Rolex = Omega (While Being a Better Value)?

[youinthehat]

I know this has been beaten to death.

And I know i'll probably get slaughtered for this topic but I genuinally curious. Well curious for the month of April 2014 because Im sure there are a multitude of topics spanning throughout the years.

So im a sub lover. Have on myself. Adore it.

I also am interested in eventually getting a PO. The thing I see alot is that Omega is just a better bang for the buck watch. The 8500, according to alot of people, have almost an advantage in every category. They say its "technologically state of the art" while the Rolex is still using the bread and butter.

With that being said, why would someone want a rolex then? I know some of the reasons would be heritage and icon but at the same time, a reason that frequently pops up is "for the name." Im sure there is some truth to it, but tbh, it makes Rolex owners sound extremely vain. Do we really purchase Rolex just because we can say we wear a Rolex? When there is a company like Omega that produced a state of the art movement with quite a number of technological advances that is almost half the price?

Many people would say "I like the PO8500 but its just too thick." Well Omega showed off the Seamaster 300M with Master Co-Axial which is based off of the 8500 and its quite a bit thinner than the 8500. This just goes to show that eventually, the 8500 will be come as thin as the Rolex movements. What would be the excuse then?

I don't know. I guess the constant "why would you buy a rolex when an omega is better in everyway, including cost" is starting to nag me.

Actually no , I would never give up my sub but still, just curious on ya'lls opinion.