Omega has won two of the six Watchstars awards for 2015-2016.
http://watchstars.com/winners/

The GlobeMaster won the prestigious "Classic Stars" against some pretty tough competition.
http://watchstars.com/categories-all-nominees/classic-stars-nominees/

The SpeedMaster won the "Stars for a Lifetime" award competing against the Rolex Sub, Day-date, JLC Reverso...
http://watchstars.com/categories-all-nominees/stars-for-a-lifetime-nominees/

Just to show how the Omega brand does well on a global evaluation,the Watchstar awards jury is composed of around 80 watch journalists from all continents.
http://watchstars.com/jury/

I normally reserve judgement on awards/prizes, as anyone who has worked with corporate marketing events knows how often the winners are "pre-selected" based on sponsorship of the event etc. But I find it hard to believe that such a diverse collection of journalists would pander to any given brand.

So fellow Omega owners/fans be proud! I thought I would share this news and wish you all a super 2016!

 

Thanks for sharing!

 

Hey @Canuck, No contest? I actually think they are pretty evenly matched, with the GlobeMaster coming out in front right now based on the calibre technology and pan dial aesthetic. Perhaps next year if Rolex rolls out the 3255 calibre to the DateJust range, than that might leapfrog the Rollie ahead, but I still see design elements in the Globemaster that I find more attractive and modern.

Could you please elaborate further the "No contest" statement? Perhaps I misunderstood what you were trying to say...

 

dupe: https://omegaforums.net/threads/spe...professional-as-“stars-for.32933/#post-369257

 

Thanks for sharing. Very interesting

 

Oops! Thanks for the heads-up, sorry I didn´t see that previous post before. Double praise for Omega doesn´t hurt I suppose.

 

Fair enough, that certainly seems to have cleared that up. We will respectfully disagree and taste is very much subjective in watch appreciation. For example, I can live with the cyclops on my polar Exp II 42mm (quite discreet and OK IMHO as a feature on a tool watch focused on dial visibility) but I find the cyclops on your Datejust completely exaggerated in terms of proportion, compared to the dial diameter. Congrats on keeping a 26 Rollie rolling in good health Happy new year!

 

Embarrassing confrontation with Aquaterra, just imagine with the Globe

 

"Oft copied?" I know Rolex waffled between the knurled bezel and fluted (there is a difference) before settling on the latter, but the knurled bezel of the Globemaster née Constellation is a direct ancestor of the equally well-regarded (I'd even say legendary) caliber 564/565/751 Constellation. Not sure why this always has to turn into a pissing contest with the Rolex Datejust folks every time the Globemaster is brought up.

 

I certainly did not entertain starting yet another Omega versus Rolex discussion when I posted the Omega awards (late) breaking news. I think the main issue here is how we state our preferences for two competing products. We can prefer a given product, without trying to put the other one down as a significantly inferior product. I think both the Datejust and GlobeMaster are excellent products, and in the end small details, brand affinity will determine which would be a preferred option. I certainly do not agree with Kanuchs evaluation that the Datejust represents a massive significant "No Contest" superiority over the Globemaster, and BTW neither do the 80 international watch journalists who voted for the Globemaster over the Daydate or oyster perpetual (the Datejust did not even make the final selection). But I suppose Kanuch is entitled to his own individual and perhaps emotionally based opinion. BTW my next intended purchase is a blue dial Yatchmaster 116622, which will be joining Rolex, Omega, JLC and Breitling watches in my collection. So I am not an Omega fan boy in any manner.

 

Stay cool folks, the new year has just begun.
Isn't it great that we all have different opinions and taste? I prefer the Globemaster, but c'mon: to each his own.

 

Where you went "wrong" (your words, not mine) was asserting/implying that the DJ is copied by the Globemaster, which in essence is creating a pissing contest. That goes beyond "stating a preference." HNY!!!

 

"No contest" is pretty inflammatory...

 

I have deleted all my posts in this thread.

 

@Scalpel your capacity for synthesis is admirable: you managed to reduce my 8 line verbose paragraph to 5 words.

 

@Canuck with this post you gave given me a whole new perspective ref. your avatar: "anon the bearded hockey man fleeth from reasoned argument"

Sorry I couldn´t resist that...just joking.

As I mentioned above you deserve praise for keeping in working order a 26yr old Rollie. HNY!

Let´s get this thread back on topic: Omega´s success in the Watchstars 2015-2016 awards!

 

If I read correctly the award the Globemaster won was for new models.

 

Good point @arkstfan, the classic stars category is indeed for three-handed mechanical watches (no complications other than date and power reserve), launched in 2015.

So I was wrong to state in in the above post that the Rolex Datejust did not make the final selection process, as there was no new major version launched in 2015. The mechanical caliber categorization also excludes any three-handed Grand-Seiko or Credor Spring Drive models.

The Globe won against final nominees such as the Rolex new Day-date, so perhaps there was some cost-benefit analysis taken into account by the jury? I have to say that on a pure watch to watch comparison I would never rate the new Globe above the new 3255 Rolex Day-date.

 

I am more thrilled than anyone to see Omega get more respect and recognition, but I think we should all take a step back...

At no time was this a "best watch in the world" contest... and when you look at the nominees in this category, it is almost ridiculous to put some of them together as comparables.... a Patek 18k nautilus with brown dial is in a class with a NOMOS... ?

Clearly you have to look at the factors being compared to truly assess the value of the win.
Globemaster won because of the design, the size, the movement innovation, the METAS certification, and the multiple options offered...
the Patek only had Dial colour change as a comparable.

At no time would anyone (but me) say, "the globemaster is better than the Patek Nautilus"...

Globemaster was a nominee in the "new" star category as well, but wasn't even short-listed... and the Tudor, a nominee in the classic category, beat it.

So its all well and good to celebrate a recognition, You have to look at what it is... Hulk Hogan's 'Slammy' won't get him much respect at the Oscars...

 

I had a look at the rules section. The first nominee phase is a spontaneous recall of watches for a given category. So for the "classic stars" 3-handed mechanical watches that had most impact during 2015 with journalists were chosen and then the selected watches were voted during the second phase. It is not clear to me for example if the Platinum limited edition of the Globemaster was competing or a SS model, or just the overall product range diversity, which you rightly position as a strength of the Globemaster entry. No brand could win more than one category, excluding the Lifetime award, which is why Omega won two categories (Classic star + Lifetime) but could not win the New Star category.

My overall take is that the "Classic stars" award should not be considered a "technical" best mechanical 3-handed watch award, but perhaps more a recognition of watches (in that rather restricted category) that generated most impact in terms of setting a new trend / direction in the industry. The Lifetime award going to a Sub or Moonwatch is very subjective, but I suppose the Moonwatch can be argued to have retained its iconic looks better and changed less over time. My guess is that in 2016 the Reverso might win this category as JLC will be ramping up the marketing on that specific product range.

When I posted these awards, it was also intended as a complementary post to another ongoing thread/discussion about Omega´s perceived status as luxury brand. I could be wrong, but my perception based on internet forum posts is that some Omega owners sometimes still feel the need to justify choosing the brand, especially for those that for some reason want to communicate some level of status with the watch they wear. What the Watchstars awards show to me is that at least at the press level Omega has already achieved a desired elevation of status, but this has still not reached the general consumer market, perhaps even more so in the US, where Omega perhaps might still be perceived as a mid-tier brand by the general public, based on recent price history and the use of non in-house movements pre-8500/9300. I think the general WIS community has already observed Omega´s new positioning and I think these awards reflect that change in mood, which I suppose is a good thing for Omega owners concerned with the future residual value of their watches and general status of the brand.