James Bond

[kennethcooke]

Someone gave me a copy of Lifetime Magazine, a quarterly publication put out by Omega Watches Group and the issues is virtually about all things James Bond. Not surprising, I hear you say, with a multi million blockbuster move, Spectre just released but, lets not forget that Ian Fleming put a Rolex Submariner No Date on his wrist and not an Omega, whatever her wears now? I am not saying that Rolex were wrong or slow to not see the global product placement potential that would bring to the Rolex brand, in fact, if any company has been dragging their feet on this it has to be Jaeger LeCoultre, my favoured brand, after all James Bond has always been linked to Aston Martin Cars and JLC produce The AMVOS range of watches with the AML logo on them. In fact there is even an immobiliser feature fitted to one of their watches which is designed to do just that to a AM DBS. Sean Connery, who will be forever regarded as the 007 by many people would have stayed true to Ian Fleming's Rolex wearing MI5 colossus.

[joe100]

I think that omega is a better fit for the franchise. Rolex is more about real achievements like Everest, Challenger Deep, and F1. A movie, no matter how iconic, isn't really their thing on the whole.

Not to say omega hasn't had any accomplishments but they do love limited editions and their product development model is completely different than rolex. Line up all the watches that say Submariner and Seamaster on the dial for example, and you'll find hundreds of omega references and only a few Rolex references comparatively. Omega changes their lineup constantly, while rolex changes slower than continental drift. Not saying either way is bad, it's the truth.

[tylerad1]

I think Rolex is doing OK without the Bond endorsement. Honestly, in my opinion, when I see brands placing their products in movies, it just screams "Sell Out". Bit of a turn off for me

[silverbullet818]

Put it this way.... think of the Rolex product placement albiet short in the Bond franchise as a LIMITED Edition thing!

[BLACKHORSE 6]

Originally Posted by joe100

I think that omega is a better fit for the franchise. Rolex is more about real achievements like Everest, Challenger Deep, and F1. A movie, no matter how iconic, isn't really their thing on the whole.

Not to say omega hasn't had any accomplishments but they do love limited editions and their product development model is completely different than rolex. Line up all the watches that say Submariner and Seamaster on the dial for example, and you'll find hundreds of omega references and only a few Rolex references comparatively. Omega changes their lineup constantly, while rolex changes slower than continental drift. Not saying either way is bad, it's the truth.

Good points here.

[Bfd70]

Ian Flemming did not put a Sub on JB wrist. A movie producer did.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=120138

[RolexLover2016]

James Bond is a CGI joke now...So I'm glad he doesn't wear a Rolex.

[TheRolexKingofLV]

Originally Posted by tylerad1

i think rolex is doing ok without the bond endorsement. Honestly, in my opinion, when i see brands placing their products in movies, it just screams "sell out". Bit of a turn off for me

x2

[landroverking]

Who cares what a made up character wears?

[Bfd70]

Well to that^ who cares what anyone else wears. People just do. Distractions of the modern world.