Omega vs Rolex "rivalry". Never understood it.

[jlovda]

Originally Posted by bobernet

So, just as an example, you’ve held a Speedmaster and a Daytona and said, “yeah, they’re pretty equal?” I find that really shocking.

I sold my Speedmaster after it sat in a watch box for 3 or 4 years mostly unworn. I’d say the quality, finish, etc difference between the two is dramatic.

I don’t hate Omega at all, but they had devolved into a brand sticking outsourced ETA movements into their cases like so many other lower-mid tier Swiss brands. They bought the escapement from George Daniels, and had ETA build new movements around them with the Omega logo.

I’m sure they want to catch Rolex from a competitive perspective, but the market speaks every day, and it’s not even close.

ETA and Omega are both part of Swatch. Also (I don't the exact year) Rolex movements were made by Aegler, until Rolex bought Aegler.

[Seibei]

Originally Posted by JP.

That being said, I think Omega is much better value for money and the movements are very well made. But that doesn't explain why these brands are seen as "rivals". Volkswagen is not considered a rival of Mercedes, Porsche or Jaguar so why should Omega be a rival to Rolex?

Value for money!?!?! Forgive me if I am re hashing something that has already been discussed in this threat but how can you imagine Omega has better value for money?

I have owned and worn my Sub every day for a year now and I could sell it for at least $2000 more than I paid for it. If I sold it today I would in fact be receiving $2000 for wearing the watch for a year. How is that for value for money?

To me, Rolex is simply a better watch for a variety of reasons. That is why I own one and not an Omega.

[bobernet]

Originally Posted by jlovda

ETA and Omega are both part of Swatch. Also (I don't the exact year) Rolex movements were made by Aegler, until Rolex bought Aegler.

It’s not an in-house vs. outside point for me. If Sinn and Oris and Breitling and Tag and every other low-mid player was building cases and using Rolex/Aegler movements, I’d agree with you. But they weren’t. That was absolutely the case with Omega until the Daniels license and “in-house” launch.

Omega-Tudor very clearly competitors with very similar (modern) progression.

Omega-Rolex, not so much.

[wesdaniel]

Originally Posted by Flyoverguy

Rolex has mastered marketing to an extent Omega never has.

<snip>

Two very good points in this post. I own a couple of Omega and a few Rolex and, overall, I find them to be very similar in a lot of ways. They both keep great time and their fit and finish is superb.

One thing I will say is that the Omega presentation is miles ahead of the Rolex presentation. I recently got a new Omega and was blown away with the quality of the box and the the overall presentation. Rolex's seems lackluster and boring to me. But, maybe that's intentional.

Somebody mentioned Rolex coming through the quartz crisis much better than Omega and that's true. Rolex has an incredible marketing machine and it has protected its name better than most any other brand - regardless of industry.

Despite (or maybe because of) having the power and size of the Swatch Group behind it, Omega's marketing, brand management and and brand identity just can't compete with Rolex.

[mistercoach32]

I am a huge Rolex fan, but I've owned three Omegas (SMP, Speedmaster Pro, and PO). That being said, the only watch I ever regret selling was my Omega PO 42mm Titanium (232.90.42.21.03.001). One of the most comfortable watches I've ever owned. The SMP quality wasn't on par with any Sub I've owned and my Speedmaster Pro didn't get much wrist time at all.

[crazycarlitos]

They were once a rival, decades ago.

That’s no longer true.

I blame the downfall on the quartz movement (1980s ?) and Swatch influence (1998)

Yes, I also own Omega watches. They still make some nice ones, time to time.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by DasKptl

I've heard that in the 1960s, Omega and Rolex had an equal status--similar prices and similar brand prestiges. Omega was Elvis' favorite watch brand.

But now, Rolex dominates.

I've heard this too. Kudos to Rolex marketing.

[Thanos]

Worst thread ever. Wow. Pathetic replys are embarassing.

[Stevec14]

These threads are always a laugh. I’ve had both a ceramic Daytona and own the current CK2998. The 2998 is as well finished as the Daytona and in some ways better. Yes it has a manual movement that hasn’t been updated in years, but it’s an amazing watch at the price point.

I have a 16710 Rolex too, so am a fan of both brands.

Price does not equal better quality in all cases, in fact I’d suggest that many here have never handled an omega. Omega does have the odd swing and miss, but when they get them right they are very good watches.

If I had a gun to my head I’d probably take the new seamaster plus 3 grand over the sub.

Bottom line is there is room for both and if you pick carefully omega make some beautiful pieces.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jmango]

Originally Posted by Seibei

Value for money!?!?! Forgive me if I am re hashing something that has already been discussed in this threat but how can you imagine Omega has better value for money?

I have owned and worn my Sub every day for a year now and I could sell it for at least $2000 more than I paid for it. If I sold it today I would in fact be receiving $2000 for wearing the watch for a year. How is that for value for money?

To me, Rolex is simply a better watch for a variety of reasons. That is why I own one and not an Omega.

Incorrect. What you are describing here is called appreciation on your investment. The $2k appreciation doesn't have much to do with true value in the context of this thread. Consider this hypothetical: If you had bought your Sub and a Seamaster on the same day, both for $100 and decided to sell them a year later, then you might have sold the Sub for $120 (an appreciation of $20 on your "investment") and the Seamaster for $80 (a depreciation of $20). If I were looking to purchase either of them from you, the Omega would be a better purchase value to me than the Rolex as the two watches are similar in quality and function with one priced $40 less than the other. The $40 difference is the now the established "luxury" cost unless one can clearly define a material difference in quality or function over the other.

Having said that, I feel so lucky in this world that I have the ability to even comment on this "first world" debate. :) My point of view is that of being the proud owner of what I feel is a vast collection (3 Rolex, 2 Breitling, 2 Tag, 1 Seiko, 1 Panerai, 5 Omega). I have never sold a watch I bought as I see value in them all and truly appreciate and am grateful for what I have.

The Omega vs. Rolex thing is almost silly to a certain degree as they are both phenomenal brands that make high quality, luxury timepieces. We are all lucky in this world to not only be able to afford them, but have such a vast variety to choose from. We could all buy a watch a week from today's offerings from Swiss manufacturers and not have a lot of overlap in our individual collections. We are simply living in wonderful times folks and there is a wide world of watches out there to experience. As for me, I love both brands and would have a difficult time choosing between the two.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Stevec14

These threads are always a laugh. I’ve had both a ceramic Daytona and own the current CK2998. The 2998 is as well finished as the Daytona and in some ways better. Yes it has a manual movement that hasn’t been updated in years, but it’s an amazing watch at the price point.

I have a 16710 Rolex too, so am a fan of both brands.

Price does not equal better quality in all cases, in fact I’d suggest that many here have never handled an omega. Omega does have the odd swing and miss, but when they get them right they are very good watches.

If I had a gun to my head I’d probably take the new seamaster plus 3 grand over the sub.

Bottom line is there is room for both and if you pick carefully omega make some beautiful pieces.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed

[zengineer]

Interesting to compare the quality, value and technical specs between the brands. I think it's hard to avoid bringing Omega into the discussion about Rolex value. Is a used Sub 4 times as good as a used Seamaster?

I wouldn't call it a rivalry, Rolex and Omega aren't actively participating. It only really exists on internet forums.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[1William]

I find Rolex and Omega both fine watches but I do not consider them rivals based on price points. I have never felt that Omega was anything but high quality but I have always been a Rolex fan and have gravitated there more than Omega.

[encarter13]

IMHO, Omega and Breitling are equals and slightly "below" Rolex.

[tHeTiMeTeLLeR]

Gotta have both imo. The one that made it to the moon and the one that didn’t. Both are signature watches but only one will be worth a lot more than you paid for it. The one that didn’t make it to the moon go figure.

[RolexJoe]

I think overall in terms of watch quality they’re quite equal. In my mind Omega and Rolex divers are on par with each other in terms of finish, features and accuracy. Omega has iconic watches like the Speedmaster just like Rolex has its iconic watches.

What puts Omega as barely lower in the watch brand pecking order for me is their constant releases of “special editions” and their lower price point. Rolex marketing blows Omega’s our of the water and with the steel sports watch shortage their watches hold value better. Omega devalues itself.

Omega should consolidate their watches to fewer variations of each model, stick to more firm pricing, and go on a new marketing campaign. More NASA/astronauts and James Bond, less Nicole Kidman. I’m sure what resonates with many Rolex buyers is the adventurers their watches are associated with (Explorer = Climbing Everest, DSSD = James Cameron, Submariner = Sean Connery Bond, etc.).

[Singslinger]

I always thought Rolex's closest, most obvious competitor was Panerai, and possibly AP.

However, my understanding is that Panerai has lost some popularity in recent years, mainly because fans have become disillusioned with the large number of "limited edition'' models the company has been issuing. Which is a shame because I think it's a great brand with very handsome watches.

As for Omega - I love the brand and actually think the PO Seamaster is better built than the Sub!

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Verdi

Breguet and Rolex rivals?!!!
No!
Can you name 3-4 models of Breguet without googling?

Breguet is with JLC.



Omega rival to Tag?!
Not at all. Tag is miles away from Omega.

Omega and Rolex, yes they are rivals, only that Rolex has the upper hand in terms of built quality.
They both make divers, dress watches, gmts, chronos....and have long history and model identity/iconic models.

Absolutely 100% right on.

Rolex and Breguet are in two completely different categories.

Breguet is with JLC, Patek, VC, AP. These are serious watch making companies with remarkably complicated handmade movements.

And to the OP since you seem to love Omega so much I would think you would put them at a higher category. Their movements are built every bit as good as Rolex if not better in some cases. So is their finishing. The only reason why prices are so different is because of desirability and demand. Rolex is much more known and more popular for many different reasons but those reasons have zero to do with quality of product. Omega is absolutely equal to Rolex and a higher tier then Tag. And so is Breitling. The new crono movement in Breitling is definitely better than the Daytonas crono. Of course the Daytona is more popular and more well-known and more sought after so the pricing will always be higher. But once again that has zero to do with the quality of the movement, finishing or overall quality of the product.

Enjoy your Seamasters. I think they are outstanding and every bit as cool as the submariner.

[nicon]

Because Rolex is now overpriced it doesn't mean it stopped to be Omega rival. Omegas and Rolexes are absolutely comparable in terms of quality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot-82BqVlx0

[Andad]

Originally Posted by JP.

I own two Omega Seamasters and I have owned three (yes THREE) Planet Oceans, one black GMT and one Omega SMP Chronograph. I'm a Omega fan... what a GREAT watch brand! There is a lot of things I don't like about Rolex... but it's very difficult to find anything negative to say about Omega (besides that I find their endless "special editions" very cheesy and gimmicky).

But I always found this Rolex vs Omega comparison a bit stupid as they're in very, very different price category. I don't know the retail price for the new Bonds but you can buy a preowned early Bond Seamasters for around 1.3K while 5/6-digit Subs start from around 5.5-6K.

It's like comparing VW Passat to S-class Mercedes. Not to say that the Passat isn't a good car... it can be more reliable than the Merc... but let's face the reality: Omega and VW will never, ever have the prestige of Rolex or Mercedes. Yet Seamaster has always seen as a "rival to Rolex Submariner".

That being said, I think Omega is much better value for money and the movements are very well made. But that doesn't explain why these brands are seen as "rivals". Volkswagen is not considered a rival of Mercedes, Porsche or Jaguar so why should Omega be a rival to Rolex?

Breguet and IWC are rivals to Rolex, imho. Omega is a rival to TAG Heuer and Breitling.

I hope this doesn't start any negative debate... it's not my intention... let's just discuss this objectively.

Well the Omega Seamaster meets the ISO requirements for a ‘diver’.

The Rolex Submariner doesn’t.

So they really can’t be compared.

[Kigan]

Originally Posted by Jonesy2099

Objectively speaking do you think the Speedmaster is a rival to the Daytona?

If you do not look at the prices of gray dealers, then I believe that some Speedmaster models should compete with Daytona. Speedmaster DSOTM, GSOTM, Racing 44 mm...

[Simon29]

I enjoy both..love my Omega Planet Ocean but am also looking to add a Submariner to my collection at some stage (I looked years ago but the timing was wrong financially..I've come back recently and am now realising how much prices have gone up / availability has gone down)!

[bobernet]

Originally Posted by directioneng

Well the Omega Seamaster meets the ISO requirements for a ‘diver’.

The Rolex Submariner doesn’t.

So they really can’t be compared.

I wasn’t aware that Omega started submitting every single Seamaster produced for testing. You realize that’s the ISO requirement, right?

Both Blancpain (FF) and Rolex (Sub and SD) have been the choice of professional and military dive organizations many times throughout the years. I’m not aware of a single large-scale deployment of Seamasters as official/supplied/recommended dive watches. Are you?

You (I think it’s you) have posted a number of times about your interpretation of the ISO requirement for 60 graduations on the bezel as opposed to the every 5 minutes which seems the more clear reading of the standard, as well as what both Blancpain and Rolex have used for years. Do you have any source that substantiates your interpretation of the standard?

This probably sounds more antagonistic than I mean it. Not intending to argue, but to clarify how much is objective fact versus your personal opinion and interpretation.

[TswaneNguni]

Omega is a great used brand.