Turned off by Bond-related marketing

[richard371]

Agreed. It's too much advertising.

[SPEIRMOOR]

First world problems. As a Bond fan and an Omega fan I haven't seen anything over the top yet.

[RHIII]

I'm kind of the opposite...I don't mind product placement and/or advertising at all.

It is purely business. Also...I purchased my first Omega PO - after Casino Royale came out...so it worked on me!! Lol

I haven't seen an over abundance of advertising personally...maybe I'm just missing it.

Just my .02

[NoVaSubowner]

Originally Posted by artschool

i think it cheapens the brand. not everyone thinks james bond is amazing.

Agree. The Rolex fanboy fascination with Bond is equally cringeworthy.

[jmiicustomz]

What I don't get is that no one here claims to hate Heineken, jaguar, lotus, seiko, BMW, beretta, etc. Over all this. I get this a watch forum but really. Bond has run the gambit of "high end" product placement over the years. Enjoy the movie and franchise what what they are or don't. Haters gonna hate.

[Baco Noir]

I don't care one way or the other about the product placement - it's the way advertising is going since we all fast forward through commercials.

What annoys me is Omega doing Limited Editions of 7,007 or 10,007 of these pieces. That's far from "limited." But, even if were 007 pieces, I'm out because I don't want movie branding on my watch, other than my Mickey Mouse Timex.

[Baco Noir]

Originally Posted by c9smw

I'm not sure I would describe the omega as huge, more just repositioned



[IMG][/IMG]

It's more of a thickness issue due to the sapphire caseback to me. The newer models sit too high on the wrist.

[Cru Jones]

nice pics: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/th...imited-edition

[chucelli]

Originally Posted by Cabaiguan

Any watch company would have jumped at the chance for the Bond association. I don't think less of Omega for it. Rolex would have done it in a heart beat.

not true.

Ian Fleming, the creator of James Bond, referenced Rolex more than a dozen times in his original writings. The fact that the Submariner appeared later in the films had nothing to do with Rolex, or product placement.

I own both Rolex and Omega, because I like these particular watches, but I definitely do not identify with Omega's marketing strategy of identifying its watches with a fictional character. Seems silly IMO.

[themaninblack]

Rolex spends an unknown fortune on marketing and advertising most of which is aimed at appealing to sentiments of superiority and leadership. Rolex is all about aspirational marketing. It's their angle and I believe it's very successful but it's all BS. I'm not James Bond and I'm not the President of a large country or the dictator of a small one. I also pay taxes, whilst Rolex does not.

[WJGESQ]

Originally Posted by vman

Am I the only one? Companies have to advertise, but the blunt product placement in the movie and association of a product with a fictitious character make me cringe. Sorry, Omega, I won't be buying your "Bond's choice" any time soon.

By the way, I am not an Omega basher by any means. Love my Speedy.

The product placement was not overt.

[Robbie68]

Bond drives a Bentley in the books not an Aston. The films have moved so far beyond the books that you can't refer back to the original source anymore. Bond is a film character who epitomizes English "cool" the suits the cars the watches etc portray an image, you either like it or parts of it or you don't. I suppose they could portray the Bond character as an average guy, buys suits at Macy's, wears a Casio or Timex and drives a Ford Focus but where's the fun in that?
I say good for Omega, Aston, Tom Ford, Barbour etc, etc we need a little escapism.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by busytimmy

Movies exist, largely, to make money. I'd say the same can be said about Omega. Blatant and unashamed product placement works on the masses, so why not milk it for all it's worth?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because a great brand shouldnt have to.

I've always been a fan of Omega but like many here I scratch my head at their marketing direction.

[Robbie68]

Originally Posted by Tony64

Because a great brand shouldnt have to.

I've always been a fan of Omega but like many here I scratch my head at their marketing direction.

Rolex an Formula One!

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Robbie68

Rolex an Formula One!

Well first off I don't think anyone would say that Rolex hasn't been very proactive with their advertising and affiliations. In fact many would be quick to point out that Rolex may well be the most recognized luxury Swiss watch brand in large part due to their aggressive marketing.

I think Rolex choosing to associate their brand with formula one is analogous to Omega's Olympic sponsorship. It just feels respectable and appropriate.

Celebrity endorsements, real or fictional, for me begin to cross the line into the absurd. Others may feel differently, but while I might have some passing interest in the technology development that formula one racing contributes to the world, or the significance of precise Olympic timing where events are won and lost on fractional seconds, I could really not care less what pierce brosnan, george clooney, James Bond, or Mickey Mouse choose to wear on their wrists.
Obviously for some it matters a great deal or these ads wouldn't exist. It just feels less dignified- to me at least.

A brand with the storied history of Omega shouldnt need resort to such department store mass marketing, and I personally find it a bit disappointing.

[MTROIS]

I definitely feel they go overboard these days... But remembering that Pierce Brosnan got me into watches and my SMP 300 diver back in the late 90's, I am willing to cut them some slack.

[clock]

I like the Spectre SM300Mc because it's a nice looking watch and how well it resembles the original. Kudos to Omega.

[Wesley Crusher]

Kind of unrelated, but Ellen sent a little boy (a big Bond fan) to the Spectre premier in Mexico City. The kid got to interview Daniel Craig and he gave the boy a Spectre SM300!

[Brianlap55]

I like the Bond marketing

[warrior]

PLEASE. If you're Omega and you're trying to compete with Rolex (or simply trying to gain more brand status/recognition), I don't see anything wrong with product placement in Bond films. For many years ( and still now), Omega just didn't advertise very much compared to Rolex. Many of the guys on TRF are a little too full of themselves and think they're "oh so cool" for pooh poohing product placement in Bond films...as opposed to other forms of advertising. They're above it all. LOL.

Hey...if you're in the US ( where the vast vast majority of the general public could not care less about watches , only have the attention span of a PEANUT when it comes to watches/brands, and only know ROLEX as a luxury watch), then you're only going to pay attention to a brand like Omega when films like SPECTRE come out. If Omega wants to expand brand awareness through Bond films, then so be it. It's a mainstream luxury brand...not haute horologie.

[jshepard]

While I too think it's crazy that an ambassador to a brand is a fictional character, I can't help but admit that I liked going to see the movie and looking to catch a glimpse of the watch on his wrist. I usually go watch spotting when watching any movie, this one was just easier to do than others. While it doesn't elevate my respect for the brand in terms of watchmaking, it's fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[somdej]

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

It's more of a thickness issue due to the sapphire caseback to me. The newer models sit too high on the wrist.

Your picture remind me the lines in the movie: James Bond asked "does it do anything?"

Q replied "It tells the time."

Literally just tells the time... Not even date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by jmiicustomz

What I don't get is that no one here claims to hate Heineken, jaguar, lotus, seiko, BMW, beretta, etc. Over all this. I get this a watch forum but really. Bond has run the gambit of "high end" product placement over the years. Enjoy the movie and franchise what what they are or don't. Haters gonna hate.

I agree with you, and tasteful, and hopefully subtle, product placement in a movie isn't always a bad thing. I think what people are objecting to is when it becomes a full blown advertising campaign.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by warrior

PLEASE. If you're Omega and you're trying to compete with Rolex (or simply trying to gain more brand status/recognition), I don't see anything wrong with product placement in Bond films. For many years ( and still now), Omega just didn't advertise very much compared to Rolex. Many of the guys on TRF are a little too full of themselves and think they're "oh so cool" for pooh poohing product placement in Bond films...as opposed to other forms of advertising. They're above it all. LOL.

Hey...if you're in the US ( where the vast vast majority of the general public could not care less about watches , only have the attention span of a PEANUT when it comes to watches/brands, and only know ROLEX as a luxury watch), then you're only going to pay attention to a brand like Omega when films like SPECTRE come out. If Omega wants to expand brand awareness through Bond films, then so be it. It's a mainstream luxury brand...not haute horologie.

First take a breath. We're all friends here right? I respect your view just not sure that I agree with your characterization of "many of the guys on TRF".

Now to address your point- I think it's a matter of demographics. I agree completely with your assertion that many will see SPECTRE in the theater, see the "cool" 007 toys (watches, cars,clothes, drinks, sunglasses, cellphone, etc) and come to the conclusion that if they possess these same accoutrements then they to will become equally and instantly as suave and irresistible.

Now we could debate whether it's the association WITH Bond that makes these products cool, of if Bond "chooses" the products BECAUSE they're cool but I suspect that would take this discussion down another rabbit hole.

I'd be curious to know the demographic of a typical Omega consumer. I think entry into the brand starts at around $5-6k. I'd be surprised that a typical 18-25 year old movie goer would have that much discretionary income, especially with Apple competing aggressively for this same market. Do Aston Martin sales increase with Bond films? I'm not sure about anyone else but I'm not spending $150-200k on sports car because some comic book/film hero drives one. Then again, I'm well North of the 18-25 demographic.

I realize that it's a matter of degree, and there are undoubtably some that will save their allowances and paper route money for the new limited edition Omega Bond watch. I think that the more typical member of a watch forum is more horological informed and interested in the history and design of their favorite brands, and as such are influenced more by these aspects when contemplating a purchase then simple product placement. Perhaps that's the basis for the dismissive comments?

[powerfunk]

I'm all for modern capitalism and product placement. But when you have magazine ads about a character who was specifically written to wear Rolex, and feature a NATO strap inspired by one specifically worn on a famous Rolex, and declare you're "James Bond's choice" it just seems embarrassing.

[JB7]

Originally Posted by jfmiii

does everyone know that? im willing to bet 99.9% of the moviegoers seeing the movie this weekend DO NOT know that..

Or care

[Syed117]

I think deep down inside, there is some level of insecurity that bothers rolex fans and/or Omega haters about this situation. If rolex (the company that spends more on advertising than any other watch brand in the world) had done this kind of marketing deal, we wouldn't be seeing these kinds of reactions.

Very few people in the present day know or care about Ian Flemings novels. Times change, characters evolve and in this case, it's a simple matter of money exchanging hands in the world we currently live in. There are very few big budget blockbusters that aren't full of product placement. Maybe we should start complaining that Ian Fleming never wrote that bond used Sony phones and computers.

Those stories are half a century old at this point and the only thing that relates the bond of 2015 to the bond of 50 years ago is the name. The old bond movies are comedies compared to what we have now.

Two generations of film bonds spanning 20 years have worn Omegas. Maybe it's time to get over it?

[vman]

^to what is stated above...

My comment has nothing to do with that movies. I can care less. But the fact that Omega milks a fictional character for extreme product placement bothers me a lot. It cheapens the brand IMHO.

[chucelli]

Originally Posted by Syed117

I think deep down inside, there is some level of insecurity that bothers rolex fans and/or Omega haters about this situation. If rolex (the company that spends more on advertising than any other watch brand in the world) had done this kind of marketing deal, we wouldn't be seeing these kinds of reactions.

Very few people in the present day know or care about Ian Flemings novels. Times change, characters evolve and in this case, it's a simple matter of money exchanging hands in the world we currently live in. There are very few big budget blockbusters that aren't full of product placement. Maybe we should start complaining that Ian Fleming never wrote that bond used Sony phones and computers.

Those stories are half a century old at this point and the only thing that relates the bond of 2015 to the bond of 50 years ago is the name. The old bond movies are comedies compared to what we have now.

Two generations of film bonds spanning 20 years have worn Omegas. Maybe it's time to get over it?

Actually it bothers me as an Omega fan.

My point of bringing up the original novels is to illustrate the original reason a Rolex was even included in the film, and that it was not the result of product placement marketing, but the result of an attempt to stay close to a storyline.

It's not the fact that Bond now wears an Omega that bothers people. It's the lack of subtlety in the message that is bothersome to many.
I am disappointed that Omega feels the need to so blatantly market their product in a movie. It cheapens the brand and its heritage. No insecurity here.

[chucelli]

one more thing to add...

I've always liked both Omega and Rolex just the same, and admired the clearly different and individual ways they both go about creating a product.
This started to change with the Pierce Brosnan Bond movies when they actually started marking their watches as "Bond" or "007" watches. Now, they have actually engraved "007" into the clasp of this fine watch. It sickens me personally.
I suppose this makes it easier to differentiate the two companies, and for me to move on.