Recent Omega Negativity

Posts
687
Likes
823
Yeah, no way its too much choice. I could see that limiting PROFITS, but not sales. NO one goes, "oh, well, I would LOVE an F150, but I got distracted by that Ford Fusion over there... and decided to buy a Chevy instead!". Thats just kinda silly.
Interesting analogy because Ford actually stopped selling sedans in the U.S. as they were far less profitable than SUVs and trucks. So if Omega lowers the price of Globemasters, Connies, Geneves, etc. they'll reach the same conclusion Ford did. Why sell them at all...
Edited:
 
Posts
7,173
Likes
23,221
I think one of the problems with so much variation is that it does tend to dilute the brand identity

That’s very likely true. The perception is that in a luxury or quasi-luxury market, if you offer too much, the consumer feels it’s less specialized, less exclusive, less desirable
 
Posts
1,970
Likes
2,131
Interesting analogy because Ford actually stopped selling sedans in the U.S. as they were far less profitable than SUVs and trucks. So if Omega lowers the price of Globemasters, Connies, Geneves, etc. they'll reach the same conclusion Ford did. Why sell them at all...
Yeah, but that is a 'profit' thing, not sales, which is what was being discussed here. Archer alluded to those models being popular elsewhere, so that is perhaps why they are still selling them (is the Geneves line still being made?).

According to my OB, his sales are Speedmaster >> Aqua Terra >> Sports Watches(300m/PO/etc) >>>>>> The rest.

One thing he DID say is that the new Lady's Aqua Terra sells a TON compared to the rest of the Lady's lines, which I don't doubt (as I think most of the Lady's lines look really dated).

My suspicion is that Omega just 'has' those lines, they don't cost them very much as they basically never sell (manufacturing costs on them is all done), so they just 'sit' there.

I AM pretty sad about the Globemaster though, I think it is awesome, and had it been styled a little more like the 168.005 (and perhaps even sold as a connie), it would have taken advantage of the well-deserved pie-pan popularity.
 
Posts
6,178
Likes
21,144
Now, more and more buyers of luxury goods are seeking a status symbol that doubles as a store of wealth.
This rings true to me, but only partially. There's luxury, and then there's luxury.

I don't think it's the same across all segments of the luxury class. The upper tiers aren't as concerned about saving 30% after-market.

I think the store of wealth concept is more of a explanation for Rolex, which is a mid-tier segment where Omega competes. I think we need to think of Rolex as distinct from all other mid-tier luxury brands, including Omega.

Rolex has a lock on this asset maintaining wealth status. It isn't just a watch. The number of variations in references, design consistency, build quality, movement proficiency all seek to logically explain how different watch brands succeed in the mid-tier luxury market. But they fall short because right or wrong, many people buy Rolex because it's not just a watch; to them, it's a financial asset.

Trying to understand why Omega seems to be dropping in position by looking at how many variations Omega has or design consistency or build quality or movement innovation just doesn't explain why Omega is not as successful. If buyers in the mid-tier luxury range are mainly concerned with store of wealth, they won't be swayed by how many different kinds of watches Omega does or doesn't make. At least I don't think it will matter to them. I could be wrong of course.

I actually wish Omega had more variations. But there are some wierd Tresor designs that they could drop.
 
Posts
2,781
Likes
4,693
Too much choice??????? What a load of absolute bollocks!

The analogy with Ford isn't quite right, Mercedes or Toyota would be better as they are probably the automotive manufacturers with the most diverse product ranges.
I've never heard it said by their customers that they 're upset by the choice!

Better still, for those who find choice so much trouble to contemplate, how about they limit themselves to the same dish for every meal for the rest of their days.......or would that be too boring?

The whole too much choice bullshit is just a load of vacuous twats trying to sound like they're knowledgeable about the industry they are crapping on about.

The only people who are possibly negatively effected by having too much choice in the range are the manufacturers themselves, who might not have the production capacity for multiple lines and the retailers. who have to figure out which ones they stock...............these are not problems for the consumer to worry about!
 
Posts
123
Likes
104
I’ve said it before. Some of their variety is done right, and some of it is not. The variety with the aqua terra line is done right in my view. If I want a black dial stainless aqua terra, I have four case sizes to choose from. If I want a diver 300, there are dozens of options to choose from, but all of them are the exact same case. That case doesn’t work for me personally. Unfortunately, I’m not in the market for an aqua terra, but would love a diver 300, just not in 42 mm.
 
Posts
624
Likes
1,474
Wow this was a good thread to catch up on! The debates about Omega's catalogue size are pretty good, I was going to chime in but everything I'd contribute has already been said. TL;DR though: I do think they have too many models, but I don't think it's a huge deal for their buyers.

I won't buy a 32XX Rolex due to the amplitude issue. I owned a new from the AD 2020 Datejust with a 3235 that went downhill after one year. I had it serviced under warranty and sold it. I still don't think they've truly fixed the problem. For the same reason I won't buy an Omega with a 2500B or 2500C movement anymore.

My understanding was that this has long since been fixed and these movements, assuming they have been serviced even remotely recently, are completely sorted. My Railmaster has a 2403B, which is I think from memory analogous to a 2500C, and it's been running flawlessly the last couple years.

Effluencers shit me to tears........... does anyone with the disposable income to buy high end stuff really listen to these attention seeking turds?
Or is their audience a bunch wannabes and plastic posers who buy knockoffs?
I find the watch influencers on You Tube insipid. I’ve not made it through a single video. This is very unlike the music, audio, paddling, sailing and other topic specific stuff I watch. I think it’s because the watch Tubers all sound elitist and snobby.

They have huge audiences, and I would be willing to bet the brands are well aware influencers and social media are an important pipeline to get younger audiences into the market. Putting George Clooney on a full page magazine ad isn't gonna draw Gen Z in.

The whole too much choice bullshit is just a load of vacuous twats trying to sound like they're knowledgeable about the industry they are crapping on about.

But if the load of vacuous twats have a load of attentive audiences, that may well translate to tangible sales impacts. Influencers may not appeal to most of the demographic on this forum but if they had no appeal, they'd all have stopped by now. It's a giant industry, the money's flowing.
 
Posts
6,178
Likes
21,144
The analogy with Ford isn't quite right, Mercedes or Toyota would be better as they are probably the automotive manufacturers with the most diverse product ranges.

I was thinking of Porsche, who love options, including even custom painting your car to any sample color.
 
Posts
375
Likes
2,125
Ironically one of the YouTubers in OP’s original post recently posted about the problem with the YouTube algorithm essentially rewarding lowest common denominator click-bait. Debating the merits of most influencer videos, especially those discussing consumer products, is like debating the merits of television ads.
 
Posts
3,862
Likes
8,353
Ironically one of the YouTubers in OP’s original post recently posted about the problem with the YouTube algorithm essentially rewarding lowest common denominator click-bait. Debating the merits of most influencer videos, especially those discussing consumer products, is like debating the merits of television ads.

Absolutely this. YouTube is not even pretending that it is a platform for information anymore so much as an algorithm for specifically pushing whichever video will get them the most ad revenue.

All of this discussion really does come down to how bad humans are at decision making and risk assessment and how that impacts a belief in value, which we then create (or destroy) irrationally. But once we've established that, however irrational it may have been, then there suddenly is a rational "best decision" (to the point that Rolex is specifically seen as a store of wealth).

Slightly off topic but about a decade ago I read a study done on capuchin monkeys that demonstrated similar behaviors in terms of risk taking and value assessment...
 
Posts
423
Likes
1,166
Hey everyone.
Is it just me or does it seem like everyone wants to take a dump on Omega these days? Two weeks ago, two watch YouTubers put out Omega downer videos pretty much within a day of each other. Then Morgan Stanley puts out it's annual report on the watch industry showing Omega dropping from 2nd to 5th on the sales charts, which spurred another round of negative videos. Most common criticism is the recent price hikes and a catalogue that's too bloated. Personally I don't think that too much choice is a bad thing, but Omega is definitely not as good value as it was 5-6 years ago. I suppose you could say the same for a certain brand with the crown but no one on YouTube seems to mind. So, is all the Omega doom and gloom really justified? Has Omega really lost its way? A penny for your thoughts (and some material for your perusal)...
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/s...nagement-saying-longines-is-profitable-and-ti
Omega has always been my go to luxury brand, and probably always will be. I still think the quality they offer is about as good as you get, for the price. They're available, not pretentious like Rolex, and every bit as good (in my opinion). And they're more striking. People notice my SMP 300 more than my Submariner. It seems as though their quality has definitely improved over the last 20 years. And I have no problem spending maybe $5k on a modern Omega, than $15k on a Rolex.
 
Posts
2,781
Likes
4,693
How is Rolex a great investment when by it's very "desirability" amongst thieves, muggers and various other vermin scumbags increases the likelyhood of you ending up stabbed and bleeding out..........a wise investment indeed!
🤣
 
Posts
624
Likes
1,474
Omega has always been my go to luxury brand, and probably always will be. I still think the quality they offer is about as good as you get, for the price. They're available, not pretentious like Rolex, and every bit as good (in my opinion). And they're more striking. People notice my SMP 300 more than my Submariner. It seems as though their quality has definitely improved over the last 20 years. And I have no problem spending maybe $5k on a modern Omega, than $15k on a Rolex.

Randoms notice my SMP about once a decade, but if I had a Sub maybe it'd be twice a decade. 😁

I agree with a lot of the rest. Not for a second since I got it have I ever thought I'd prefer a Sub. Price being equal wouldn't change my mind on that.
 
Posts
1,850
Likes
2,805
Randoms notice my SMP about once a decade, but if I had a Sub maybe it'd be twice a decade. 😁

All just anecdotal, but when I wore my subs (I’ve had two, one vintage one new, sold both) they got commented on quite a lot—that was one of the main reasons I got rid of them. Since daily-wearing my SMP300 a few years ago, it’s gotten commented on exactly as one time. It was yesterday. By a college student who’s obsessed with watches. And who asked if it was a Tudor. 😀 (To be fair I do wear it on an oyster-style AT bracelet rather than the Bond one, so it might confuse even the more educated casual looker.)
 
Posts
3,862
Likes
8,353
Since daily-wearing my SMP300 a few years ago, it’s gotten commented on exactly as one time.

I've never gotten a comment on my SMP. My summer blue Heritage has received multiple positive comments at this point, mostly from watch enthusiasts in the Portland metro or Seattle (and not so much in my home area). My most commented on watch though is still a citizen.

I would be willing to bet that a Submariner would get some comments in the Portland area.
 
Posts
1,970
Likes
2,131
I've never gotten a comment on my SMP. My summer blue Heritage has received multiple positive comments at this point, mostly from watch enthusiasts in the Portland metro or Seattle (and not so much in my home area). My most commented on watch though is still a citizen.

I would be willing to bet that a Submariner would get some comments in the Portland area.
The only watches I've had anyone notice was my Railmaster and my Longines Zulu Time! None of my Rolex, Speedies/etc ever get noticed!
 
Posts
3,862
Likes
8,353
The only watches I've had anyone notice was my Railmaster and my Longines Zulu Time! None of my Rolex, Speedies/etc ever get noticed!

Cool- as much as anything I think the biggest variable is probably simply that I wear my summer blue more often, so it's just a matter of statistical probability that I wear it some place another watch Enthusiast happens to be. Probably the SMP will get noticed eventually, probably at OMSI or the zoo by another watch dad...
 
Posts
3,862
Likes
8,353
Well- for me personally--



I was down in Portland today to pick something up, and tried this 126610LV on. And for me personally? I prefer my Seamaster professional over the modern 6 digits just period. Despite the on paper measurements my Heritage wears just as thin and fills my wrist better, how thin Rolex watches are is incredibly, vastly overrated. I don't like their ceramic; I don't particularly like how shiny the dial is ( it's much less attractive than the wet glossy appearance the ceramic dial has); the flashiness of the crystal is honestly more distracting than the wet reflections Omega's modern double-domes have.

Design-wise all it's got is a better lug to lug than the current 42 mm SMP... definitely. And of course, the aforementioned value retention. And if I don't care about the latter and the former isn't a big deal because the 42 mm fits me anyway, it literally just comes down to which watch is more attractive and more interesting- and that's the modern SMP.

 
Posts
624
Likes
1,474
I've never gotten a comment on my SMP. My summer blue Heritage has received multiple positive comments at this point, mostly from watch enthusiasts in the Portland metro or Seattle (and not so much in my home area). My most commented on watch though is still a citizen.

I would be willing to bet that a Submariner would get some comments in the Portland area.

I've had one or two random people comment very positively on my SMP before, but I actually think the watch that gets the most comments is my Casio F-91W. Only watch nerds notice Omega and Rolex but everyone notices a cool vintage Casio.

I also had someone I knew ask about my Railmaster but they didn't really know what it was, they just thought it looked awesome. Which it does.
 
Posts
221
Likes
931
All more great reasons to go vintage and not care what the new market thinks.

I never watch this stuff, and I don't expect to start. Is it a YouTuber thing to put your finger on your mouth?
Called "dumb youtuber face" and required for the clicks on the thumbnail.
popularity of Cartier can be attributed to Gen Z, who see Cartier as being more classy and understated compared to Rolex.
The vast majority of them are wearing fake Cartiers; if the Gen Zs in the downtown core here are to be observed.