Tudor vs Omega (in 2021)

[liberalclown]

First BB Chrono against new Speedy
Then Gold BB58 against Bronze Gold Seamaster 300
Now Black Black BB Metas against Black Black Seamaster Pro Metas

Very similar releases this year in very similar price points. Omega released them first but I wonder who "get inspired" from whom? Is it Tudor targeting Omega's market or Omega trying to grab Tudor's mostly younger customer demographic's attention?

[Explorer2polar]

I like Tudor but Omega wins this race easy. No competition.

[motiontimers]

Originally Posted by Explorer2polar

I like Tudor but Omega wins this race easy. No competition.

+1

[Richie07]

Omega by a mile. Tudor don't have the heritage or cultural significance of Omega. Omega also are technically superior to Tudor with better finishes and a broader product line.

Omega only come up short in people's eyes due to the Rolex juggernaut. It's a simple as that. If Rolex didn't exist, Omega would be the king of the sport watch world.

[spacebjorn]

The fact that you think Tudor can stand toe-to-toe with Omega competing for the same customer segment tells how badly Omega has fallen from their spot on a marketing standpoint.

If it weren't for the Rolex-sister company branding behind Tudor would you even care for watches like the BB chrono?? The new speedy is completely on another level if you ask me. It's moons apart.

[superspectral]

IMHO Tudor has a way to go to compete with Omega on style and quality. For the most part, Tudor undercuts Omega on price. Will Tudor catch up in 5 years - not entirely, I think. But they will overlap more with Omega.

Rolex has a very cohesive set of watch model segments. Omega kind of tries but there are a whole lot of Speedmasters and especially Seamasters that really are hardly cousins. Omega could be trying to do a better job of filling in the void Rolex has by promoting themselves as the "celebration watch for the guy who made it" - as it seems like Rolex is either going for the bitcoin or the Patek crowd.

[CAOrthopod90]

IMO, clearly Omega is the superior brand name to Tudor and I bet that general public recognition data (if there were any) would support that. Omega has a rich history as a watch brand and makes quality watches that I believe are equivalent to Rolex. However, their issue has always been overproduction both in number of individual units and the number of models, hence no scarcity. As someone else mentioned Omega has the opportunity to really take the cake as the "I made it" career milestone/status watch with Rolex's current production numbers but they really have to step their game up with marketing.

Tudor is just "poor man's" Rolex in my mind.

Originally Posted by superspectral

Omega could be trying to do a better job of filling in the void Rolex has by promoting themselves as the "celebration watch for the guy who made it" - as it seems like Rolex is either going for the bitcoin or the Patek crowd.

^ the bitcoin/Patek part gave me a good laugh. Spot on my man!

[superspectral]

Originally Posted by spacebjorn

The fact that you think Tudor can stand toe-to-toe with Omega competing for the same customer segment tells how badly Omega has fallen from their spot on a marketing standpoint.

If it weren't for the Rolex-sister company branding behind Tudor would you even care for watches like the BB chrono?? The new speedy is completely on another level if you ask me. It's moons apart.

Omega is not being nearly as cut throat as they should be to skewer both Rolex and Tudor.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by superspectral

Omega is not being nearly as cut throat as they should be to skewer both Rolex and Tudor.

I'm not sure a Coke vs Pepsi or Ragu vs Prego type marketing battle is one Omega wants to engage with Rolex.

[DrStrangluv]

Originally Posted by spacebjorn

The fact that you think Tudor can stand toe-to-toe with Omega competing for the same customer segment tells how badly Omega has fallen from their spot on a marketing standpoint.

If it weren't for the Rolex-sister company branding behind Tudor would you even care for watches like the BB chrono?? The new speedy is completely on another level if you ask me. It's moons apart.

Agreed. Tudor getting more media coverage does not make them a greater watch manufacturer. They are just better at capturing the current market demand. Big fan of both Omega and Tudor though.

[warrior]

Yes. Insightful re: the question.

Originally Posted by spacebjorn

The fact that you think Tudor can stand toe-to-toe with Omega competing for the same customer segment tells how badly Omega has fallen from their spot on a marketing standpoint.

If it weren't for the Rolex-sister company branding behind Tudor would you even care for watches like the BB chrono?? The new speedy is completely on another level if you ask me. It's moons apart.

[SaddleSC]

Omega > Tudor...and I love (and own) both.

[Oyster Sauce]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

Omega > Tudor...and I love (and own) both.

+1 Omega is still a notch above Tudor in my mind, but the fact that we’re having this conversation is legitimate and significant. Omega should be watching their back, and doubling their efforts on the Rolex front at the same time. Would love to see a true rivalry between Omega and Rolex.

[Kinnakeet]

Omega makes a watch that is better than Rolex I feel. Let alone Tudor.

[rambo99]

Originally Posted by Kinnakeet

Omega makes a watch that is better than Rolex I feel. Let alone Tudor.

how is omega better than rolex? could you give us an example, which model?

[Baboon]

Omega ftw

[Wrist Watcher]

Omega easily imo.

[the dark knight]

I think Tudor's success is an incredible testament to Rolex. Just being the little brother to Rolex has really helped them. Considering that their most popular line (the Black Bay) is essentially an homage of an homage. Harkens to the Tudor Subs of yesteryear which were made to be more affordable versions of the Submariner.

Or look at the hype around the BB Chronos. The first one was widely panned, but they released dial variations that slyly allude to the steel Daytonas and they are hot.

[Manamana]

Omega no contest, can't imagine how can someone even think of comparing both.

[Nodzex]

Originally Posted by Manamana

Omega no contest, can't imagine how can someone even think of comparing both.

What he said!

[gnuyork]

Omega, especially the new Speedmaster.

Now the steel BB58 is interesting to me, (though not the gold or silver so much) and I'd rather wear that than just about any Omega dive watch (though I have the first Planet Ocean and it's amazing), but just to be clear, I'm not saying the Tudor is better, but I like the smaller 39mm case size for the diver.

[johnorpheus]

I like both, and both should start to see a bigger customer base as people become disillusioned with the inability to get the Rolex they want. I don’t think Rolex is coming back to earth anytime soon and the people who are in the market for a high end sports watch under 10k will have to start turning to other historic brands.

[samson66]

I like both and I own both and trust me when I tell you Tudor is nowhere near in the same league as Omega. I can't imagine anyone who has owned both disagreeing with this.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

[RampageWatch]

Originally Posted by samson66

I like both and I own both and trust me when I tell you Tudor is nowhere near in the same league as Omega. I can't imagine anyone who has owned both disagreeing with this.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

Well, I might be alone on this, but I tend to disagree.

I don’t own either BB Chrono (yet) or the new Speedy, but have tried both on.
For me the speedy was a real let down, hard to fescribe, but it felt kinda cheap, the bracelet in particular felt loose and lacked finesse.
The tudor on the other hand, felt more substantial in feel and finish and fit.

If we’re talking movements specifically,
I’m no specialist, but I suspect the speedy might b ahead on that....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brny11]

Originally Posted by samson66

I like both and I own both and trust me when I tell you Tudor is nowhere near in the same league as Omega. I can't imagine anyone who has owned both disagreeing with this.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

I agree and disagree. One is slightly better the other is more special. I’d take 10 Tudors over an Omega.

You are not wrong and neither am I. Beauty of individuality.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by samson66

I like both and I own both and trust me when I tell you Tudor is nowhere near in the same league as Omega. I can't imagine anyone who has owned both disagreeing with this.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

I’ve owned both and I disagree.

[RayRay89]

Omega is more bang for your buck, even over Rolex.

[Jack T]

Originally Posted by RayRay89

Omega is more bang for your buck, even over Rolex.

I have to agree with you; I own a Planet Ocean, 10 years old but rock solid, looks beautiful and feels great on my wrist. The Aqua Terra is a terrific watch, as is the 300M and Railmaster. Movements, cases, dials and performance are all excellent, plus you can buy one.

The Omega owners all talk about their watches, enjoy shopping for them, wearing them, bracelet and strap options, the entire ownership experience.

On this site, the overwhelming theme is about the dreadful procurement process, and how much money does one have to throw away to get a hideous orange dial OP.

[johnorpheus]

Originally Posted by Jack T

I have to agree with you; I own a Planet Ocean, 10 years old but rock solid, looks beautiful and feels great on my wrist. The Aqua Terra is a terrific watch, as is the 300M and Railmaster. Movements, cases, dials and performance are all excellent, plus you can buy one.

The Omega owners all talk about their watches, enjoy shopping for them, wearing them, bracelet and strap options, the entire ownership experience.

On this site, the overwhelming theme is about the dreadful procurement process, and how much money does one have to throw away to get a hideous orange dial OP.

Yep, new Sub on the secondary market approaching nearly three times a PO, which is arguably a more superior technical watch and looks and feels terrific on the wrist.

[Doc Savage]

Originally Posted by RayRay89

Omega is more bang for your buck, even over Rolex.

This

Originally Posted by Jack T

...On this site, the overwhelming theme is about the dreadful procurement process, and how much money does one have to throw away to get a hideous orange dial OP.

So true