Omega, you blew it with the new 321’s!

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

After giving it some thought, I truly believe that Omega has blown it with the re-introduction of the 321 Speedmaster. The Apollo 11 50th anniversary LE and the new Ed White 321 are a disappointment. These two watches are a melange of the old and the new which in the end makes them unsatisfying. The fact is that you only have one chance at a first impression and Omega blew the opportunity to come up strong with a genuine reintroduction of the moon landing speedy with a 321 movement. A real, no nonsense re-release of the watch Buzz Aldrin wore on the surface of the moon, the ST105.012 (erroneously later reported as the 145.012) in stainless steel would have been so much more satisfying to the enthusiasts at whom this watch is targeted. No sapphire crystal, no platinum, no Ed White hybrid style, and no display case back or inscription. For those who want to see the movement Omega could have offered a second sapphire case back as part of the package. This should have been the watch Omega used to re-release the 321 into the wild. Later editions could have used the 321 movement in a myriad of different ways, but not the first time back. Omega... what were you thinking?

billythekid · Feb 2, 2020

JwRosenthal · Feb 2, 2020

I think it’s a matter of perspective. I can’t speak to the Swiss, but with Germans (and with cars) they have no desire to look back, only forward. I think it’s a very American idea to be sentimental and want something “authentic” and new at the same time. I think the Swiss are begrudgingly rehashing their old designs (because of consumer demand) but still feel compelled to modernize it slightly- as is their design philosophy to keep moving forward and be on the cutting edge.
I agree, if you’re going to the trouble of reissuing a 1:1 of a historic movement, then make the watch in which you introduce it a 1:1, but I think that goes counter to the core values of a company that is always trying to move forward.
Just my .2002 cents (vintage BMW reference there for those that didn’t catch it). 😉

BlackTalon · Feb 2, 2020

pretty sure they sold out the Apollo 11th 50th, so I doubt Omega thinks they have failed. Not by a long shot (moon shot?)

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

Jw, Respectfully, the 321 was a discontinued movement. It had not been made for decades. Omega had to scan all the parts in order to manufacture them. It is something from an age gone by. This is the quintessential meaning of “looking back“. If they did not want to look back why re-issue the 321 at all?

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

BlackTalon
pretty sure they sold out the Apollo 11th 50th, so I doubt Omega thinks they have failed. Not by a long shot (moon shot?)

If we look at things from a corporation‘s perspective (any corporation) nothing would ever be admitted as a failure. What I am saying is that they failed the speedmaster enthusiast community. At least they failed me.

BlackTalon · Feb 2, 2020

They will have plenty of future watch sales at elevated prices from the inclusion of the 321.

They are a business. They need to make money/ profit. They do not cater to the collector community -- they develop projects that are projected to have a good return on their investment. To expect more will just drive you crazy.

Porsche hears all the same crap. People who are into the older cars constantly bash their decisions on the new cars. Yet the company flourishes. Collectors will almost always buy old/ used watches; they are not the backbone of the company's client base.

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

BlackTalon
They will have plenty of future watch sales at elevated prices from the inclusion of the 321

I believe that as well. However, respectfully, I think you are missing the point.

wsfarrell · Feb 2, 2020

saulgoodman
Omega blew the opportunity to come up strong with a genuine reintroduction of the moon landing speedy with a 321 movement

Couldn't agree more; been saying that for months...

JwRosenthal · Feb 2, 2020

saulgoodman
Jw, Respectfully, the 321 was a discontinued movement. It had not been made for decades. Omega had to scan all the parts in order to manufacture them. It is something from an age gone by. This is the quintessential meaning of “looking back“. If they did not want to look back why re-issue the 321 at all?

Saul, I was agreeing with you- hence my comment on if they are going to the trouble to remake this movement... but was making a case for their design decisions.

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

JwRosenthal
Saul, I was agreeing with you- hence my comment on if they are going to the trouble to remake this movement... but was making a case for their design decisions.

I see that. Then I think you will agree that this movement was brought back to satisfy enthusiasts. Others outside of that community couldn’t give a hoot if two mice on a treadmill are running the watch. After so many years to make a move like bringing the 321 back and not staying initially true to the watches that carried that movement is a failure in my opinion. After an Initial re-introduction of a true nod to the past they could have gone forward and used the 321 movement in any way they desired. The truth is that this movement is probably so expensive to make it will be used sparingly in the future. All the more reason they should have stayed true to the roots of the watches that this movement serviced.

M'Bob · Feb 2, 2020

You mean they blew it for you. If they had the details you wanted, noted above, would they have still blown it?

You can't please everyone with every desired bit. On the whole, I think they did a really respectible job, which will satisfy MOST buyers. But this remains to be seen, doesn't it? But from the initial response, I don't think it's an Edsel. So from that perspective, the company probably didn't blow it.

WatchCor · Feb 2, 2020

Matter of personal oppinion. I see though what you mean and respect your point.

Then again I personally believe they hit the nail right on the head with this. At least on paper and photos it looks to me like a excellent hybrid of new and old.

I understand what you mean though because I agree that if you're gonna make a 1:1 Ed white , then for the love of all that is holy put a hesalite/plexi on it and a standard caseback. As pointed out earlier it might have been an better idea to provide a extra saphire caseback for the customer to decide if they want the movement shown.

BlackTalon · Feb 2, 2020

I personally think the A11 50th drew in a lot of non-collectors who love space stuff, and will now jump on the 321 bandwagon for a future watch. Omega will easily sell all the 321 they make for the next few years.

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

M'Bob
You mean they blew it for you. If they had the details you wanted, noted above, would they have still blown it?

You can't please everyone with every desired bit. On the whole, I think they did a really respectible job, which will satisfy MOST buyers. But this remains to be seen, doesn't it? But from the initial response, I don't think it's an Edsel. So from that perspective, the company probably didn't blow it.

Yes, they blew it for me. This is one man’s opinion. Having said that, I am certain I am not alone. Even your comment that “They did a really respectable job” isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement. Like I said, the watches they used to reintroduce the 321 have me scratching my head. Why go through all that trouble? I especially got a laugh out of the fact they made a big deal about the DON bezel on the 2020 model as if they are claiming minute attention to detail. Seriously? It almost feels as if they rebuilt the 321 and then threw it into a watch made from whatever parts they had lying around. Not Omega’s greatest moment.

GadgetGuy88 · Feb 2, 2020

This can happen. It just doesn’t work for you- and I’m sure others.

It’s like what the Tin Tin could have been. Not for all folks...

saulgoodman · Feb 2, 2020

Jakemeister1000
This can happen. It just doesn’t work for you- and I’m sure others.

It’s like what the Tin Tin could have been. Not for all folks...

Funny you should mention the Tin Tin. I recently read that it is becoming one of the more collectible speedys.

M'Bob · Feb 2, 2020

saulgoodman
Even your comment that “They did a really respectable job” isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement.

That's fair, but my name is still on the list; things don't have to be perfect to still be quite desirable.

VetPsychWars · Feb 2, 2020

waah they didn't make what I wanted who cares if they sold all of it I didn't want it waah

Why don't you write Omega and tell them what makes you enthusiastic? A company making luxury products cannot read your mind and make what you want unless you TELL THEM what you want.

I'm pretty confident that they don't read this forum.

Tom

Evitzee · Feb 2, 2020

Man, it's been about nine months since the Apollo 11 was released and there have been thousands of comments about it, some love it, some hate it, 'Omega should have done this, Omega should have done that'. The market has spoken and it seems to have embraced the 6,969 pieces of a 'too large' edition, people are still trying to catch one at AD's and boutiques. Secondary prices are still above retail and seem to be holding up.

The Ed White isn't out yet but by all indications there are lengthy waiting lists for this one, too.

All in all I think Omega has done well over the past year with the watches to commemorate 50 years. Yet some people still want to tell Omega that they stuffed it up and failed.