Omega's new Marketing "Master Chronometer" Grade

[DJJon]

Anyone see that Omega is trying to trump COSC by adding 15,000 Gauss exposure to the COSC certification?

They are calling it "The World's First Master Chronometer" grade.

http://www.omegawatches.com/baselwor...n#!globemaster

Rolex just got out-marketed but I am not expecting anyone to consider this to be much of a consideration.

The watches are beautiful as would be expected.

[tkerrmd]

Wouldn't mean anything to me, but thanks for the info!

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by DJJon

Anyone see that Omega is trying to trump COSC by adding 15,000 Gauss exposure to the COSC certification?

They are calling it "The World's First Master Chronometer" grade.

http://www.omegawatches.com/baselwor...n#!globemaster

Rolex just got out-marketed but I am not expecting anyone to consider this to be much of a consideration.

The watches are beautiful as would be expected.

"Huh"

[Dokbrick]

What I have learned as an Omega owner is that no matter how much I like my Omega, I want a Rolex more :p

[GradyPhilpott]

I'm not going to weigh in on the technology, because I don't think it means much in the real world.

However, I have been saying for years that Omega needs to go back to their roots styling-wise and this watch has done just that.

I would consider an Omega watch that was more than just a Rolex wannabe in the styling department.

They don't have to set the world on fire just to be themselves.

P.S.

Looking at the complete line, though, I have to say that except for the Speedy Pro, the watches are either too grandiose (Constellation, Tresor) or completely yawn inducing (just about everything else).

[xjeeunitx]

Omega has stepped up their game. That is for sure. However, there is nothing in their line up that really gets me hyped up. The only watch that I will keep and consider having in my collection is a Speedmaster Professional (moon watch).

[HogwldFLTR]

It's an awfully nice looking watch for certain although I wish it were on a bracelet instead of a strap. Never the less it's very attractive.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by DJJon

Anyone see that Omega is trying to trump COSC by adding 15,000 Gauss exposure to the COSC certification?

They are calling it "The World's First Master Chronometer" grade.

http://www.omegawatches.com/baselwor...n#!globemaster

Rolex just got out-marketed but I am not expecting anyone to consider this to be much of a consideration.

The watches are beautiful as would be expected.

Please elaborate on the purpose of this thread.

Two great sets of watches. Confused as to the point. Please explain.

[Dubarzy]

I really do like the look of the Globemaster. The price just seems too high for what it is. Still, I'd like to see one in person once they hit the stores.

[Syed117]

This belongs in the Omega sub forum.

Originally Posted by Dubarzy

I really do like the look of the Globemaster. The price just seems too high for what it is. Still, I'd like to see one in person once they hit the stores.

I really like it as well.

I think the price is mostly a perception problem. Rolex has the brand recognition and its watches maintain their value.

Omega is moving up and definitely pushing in terms of technology. For a company that produces hundreds of thousands of watches every year they are definitely making advancements in terms of movements. Stricter tolerances on accuracy and master Co axial having an extreme level of anti magnetism are great.

Those things aren't necessary by any means, but it shows a company willing to advance (or at least try) what's on the inside.

I'm a huge Omega fan and I really appreciate that they are willing to try new things when it comes to movement technology. They've stood behind their products as well. I think it's great that Rolex has one upped Omega by now offering five year warranties, but Omega has been offering their four year warranty on Co axial movements for years.

[tomcorkery]

love the blue one. dont think it will pull me away from the op 39 in blue though. Will see when I try them on.

[Scholar]

That's not quite it.

They're developed a certification system for accuracy that is open to all (though because of the antimagnetic requirement rules out non-Omega, for now) but the accuracy requirements are a lot higher than COSC. (This is nothing new. The old Swiss Observatory standard was a lot stricter than COSC. Padi has posted about it quite a bit on this forum; it was ended when Seiko managed to best built-for-competition watches with off the shelf Grand Seiko.)

Unlike COSC, the METAS certification won't be just be for the movement, but the finished watch as well. (Similar to JLC and Seiko's certifications, in that way.)

[psv]

out-marketed?

Omega is all over the place. New models. Old models. Try new colors. New dials. Re-issues galore. Trying polished centers links. Own boutiques to cut down on the heavy discounting (but no one buys an Omega without getting 25% off). Heavy product placement in movies, James Bond, etc. Beating the Speedmaster horse to death over and over again. One can go on and on...

Don't get me wrong, is an important brand with some historical models. They make very good watches. But they will never be Rolex.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

It's an awfully nice looking watch for certain although I wish it were on a bracelet instead of a strap. Never the less it's very attractive.

I'm impressed that they went for an all-brushed bracelet! Omega had a brief phase recently of slapping PCLs on everything.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

It's an awfully nice looking watch for certain although I wish it were on a bracelet instead of a strap. Never the less it's very attractive.

I'm impressed that they went for an all-brushed bracelet! Omega had a brief phase recently of slapping PCLs on everything.

EDIT: Can someone delete my accidental double-post?

[jshepard]

I think the Globemaster looks nice, but master chronometer or not, I'd probably go JLC for a dress watch in that price range. It's tough to beat the history of JLC when it comes to movement manufacture. Plus chances of breaking the watch when dropped on tile floor is probably the same which is probably more likely than forgetting to remove it before if I ever had to undergo an MRI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[improviz]

Originally Posted by psv

out-marketed?

Omega is all over the place. New models. Old models. Try new colors. New dials. Re-issues galore. Trying polished centers links.

Rolex has committed each of these egregious sins repeatedly (blue and black/gold Yachtmasters, Hulk, Smurf, PSLs on Daytona and GMT IIc, Seadweller 4K), but I don't see you complaining about that.

[tcpx]

Love Omega, but I'll take a datejust II please

[breitlings]

Omega and rolex are sort of similar with rolex still being much better to me. Richard Mille is on another level in terms of movements with double barrel high accuracy high shock resistant watches, movements made partially out of grade 5 titanium. When I saw what they were doing the writing was on the wall. Rolex will need to up their game, not to compete with AP Patek or vacheron, but to compete with Richard Mille. I.e. There will need to be some upgrades to the movements of rolex, getting rid of brass and increasing the resistance to shocks and Emf are important steps for rolex in the future. I don't think rolex has to beat omega, it's Richard Mille they have to beat, not on the outside but the inside.

[ndsleep612]

"Master" advertising, "Master" paid product placement, "Master" too much generic product line. "Master".....

[capote]

Yes Omega is tailormaking a certificate for their own watches, I don't expect this to catch on to other manufacturers. The Globemaster is good looking enough, but the whole watch world suffer from chronic nostalgia these days.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by breitlings

Omega and rolex are sort of similar with rolex still being much better to me. Richard Mille is on another level in terms of movements with double barrel high accuracy high shock resistant watches, movements made partially out of grade 5 titanium. When I saw what they were doing the writing was on the wall. Rolex will need to up their game, not to compete with AP Patek or vacheron, but to compete with Richard Mille. I.e. There will need to be some upgrades to the movements of rolex, getting rid of brass and increasing the resistance to shocks and Emf are important steps for rolex in the future. I don't think rolex has to beat omega, it's Richard Mille they have to beat, not on the outside but the inside.

No, it isn't. This is like saying Airbus needs to compete with Solar Impulse. Completely different things.

[Cabaiguan]

I love these bash Omega threads...

[hchj]

I like omega watches especially the planet ocean series. I think Omega is trying very hard to set a new standard and wants to be seen as an innovative company. Competition is good for consumers...

[Syed117]

A somewhat frustrating aspect of many members of the Rolex fanbase are the hypocritical views when any other brand (especially Omega) does something that Rolex has been guilty of for years. Or if they are trying to make tangible improvements in any aspect of their watches. Those improvements are downplayed. Yet, when Rolex attempts the same, it's the next great innovation. I respect and appreciate Rolex as much as any sane person would, but the whole "drinking the kool aid" phenomenon is too true.

People have an issue with them labeling these new co-axial movements with the word "master". Yes, it's marketing nonsense and the dial would look cleaner with less text, but those same people have no issue with the obscene amount of text that Rolex puts on their dials. "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified". At least "master" is a brand marketing name to differentiate those movements from standard co-axial movements. The words Rolex puts on their dials are superfluous nonsense. It's great that Omega is creating a new standard that is higher than the previous one. If all their new movements will be resistant to 15,000 gauss, that's a great thing despite any amount of argument that watches don't get magnetized often.

If Omega is pushing for their movements to be held at at even higher standard of precision, only someone extremely biased would try to downplay that. How is that possibly a bad thing? Even Rolex is pushing for more accurate timekeeping with the new 3255.

Like I said earlier, the same applies to warranties and service intervals. Omega held up the co-axial escapement as a breakthrough in terms of durability. We don't really know how they will hold up in the long term, but they stood by that innovation with a four year warranty. It's been offered for years. They also said that service intervals would be longer. That's great news for consumers. Yet, the detractors went on and on about how warranty doesn't matter and service intervals don't really matter because Rolex hadn't followed suit. Now they have and it's now a big deal.

It's fantastic that these companies are willing improve watch technology and they should all be praised when doing things that benefit consumers. Not just Rolex.

[improviz]

Originally Posted by ndsleep612

"Master" advertising, "Master" paid product placement, "Master" too much generic product line. "Master".....

Are you aware that Rolex spends far more on advertising (paid product placement is another form of this, and was neither pioneered by nor exclusively used by Omega; BMW did it in the Bond movies as well, does this mean they are a bad car?) than any other watch manufacturer, and has now for 15 years running?

For 2014 Omega was third at $34.49M, well behind Rolex which spent 63% more on advertising than Omega ($56.37M, plus another $12M for Tudor) with Breitling ($45.12M) in second place:
http://www.watchtime.com/wristwatch-industry-news/industry/what-watches-spent-the-most-on-advertising-in-2014/

[psv]

We complain plenty about Rolex. But this thread was about Omega. On a Rolex forum. Go figure. Try singing the praise of Opel, and how hard they are trying, on a BMW or Mercedes forum. Or go to a Real Madrid forum and say that Atletico Madrid is better.

[ndsleep612]

I'm aware of the marketing costs. I'm not bias against omega, just that they ruined the dials on their new product line with "master" on it. The Aqua terra line is great, except now it said "master" on the dials.

Originally Posted by improviz

Are you aware that Rolex spends far more on advertising (paid product placement is another form of this, and was neither pioneered by nor exclusively used by Omega; BMW did it in the Bond movies as well, does this mean they are a bad car?) than any other watch manufacturer, and has now for 15 years running?

For 2014 Omega was third at $34.49M, well behind Rolex which spent 63% more on advertising than Omega ($56.37M, plus another $12M for Tudor) with Breitling ($45.12M) in second place:
http://www.watchtime.com/wristwatch-industry-news/industry/what-watches-spent-the-most-on-advertising-in-2014/

[improviz]

Originally Posted by psv

We complain plenty about Rolex. But this thread was about Omega. On a Rolex forum. Go figure. Try singing the praise of Opel, and how hard they are trying, on a BMW or Mercedes forum. Or go to a Real Madrid forum and say that Atletico Madrid is better.

It's an Omega forum that is on the site Rolex Forums. Are you insinuating that people should not, in an Omega forum, say nice things about Omega?

[improviz]

Originally Posted by ndsleep612

I'm aware of the marketing costs. I'm not bias against omega, just that they ruined the dials on their new product line with "master" on it. The Aqua terra line is great, except now it said "master" on the dials.

OK so if you're aware of the marketing costs, why insinuate that advertising and product placement are bad things as you did in the post to which I was responding?

Also as someone else pointed out: why is Omega putting "Master Chronometer" on their dials worse than Rolex putting "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified" on theirs?