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

[trackntrail]

Originally Posted by 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

yup this sums it up for me too

[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).

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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.

[DJJon]

Originally Posted by superdog

Please elaborate on the purpose of this thread.

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

Really Seth?

What is the purpose of asking the purpose?

What purpose do 90% of any TRF threads serve?

[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.

[tonyfabro]

Originally Posted by 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.

I feel this way too

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[ndsleep612]

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

[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/

[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 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?

[jmsrolls]

In 1983, I purchased my first high end watch:



I asked the sales person at the time if it would keep good time. His answer was "If you want accuracy, buy a Casio." I thought he was kidding but my President could never be regulated to better than a minute/day.

In 2003, I finally let the President go and have owned a hundred or so different watches since then. Yes, I was a flipper. I've owned a 16570 EXPII, a GMT Master, a TT GMT Master II, a Sea Dweller, and a vintage 6050 but never a Sub. I currently have a polar 216570 EXPII which will soon be leaving my collection.

Why is the 42 EXPII leaving? It's leaving because of the arrival in March of my Seamaster 300 Master Co-Axial to go with my First Omega in Space:



Since joining my collection, the 300 MC has gained .25 sec/day. That's not quartz timing but close. It dresses up or down nicely for the pool or the boardroom. The clasp is easily adjustable allowing on the fly sizing like glidelock. The 60 hour power reserve means I do not have to put it on the winder every night. The added ability to step the hour hand for time zone changes without stopping the movement is a great feature as well. The 15K gauss rating pretty much eliminates any risk of magnetization. No, it doesn't have a date feature but the date only changes once every twenty-four hours and my memory is still sharp enough so that I only have to check the date once a day. And a final plus: when I set the hands to the markers and push in the crown, the hands do not move. They stay right where I put them. I never could do that with a Rolex.

As for "Master Co-Axial" on the dial, it makes more sense than "Superlative Chronometer." It means that Omega has taken the co-axial movement to the next level horologically. What makes a Rolex chronometer superlative to any other chronometer?

Don't get me wrong, Rolex makes fine watches but there is nothing in the Rolex line that trips my trigger anymore.

At my age (71), I've bought my last car with its last set of tires. I'm enjoying my sunset years with my last wife and my last two watches.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

In 1983, I purchased my first high end watch.......

At my age (71), I've bought my last car with its last set of tires. I'm enjoying my sunset years with my last wife and my last two watches.

what a great post, it puts things in perspective. I wish you many great healthy years.

[Jazz ham]

Originally Posted by ndsleep612

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

Control-1000 hrs/testing