Omega warranty is now 5 years on new watches

Posts
308
Likes
463
......
I’d suspect that it’s secretly a dream of the CEO but the commercial reality will kick in and the pressure to generate the profit from stepping the volume back up will prevail.

Yes I agree. The potential is there huge the gap between current and dream position is a large on and which would require tough decisins and restraint to attempt closing. I guess ultimately it will fepend on what backing the vision has and the appetite to weather tha ‘journey’. I imagine it will mean pain for die hard omega fans too and not just the company stakeholders as supply would be constrained and prices would go up. It would be good news for investment pieces but bad news for enjoyment pieces as the costnof entey would likely be higher and more onerous (waiting lists etc). Double edged sword.
 
Posts
180
Likes
831
This is great news, and about time Omega did this to be honest.
 
Posts
255
Likes
732
It would be great if they would allow extensions to any watches still under their original warranty via an authorized dealer or OB check. I understand this could be a huge logistical nightmare but it wouldn't go unnoticed.

Sucks for us that bought a watch last year or even a few months ago. I know it's a long shot. But it would be cool. Most watches haven't actually changed since the policy was enacted. Not reason not to do this. E.g. Speddmaster Professional.
 
Posts
308
Likes
463
Sucks for us that bought a watch last year or even a few months ago. I know it's a long shot. But it would be cool. Most watches haven't actually changed since the policy was enacted. Not reason not to do this. E.g. Speddmaster Professional.

A fair point and it is easy to empathise with people who’ve missed the cut off date by a short time. But commercial realities are that Omega have to draw the line somewhere and I was very surprised they did it retrospectively (at all). Watches still in stock are a known quantity whereas watches already sold are potentially higher risk even if the model has not changed. I think the main motivation for back dating was to avoid alienating very recent purchasers - rather than provide a ‘windfall’ for all existing watches sold in last few years that might be still under warranty. If they’d have made it 12 months fatehr than 4 months cutoff, then those who purchased 13 months ago would feel hard done by.

You’re right - I expect it would be a logistical nightmare and very costly to provide a verification process to assess eligability. Though I suppose they could provide it for a service fee.
 
Posts
255
Likes
732
A fair point and it is easy to empathise with people who’ve missed the cut off date by a short time. But commercial realities are that Omega have to draw the line somewhere and I was very surprised they did it retrospectively (at all). Watches still in stock are a known quantity whereas watches already sold are potentially higher risk even if the model has not changed. I think the main motivation for back dating was to avoid alienating very recent purchasers - rather than provide a ‘windfall’ for all existing watches sold in last few years that might be still under warranty. If they’d have made it 12 months fatehr than 4 months cutoff, then those who purchased 13 months ago would feel hard done by.

You’re right - I expect it would be a logistical nightmare and very costly to provide a verification process to assess eligability. Though I suppose they could provide it for a service fee.
Similar to offering an extended warranty after paying a small extension to complete the 5 years. Pro-rated. One can dream 😉
 
Posts
29,678
Likes
76,840
Did anyone notice the change in recommended service intervals as well?

Here is a screen shot from before the warranty change:

pressuretestfrequency%20copy_zpsxj96tdos.jpg

Now after:



I guess recommending a service interval that is potentially less than your warranty period doesn't make a lot of sense, so they had to change it. But remember, no changes have been made to the actual watches...if you are wondering if they are just making this stuff up as they go along, you may be right. 😁
 
Posts
494
Likes
239
Good choice, Omega.
It's pretty sad that they could not catch up with Rolex over the last years... but that is at least a good step towards the fanboys...😀
I always liked Omega more (because of service experiences, the extract of the archives,...)...
 
Posts
134
Likes
289
This happened after 6 weeks to me, I did not want it back to exchanged for other watches.
Out of interest what watches did you swap it for Omegawatchguy?
 
Posts
925
Likes
494
Did anyone notice the change in recommended service intervals as well?

Here is a screen shot from before the warranty change:

pressuretestfrequency%20copy_zpsxj96tdos.jpg

Now after:



I guess recommending a service interval that is potentially less than your warranty period doesn't make a lot of sense, so they had to change it. But remember, no changes have been made to the actual watches...if you are wondering if they are just making this stuff up as they go along, you may be right. 😁

Precisely.
The other mob have been doing it. Especially since their carefully worded statement buried within a press release that the typical service interval is now 10 years. It means nothing, but implies something.
 
Posts
925
Likes
494
Good choice, Omega.
It's pretty sad that they could not catch up with Rolex over the last years... but that is at least a good step towards the fanboys...😀
I always liked Omega more (because of service experiences, the extract of the archives,...)...

Another thing about Omega is their restoration division.
Even though access to it is somewhat limited.
Of course, they are not the only manufacturer that has one.
 
Posts
787
Likes
7,302
So....what is involved in "checking" the water resistance once a year? Is that full service....or something that can be done at an AD while you wait?

Hmmmm....now its service your watch every 5-8 years....but check water resistance yearly. I think @Archer is onto something.....
 
Posts
29,678
Likes
76,840
Precisely.
The other mob have been doing it. Especially since their carefully worded statement buried within a press release that the typical service interval is now 10 years. It means nothing, but implies something.

That wasn’t a press release, but a letter send to AD’s informing them of the 5 year warranty period that someone got a copy of. Many have misinterpreted what was said as an increase in service interval to 10 years, but it’s actually just an observation rather than a recommendation.

It means something no doubt, that people don’t follow the normal 5 years or so service interval.
 
Posts
29,678
Likes
76,840
So....what is involved in "checking" the water resistance once a year? Is that full service....or something that can be done at an AD while you wait?

Hmmmm....now its service your watch every 5-8 years....but check water resistance yearly. I think @Archer is onto something.....

Checking water resistance is just what it sounds like. Just a pressure test.

It is in no way any type of service, just a check. If the watch fails the test, then you would have to get some actual work done to fix the leaks.

Water resistance is not a permanent feature, and just like anything must be maintained.

Cheers, Al
 
Posts
925
Likes
494
That wasn’t a press release, but a letter send to AD’s informing them of the 5 year warranty period that someone got a copy of. Many have misinterpreted what was said as an increase in service interval to 10 years, but it’s actually just an observation rather than a recommendation.

It means something no doubt, that people don’t follow the normal 5 years or so service interval.

True enough.

Sorry my mistake labeling it a press release.
It may as well have been a press release because the first thing the world heard of it all was through online media where the 5 year warranty thing along with a statement from the author about (to paraphrase) recommended service intervals being increased to 10 years.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist by any means.
But it was almost as if it was a piece of correspondence that was carefully leaked to the right person. The misconception spread like wildfire. But interestingly Rolex never stepped up and clarified the myth.
After all, why even make mention in the communication about service intervals and a 10 year time frame.
Industry norms were very well established and servicing customer needs well.

And this sort of feeds into another discussion currently on the forum regarding the Co-axial.
Edited:
 
Posts
29,678
Likes
76,840
Rolex is not the least bit shy about bragging on every little detail of their products, so if they really had a recommended 10 year service interval, they would be shouting it from the rooftops daily, not burying it in a letter sent just to AD's. That alone should give anyone who thinks it may be a real thing cause to question the validity of the claim.
 
Posts
1,872
Likes
2,154
Rolex is not the least bit shy about bragging on every little detail of their products, so if they really had a recommended 10 year service interval, they would be shouting it from the rooftops daily, not burying it in a letter sent just to AD's. That alone should give anyone who thinks it may be a real thing cause to question the validity of the claim.

Good point!
 
Posts
925
Likes
494
Rolex is not the least bit shy about bragging on every little detail of their products, so if they really had a recommended 10 year service interval, they would be shouting it from the rooftops daily, not burying it in a letter sent just to AD's. That alone should give anyone who thinks it may be a real thing cause to question the validity of the claim.

Agreed.
I do wonder why it was contained in the communication though.
It's of no tangible relevance to anybody unless it was in response to a specific question from the dealer regarding the average statistical service interval.