Is Rolex THAT much better than Omega?

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Krash

Which models can you get 40%-50% below retail?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure there are if they could sell them that is. Check around, but from the top of my head a gold Speedmaster. I'm not talking about steel Speedmasters or Seamasters. By the way I got 25% discount on a gold Rolex DD, 10% on Air King, and 20% on a Z Blue Milgauss in 2019/2020.

[worldofoyster]

Omega makes great watches, very accurate movement. on the other hand, Rolex has better brand recognition.

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Marcjvr

FWIW I wear my Speedy more than my 2 Rolexes

Yes me too, but I have more Rolex. Maybe because I like Chronographs, but I still wear my Speedmasters more than my Daytona. If you have an older model Speedy try replacing the bracelet with the new one with the extension, and nice tapper. You would wear your Speedy even more.

[6172crew]

Originally Posted by Lesnerelli23

I’m just curious what people here think, design language aside. And I know this gets discussed in other threads but I wanted to start one concise thread about it.

I feel like, usually, resale value dictates how a product is perceived in quality. Most “men’s” Rolex can fetch 100% MSRP or better in used condition. Some may fall to like 80% but even that is WAY better than any other product I can think of.

Omega on the other hand drops around 50% or more. And, one can even find discount on brand new pieces.

The Bond seamasters are just as recognizable to collectors as Rolex models. The Speedmaster has a very high regard. And there are many more Omega pieces with history and prevalence in the community.

So my overall question is, what’s up with that? Isn’t the quality comparable? ETC…

I have a 40mm Speedy Racing and I had a Planet Ocean. Both extremely accurate and had, maybe, better finishing than the Rolexes I have. Very impressive.

What do you all think? Is it just a marketing thing? Is Rolex better for quality and longevity?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My only issue with my planet ocean is how thick it is. Fit it into a 12mm thin case and I would have no complaints. I’m not a watch seller so I’m not really concerned with how much I can make off my watches but it does feel nice knowing it holds value.
Even the speedmaster automatic are too thick.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by OG1982

Omega make great watches and arguably better movements than Rolex. Despite having this opinion, I still prefer Rolex and always will.

There is something special about a Rolex that Omega just doesn't have.

This! To expound further on this point, Omega does have a few models that do have that special sauce. They are the Speedmaster and the Planet Ocean. The main difference in desirability is driven by marketing, in which Rolex invests more time and money.

Kat


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cdmorenot]

I own Omega and Rolex watches and no, Rolex is not that much better than Omega. I actually think Omega makes a better watch but Rolex, as a brand represents so much more. I could go 100% Rolex or Omega and I’d feel fine either way.

[fskywalker]

No


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Dr. Robert]

Omega makes great movements but I am not a fan of their modern watches. Their designs, looks. The classic speedy is my favorite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marcjvr]

Originally Posted by Lesnerelli23

I’m just curious what people here think, design language aside. And I know this gets discussed in other threads but I wanted to start one concise thread about it.

I feel like, usually, resale value dictates how a product is perceived in quality. Most “men’s” Rolex can fetch 100% MSRP or better in used condition. Some may fall to like 80% but even that is WAY better than any other product I can think of.

Omega on the other hand drops around 50% or more. And, one can even find discount on brand new pieces.

The Bond seamasters are just as recognizable to collectors as Rolex models. The Speedmaster has a very high regard. And there are many more Omega pieces with history and prevalence in the community.

So my overall question is, what’s up with that? Isn’t the quality comparable? ETC…

I have a 40mm Speedy Racing and I had a Planet Ocean. Both extremely accurate and had, maybe, better finishing than the Rolexes I have. Very impressive.

What do you all think? Is it just a marketing thing? Is Rolex better for quality and longevity?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In this case Omega was better when it really mattered

[RichardBartlett]

I like the Snoopy but as a brand Omega leaves me stone cold. To the point I'm almost anti Omega..

Yet I haven't got the faintest idea where that came from or indeed why....

[nicon]

No, but Omega made their current models unwearable. Everything except Moonwatch is too thick, too big and too heavy. Quality wise they are very close with some elements better on Omega and some on Rolex side. And Omega has much better brand perception without rappers and new money douches.

[m j b]

Originally Posted by L_S_SHOE

I don’t think we’re defining value in the same way.

To me, value is what I get in return for the money I spend. . . Value is not the same as return on investment or appreciation.

Well said. Also, a lot of folks here are confusing marketing with advertising. The latter is just one component of the former. There's a lot to marketing a product, much more than just ads.

Originally Posted by nicon

No, but Omega made their current models unwearable. Everything except Moonwatch is too thick, too big and too heavy.

Generally I agree, but the Speedmaster 57 is not big nor thick and not heavy.

I would buy one except that I already have a Speedy and I be poor.

And I think some of their dress watches (Constellation?) are also nice and thin and not ridiculously large.

[JoseR]

Originally Posted by CKLinLA

Leaving asides design factors, I view Omegas movements to be generally better.

My sense is that my Omegas are more accurate time keeping wise than my Rolex,

+1.

[samson66]

"That" much better? I'm not sure they are better at all.

Both brands are terrific

And yes it is totally a marketing thing.

[123Blueface]

Both brands are iconic.
Omega makes amazing movements.
Aesthetically, their watches don’t appeal to me, other than the Speedmaster.

[Nodzex]

Originally Posted by Lesnerelli23

I’m just curious what people here think, design language aside. And I know this gets discussed in other threads but I wanted to start one concise thread about it.

I feel like, usually, resale value dictates how a product is perceived in quality. Most “men’s” Rolex can fetch 100% MSRP or better in used condition. Some may fall to like 80% but even that is WAY better than any other product I can think of.

Omega on the other hand drops around 50% or more. And, one can even find discount on brand new pieces.

The Bond seamasters are just as recognizable to collectors as Rolex models. The Speedmaster has a very high regard. And there are many more Omega pieces with history and prevalence in the community.

So my overall question is, what’s up with that? Isn’t the quality comparable? ETC…

I have a 40mm Speedy Racing and I had a Planet Ocean. Both extremely accurate and had, maybe, better finishing than the Rolexes I have. Very impressive.

What do you all think? Is it just a marketing thing? Is Rolex better for quality and longevity?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You ask that question on Rolex forum, really!

[Guppydriver]

Originally Posted by Lesnerelli23

I feel like, usually, resale value dictates how a product is perceived in quality.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think "perceived" might be the key word here. Those who know watches understand that both brands are machine built, mass produced watches built to the same tolerances (mas o menos).

Look at Toyota versus say..... I don't know..... Land Rover. I've been in very high end Range Rovers that use impeccable quality materials that scream luxury. However a base Taco will destroy anything in it's path from a resale standpoint.

Knowing your collection is still worth something, no matter how old, does add satisfaction to most owners, regardless of intent to keep or eventually move on to something different.

[Gearjockey]

Originally Posted by 6172crew

My only issue with my planet ocean is how thick it is. Fit it into a 12mm thin case and I would have no complaints. I’m not a watch seller so I’m not really concerned with how much I can make off my watches but it does feel nice knowing it holds value.
Even the speedmaster automatic are too thick.

Is the SD and DSSD or challenge too thick as well?

[Seddyspaghetti]

No. But i prefer rolex aesthetics way more

[Sublovin]

These are silly arguments and questions. Better?? What does that mean? My iPhone is better at telling time than all of them.
High-end watches are jewelry and the Rolex is better at making people feel perceived value, so yes, it’s better.

[joe100]

They’re two different companies doing their own thing. They can exist together, I promise.

[911991]

Originally Posted by Wingman244

I just flipped my Daytona for a Omega Speedmaster Racing. What I like about the Omega better.
Packaging, presentation box all better with Omega v. Rolex.
Better accuracy. My gosh the Omega 9900 coaxial is just dead on.
Design language such that your can actually read your watch with just a glance.
I want a date! And Omega gives me the choice to buy a chronograph with or without a date.
I see no difference in case finishing - Omega finishes their cases between the lugs so you can actually wear a straight ended strap like the one in the picture.
Omega will sell you a bracelet, a strap or a NATO for your watch - what a concept. They will actually sell you a bracelet from another model if it will fit.
Omega wears much better at 44.25mm case on my 7.5" wrist. No comparison with the Daytona which just flopped from side to side.
Exhibition case back - come on Rolex. It's a mechanical watch - I want to see the movement.
Choice - Omega offers me a lot of choice.
Value - My Speedmaster was 1/5th the grey market price of my Daytona. I'm financially blessed enough to buy a grey market Daytona, but the current market price is hyped way out of reality.
My Daytona was my 3rd Rolex and probably my last, I keep flipping them and getting an Omega.
2 lines of text above and below. 1 line below would have been better. Daytona, my gosh.

I just bought this Apollo 8 Dark Side of the Moon 3 weeks ago. And I agree with pretty much everything said. The watch case is the nicest I seen period. It was also extremely pleasant to feel like you were very appreciated as a customer (non of the put you on a list, buy some jewelry first, rest of the BS going these days) I walked away very happy with my purchase.

This was a hard to get model for a while, and Omega realized it and raised the price by $5k for 2024 (hmm sounds like a Rolex move LOL). I just changed the band to a rubber sport band and love looking at the movement at work through the case back. Funny I have gotten more complements, and can I see that from people than my Rootbeer GMT. I still love Rolex watches but his is a nice change of pace for me

[Lesnerelli23]

Responding to some of the points made:

I agree that the abundance of choices makes Omega seem more gimmicky and diluted in their identity. It’s like going to a restaurant with an 8 page menu vs 1.

It feels like they make a lot of watches that get it 60-80% right. While Rolex, with less offerings nailed most of their designs.

I’m not one who buys based on resale value. When I buy a watch I intend to keep it. That being said, when I bought my 116610 I did find comfort in the fact that if a scenario ever came along where I needed money very quickly, I knew I could get back most of what I paid for it, or more. But, I was really kicked in the pants when I decided my planet ocean wasn’t going to stay. I got back about 1/2 which was really crazy to me because the MSRP had gone up right after I bought it…. I think I sold it for $3k.

Obviously Omega makes a thicker watch than Rolex but on some models, like the Speedy and the PO the lug to lug is much shorter than a Rolex equivalent. The way the lines work on these models, to me, makes the thickness disappear. However, I absolutely despise Omega bracelets. All though I’ve never seen the 321 in person, I can’t think of a single Omega bracelet I actually like. The PO bracelet wrapped my wrist well but I don’t like that it doesn’t taper and I hated the clasp. I have the 40mm Speedy Racing and I sold that bracelet which I had removed the second I opened the package. It was hideous and had no micro adjustments!

Someone mentioned innovation as being stronger for Omega. I’m not terribly convinced about that. My knowledge may be short though. However, Rolex HEV seems more innovative to me, 100m WR on Daytona vs … is it 30 or 50 for the popular Speedys? (Mine is 100m, a major selling factor for me of that model). The glidelock clasp. And, the sky dweller command ring, I can’t remember the exact name (sorry lol). Just to name a few.

The accuracy of Omega movements is a great point. However, that’s a rather recent improvement right? The METAS thing just started a few years back and my PO did basically run +-0. Tudor offers this as well though. Also, we don’t have decades to back these movements up yet. One thing that has deterred me from jumping more into Omega is that it seems like their movements get out of timing over the years much more than Rolex. You can find MANY examples on this forum of 20-30+ year old Rolex running within COSC or better. Is that due to seals keeping the oils in tact better, or tolerances for parts? Or, maybe I’m wrong and don’t have enough experience with older Omega.

Personally I think Omega fits right between Tudor and Rolex with a little overlap into each “tier”.

One last observation. I think Rolex really pulled a cheap move when they went black dials on both the LV and the white gold Subs…. That probably lowered production costs by a lot making just the one dial option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mystro]

Who says TRF is nothing but Rolex fan boys…….?? The old days when an Omega vs Rolex would come up there would be some banned and many left bloody and insulted.

Most of us have evolved to include other brands like Omega, Panerai, AP, etc….just to name a few. It’s a wonderful thing when any given WRUW thread has many brands represented besides Rolex. Sure we all love Rolex and know they are great but owning other brands give us more prospective and knowledge as a WIS.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Nonsense.

He claims to be a watchmaker!

[Re Re]

Originally Posted by Lesnerelli23

Personally I think Omega fits right between Tudor and Rolex with a little overlap into each “tier”.

Tudor is not even close to Rolex and Omega.

[Henrimontgomery]

Back then Omega could do great watches.

Nowadays it’s horrendous straight bracelet from the 2000s, it has the “MASCULINE MAN” vibe across the full line up. Thick, large, straight watches.

There is no subtlety and the brand has become a factory of “editions”. 60 years ago we went on the moon, and you’ll never get to forget it!

[Talon84]

Originally Posted by Lesnerelli23

Someone mentioned innovation as being stronger for Omega. I’m not terribly convinced about that. My knowledge may be short though. However, Rolex HEV seems more innovative to me, 100m WR on Daytona vs … is it 30 or 50 for the popular Speedys? (Mine is 100m, a major selling factor for me of that model). The glidelock clasp. And, the sky dweller command ring, I can’t remember the exact name (sorry lol). Just to name a few.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So…Omega

Coaxial movement
Helped set up METAS
Use of ceramic bezels before Rolex and fully ceramic cases
15000 gauss antimagnetic silicone hairspring
Titanium way before Rolex
Sedna Gold…some really cool tech behind that material
Spirate movement
De ville tourbillon
Omega Chiming watches
Lovely historic pieces off catalogue like the 18 CHRO (google it!)
Legendary movements like the 321 and 1861

Im sure rolex have a list too, but i do think Omega has innovated more with materials, movements and designs….some good, some bad

[Talon84]

.

[jb335]

Originally Posted by Henrimontgomery

Back then Omega could do great watches.

Nowadays it’s horrendous straight bracelet from the 2000s, it has the “MASCULINE MAN” vibe across the full line up. Thick, large, straight watches.

There is no subtlety and the brand has become a factory of “editions”. 60 years ago we went on the moon, and you’ll never get to forget it!

What he said

I like vintage Omega and a standard modern Speedmaster but otherwise, the current catalog (and for 20+ years) has been bad. Overall, poor design and even worse branding.

I


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk