

 

I was in my AD today to pick up my Moonwatch after service and they told me they expected my/SWMBO's Snoopy to arrive in March. I am first on the list with the AD and further down the list with the OB. We want one each to stop us fighting over who wears it (like I don't already know the outcome).

 

nobody’s said or claimed they could do anything like an exacting job, but instead only that they’re making efforts regarding culling known bad actors.

for example, emails and phone numbers seem to be fairly reliable for sorting, and this may be as much as they have or could be expected to do

I think the more substantive piece of the report )to me) was that allocations are being made on a named client client basis by HQ, rather than to and by an OB/AD.

 

How would HQ be able to allocate to names on an AD list? I can see them doing this with OB's since that's all Swatch/Omega data but an AD isn't going to just send up all of the historical data on their customers to Swatch.

 

When you say ‘combed and cross compared’ I assume that to be a fairly exacting job.

either way, like I said I’m sure there is some vetting going on - but much of everything about this watch is speculation and no one really knows how much or what.

One of the first purchasers of this watch at a Sydney boutique was by all accounts a first time purchaser which contradicts some of the bluster that you need to be a VIP or VViP to score one.

As is often the case, the true answer lies somewhere in between....

 

I didn’t say HQ is allocating names to an AD list? My assumption based on what was reported to me is that for the foreseeable future HQ isn’t allocating watches to ADs whatsoever, precisely because HQ is allocating watches to known clients.

 

It doesn’t seem like it to me.

Every week a handful (?) of watches are produced, so they need only look each week to select a handful of names of otherwise “known” clients. They take those known clients roughly reliable data (tel., email, ?), against some purported list of “blacklisted” buyers and if nothing comes up they go about their way (fallible as it may be)?

It could be untrue, but it doesn’t seem it’s implausiblile and so untrue.

Of course it’s all hearsay and conjecture - but isn’t that precisely the conversation we’ve all agreed to have around here lest we be left with nothing at all to speak of (*glances side to side at 9/10ths of OF content*)?