Price v Value

[Stitch]

Hi All

I've been browsing for a while and I'm having trouble choosing between an Omega and Rolex.

The obvious watches I have been looking at are the Planet Ocean 42mm and the Sub date (I'd be after the new sub).

Part of my dithering relates to the price differentail but more so the "value" of both watches. Is the Rolex actually £2k (uk sterling) "better" than the Omega?

I will keep the watch (and hopefully pass it on) so not overley concerned about re-sale (I wear a Tag daily which i've had for 17 years - 18th B'day present).

I've read lots of the threads about the internals and I'm trying to understand if the Rolex's£2k premium over the Omega is justified.

Thanks

[MURRAY]

Stitch...in 20 years you'll be 55.....you won't remember where that 2lbs wound up being spent along the way any way....do you want to be questioning yourself that you bought the right one? Buy the Rolex......I guarantee you bill be happy you did...as I am sure many of our others TRFers will attest....

[Stitch]

Thanks for the reply. The older i get the tighter I get so £4.6K compared to £2.3k seems like a lot of spare cash!

I like the look of both watches - the new sub probably edges ahead of the current PO though.

Originally Posted by MURRAY

Stitch...in 20 years you'll be 55.....you won't remember where that 2lbs wound up being spent along the way any way....do you want to be questioning yourself that you bought the right one? Buy the Rolex......I guarantee you bill be happy you did...as I am sure many of our others TRFers will attest....

[Joey_V]

Answer for me is yes, it is worth it.

The Sub is the classic, the PO is nice but is not in the same league regardless of the comparisons the Omega-fans make. It used to be that the PO had a better bracelet, clasp but with the new Sub, that's no longer the case. The new Sub has an equally well made bracelet and a better clasp. The case/bezel on the Sub is made of more "exotic" materials but you'll hear Omega-fans say that it's not "tool enough" or something along those lines.

I'd pick my 16610 over a PO and I sure as heck would pick the SubC over the PO.

I've had a PO before - actually 3 of them. 2 had to be returned for defects, btw. It's not as bulletproof as it seems.

[Tools]

Omega and Rolex are different companies with different pricing structures and different marketing strategies...they cannot truly be compared so simply as "a 2k k premium"

Omega can be found all day long at 30% off......so, for value, that is the starting point and what the value is when you walk out the door.....and it drops even more with each step you take...

Rolex does not take quite so much a hit, and usually after 5 years or so, it is right back to the appproximate purchase price...

They are both fine watches, and Omega is trying hard to make Rolex their competitor...but it really isn't - it's just that they are favorites to "compare" against..

Bottom line... The biggest reason to buy a Rolex is because you want a Rolex on your wrist, even though it's reputation is well deserved..

Anybody who thinks the price difference isn't worth it...they should get the Omega....... It too is a fine watch..

[ArcticMoose]

I tried to solve the same equation, and the answer I came up with was "definitely not". (And I was choosing between the new blue TT Sub and a blue Seamaster, so the price difference was even greater.) There were even a lot of things l liked better about the Seamaster, but there was just something about the Sub. I ended up buying it, and I'm sure it was the right decision, I just can justify it logically.

[Stitch]

Interesting you mention the clasp as that's the one thing on the PO I thought was a poor design (the two push pins). The Sub (and even my Tag) has the clasp lock for added security.

I popped into the AD a few days ago - they are expecting the new sub date in sometime during July/Aug. Numbers etc to be determind.

May pop back in and put my name down.

Originally Posted by Joey_V

Answer for me is yes, it is worth it.

The Sub is the classic, the PO is nice but is not in the same league regardless of the comparisons the Omega-fans make. It used to be that the PO had a better bracelet, clasp but with the new Sub, that's no longer the case. The new Sub has an equally well made bracelet and a better clasp. The case/bezel on the Sub is made of more "exotic" materials but you'll hear Omega-fans say that it's not "tool enough" or something along those lines.

I'd pick my 16610 over a PO and I sure as heck would pick the SubC over the PO.

I've had a PO before - actually 3 of them. 2 had to be returned for defects, btw. It's not as bulletproof as it seems.

[icnbne]

is it 2k better? mechanically, no, in some ways the PO will even be superior..
but emotionally, the two watches cant be compared..

[larsr]

To fully evaluate the "value" question you need to consider the re-sale value of each brand. I would imagine, though I have never studied it, the right Rolex will depreciate far less than the right Omega.

But if you are really worried about value... buy in the secondary market.

Finally, the real answer on value is personal. Which watch makes you smile more. That is the one that gives YOU the most value.

[Stitch]

That's interesting. That's what I'm trying to understand. Is the Rolex movement inferior to the PO then?

Originally Posted by children

is it 2k better? mechanically, no, in some ways the PO will even be superior..
but emotionally, the two watches cant be compared..

[zippaul]

Here is my take on it...I used to own the Omega Planet Ocean 42MM with orange numerals at the 12, 6, and 9. It was a nice timepiece but there were a few things I wasn't crazy about. The physical height of the watch is around 15mm which made it difficult to slide under cuffs. I wear suits to work. I wasn't crazy about the matte black face as opposed to a deeper black and I wasn't a fan of the HRV (Helium Release Valve) at about the two o:clock position. The bracelet while comfortable seemed to scratch rather easily, especially around the clasp area. The fit and finish was excellent in either case and no manufacturer in my opinion can match the artwork on the back of the PO, just gorgeous. When I first purchased the PO I bought it based on what I had seen on Omega's website which isn't the best move. I should have seen it in person before I ordered it. I was in the same spot where I was trying to avoid paying what I thought was a premium for owning a Rolex. The entire Omega line I would argue is tough to beat when it comes to simple (dollar) value. Comparing dollars and cents isn't always the best way to make a purchase. I now own the Rolex Submariner 16610LV and I love it. I also purchased a black bezel insert to interchange when I am in the mood to do so. The reasons I listed above for basically getting rid of the Omega were the reasons to own the Rolex for me. The quality is spectacular. The bracelet is made of 904L stainless steel which might not mean much to most people and I am sure the 316 stainless will hold up the same but to my eyes the 904L looks whiter and brighter which I like. The bracelet also doesn't seem to scratch like the PO. It is much easier for me to read the time on the Sub as opposed to the PO. The reason is that up close I need reading glasses and the higher contrast of the deeper black and the maxi dial and white hands of the Rolex is easier to see than that of the matte black of the PO. The lume is good on the Rolex, the lume on the Omega is great. Not sure why. They both seem even to me as far as time accuracy but the Rolex's reserve power seems much better. I know I have thrown a bunch of stuff out there but I figure if it helps you then great. Good luck and I am sure you will love either.

[icnbne]

Originally Posted by Stitch

That's interesting. That's what I'm trying to understand. Is the Rolex movement inferior to the PO then?

the movement is superior in the Rolex imo, but bracelet and clasp has been constantly better in the Omegas (this ma change with the newer Subs though..) and the Lume is always better in the Seamasters..

[Stitch]

I would agree with your resale comment. I would like to understand which is superior mechanicaly, as mentioned by the earlier posts.

I've had my money's worth from the Tag so just fancy something new. My brother has a Omega's and they have been faultless.

Originally Posted by larsr

To fully evaluate the "value" question you need to consider the re-sale value of each brand. I would imagine, though I have never studied it, the right Rolex will depreciate far less than the right Omega.

But if you are really worried about value... buy in the secondary market.

Finally, the real answer on value is personal. Which watch makes you smile more. That is the one that gives YOU the most value.

[Stitch]

That's actually very helpful!
Thanks

Originally Posted by zippaul

Here is my take on it...I used to own the Omega Planet Ocean 42MM with orange numerals at the 12, 6, and 9. It was a nice timepiece but there were a few things I wasn't crazy about. The physical height of the watch is around 15mm which made it difficult to slide under cuffs. I wear suits to work. I wasn't crazy about the matte black face as opposed to a deeper black and I wasn't a fan of the HRV (Helium Release Valve) at about the two o:clock position. The bracelet while comfortable seemed to scratch rather easily, especially around the clasp area. The fit and finish was excellent in either case and no manufacturer in my opinion can match the artwork on the back of the PO, just gorgeous. When I first purchased the PO I bought it based on what I had seen on Omega's website which isn't the best move. I should have seen it in person before I ordered it. I was in the same spot where I was trying to avoid paying what I thought was a premium for owning a Rolex. The entire Omega line I would argue is tough to beat when it comes to simple (dollar) value. Comparing dollars and cents isn't always the best way to make a purchase. I now own the Rolex Submariner 16610LV and I love it. I also purchased a black bezel insert to interchange when I am in the mood to do so. The reasons I listed above for basically getting rid of the Omega were the reasons to own the Rolex for me. The quality is spectacular. The bracelet is made of 904L stainless steel which might not mean much to most people and I am sure the 316 stainless will hold up the same but to my eyes the 904L looks whiter and brighter which I like. The bracelet also doesn't seem to scratch like the PO. It is much easier for me to read the time on the Sub as opposed to the PO. The reason is that up close I need reading glasses and the higher contrast of the deeper black and the maxi dial and white hands of the Rolex is easier to see than that of the matte black of the PO. The lume is good on the Rolex, the lume on the Omega is great. Not sure why. They both seem even to me as far as time accuracy but the Rolex's reserve power seems much better. I know I have thrown a bunch of stuff out there but I figure if it helps you then great. Good luck and I am sure you will love either.

[ersnyder]

I'm not really sure the difference between Rolex and any other quality brand/model is actually "worth" it. The only thing that makes a Rolex "worth" it is if you like the design of the watch and the cache Rolex brings to the mechanism. If you don't, I really don't know why you would spend all the extra dough!

[zippaul]

The area I did not touch on because I am no expert is the inner working (guts) of the two watches you are looking at. The Omega uses the CO-Axial 2500C I believe. It is supplied by ETA and heavily modified by Omega. Omega and ETA are owned by the Swatch Group, so I would consider it an "in family" movement. The beats are I think 25500 which is different from most, not worse, just different. The Rolex uses the 3150 and is made and was developed in house at Rolex. The beats are I think are 28800. What does this all mean? I'm not sure at all. In fact I am not sure which is better and what better really means. The one thing I do know and it is really all you have to know is that the movement in the Rolex Sub has been around a long time and has proven it's robustness and reliability. That was good enough for me. The CO-Axial has been around but just a short time now so the jury is still out.

[rkammer]

Back to the classic question and I don't think it has a set answer. The Omega people answer it one way, and the Rolex people answer it another way.

I won't attempt to give you a set answer but rather my insight on the issue. I own an Omega Seamaster, an Omega Speedmaster Professional, and a Rolex Sea Dweller. I love them all in addition to my other dive watches (mostly Seiko). But, I could never have justified the cost of the Rolex purely from a cost/value standpoint. I actually sold a collectible vintage watch in order to buy my Rolex or, I never would have spend that kind of money for it. But, that's me.

Having said all that, I will never own more than one Rolex watch because of the cost factor. I will, however, own other watches that are, in my opinion, just as desirable to me because of their cost/value factors.

So, in the end, you must decide, not based on cost alone, if you are the kind of person who will be sufficiently proud to own a Rolex and then pay the cost to satisfy that desire. If, however, it grates on you to spend that much just for the Rolex name, you probably should stay with the Omegas.

I hope I've shed some light on your question as opposed to muddying the waters for you. Good luck with your decision either way.

[Roxas]

Omega isn't in the same league as Rolex. Actually, I think it's only the brand value that makes the prices so different.

[Stitch]

Lots to think about. I'll wait to see what the new sub looks like in the flesh.

[Joey_V]

Originally Posted by Stitch

Lots to think about. I'll wait to see what the new sub looks like in the flesh.

I wouldn't hang my hat on the argument that the PO has a superior movement. It doesn't have the 8500 movement, it's just a modified ETA with a coaxial modification.

Plus, my first PO had a busted movement from the getgo AND the one I saw in the AD case had a non-functioning movement! What are the chances of 2 broken movements in the same AD??

[Stitch]

Thanks.

That's the crux - is the £2k a brand/marketing thing (compared to Omega).

Decisions decesions.

Originally Posted by rkammer

Back to the classic question and I don't think it has a set answer. The Omega people answer it one way, and the Rolex people answer it another way.

I won't attempt to give you a set answer but rather my insight on the issue. I own an Omega Seamaster, an Omega Speedmaster Professional, and a Rolex Sea Dweller. I love them all in addition to my other dive watches (mostly Seiko). But, I could never have justified the cost of the Rolex purely from a cost/value standpoint. I actually sold a collectible vintage watch in order to buy my Rolex or, I never would have spend that kind of money for it. But, that's me.

Having said all that, I will never own more than one Rolex watch because of the cost factor. I will, however, own other watches that are, in my opinion, just as desirable to me because of their cost/value factors.

So, in the end, you must decide, not based on cost alone, if you are the kind of person who will be sufficiently proud to own a Rolex and then pay the cost to satisfy that desire. If, however, it grates on you to spend that much just for the Rolex name, you probably should stay with the Omegas.

I hope I've shed some light on your question as opposed to muddying the waters for you. Good luck with your decision either way.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by tools

omega and rolex are different companies with different pricing structures and different marketing strategies...they cannot truly be compared so simply as "a 2k k premium"

omega can be found all day long at 30% off......so, for value, that is the starting point and what the value is when you walk out the door.....and it drops even more with each step you take...

Rolex does not take quite so much a hit, and usually after 5 years or so, it is right back to the appproximate purchase price...

They are both fine watches, and omega is trying hard to make rolex their competitor...but it really isn't - it's just that they are favorites to "compare" against..

Bottom line... The biggest reason to buy a rolex is because you want a rolex on your wrist, even though it's reputation is well deserved..

Anybody who thinks the price difference isn't worth it...they should get the omega....... It too is a fine watch..

x2

[pitbull03]

If you're actually entertaining the idea of a Rolex, go ahead and buy the Rolex.

If they were the same cost, which would you buy?

Going cheap now will only cost you more in the long run, when you put the Omega in the drawer and buy the Rolex anyway. Ask me how I know. ;)

[Stitch]

I guess the one question I can answer is "what would I get if the two watches were the same price". Answer if the Rolex.

[Fozzy]

I loved the look of the Sub date 16610 for years and promised myself one at some stage, but tbh I did find my mind wandering towards a 45mm PO, there are so many happy owners of that watch who testify to it's quality. The price v value argument was beginning to win me over in favour of the Omega.

At this stage I hadn't tried on either watches in person, I was basing my choices on the countless reviews and comparisons out there on the web, there are many to read as i'm sure you know. I have no local ADs in my town that stock these watches, so I travelled the 30 miles to my nearest AD to try them on.

In my mind I was going there to buy the 45mm PO, anyway they hadn't a 45mm PO in stock, but I tried the 42mm and the 45mm chrono PO on, and yes they were really fine time pieces.

I asked the sales woman if I could try on a Submariner, she brought me out a 16610 Submariner.

When I tried on that Submariner it was as if a long lost friend had returned home, it was mean't to be there, it's really hard to put into words. I was seriously for buying the PO at almost half the money, but came home with the Submariner.

I would be prone to buyers remorse with items costing as much as this. I never had it with this, I still love the watch as much as the first day I bought it.

So I think I think the watch is worth every penny, I do think I would have had buyers remorse buying the PO, knowing what I could have had.

[Stitch]

That is soo spokkey. I was tying my previos post as you replied.!

Originally Posted by pitbull03

If you're actually entertaining the idea of a Rolex, go ahead and buy the Rolex.

If they were the same cost, which would you buy?

Going cheap now will only cost you more in the long run, when you put the Omega in the drawer and buy the Rolex anyway. Ask my how I know. ;)

[Bon Temps]

Stop thinking and buy the Rolex. You will it!

[Stitch]

Lol

Just noticed this thread on the Omega forum. I'd better go and get my popcorn
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=111805

[Stitch]

Thanks for all the replies guys - much appreciated.

[Howie]

In the end, all watches tell the same time - it's how the watch makes you feel, and that's a very intangible value. Try them both on, the one that smiles at you the most is the one you should acquire.