What’s happening on March 26th then?

Shay · Mar 29, 2022

JwRosenthal
I am seeing a much larger social implication here that I am loving. How does omega compete with a Juggernaut like Rolex…you don’t. Give it away- pull back the curtain, let them all eat cake. Put out a $260 watch and say suck it!
Looking at new Rolex rollouts this week- I laughed- my god do they look completely disconnected from the world, hawking the same old shit with a tweak here or there- just sad really, how long are they gonna beat that poor Oyster to death!

Do something Bold Rolex! Do something crazy, do something…for everyone! Otherwise, you are last years news.

There was an interesting analysis yesterday on YouTube. Rolex is all about extrinsic value ( I have what you can’t have because I have more money than you). This is why Rolex is playing the scarcity game hard. Omega realised it cannot compete with that and is focussing more on intrinsic value ( you feel good and happy when you wear a watch and this is the path Omega is going) and I would agree. The guy you did the analysis ran a poll to ask people what drives them to own a watch and 4 out of 5 said intrinsic value.

dsio · Mar 29, 2022

kelsey
Look I respect your opinion, even completely understand where you coming from, so atleast respect mine and don’t be so blinkered.
Your emotional because your Omega fan, and I am emotional for the same reason, we just believe in two totally different outcomes.
I certainly not alone in believing this has done serious damage to the Speedmaster’s status, just that alone shows this opinion can be had.

Once again I’ve been around a lot longer mate, you’re not the first person to go “oh x or y will ruin the reputation of Omega or the Speedmaster or the Seamaster”, you’re about the 3000th. The Costco war, the calibre 2500 debacle, the 3313 debacle, the quartz crisis, the initial Swatch takeover, the sudden upmarket push of the late 2000s, dozens of other events were exactly the same with self described experts predicting doom. I had some guy have a complete mental breakdown over the Tokyo Olympics Speedmasters because he claimed Omega had committed fraud by re-releasing two of his LE watches (Gemini 4 & 35th Apollo). It was all horseshit, rightly or wrongly nobody cared.

Now your prediction that the values will go up now, when there actually are a pile of people being doomers over there being a Swatch Speedmaster, but then… somehow after everyone forgets about it in a year or two and nobody cares anymore it will suddenly do damage is not really sensible to me at all.

What has happened is this, sales of actual Omega Moonwatches has gone up in the short term, boutiques and ADs have seen a significant upsurge in demand for the real McCoy. Over time the people who have MoonSwatches will want to upgrade either when the watches wear out or are no longer appropriate for them (wearing a suit to work rather than jeans). Sentimentality will lead them to a Moonwatch.

TAG Heuer released the plastic quartz F1 in the 80s not long after the TAG takeover and they’ve dined out on loyal customers upgrading from those for decades, it was a hugely beneficial thing for the brand and helped them secure a younger demographic to build off.

I’ll admit when I’m wrong if it happens but I give it a near zero chance as this, from a reputation perspective is far more minor than the vast majority of events Omega has been through even in the last 20 years, really it’s a handful of people who care, they just happen to be loud.

kelsey · Mar 29, 2022

dsio
Once again I’ve been around a lot longer mate, you’re not the first person to go “oh x or y will ruin the reputation of Omega or the Speedmaster or the Seamaster”, you’re about the 3000th. The Costco war, the calibre 2500 debacle, the 3313 debacle, the quartz crisis, the initial Swatch takeover, the sudden upmarket push of the late 2000s, dozens of other events were exactly the same with self described experts predicting doom. I had some guy have a complete mental breakdown over the Tokyo Olympics Speedmasters because he claimed Omega had committed fraud by re-releasing two of his LE watches (Gemini 4 & 35th Apollo). It was all horseshit, rightly or wrongly nobody cared.

Now your prediction that the values will go up now, when there actually are a pile of people being doomers over there being a Swatch Speedmaster, but then… somehow after everyone forgets about it in a year or two and nobody cares anymore it will suddenly do damage is not really sensible to me at all.

What has happened is this, sales of actual Omega Moonwatches has gone up in the short term, boutiques and ADs have seen a significant upsurge in demand for the real McCoy. Over time the people who have MoonSwatches will want to upgrade either when the watches wear out or are no longer appropriate for them (wearing a suit to work rather than jeans). Sentimentality will lead them to a Moonwatch.

TAG Heuer released the plastic quartz F1 in the 80s not long after the TAG takeover and they’ve dined out on loyal customers upgrading from those for decades, it was a hugely beneficial thing for the brand and helped them secure a younger demographic to build off.

I’ll admit when I’m wrong if it happens but I give it a near zero chance as this, from a reputation perspective is far more minor than the vast majority of events Omega has been through even in the last 20 years, really it’s a handful of people who care, they just happen to be loud.

I’m not exactly a young man either, I would have used the tag f1 example as very favourable to my argument to be honest.

Judging by the flood of Moonswatch threads I’d say the pro plastics are the loudest 😉

Status is very hard to build and easily lost, once lost hard boarderline impossible to get back.

SlCKB0Y · Mar 29, 2022

dsio
Once again I’ve been around a lot longer mate, you’re not the first person to go “oh x or y will ruin the reputation of Omega or the Speedmaster or the Seamaster”, you’re about the 3000th. The Costco war, the calibre 2500 debacle, the 3313 debacle, the quartz crisis, the initial Swatch takeover, the sudden upmarket push of the late 2000s, dozens of other events were exactly the same with self described experts predicting doom. I had some guy have a complete mental breakdown over the Tokyo Olympics Speedmasters because he claimed Omega had committed fraud by re-releasing two of his LE watches (Gemini 4 & 35th Apollo). It was all horseshit, rightly or wrongly nobody cared.

Now your prediction that the values will go up now, when there actually are a pile of people being doomers over there being a Swatch Speedmaster, but then… somehow after everyone forgets about it in a year or two and nobody cares anymore it will suddenly do damage is not really sensible to me at all.

What has happened is this, sales of actual Omega Moonwatches has gone up in the short term, boutiques and ADs have seen a significant upsurge in demand for the real McCoy. Over time the people who have MoonSwatches will want to upgrade either when the watches wear out or are no longer appropriate for them (wearing a suit to work rather than jeans). Sentimentality will lead them to a Moonwatch.

TAG Heuer released the plastic quartz F1 in the 80s not long after the TAG takeover and they’ve dined out on loyal customers upgrading from those for decades, it was a hugely beneficial thing for the brand and helped them secure a younger demographic to build off.

I’ll admit when I’m wrong if it happens but I give it a near zero chance as this, from a reputation perspective is far more minor than the vast majority of events Omega has been through even in the last 20 years, really it’s a handful of people who care, they just happen to be loud.

Someone who actually gets it!

Watches and Wonders 2022 is running from 30th March until April 5 and will feature all the big names in watches announcing releases - A. Lange & Söhne, Breitling, Grand Seiko, Hublot, IWC, JLC, Montblanc, Oris, Panerai, Patek Philippe, Piaget, Rolex, TAG Heuer, Tudor, Vacheron Constantin, Zenith and many more.

A week before this grand event, Swatch has managed to generate hype that overshadows everything these uptight stuffy brands will announce, including Rolex adding a millimetre to a watch here and a red bezel there, to watches no normal person can buy.

Truly think about it. They have got the entire watch world losing their minds, have generated hype in non-watch people not seen since the Apple Watch and have done so with a $250 plastic watch.

In the process millions more people know of the Omega brand and it’s association with space flight and they have completely reinvigorated the Swatch brand. The younger people buying these watches today will be the ones buying actual Moonwatches in a number of years once they have an established career and expendable income. It’s one of the truly great pieces of marketing in recent memory.

As a bonus, they have managed to truly butt hurt all the watch snobs (some on this very forum), who collect watches for all the wrong reasons - because they care what other people think about whats on their wrist, because they feel it diminishes what they see as a display of socio-economic superiority.

Bugbait · Mar 29, 2022

kelsey
However Speedmaster as a aspirational status symbol which in the past was 90% of its sales well that’s loosing appeal.

The more hype this plastic gets the worse it gets for Speedmaster, as someone else just commented now the Speedmaster is associated with a cheap plastic watch…..now that is hard to undo.

Again it’s great for the swatch group but bad for Speedmasters status symbol as an aspirational piece.

Assuming the Omega Speedmaster is an aspirational piece for many, I think the MoonSwatch will benefit it.

More people know what a "Moonwatch" is now due to the MoonSwatch release. So when the fresh faces flash their MoonSwatch and say, "Hey, checkout my Speedmaster Moonwatch", the Omega owners can reply with, "Cute, now check out the original, real thing".

"Awww damn, now me wants the real thing." New aspirational customer in the making.

Over simplified of course but just trying to demonstrate a different side. The more people that know what your aspirational product is the more desirable it becomes to the masses.

(typing this on a crowded train via my phone so not as articulate as I'd like)

Pun · Mar 29, 2022

I think long back there was time when Rado/tissot tie up was launched to help Tissot which was very small that time. Now Tissot is huge in comparison to Rado. Similarly about Swatch there was a time when they were 1 billion watches company.

But to dilute a brand you’re preparing to counter Rolex, this way is far from a genius stroke.

Duckie · Mar 29, 2022

STANDY
Wrong, a cheap plastic watch is associated with a iconic expensive Omega Speedmaster. Two totally different things.

Two years from now you will not see a Swatch MoonSwatch as they will be toast. And the masses will be camped out buying the Swatch latest Star Wars watch with light sabre hands

@dsio will probably shock you with the spike in membership here.

Watch folk that own Speedmasters want one…..explain that…

Let us all keep in mind the fact that this debate is like comparing apples and oranges.
The disagreement is around a plastic watch that's called a "Speedmaster" just as there have been countless variations of Speedmasters including a number of digital references as totally different case shapes throughout the decades. It just happens to also be labelled as a Moonswatch.
This is the total opposite to the SPEEDMASTER PROFESSIONAL which has not been diluted in any shape or forum.
The only direct comparison is through the visuals and Omega branding. Other than that, there is absolutely no real comparison.
The Speedmaster Moonswatch is eventually going to be a throw away fashion item which the Speddu Pro is not, where as the Speedmaster PROFESSIONAL Moonwatch is an heirloom quality wristwatch which can be serviced repaired or restored.

cvalue13 · Mar 29, 2022

kelsey
Again it’s great for the swatch group but bad for Speedmasters status symbol as an aspirational piece.

It sounds like what you don’t do is invest in the luxury apparel segment? Your insistence is the principle that an aspirational luxury brand somehow cheapens itself by doing such a high-low collaboration, which principle is dubious in the face of the luxury apparel segment in the past 10 years.

Luxury brands have to engage with the younger, aspirational audience. 100% of growth in luxury apparel now comes from Gen X and Millennial buyers, and they currently represent 40% of all luxury apparel spending. They’re projected to be >60% of luxury apparel in the near future (at which point the even younger generations will begin cannibalizing market share).

That context in mind, far from being “bad for Speedmasters as an aspirational piece” it cements and emphasizes that Speedmasters are aspirational pieces - particularly in the minds of the only generations that are relevant to defining what’s “aspirational.”

Why there are more fashion brand collaborations than ever right now (Verb)

“Yes collaborations reach new audiences, but one trend we’re seeing in particular for Luxury is the chance to cast the net wider, reaching the Aspirational Audience. The Aspirational Audiences are those who typically cannot afford Luxury but aspire to the brands, the lifestyle, the look. It’s a key market, with37% of global consumers fitting into this category – a huge audience for brands to be tapping into….

Ultimately, Brand Collaborations are enabling brands to create in sectors they wouldn’t traditionally have ventured, giving them access to a newer (and in many cases younger) audiences, and often shifting the brand market perception, creating cultural relevance.”

Unpacking the high-low fashion formula (British Vogue)

“These days, the clothes don’t even need to sell-out: “brand recognition” is the high-low collaboration’s modus operandi, with a kudos effect that rubs off on both the retailer (more people come through the doors) and the designer…. Last year, Balmain looked to have brought “a piece of the dream”, as Olivier Rousteing put it, to the masses [with H&M], as it offered its signature £7,000 embellished minidresses for £399.99. But within minutes of the collection going on sale, hundreds of “new with tags” pieces hit eBay, with those dresses listed for thousands of pounds. Balmain’s chief executive officer, Emmanuel Diemoz, told The New Yorker that the H&M collaboration “will make the Balmain customer see how everyone wants Balmain but can’t have it”.”

Fashion collaborations have reached a fever pitch; how did we get here? (London Luxury)

“[H&M X Karl Lagerfeld] was an eye-opener for the fashion world; collaboration, once shunned as a form of brand dilution, was now a leading and lucrative strategy…. The appeal here is clear. It’s about the democratisation of fashion and drawing in an aspirational audience – the consumer that can’t necessarily afford luxury, but aspires to the lifestyle…. No one saw a collection co-authored by Supreme and Tiffany & Co. – preserve of Park Avenue princesses – coming. What does that target audience even look like? A 23-year-old sneakerhead who holidays in the Hamptons? And yet, when the collection went live in November 2021, it sold out within seconds…. Creative and wonderful or tacky and cynical, mismatched collabs provide an element of surprise that is a critical weapon in the war to stay current.“

Suffices to say, that it’s worse than old-fashioned to think that a high-low collaboration necessarily tarnishes the exclusivity of the “high” end participant. Instead, with a good collab there are three main resulting shifts.

• First, people who can’t yet buy the high end product are made aware of the aspirational “real” product their purchase imitates.

• Second, the people who can buy the high end product and are singularly concerned with their status are reminded that there are great hordes of aspirational buyers, sleeping on sidewalks for a chance to pretend that they too are an owner.

• Third, people who enjoy watches just have fun.

M'Bob · Mar 29, 2022

cvalue13
It sounds like what you don’t do is invest in the luxury apparel segment? Your insistence is the principle that an aspirational luxury brand somehow cheapens itself by doing such a high-low collaboration, which principle is dubious in the face of the luxury apparel segment in the past 10 years.

Luxury brands have to engage with the younger, aspirational audience. 100% of growth in luxury apparel now comes from Gen X and Millennial buyers, and they currently represent 40% of all luxury apparel spending. They’re projected to be >60% of luxury apparel in the near future (at which point the even younger generations will begin cannibalizing market share).

That context in mind, far from being “bad for Speedmasters as an aspirational piece” it cements and emphasizes that Speedmasters are aspirational pieces - particularly in the minds of the only generations that are relevant to defining what’s “aspirational.”

Why there are more fashion brand collaborations than ever right now (Verb)

“Yes collaborations reach new audiences, but one trend we’re seeing in particular for Luxury is the chance to cast the net wider, reaching the Aspirational Audience. The Aspirational Audiences are those who typically cannot afford Luxury but aspire to the brands, the lifestyle, the look. It’s a key market, with37% of global consumers fitting into this category – a huge audience for brands to be tapping into….

Ultimately, Brand Collaborations are enabling brands to create in sectors they wouldn’t traditionally have ventured, giving them access to a newer (and in many cases younger) audiences, and often shifting the brand market perception, creating cultural relevance.”

Unpacking the high-low fashion formula (British Vogue)

“These days, the clothes don’t even need to sell-out: “brand recognition” is the high-low collaboration’s modus operandi, with a kudos effect that rubs off on both the retailer (more people come through the doors) and the designer…. Last year, Balmain looked to have brought “a piece of the dream”, as Olivier Rousteing put it, to the masses [with H&M], as it offered its signature £7,000 embellished minidresses for £399.99. But within minutes of the collection going on sale, hundreds of “new with tags” pieces hit eBay, with those dresses listed for thousands of pounds. Balmain’s chief executive officer, Emmanuel Diemoz, told The New Yorker that the H&M collaboration “will make the Balmain customer see how everyone wants Balmain but can’t have it”.”

Fashion collaborations have reached a fever pitch; how did we get here? (London Luxury)

“[H&M X Karl Lagerfeld] was an eye-opener for the fashion world; collaboration, once shunned as a form of brand dilution, was now a leading and lucrative strategy…. The appeal here is clear. It’s about the democratisation of fashion and drawing in an aspirational audience – the consumer that can’t necessarily afford luxury, but aspires to the lifestyle…. No one saw a collection co-authored by Supreme and Tiffany & Co. – preserve of Park Avenue princesses – coming. What does that target audience even look like? A 23-year-old sneakerhead who holidays in the Hamptons? And yet, when the collection went live in November 2021, it sold out within seconds…. Creative and wonderful or tacky and cynical, mismatched collabs provide an element of surprise that is a critical weapon in the war to stay current.“

Suffices to say, that it’s worse than old-fashioned to think that a high-low collaboration necessarily tarnishes the exclusivity of the “high” end participant. Instead, with a good collab there are three main resulting shifts.

• First, people who can’t yet buy the high end product are made aware of the aspirational “real” product their purchase imitates.

• Second, the people who can buy the high end product and are singularly concerned with their status are reminded that there are great hordes of aspirational buyers, sleeping on sidewalks for a chance to pretend that they too are an owner.

• Third, people who enjoy watches just have fun.

This is a very impressive post, and very well-researched. I can’t really counter any of the points, further, the folks at Omega aren’t idiots, so wouldn’t be doing this if it wasn’t going to improve SOMETHING for them: sales, new buyers, more brand recognition, etc.

Yet…I still don’t like it. So I have to figure out why. And be honest about it. And admit that my response is emotional, and not necessarily rational.

So I can concoct only two reasons, again with the caveat that they may not make sense…

1) I rightly or wrongly hold the brand in high esteem, and I know Rolex, Vacheron and Patek will never do this, so it bugs me. I know, I know: apples to oranges.

2) Maybe I don’t actually want so many new members to the club. I’ve been in many collecting hobbies, and as soon as the masses get a hold of it, and “everyone’s” interested, it gets less fun. Despite the fact that you could make the argument that more interest = more spillover to the real thing = prices going up = greater value to those that already own.

Still don’t like it…

savka · Mar 29, 2022

M'Bob
This is a very impressive post, and very well-researched. I can’t really counter any of the points, further, the folks at Omega aren’t idiots, so wouldn’t be doing this if it wasn’t going to improve SOMETHING for them: sales, new buyers, more brand recognition, etc.

Yet…I still don’t like it. So I have to figure out why. And be honest about it. And admit that my response is emotional, and not necessarily rational.

So I can concoct only two reasons, again with the caveat that they may not make sense…

1) I rightly or wrongly hold the brand in high esteem, and I know Rolex, Vacheron and Patek will never do this, so it bugs me. I know, I know: apples to oranges.

2) Maybe I don’t actually want so many new members to the club. I’ve been in many collecting hobbies, and as soon as the masses get a hold of it, and “everyone’s” interested, it gets less fun. Despite the fact that you could make the argument that more interest = more spillover to the real thing = prices going up = greater value to those that already own.

Still don’t like it…

This is an incredibly mature and thoughtful exchange — the best I’ve seen on this topic across multiple forums. Thanks for sharing.

M'Bob · Mar 29, 2022

savka
This is an incredibly mature and thoughtful exchange — the best I’ve seen on this topic across multiple forums. Thanks for sharing.

Very gracious of you to say so. Thanks…

JwRosenthal · Mar 29, 2022

savka
This is an incredibly mature and thoughtful exchange — the best I’ve seen on this topic across multiple forums. Thanks for sharing.

Was thinking the same thing- a measured response to “why I don’t like it”. Not once did I see “devalued”

dsio · Mar 29, 2022

savka
This is an incredibly mature and thoughtful exchange — the best I’ve seen on this topic across multiple forums. Thanks for sharing.

I know, sometimes Bob goes and says something profound and highly insightful like this.

There are benefits to more and younger people getting involved that are worth considering as they benefit you too, we’re currently at a point where there is a genuine lack of highly capable independent watchmakers, we need both young blood to replace the ones retiring (and pining for the fjords) and a market of people interested in vintage watches to keep them in business and maintain demand for vintage servicing / parts.

A healthy influx of people also keeps the knowledge going and growing, if you look at where things were even just over a decade ago when Chuck Maddox passed away, his site was among the only high quality resources, now we have MWO, Speedmaster101, SpeedyTuesday, GTGs, a whole plethora of information available and writers putting it out. The reason we spend so much on storage and hosting for images, and require people leave their FS listings up indefinitely is to continuously archive and expand the number of photos of different references out there for future researchers and authors. Knowledge needs to be preserved and passed on to the next generation.

A healthy market and long term appreciation for all models including vintage also means many years from now when some of us end up pining for the fjords ourselves, our families will be able to liquidate our collections, see that they go to good homes and get good values. So many great collections have been bought for a pittance in decades past, we want people to know what they have, to not be ripped off and for there to be a stable market, and that depends on keeping the passion alive.

Just some food for thought on the benefits.

Dan S · Mar 29, 2022

I could be totally wrong, but I look at the Speedmaster a little differently. My suspicion is that Omega is continually desperate to prop up continuing interest in the Speedmaster, which is really their only iconic model, and they do so with gimmick after gimmick after gimmick - mostly LEs, some very silly, and it never seems to move the needle very much, but the Speedmaster hangs on. Yes, the MoonSwatch is a different sort of gimmick, but I don't see it having a negative effect on the Speedmaster. The people who think this will devalue the brand may have an unrealistic view of Omega and the Speedmaster. In the bigger picture, it is not really a true luxury brand or a status symbol IMO. Don't hate me for saying this, I like Omega and Speedmasters very much.

JwRosenthal · Mar 29, 2022

Dan S
…it is not really a true luxury brand or a status symbol IMO.

Neither is Rolex, but don’t tell them, or their cult that.

kelsey · Mar 29, 2022

M'Bob
This is a very impressive post, and very well-researched. I can’t really counter any of the points, further, the folks at Omega aren’t idiots, so wouldn’t be doing this if it wasn’t going to improve SOMETHING for them: sales, new buyers, more brand recognition, etc.

Yet…I still don’t like it. So I have to figure out why. And be honest about it. And admit that my response is emotional, and not necessarily rational.

So I can concoct only two reasons, again with the caveat that they may not make sense…

1) I rightly or wrongly hold the brand in high esteem, and I know Rolex, Vacheron and Patek will never do this, so it bugs me. I know, I know: apples to oranges.

2) Maybe I don’t actually want so many new members to the club. I’ve been in many collecting hobbies, and as soon as the masses get a hold of it, and “everyone’s” interested, it gets less fun. Despite the fact that you could make the argument that more interest = more spillover to the real thing = prices going up = greater value to those that already own.

Still don’t like it…

100% agree and you’ve expressed it 1000% better then I could.

Elitr6 · Mar 29, 2022

I'm just waiting to get mugged wearing my speedy pro by some idiot hoping it's a moonswatch 🤨

kelsey · Mar 29, 2022

Dan S
In the bigger picture, it is not really a true luxury brand or a status symbol IMO. Don't hate me for saying this, I like Omega and Speedmasters very much.

Agree with this, for this very reason I feel fine wearing my moonshine gold 50th as a daily wear in a way that I feel I couldn’t wear say a Rolex solid gold president.
I don’t feel the solid gold 50th is a show off in your face piece like other more luxury brands would be.

M'Bob · Mar 29, 2022

kelsey
100% agree and you’ve expressed it 1000% better then I could.

Thanks for the nice comment.

kelsey · Mar 29, 2022

JwRosenthal
Was thinking the same thing- a measured response to “why I don’t like it”. Not once did I see “devalued”

However both quotes can mean very similar.
Value is a personal thing and not necessarily a function of say price.

What’s happening on March 26th then?

Shay

dsio

kelsey

SlCKB0Y

Bugbait

Pun

Duckie

cvalue13

M'Bob

savka

M'Bob

JwRosenthal

dsio

Dan S

JwRosenthal

kelsey

Elitr6

kelsey

M'Bob

kelsey

Similar threads

Omega smartening up on March 26th?