Omega Planet Ocean Liquidmetal vs Rolex Submariner, what holds better value?

[nikolani]

My first post
on this great forum. So much good quality info and help from experienced owners it is just incredible!

I have been wanting to buy a Sub for some time now, but when I saw the PO Liquidmetal must say that my heart crossed to Omega. The only question I have for more experienced watch people is related to the potential resale price of PO LM in the future.

Rolexes are well known for holding the best value over time. Omegas not so much, from what I could see the standard PO's loose upto 50% of value in 2 years time. As I dont like wasting my money too much I discarded Omega easily.

But what I dont know is how will the Limited Edition factor of PO Liquidmetal influence the resale price? In theory limited eds should loose less value in time, but on the other hand it is not as limited as the word may imply with 2000 pieces to be produced. The second factor where I am in the dark, first liquidmetal watch in the world factor...

So, if there are some good souls out there experienced in valuation, I would be very gratefull for argumented estimate of how much % value the PO LM is likely to hold in lets say 5 yrs time...

Offcourse I understand noone has the crystal ball to see the exact future so am looking fwd to hearing your views.

Thanks in advance!

[bcacncnc]

For the LM, I think there is good demand for it so I would guess that it would hold its value well. Having said that, who knows if/when the "new" PO is released which may eat into the LM's niche?

[Tunacan26]

Not an expert, but my limited knowledge tells me that with the great majority of Omega and Rolex watches, Rolex ALWAYS has better resale. An example, Alanfurman only takes Rolex's in trade.

[Zirotti]

Buy either pre-owned and save a boatload.

[improviz]

Why? Three reasons:

1. Historically, Rolex does exactly that, particularly the SS models;

2. While it's true that the LMPO is a limited-production piece, the number is still high enough to, at least short-term, prevent it from obtaining any sort of collector status (most limited-edition pieces with that many pieces sell for marginally more than their non-limited-edition counterparts).

But this one is different, you say; it's got the LiquidMetal, yes?

Yes. But this leads into my third point:

3. While it's true that it, to now, is the only Omega to feature the LM bezel and face, from what I've read future pieces will be adapting this technology (I seem to recall that the next-gen PO will have it), which will eliminate the scarcity of the piece.

Now, one thing that might work in its favor, long-term, is if they discontinue the 42mm PO. In this case, they'd be the only 42mm LM pieces out there, which would be a strike in their favor, particularly in the long-term (assuming they never bring it back). Similarly, if this is the only run they ever do with LM dials, that would help.

Short-term, difficult to say, it's an unknown quantity....frankly, though, these aren't investments, and if you're concerned about getting back all/most of what you paid, don't get a new one, get a gently-used one and you'll be fine with either brand.

[Flash Gordon]

You know any answer is pure speculation, right? LM is such a new model and the Sub is an old one. It's like comparing apples and oranges.

[Welshwatchman]

My guess is that the specific model Omega will be worth 70% of the current MRSP in 5 years time.

There you go.

[Wisconsin Proud]

It depends if the potential buyer considers the LM's increased price to be worth the difference in look than th standard PO. A substantial price difference may have buyers looking at the regular PO instead.

Similarly, when the Rolex ceramic sub completely replaces the regular sub, will people want to pay the extra $1000-1500 for it or will demand for the previous sub increase because of the extra cost.

The LM PO is a nice piece but I don't think the price will stay up with a similarly priced Sub but should do better than the standard PO.

[Tunacan26]

I know nothing -- Oh, wait -- I know ONE thing -- Rolex in 99.9 percent of cases holds its value better than Omega.

[NMS75]

Rolex certainly keep their value better than Omega. Everyone knows what a Rolex is but not everyone knows what an Omega is - all thanks to Rolex's clever marketing!

So if you want to buy a watch as an investment buy Rolex! However, if you prefer the Omega to the Rolex I'd go for the one you prefer as you will enjoy wearing it more. That said, if you prefer the Rolex then even better for you.

As for POs losing 50% of their value in 2 years that is complete rubbish! I sold a 2 year old Omega Seamaster PO recently and I certianly did not lose 50% of its orginal cost price!

M

[wboro4]

Rolex usually keeps their value better than omega, but that omega is a sharp watch for the money

[Speed]

Rolex Sub / hands down.

I am falling back in love with Omega though. Speedy is on my wrist as I type this!

[esm]

Sub 100%.

was offered a PO LM at my AD while trying on the Sub-C, and looked at it, didnt tickle my fancy (since i have an Orangy already), so they sold it to the other customer .

apparently, they have no problem selling it now (like hot cakes)... but how muct re-sale value it will have in 12 months time will be a mystery

i have a feeling it'd go down the same track as other Omega limited number/production models

[zippaul]

It only matters if you intend to sell it. If you get easily bored with a particular style watch or are a "flipper" then the Rolex will retain value better than Omega. If you are a buy and never intend to sell type then I would go for whichever timepiece makes you happy now and not be concerned about perceived value. Both are beauties, good luck.

[rfknauss]

Rolex Submariner.
And welcome to TRF!

[31jewelscom]

If I had to choose 1 watch based on looks and feel it is the PO all the way. If I wanted one based on resale value it has to be the Sub. Of course I have both so that was easy.

[esm]

Originally Posted by 31jewelscom

If I had to choose 1 watch based on looks and feel it is the PO all the way. If I wanted one based on resale value it has to be the Sub. Of course I have both so that was easy.

aint that the truth Austin

[Subdialler]

Hi there and good question(s).

I think you already know the answers, and that's probably why you're asking!

The whole world can be flipped on it's head by sentiment or something happening, so I'm suggesting 'buy what makes you happy'. Try not to buy a watch to retain your investment, although it does make you happier thinking you've put your money on a safe bet!!

Look at prices historically as this is better than trying to look forward.

Have fun with whatever you buy!!

[Steve260]

One other consideration...

What happens when you need to have either watch repaired or serviced? I know I DREAD the day my Omega watches will need serviced. Sending a watch to Swatch for service is pretty much like going to Las Vegas and just rolling the dice. Might make things better, might make things worse, and it's anyone's guess how long it may take...
On the other hand, I NEVER worry about repair or servicing on my Rolex watches. RSCs seem to get things done right and reasonably quickly, 99.999% of the time. Very few complaints.

So, resale is one thing; cost of ownership/maintenance is another. And ALL mechanical watches will eventually need maintenance - it's just part of the deal.

I know Omega is trying hard to compete head-to-head with Rolex, but until Omega gets a quality/reliability service network in place that is comparable to Rolex Service Centers, it just ain't gonna happen, IMHO.

Yes, Rolex has historically had better resale value than any other watch (except perhaps Patek?) And the new Omega Liquid Metal PO is a very nice piece! Just suggesting that the respective brand's service networks might factor in to your choice.

Maybe consider Fr. John's experience - he has a (gorgeous) LM-PO as well as other Omegas and Rolexes, and I think he's been happy with both brands. Of course, I also think he has a good Omega watchmaker he uses for Omega service, instead of the Swatch centers?

Good luck with your choice!

Steve

[Frogman4me]

I never seen a used Liquid metal PO for sale yet, they are limited to under 1900 pieces. I tried one on for the first time at the Omega Boutique in NYC and was stunned by its beauty. I was wearing my GMTII C so I had a chance to compare the ceramics and to be honest the liquid metal dial and bezel was very tasteful and understated compared to the GMT's busy ceramic bezel. I guess a better compare would be the Sub C vs LM PO. I have yet to see a Sub C, but historically the Sub holds value like no other.

[ralpie]

Looks like the Omega actually won this one! 5 years later and LM LEs are still going at just around original retail of $5800. Pretty impressive considering you can get nearly all of the features of that watch in the standard 8500 PO or even more in the LM titanium PO.

A rare case where Omega beat out Rolex on resale value.

Anybody think it might happen again with DSOTM vs Daytona? I think DSOTM is beautiful, but slightly too large to have real mass appeal.

[xjeeunitx]

However, the PO 8500s sure have lost their values. You can buy one for $3600-$3800 used now. MSRP is $6200. It makes so much sense to buy watches pre-owned these days. Unless you like losing money...

[improviz]

In the four years since I first voted "no" in this thread, two things of happened: the first is, I have purchased one, and the second is I am happy to report I have been proven wrong!

[SUPERDOC]

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

My guess is that the specific model Omega will be worth 70% of the current MRSP in 5 years time.

There you go.

wow... hell of a thread... like a time capsule...

Amazing what Omega has done in the last 5 yrs...

Who'd of thunk it? A Modern Omega commanding MORE than its original MSRP...

This was the first watch for which I had ever paid Full MSRP!

even if it had depreciated, I'd have no regrets...

[Urosfan]

Submariner hands down

[ralpie]

It really is incredible! I would've been on the wrong side of history with this one had I voted. I think the LM LE was the beginning of this Omega renaissance.

[ralpie]

Originally Posted by xjeeunitx

However, the PO 8500s sure have lost their values. You can buy one for $3600-$3800 used now. MSRP is $6200. It makes so much sense to buy watches pre-owned these days. Unless you like losing money...

Agreed, but this watch specifically is what the OP was considering.

[rokosh]

Omega makes great watches period.
What doesn't make any sense to me is why they need to revise their designs annually.
For instance, I picked up an all-gold 2500 PO- a gorgeous watch which I'm wearing now as I tap this.
Within a year, Omega in it's wisdom, released an updated version of the PO, decimating any resale value of the 2500.
Thankfully I never intended to sell the PO, it was a keeper. And in any case, gold/PM's never retain value in any brand.
But assuming I had an SS PO and decided to flip, I would really have lost out.

Now had I picked up a GMTII and later decided to sell?
Jus' sayin'...

Anyway, recently picked up a 45th anniversary Moonwatch- amazing watch, can gaze at it for hours.
Production supposedly limited to 1969 units.
Heh, wonder what Omega feels about that next year!

[flw]

Originally Posted by rokosh

Omega makes great watches period.
What doesn't make any sense to me is why they need to revise their designs annually.
For instance, I picked up an all-gold 2500 PO- a gorgeous watch which I'm wearing now as I tap this.
Within a year, Omega in it's wisdom, released an updated version of the PO, decimating any resale value of the 2500.
Thankfully I never intended to sell the PO, it was a keeper. And in any case, gold/PM's never retain value in any brand.
But assuming I had an SS PO and decided to flip, I would really have lost out.

Now had I picked up a GMTII and later decided to sell?
Jus' sayin'...

Anyway, recently picked up a 45th anniversary Moonwatch- amazing watch, can gaze at it for hours.
Production supposedly limited to 1969 units.
Heh, wonder what Omega feels about that next year!

Interesting point. It hadn't occurred to me that Omega's practice of upgrading their models so often would actually drive their resale values down ... But it makes sense. Perhaps Omega shouldn't take the business model of the auto companies ... But it can't be denied that they have had incredible success over the last decade or so, and their new-stock sales have soared. Omega and Rolex have very different philosophies, I think ... But that's part of what makes me want to own both.