I think that Omega and Rolex are aiming for different things. Omega is aiming to deliver a luxury product that is pushing the boundaries of movements and design while maintaining attainability. Rolex is aiming to be the MOST desired watch brand in the world while maintaining timeless design and reliability. Both brands are achieving their goal. I have an Omega smp wave dial but I really want a stainless steel sports model Rolex. One brand is attainable luxury while the other is desired luxury
As far as being attainable, I dont think Omega is more so than Rolex retail wise. It is just you can find Omega on the grey market for cheaper (which sets the bar for used as well). But brand new Aqua Terra is about $5,800 or so and a new Datejust is around $6,900. So no huge difference. But I find most people in the market for an Omega is looking to spend less than 4k while a Rolex consumer is looking to spend up to 8k or so. The Rolex consumer is not expecting a sale/deal while the Omega consumer usually wont buy without a deal.
@@planetdee3587 I think you are confusing attainable with affordable. Anyone with the cash ready can walk into just about any AD or boutique and ask for the Omega they desire. Next to no one can walk into an AD or boutique with the cash and ask for a Rolex they desire. This is what I mean by attainable.
@@joelminear-kulpinski4434, I am a bit confused. I was trying to point out their prices are not that different from each other as far as retail goes. So when you say Omega is trying to be more attainable, I disagree. Their prices are almost the same so they are equally attainable almost.
@@planetdee3587 regardless of price even if both brands sold their watches for the same price, you can not go into any AD and ask to buy a Rolex brand new because Rolex have choked supply. At the same AD you tried to get a Rolex you WILL be able to buy an Omega. This makes the Omega attainable and the Rolex desired. I hope that is more clear.
Well the compromise though is you get a chunky poor looking watch. Witg rolex you get the specs AND the looks. Oh and you can resell it 10 years later for double the price. So your also making money on the side
@@94jmbottaro Never hat that bs. no one will buy your beat up 10 year old Gmt. There s very vew rolexes worth reselling. Def more than omegas tho. But calling omegas chunky and ugly? I bet you have either watches and no idea what you are talking about.
@@mfesch7386 nobody wants your 10 year old GMT? The market doubling over the last 2-3 years begs to differ. Pre-ceramic subs were 5k like 4 years ago. I dont care what era Rolex you have, they have all doubled in price over the last 5-6 years. Not to say that will happen again but who knows. I personally think they're moving up market on purpose and putting Tudor in their place to contend in their old price bracket. I think there's still value increases that haven't been realized yet. In both brands.
@@martinyong2806 well, he was wearing a Rolex... But inside of the suit (not exposed to the moon conditions, i.e. vacuum, temperature...)... It is next to nothing.
I liked the rolex explorer because of the everest heritage.. then i found out it was not even an explorer but an oyster... oh well kinda wierd but ok. Then i found out rolex was not even first at summit on hillarys wrist but it was smith.... damn rolex im not gonna buy your watches now lol
Radnaksi Demha Nope, because Rolex’s are just very overpriced tool watches. They only really rose to popularity over the last 20 years. And that is 100% due to pop culture, not because they make the best watches.
Rolex is an obvious choice for everyone but if I see a person wearing Omega, I respect that guy more in terms of horology. In my opinion he is sophisticated.
Well said mate. Well said! I have both brands Deepsea and PO. I have both divers for what they are made for. Diving…but when I wear either one my eyes are always focused on the Omega. The movement is amazing and all the finishes are top notch. Where with the Rolex I do see flaws. Only slightly but they are there. Both watches are great but Omega to me has more history. The service I received from Omega is absolutely amazing. The Rolex AD didn’t give to shits. I get follow up calls from Omega. I don’t get anything from the Rolex AD. I wear my Rolex more so that my Omega New sunburnt Orange doesn’t get scratched. I prefer Omega any days. Rolex is big now due to social media. Remember back early 2000. No one wanted the Daytona. They either went for the sub or Omega SMP. Now that’s changed cause of platforms like this.
As a famous watch channel once said “Rolex sells watches, Omega makes them”. Rolex is a better brand, and I qualify that by saying that they have immortal brand recognition and have become a status symbol. The first watch brand in the forefront of everyone’s mind is Rolex, and they have profited greatly because of that. However, if you compare the spec sheets between a Seamaster 300m and a Rolex Submariner, you’ll find something surprising. The Seamaster has a better movement and overall resistances than the Submariner, and the cost to service an Omega vs a Rolex is significantly cheaper. So why then does the Sub cost double that of the Seamaster? Rolex is the brand every watch company aspires to be, Omega is the brand everyone’s build quality strives to maintain. I say this as an owner of a Seamaster 300 and a Rolex 114300 Rhodium. The Omega is my everyday wear, the Rolex is my dress watch. I feel like that usage speaks to the soul of both brands, just my hot take on the discussion.
I agree. I am a Rolex fanboy. However, after I saw the New Omega Seamaster 300M Professional AKA The Great White. I immediately purchased it with both straps and I wear it more then my Rolex 116613LB.
Do you think a Rolex submariner is 100 times better than an Invicta pro diver? Probably not. Your cheap straw man argument doesn't work because you pay the price for the grade of perfection and not price-performance.
Before the quartz crisis in the 70s Omega was the standard in luxury watches of that price range. Today's Rolex status is the result of their marketing smarts combined with Omega trying too hard to keep up with new trends and not sticking up to their guns. Anyway, today we could say that their brand prestige is comparable overall. If we talk strict technology, the last Seamaster line surpasses their Rolex counterparts.
Marco Salis Casio surpasses Rolex and seamaster in technology, Rolex surpasses Casio and Seamaster in durability and Seamaster surpasses Casio and Rolex in limited editions.
Pointsur's World i was referring to watch technology as a whole may it be quartz, electronic or mechanical. The objective of these technologies only serve one purpose and one purpose only, which is to tell time precisely. Mechanical watch is obsolete and what left for these watches are the emotional / psychological side of it, portrayal of luxury, class, status and taste as well as the beauty of craftsmanship. I would say most who own these would care less about what’s inside these watches.
i dont think you can compare the prestige at all tbh. basically everyone anywhere in the world knows what rolex is, whether they are into watches, young or old ect. omega isnt on that level. that said purely within the watch community id say they are probably about equal yeah.
@@Touyoujin And that separates the difference between a watch wearer and a watch enthusiast. Yes we know that quartz may be high tech, but a lot of people don't want that. It has not o soul to it. I appreciate a handmade timepiece. It says a lot when someone can make something by hand that is extremely accurate. Watchmaking should never become a lost art. If mankind is ever reduced to the stone age he will still know how to keep time. A quartz watch will do you no good.
All valid points, but for me, Omega is a no brainer since I like to wear watches at work, and im one of the few who actually needs a crazy antimagnetic watch, which rolex doesnt offer. (Milgauss doesnt cut it actually). Besides that, the amount of attention the word rolex gets when worn , is not for me. Just a personal preference, but I rather have more of a sleeper on the wrist than a watch that constantly begs the question, “is it real”.
Very true. Omega is such a respectable brand and people who don't know aboit watches might not even know it. And that's an advantage because if you have a Rolex, either people will ask you if it's real or if they know it's real then any thief will know how much it can cost and will want it.
Ilias Tasikas not true at all which isn’t surprising for non horological fan. They have different Mission one aims to improve on existing designs while the other love churning out new things (omega).
@@JAYJAY-ch4ik I spend time almost every day the last 10 years for watches,movements,companies,watchmaking history and you are saying to me that I am a non horological fan.I think you have right.I am not just a watch fan,I am a watch geek. You apparently have never looked the features but that's okay I will educate you. Omega watches have: 1) 15.000 gauss magnetic resistance (Rolex magnetic resistance is under 1000 gauss). 2)Two barrels in series which help the maintenance of the accuracy after 24h. 3)METAS certification (which tests the watch as a whole with 8 tests and not only the uncased movement). 4)By far better decoration - finishing(that's why Omega watches have transparent cases). 5)Co Axial escapement 6) 6 positions adjusted (not 5 as Rolex) 7)Better power reserve,water resistance,shock resistance and silicon hairsprings. Rolex watches have: 1)Fake waitlists 2)Overpriced watches 3)No movement decoration 4)No movement innovation 5)The best resale value But people are still buying them. Do you know why?Marketing is the answer.Also design is subjective but movement innovation is objective. JAY JAY I don't hate Rolex,in fact my best 4 luxury watch companies are Omega,Longines,Rolex,Panerai but we must admit the superiority of Omega movements.
@@iliastasikas9553 also, I don't understand how you can compare two things (the time teller comparison) without stating some criteria first. The only thing he mention is the fact that Omega has a larger watch model base... and this is a bad thing?! I understand if you are a watch geek that wants to buy ALL possible models, then is complicated indeed... but how man people like these are in the world?
Ilias Tasikas From what u listed for omega, it doesn’t prove their watches are better. It’s just simply better value for money. Rolex has been keeping things simple for quality and durability given that they have categorized most of their watches as tool for professionals, making subtle improvements to existing designs. As a watch geek, u should know better.
There is no denying the Rolex is the more well know and desired between the two. However, once you remove general brand recognition and hype, I personally prefer Omega, for three reasons. The first reason is that I prefer their watches. I like most of their designs, especially those twisted lugs, and as I have a large wrist the larger size and thickness on average doesn’t bother me as much as it might some. I like their bracelets, their cases, their dials, and especially their movements. I personally think the 8900 and 8800 are the equal or better to any Rolex movement, and the 9900 blows the Dayton movement away. Secondly, as someone who appreciates brand history, I appreciate the history of Omega more. The brand strives for the pursuit of excellence like few others, which can be seen in their results during the Chronometer trials before the Quartz Crisis. Once this brand ethos gets taken into account, it becomes easier to forgive them for diving headfirst into Quartz technology, because advancement in watchmaking is what they’re all about. By comparison, Rolex’s decision not to do so was a massive gamble that they’re are simply lucky worked out. Appreciating the brands overall history is also part of the reason Vacheron Constantine is my favourite high horology watchmaker. Finally, I prefer Omega to Rolex because of the hype that Rolex has. While I can definitely appreciate that Rolex’s are phenomenal watches, I don’t think they are good enough to warrant the reaction they garner. When a new Rolex is released the wait list stretches to years within months, and then resale for 50-100% over retail. Rolex’s are almost always worth their retail value and no more (sometimes they’re even a little overpriced). I feel the admiration Rolex has within the watch community is deserved, but the pedestal they get put on in the general community is not. For this reason I prefer Omega, as I find them to be the equal to Rolex, only without the unnecessary hype, and often accompanied stigma. It also doesn’t hurt that this also makes Omega much easier to acquire. The third reason was probably the main reason I started looking at Omega over Rolex, but the more I looked, the more the other two reasons rose to prominence. Rolex’s hype is now very much a minor reason, compared to their design and history, to prefer Omega for me now.
Actually the apology of an Omega owner. Had the same one. But let's cut to the chase. You own a Rolex, everybody knows, you own an Omega, almost nobody gives a shit or you get surrounded by Moonwatch fanboys. Yeah as I said too their movements are impressive so is a Tesla. But still you want the Porsche.....if you own an Omega, you mostly own it for yourself to pamper. You own a Rolex, you get pampered, mostly with envy or somebody will cut your hand off :D
I feel that both Rolex and Omega should be held at same standard. I personally feel Omega is better personally and prefer their willingness to try new things.
Totally agree with you on this that Omega made too many random watches but now they have narrowed down their catalogue and Omega is definitely comparable to Rolex.
As a Swiss-American that visits the CH a lot, consensus is that Omega and Rolex are both "entry level, lower mid tier" watches. In fact, my Grandpa use to hate on Rolex because it not even a an OG Swiss product (Rolex was founded in London). Me, I love both companies and own them both. I do think the tide is turning against Rolex and Omega closes the gap with their new Omega SMP 300 2018. I do agree, Omega saturated their lines and put way too many out there. But they are trimming the fat. Rolex...well I think they're trying to be like PP, AP, VC but they are failing miserably. Not to mention, people in the West aren't very patient. If Rolex spent their money in ramping up production instead of marketing then no problem. But those wait lists are getting annoying and people are moving on to other watch brands. Just my 2 cents
Nope, people are buying second market at a premium. That only makes Rolex even more desiderable. Regarding the SMP 300M, it is such an overdesigned, (for me) ugly watch, toyish looking thing. Sorry but the SMP 300m is not going anywhere near on killing the Sub. I can see much more the Seamaster 300 doing that, but not the M version.
I honestly don't care....both are amazing watch brands, they both had their off-days in watches but still make the best, most iconic and influential watches. The subby the speedy the seamaster the seadweller just to name a few...they're all great. Stop comparing them, they're different.
When I started to get into watches I wanted to buy a submariner date but when I realize that I had to wait at least 4 years to get one I informed myself about an alternative. That was how I discovered the omega seamaster line. Eventually I bought a seamaster profesionell 300m date black dial and I couldn't be happier about my purchase. They are mechanically superior to the sub and even cheaper and easier to get. I think that rolex is better at marketing but omega is better as watchmaker.
@@smashexentertainment676 Rolex don’t need me, so I don’t need them. Great product-awful attitude, and I’m surely not going to butter up to any fancy shop assistants to get something that I pay hard earned money for. For me Rolex doesn’t exist.
@@John-g1v8s I would love to own a few Rolex watches some day, but I also love to keep my hands intact, since expensive stuff in my country makes me a constant target for burglars. I made a wish list of watches I'd get if I ever score a jackpot, and none of the watches on a list have a 'more available' alternative. If I want a watch, I'm not gonna be replacing it with another watch, coz it will always bug me that it's not THE WATCH. All the watches I own were picked for all the good reasons other than alternative to the watch I wish I had.
Making customer wait is them trying to show high want and exclusivity to justify the high prices they charge. These are juts watches I don’t collect them, don’t need to “impress” anyone with the brand I wear or need any status behind what’s on my wrist so Rolex is not even an option for me. I want bets bang for buck, if I were going to spend Rolex- Omega money I would go Omega but I personally would look other brands like Longines, Nomos, etc. over both as these offer quality at a better price points.
You should have qualified at the start what you mean by “better”. If you you remove the relative “go to market” strategies of both companies and just focus on just the characteristics, quality at price point you may come out with a different outcome...
You seem to have ignored that Omega was a much more respected brand in say the 20's to 70's. They did stuff things up in the 80's and since. But an Omega from the 60's or 70's is a much better watch than a Rolex, it's not even close!
I like that I can walk into any Omega boutique and hand the sales person cash, and walk out with the model of my choice. There’s no chance in hell I can ever walk into a Rolex AD, hand the sales person cash, and walk out with the Rolex model I desire. I have respect for Rolex and would love to own one some day, but I put that out of my head a long time ago due to their crappy games.
Rolex is better at marketing and at finding business opportunities, it was created by a business man. Omega has always been the better watch, from movements to reliability, it was created by horologists. Rolex is better at the subjective game - plays with peoples emotions, making them crave their products and making them believe they have something unique and great on their wrist with their watches. Omega is better at the objective game - makes a better product and at an affordable price, great bang for your buck so to speak. Rolex is catching up in the objective game with better movements, and Omega is catching up in the subjective game with marketing in movies and working in NASA campaigns. Definitely an interesting battle between these two horology titans, I do feel however that Omega is catching up faster than Rolex at each others game.
I wish I could give you my honest opinion, but unfortunately I don't have the money to own an Omega or a Rolex... But if I could one day buy one of them I'll definitely go for an Omega Seamaster 300!! Just what my heart and mind telling me…cheers Jory… Have a successful weak everyone!!
Yeah omega should just concentrate on consolidating their best references and making them better, insted of introducing a whole plethora of random references.
I've been able to enjoy 5 different Omegas and for me that is why I prefer them to a Rolex. You can actually enjoy them and attain them and benefit from the savings that can be made in the second hand market. For me Omega is more fun as an enthusiast...Rolex is too serious due to their MRSP.
I like them both. But, I tried to wear Seamster and Sub (I don't own them), and wearing SM I felt cool. I didn't get that feeling from Sub. So, slight advantage to Omegas "cool" factor.
I really like Omega because it is very elegant and low-key. It seems to tell you that I am a gentleman. Rolex's style is very powerful and strong. show off. Trying to tell people that I am rich
I love both brands but have actually owned Omega and never had a Rolex. 2nd had Omegas cost less than new, that’s how it should be! The current situation with Rolex sports watches is stupid! 3k or more over retail for 2nd hand just because you can’t buy new is strange to me! They could sell more if they wanted to! 🤔
The Omega Speedmaster was the first watch on the moon. Later though, several astronauts wore personal Rolex GMT Masters to the moon, and thus Rolex has been there. Omega was there first though. As for the two brands - both are very nice. I do find it interesting though that it’s always Omega fans trying to compare themselves with Rolex (and never the other way).
Just Bought a planet ocean chrono. I paid 6k for it and it's a 600m wr chrono.... What kind of Rolex would you get for that money? Yes a beat up submariner.... They are just overpriced for what they are
Rolex vs Omega, Ford vs Chevrolet, or Mercedes vs BMW, both sides can build an argument to support their favorite. As a collector, I have both Omega and Rolex. Where Rolex clearly WINS over Omega is in value retention in the long term.
I could be wrong but Rolex put it into practice. The oyster or at least the screw down only existed as a concept. (I think) literally I could be misremembering haha
Ben King you are right. It was a technological article not put into practise in an industrialised setting. Rolex is the first to successfully implement that thought in that paper that was yet to be proven.
Rolex or Omega, both watch brands have that certain something. Both have made history, both have a big name, I prefer Omega watches because they have more love for detail. My favorite watch clock is the Speedmaster, the older the watch was the more character it shows is like a Jaguar E Type :)
Just my feelings- I’m an Apple fan and also have a Rolex and not an Omega as a disclaimer. Apple and Rolex were the original innovators but these days have stayed safe and left the actual innovation to Samsung/Omega. However, the amount of polish and refinement that goes into Apple/Rolex is unmatched, and they generally won’t release things that are not perfect (I said GENERALLY so calm down lol), whereas you have Samsung with the Galaxy Fold and exploding Note7 as recent examples and the complaints that I have personally (and anecdotally, sure) seen about Omega quality control and finishing issues. Of course Apple/Rolex has quality issues here and there (new MacBook keyboards, Bendgate, etc), but generally they’re known to be reliable and consistent. Another difference is the over saturation of limited editions that dilute their brand (the many Moonwatches, Samsung Galaxy S10 Active Extreme Edition etc), whereas Rolex/Apple keep their product line predictable but buyer-friendly.
I am more curious about these manufacturer's customer service. Is one more responsive than the other, how is the turn around time, does their servicing reflect "good or appropriate" value? I feel the story does not end after purchase, rather it merely begins. Maybe I am just philosophically optimistic. All fair points T3. :-)
Apples and oranges. Inverse to Omegas strategy, Rolex hate their customers and don't release enough product in order to drive high prices and the inflated aftermarket. Also with Rolex, design increments are glacially slow and conservative and while we are on the subject, why is it a given that only releasing the same calibres over and over is a good thing? Omega offers choice and choice is good. Bottom line, the design language of Rolex is a bit stuffy. Omega offers contemporary design and first class engineering at a much better price point. Full stop. Buying watches as an 'investment' is balderdash. Buy what you love.
Well....I sold the Rolex Sub I had, but can’t even consider flipping my SMP or PO. Personally, I think Omega compares nicely with Rolex. I am not concerned with having people know what watch I am wearing. In fact, my SMP might help me not get robbed.
Disclaimer - I own neither. However, before I knew about watches, I had a negative view of Rolex because it permeates pop culture excessively. This isn’t about trying to be contrarian, but because I knew of Omega less coming into the hobby, I had a more favorable view of them, and learning about watches hasn’t done enough to change my perception.
Personally, I find Omega's offerings more interesting than Rolex. Rolex had always been pretty boring to me, but over the past few years I have been interested in the OP39, Explorer II, and Air King.
You made very good points, but I will add one thing in Omega’s defense. Rolex has historically been very innovative (leaders in water resistance, date mechanism) but in the modern era Omega’s co-axial escapement is a big innovation, and Omega’s movements are more anti-magnetic than Rolex’s (1,000 Guass in the Milguass vs 15,000 guass for most Omega Coaxial movements)
I recently bought an omega seamaster 300m a week ago.. I have the money for a Rolex too but i choose the omega. It looks better than the submariner, its more available and has a better movement. I also don't need to send it to another freaking country to get it serviced if i want to. Not buying it for flipping it like most people that are Rolex fans do. Feels like that is the ultimate goal with it. IDK. Just my feeling when it comes to collectors.
Rolex is simply the only recognized luxury brand of the masses. Somehow, somewhere Rolex became the “only luxury watch” and the general public has never heard of other options. I was one of those prior to my developing an interest in watches years back. They’re tool watches and certainly a well made watch, but I believe even watch guys buy primarily for the satisfaction of someone noticing they have a “Rolex” on their wrist.
Omega is always chasing after Rolex in terms of brand awareness, but I think Omega makes better products than Rolex and for less money. Also you can actually buy an Omega if you go to an AD.
I own a lot of watches from a lot of different brands (Rolex, Omega....and even Patek, ALS, AP, JLC, etc). The one that gets the most wrist time from me is my Omega 42mm Planet Ocean in titanium. It simply checks all the boxes - beautiful, robust, waterproof, built like a tank, versatile in all situations, the list goes on an on. And the best part is that in a world where it seems like everyone wears a Submariner, this stands out from the crowd.
Very nice Video as always! Just a different question, I can’t finde the Time Away Channel anymore.. Has it been deleted or was it just renamed to Time 2 Drive?🤔 Cheers!
Two thoughts: First, Tim Mosso just did an extensive and sophisticated Watchbox commentary on Omega and Swatch Group about a week ago. If Omega’s strategy and historical problems interest you, then that’s the video to watch. Second, product placement and the Ian Fleming novels aside, Omega makes more sense as the watch worn by James Bond. Omega was an important supplier of watches to the RAF during World War II, and was publicly commended by the British government later on for its support during the war. The current Seamasters still have some of the DNA of those early military watches. And that’s the kind of thing “Commander” Bond would surely know about.
You ignore the fact that Rolex has gotten ridiculously overpriced, maybe because you're evaluation is from the business rather than consumer perspective.
Bongo Nutty how’s is Rolex being ridiculously overpriced when Omega is selling just slightly lower? And as of now, Omega’s watches are priced almost on par with Rolex. I was surprised that even at this price, some of their parts are not even pure gold but gold plated instead.
Rolex = Ferrari - Anyone and everyone knows the brand and is synonymous with Luxury/Performance. Omega = Porsche - More niche markets, appreciated by enthusiasts that know the same performance can be had at a better bang for your buck, albeit at depreciation cost.
Watching this with my Orient Bambino and never even touched an Omega or a Rolex in my life, one day i will have both to compare by miself... one goddammit day...
I have a no date Submariner and have owned the new Seamaster 300 (blue dial) for about six months. I prefer the oyster bracelet to the Omega and wish the Seamaster would lose the He escape valve- but otherwise the new Omega Seamaster 300 is a better watch inside and out, and certainly a much better value. Omega really upped its game with the new SMP.
The Time Teller I think from the videos I’ve seen specifically Horology House and the poor quality control they are just overwhelmed running shifts day and night.
@Mark Michael Chris at Horology House isn't making fake UA-cam videos, or fake Gram Posts, nor is he publishing fake Gram Pictures. Lol. Rolex isn't even at ORIS levels of execution or QC right now. The Crown can't even throw a rock and touch Omega. I've seen many Omegas at 20X; consistently better than Rolex pieces. And, believe it or not, the best Rolex pieces I've seen are 41mm Datejusts (relatively affordable).
Not fair comparison, anything looks like amateur compared to GS )) Tho I've seen a lot of Rolex close ups and never seen a single flaw. But ofc everything has a limit where enough magnification is gonna show imperfections.
I will take a contrarian view. I see both these brands are flawed. Omega makes too many references and has too many limited editions. Both issues dilute the brand equity. Rolex has too high of a markup and creates artificial scarcity. Rolex spends too much money on promotion and houses that cost on to the consumer. Rolex breaks the cardinal rule of the free market by not meeting demand of the consumer.
I personally believe that the game has flipped between the brands over the years. Omega used to play catch-up with Rolex, then vice versa. More recently though, the brands just seem to be sticking with their foundational material. Only difference being that Omega seems more comfortable with being a little outside of the box, but only a little. I wouldn’t say Rolex is playing it safe. It’s more of a “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” kind of situations. However I do agree that over the years, Omega has made way too many obscure and odd pieces.
In France (I would say it generalize to most of Europe), having a Rolex is considered sooo douchy as It is seen as a display of wealth (which is seen pretty negatively over there). However, as many watchmakers consider Rolex as their go to watch, it is hard to put down. On the other end, I think the constellation globemaster and deVille lines from Omega are more refined compared to their counterparts at Rolex.
Hi Jory, after my first comment, earlier on today, I'd like to add something else. You can't simply compare Rolex and Omega as they're two completely different things in my opinion. Rolex is just high-end products, where luxury meets technology; conversely, Omega it's simply where top-notch technology gets embedded with "affordable" luxury. Somebody says that a Rolex timepiece equals a solid "check" on your wrist and I somehow agree. On the other hand, Omega watches - apart for few limited editions, especially targeted to diehard collectors - are just like cars: the moment you drive them out of the dealer's premises, their value starts decreasing and..., speaking of watches, you can immediately find them online at much cheaper prices. So, once again I'd like to stress that Rolex is a must-have product to pose with and probably invest your money quite sensibly, while any Omega product is just nice, fun to wear and intriguing to research and study right before buying it.
The lever escapement, which is used in the vast majority of watches, was invented some 250 years ago by Thomas Mudge. Although it has been adopted universally, it has one fundamental flaw; it requires oil. That means regular servicing. In the 1990s Omega were looking for a product differentiator. They bought the rights to use the co-axial escapement of George Daniels, an English watchmaker who had been pedalling his invention around the watch world since the late 1960s. The supposed advantage of this escapement was the lack need for lubrication. This was seen as the answer to low maintenance quartz watches, especially the new eco drive models, which required zero lifetime servicing. Omega fitted it into the 2500 movement and all hell broke loose. The first problem was Pallet Fork Shifting. A slight shift in the escapement and it was enough to bring everything to a halt. It occurred whenever a watch contain the movement faced a shock. This was a result of poor testing in development and omega had to come up with a new shock system that stops the balance wheel from moving sideways under shock. No sooner had this problem been resolved than another one reared its head. Lubrication. With the Mudge escapement lubrication is needed to avoid wear on sliding parts. In theory the co-axial escapement doesn’t slide therefore it should need no lubrication. But any good engineer will tell you that impact involves slide and slide involved impact. I worked as an engineer in the tribology area where this is well recognised. Omega watches were now stopping not due to Pallet Fork Shifting, but due to something else. It turned out to be the impact itself. The Lubrication on the Mudge system not only reduced wear, it absorbed impact. Without it the coaxial escapement was hammering itself to pieces. The answer was two fold: slow down the beat speed and add lubrication. The beat speed determines a watches long term accuracy. The faster the beat the more accurate the movement (and the smoother the second hand movement). Omega had to drop it to 25,200 from 28,800. That was NOT a good move. Adding lubrication was a problem because the movement was not designed for it. Omega found they needed 30 oiling points on the 2 tier coaxial escapement. 10 on the escape wheel and 20 on the intermediate escape wheel teeth. So much for an oil free serviceless movement! And during that time watch lubrication improved to the point where watches could go for at least ten years without a service, making the whole point of the coaxial movement debatable.
I’d actually argue that Rolex is to Omega as Mercedes-Benz is to BMW. Mercedes/Rolly is definitively the more ‘luxe’ builder and both their designs and range stay beautiful and relatively consistent for decades. Bimmer/Omega chases after performance above all else - sometimes at the price of timeless design - and are far easier to get your hands on. They’re also not as afraid to get _weird_ with it (see: 15,000m dive watches, the folding car concept etc.) as the competition. Despite these philosophical differences, though, to a layman they’re perceived as roughly on the same ‘tier’ of car-/watch- making.
I prefer omega. I think they are better value as a watch (rolex better investment) due to the coaxial and METAS certified movements. The only thing is they are too big and too thick. But you got your facts right and i respect that. Keep it up!
I walked into a main UK watch dealership on Friday and bought an Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean Chronograph. It cost £7800. The big thing here it is nearly half the price retail than it’s competitor Rolex watch and I was able to buy the watch. I saw the watch and experienced the joy of choosing my watch and being able to buy it. On the other hand the Rolex was not available and I was told that I am ineligible to go on the Rolex list because they are not taking any more new potential customers. That says it all. Even if I want to buy a Rolex I can’t unless I pay an exorbitant amount to a re-seller. Fuck that and fuck Rolex. I’m buying to keep not sell and to pass on to my children. So thank you Omega for creating and producing great timepieces.
I love watches from both brands. I have watches from both brands. I think people are too obsessed with "is that better than that?". We are watch lovers in this beautiful community. Our love for time pieces connect us to each other. I feel we all should feel privileged we live in an era with so many choices of watches and brands. I appreciate reviewers like you and anyone else whom share our passion for watches. Thank you for your dedication.
Excellent rant Jory. I think these are two very different watch companies with very different marketing strategies. Rolex tightly controls the scarcity of their watches and Omega sells as many as they can, hence the number of models (limited edition, etc). Rolex's model generates a lot of free advertising and desirability where Omega generates profit through volume. Both make excellent watches. I like Omega a little more because they have higher quality for the price and less name recognition (probably not the norm).
Watch industry.. The only industry where being stationary is actually rewarded. Rolex is worse than Omega for the same reason that AP is worse than A Lange and Sohne. Brands that focus on only one line should be considered boring.. Because that's what they are.
Rolex isn't perfect far from it. I had a Submariner that had a catastrophic mechanical failure with the spring. Came back from servicing to discover that they did not pressure test it properly and there were two noticeable dust particles under the glass. It was enough to turn me off from Rolex.. I stick to Breitling & Omega. I have yet to have failures/qc issues with those. Hell.. I have yet to have any QC issues with two Orients that I have owned for 4 years.
@@solidarnosc9663I found this dude again 😂 Didn’t you just make a comment on someone buying his new Rolex Submariner and criticizing it instead of being happy? And I thought you owned a Datejust, not a Submariner? And I thought you sold the Datejust instead lol. You never mentioned this magical Submariner you happened to have. Unless you never actually owned either. Rolex makes better watches 🤷♂️ More accurate, better power reserve, better tick rates, better clasps, better bracelets, better finishing, better materials, better brand. Let me know if you need proof of my collection. I’ve owned the watches and can actually speak on them.
@@fj7509 The Rolex marketing team now stalks and nags me on UA-cam because a) they didn’t like the criticism and b) I did not list my entire watch collection (both present and prior). Plenty of people have had issues with Rolex’s customer service and QC, me being one of them. You need validation from me to be happy with you wristwatch? And save the supercilious tone for your wife, no one here cares.. oh and be sure to send me proof of your collection because you actually think I care about you.
To answer yourr question. Omega is winning in terms of quality and innovation. Rolex is destroying in "Brand Recognition". Omega is the first watch on the moon, deepest watch ever, official time keeeper of olympics, james bond watch. Also they are co axial and master chronometer - big feats. Yet to the normal person, rolex build that reputation. They could sell you a plastic watch, but if it says "Rolex" on it, it will sell for a lot. So bottomline, Omega, quality, watch making and innovation, they are king. Rolex - god marketing. You are welcome.
When I was younger I had no interest in watches but I knew a brand called Rolex existed. I didn’t know of any other brands and even referred to my dads seamaster as a Rolex watch. Every brand wants people to make a connection between their name and product. If a person then unknowingly makes that connection they will instantly think of that brand name when they think of their product. Rolex has nailed their marketing and that’s why they’re the most famous watch brand in the world.
The first luxury watch I ever owned was an Omega Seamaster Chrono Titanium. I've owned several Rolex since then, Sub, DJ41, YMII and the one watch that I still wear more than those is my Omega. Comfortable, understated and it means more to me when an Omega wearer makes a comment about my Omega.
I fell the best thing to do after this is watch watchfinder and co’s vid on this topic to get both sides. Such a fun topic as it leans on the long heritage of both brands. I feel recently omega has started to climb back on top ;)
Good point. Another alternative is to watch some of Tim Mosso's reviews and comparisons between Omega and Rolex, *and read the comments below. People are recognizing Omegas' "turnaround" (proper phrase? Awakening?) and quality step-up along w/the IMHO better Co-Axial movement. Omega seems to be streamlining their brand a bit more as well, at least relative to the past. I own one of each (42mm PO and 14270 Explorer) and to me they compliment vs compete against each other. Both are somewhat Bond-related as well, so that's a push at the end of the day. ⌚👍
No board members and shareholders pushing for more profit making Rolex go in directions they otherwise may not go in. This is where omega suffer and is the key difference in the brands. Continuing to produce more watches striving for greater profit had damaged the brand and continues to do so. Tim Mosso did a great video on this as well.
Valid points all around regarding the business model's affect on brand equity. But what's your opinion if you just compare watch for watch wrt quality, design, and innovation?
I think better pertains more to marketing and supply management... the watches on a stand alone basis are certainly comparable as you've attested... I believe you've mentioned it yourself in so many words, enjoy the watch for yourself, not others...
The main problem I think is the marketing and product line applied by both of the companies. Throughout the years, Rolex marketing strategies has successfully planted their products in consumer's mind and even for non watch enthusiasts, the first thing you asked them bout Rolex, they might tell you is a gold shinny watch, and some of them might even answer Submariner. For omega if you asked the same way, I don't think people could answer even one of their products.
Who is better Ferrari or Lamborghini? None! Is matter of taste and preference, although I will concede that Rolex still has that generally accepted higher status, is just relative to personal style and value. I can't imagine somebody looking at me down, for wearing a stunning Seamaster, just because he flaunts a Submariner.
Rolex will always be considered better because it is not based on whether it is a better product but simply brand perception and how the public feels about Rolex. That is something you cant dispute, fight, debate the product over. Once a brand name is stuck in the minds of the public, it just never goes away. Some examples which even effect what we call the item; bandage vs bandaid (the brand), in-line skates vs Rollerblades (the brand), petroleum vs Vasceline (the brand).
Hmm. Perhaps people will turn to Omega when they get tired of waiting for Rolex supply and feel paying for a Rolex might be financially irresponsible. Two of the reasons why I picked up a Speedmaster instead of a Submariner. Doesn't help that I've always wanted a Submariner since I was a kid, and I'll probably still get one in the future.
I would say not directly comparable. I would say both have their own individual identities. Personally, I would rather have the vast majority of the Omega catalogue (as it stands right now) as they suit my tastes better. Though I do like the Rolex OP in Red Grape a ton! But of all of the luxury watches I'm getting a Grand Seiko Golden Snowflake before anything else.
I disagree about Basel. I think Omega made a bigger splash releasing their watches on their own this year because they weren’t overshadowed. You are right about too many variations though.
Grateful for the excellent knowledge once again, Good Sir.
At least you can actually buy Omegas.
And... I still don't want one.
LOL
@@AndyWilly25 sounds like Rolex marketing to me. Why you wouldn't want an aqua terra 38mm or speedy is very strange
@@tirrelldaveport3671 no one wants to buy from a brand that also sells notepads
Agreed!!
I personally prefer Omega, but I still respect Rolex immensely.
HiFi
I think that Omega and Rolex are aiming for different things. Omega is aiming to deliver a luxury product that is pushing the boundaries of movements and design while maintaining attainability. Rolex is aiming to be the MOST desired watch brand in the world while maintaining timeless design and reliability. Both brands are achieving their goal.
I have an Omega smp wave dial but I really want a stainless steel sports model Rolex. One brand is attainable luxury while the other is desired luxury
Well said!
As far as being attainable, I dont think Omega is more so than Rolex retail wise. It is just you can find Omega on the grey market for cheaper (which sets the bar for used as well). But brand new Aqua Terra is about $5,800 or so and a new Datejust is around $6,900. So no huge difference. But I find most people in the market for an Omega is looking to spend less than 4k while a Rolex consumer is looking to spend up to 8k or so. The Rolex consumer is not expecting a sale/deal while the Omega consumer usually wont buy without a deal.
@@planetdee3587 I think you are confusing attainable with affordable.
Anyone with the cash ready can walk into just about any AD or boutique and ask for the Omega they desire.
Next to no one can walk into an AD or boutique with the cash and ask for a Rolex they desire.
This is what I mean by attainable.
@@joelminear-kulpinski4434, I am a bit confused. I was trying to point out their prices are not that different from each other as far as retail goes. So when you say Omega is trying to be more attainable, I disagree. Their prices are almost the same so they are equally attainable almost.
@@planetdee3587 regardless of price even if both brands sold their watches for the same price, you can not go into any AD and ask to buy a Rolex brand new because Rolex have choked supply. At the same AD you tried to get a Rolex you WILL be able to buy an Omega. This makes the Omega attainable and the Rolex desired.
I hope that is more clear.
Depends on what you consider “better”. As far as brand marketing, management, Rolex is better. As far as watch making I’ll take Omega any day.
Well the compromise though is you get a chunky poor looking watch. Witg rolex you get the specs AND the looks. Oh and you can resell it 10 years later for double the price. So your also making money on the side
Not sure about rolex having better marketing nowadays.. I dont understand their ads at all. Omega's ads on the other hand.. ❤
@@94jmbottaro Never hat that bs. no one will buy your beat up 10 year old Gmt. There s very vew rolexes worth reselling. Def more than omegas tho. But calling omegas chunky and ugly? I bet you have either watches and no idea what you are talking about.
@@94jmbottaro it depends on the watch model & this is obviously subjective, but IMO the omega often looks better than Rolex.
@@mfesch7386 nobody wants your 10 year old GMT? The market doubling over the last 2-3 years begs to differ. Pre-ceramic subs were 5k like 4 years ago. I dont care what era Rolex you have, they have all doubled in price over the last 5-6 years. Not to say that will happen again but who knows. I personally think they're moving up market on purpose and putting Tudor in their place to contend in their old price bracket. I think there's still value increases that haven't been realized yet. In both brands.
O wait... you are just talking about business, branding, marketing, ect...
You are not actually talking about the watches.
yeahh only marketing
I’m an 80’s baby so Bond was played by Roger Moore wearing a funky Seiko! 😂
Exactly. My James Bond wears a Seiko. Rolex and Omega were for old people in the Eighties. Digital was the way to go.
I loved the Seiko G757 from Octopussy!!
Roger is the BEST!!! And seiko is the BEST!!!!
@Jurre is Online Yeah of course
Ps i wasnt awnsering to you
Jurre is Online you aren’t anonymous at all lol. UA-cam allows to check posters location exact to the city and street Google privacy:).
1.rolex fail to go to moon
2.history is shorter than omega
3.over priced
4.too many fakes
5.i love u rolex
bad watches don't get to be faked))
@Michael Tampa No wonder Apollo 13 failed. Lol
correction Jason, one of the astronaut wear Rolex GMT (1675). Only Omega get the credit due to the sponsor of NASA.
@@martinyong2806 well, he was wearing a Rolex... But inside of the suit (not exposed to the moon conditions, i.e. vacuum, temperature...)... It is next to nothing.
I liked the rolex explorer because of the everest heritage.. then i found out it was not even an explorer but an oyster... oh well kinda wierd but ok. Then i found out rolex was not even first at summit on hillarys wrist but it was smith.... damn rolex im not gonna buy your watches now lol
I prefer Omega. The Aqua Terra in blue is absolutely beautiful.
I just traded my 1990 datejust 16233 tapestry dial for a 2016 Aqua Terra day date 41mm black dial.... even swap.
Cause you came to afford omega before rolex
Thats my dream watch
Radnaksi Demha Nope, because Rolex’s are just very overpriced tool watches. They only really rose to popularity over the last 20 years. And that is 100% due to pop culture, not because they make the best watches.
Radnaksi Demha I prefer the look of the Omega.
Rolex is an obvious choice for everyone but if I see a person wearing Omega, I respect that guy more in terms of horology. In my opinion he is sophisticated.
Same here
Well said mate. Well said! I have both brands Deepsea and PO. I have both divers for what they are made for. Diving…but when I wear either one my eyes are always focused on the Omega. The movement is amazing and all the finishes are top notch. Where with the Rolex I do see flaws. Only slightly but they are there. Both watches are great but Omega to me has more history. The service I received from Omega is absolutely amazing. The Rolex AD didn’t give to shits. I get follow up calls from Omega. I don’t get anything from the Rolex AD. I wear my Rolex more so that my Omega New sunburnt Orange doesn’t get scratched. I prefer Omega any days. Rolex is big now due to social media. Remember back early 2000. No one wanted the Daytona. They either went for the sub or Omega SMP. Now that’s changed cause of platforms like this.
Both are good. But I do think omega is more innovative
More watch tech for the price.
As a famous watch channel once said “Rolex sells watches, Omega makes them”. Rolex is a better brand, and I qualify that by saying that they have immortal brand recognition and have become a status symbol. The first watch brand in the forefront of everyone’s mind is Rolex, and they have profited greatly because of that. However, if you compare the spec sheets between a Seamaster 300m and a Rolex Submariner, you’ll find something surprising. The Seamaster has a better movement and overall resistances than the Submariner, and the cost to service an Omega vs a Rolex is significantly cheaper. So why then does the Sub cost double that of the Seamaster?
Rolex is the brand every watch company aspires to be, Omega is the brand everyone’s build quality strives to maintain.
I say this as an owner of a Seamaster 300 and a Rolex 114300 Rhodium. The Omega is my everyday wear, the Rolex is my dress watch. I feel like that usage speaks to the soul of both brands, just my hot take on the discussion.
I agree. I am a Rolex fanboy. However, after I saw the New Omega Seamaster 300M Professional AKA The Great White. I immediately purchased it with both straps and I wear it more then my Rolex 116613LB.
A more appropriate question would be "is Rolex TWICE as good as Omega?"
I think we can all agree that the answer to that is hell no.
Full of Mischief well explained.
Do you think a Rolex submariner is 100 times better than an Invicta pro diver? Probably not.
Your cheap straw man argument doesn't work because you pay the price for the grade of perfection and not price-performance.
Before the quartz crisis in the 70s Omega was the standard in luxury watches of that price range. Today's Rolex status is the result of their marketing smarts combined with Omega trying too hard to keep up with new trends and not sticking up to their guns. Anyway, today we could say that their brand prestige is comparable overall. If we talk strict technology, the last Seamaster line surpasses their Rolex counterparts.
Marco Salis Casio surpasses Rolex and seamaster in technology, Rolex surpasses Casio and Seamaster in durability and Seamaster surpasses Casio and Rolex in limited editions.
@@Touyoujin Casio is also a QUARTZ watch. Can't even compare that.
Pointsur's World i was referring to watch technology as a whole may it be quartz, electronic or mechanical. The objective of these technologies only serve one purpose and one purpose only, which is to tell time precisely. Mechanical watch is obsolete and what left for these watches are the emotional / psychological side of it, portrayal of luxury, class, status and taste as well as the beauty of craftsmanship. I would say most who own these would care less about what’s inside these watches.
i dont think you can compare the prestige at all tbh. basically everyone anywhere in the world knows what rolex is, whether they are into watches, young or old ect. omega isnt on that level. that said purely within the watch community id say they are probably about equal yeah.
@@Touyoujin And that separates the difference between a watch wearer and a watch enthusiast. Yes we know that quartz may be high tech, but a lot of people don't want that. It has not o soul to it. I appreciate a handmade timepiece. It says a lot when someone can make something by hand that is extremely accurate. Watchmaking should never become a lost art. If mankind is ever reduced to the stone age he will still know how to keep time. A quartz watch will do you no good.
All valid points, but for me, Omega is a no brainer since I like to wear watches at work, and im one of the few who actually needs a crazy antimagnetic watch, which rolex doesnt offer. (Milgauss doesnt cut it actually). Besides that, the amount of attention the word rolex gets when worn , is not for me. Just a personal preference, but I rather have more of a sleeper on the wrist than a watch that constantly begs the question, “is it real”.
Very true. Omega is such a respectable brand and people who don't know aboit watches might not even know it. And that's an advantage because if you have a Rolex, either people will ask you if it's real or if they know it's real then any thief will know how much it can cost and will want it.
Alain Leon g shock is a no brainer for me
Rolex has better marketing. Omega has better watches.
Ilias Tasikas not true at all which isn’t surprising for non horological fan. They have different Mission one aims to improve on existing designs while the other love churning out new things (omega).
@@JAYJAY-ch4ik I spend time almost every day the last 10 years for watches,movements,companies,watchmaking history and you are saying to me that I am a non horological fan.I think you have right.I am not just a watch fan,I am a watch geek. You apparently have never looked the features but that's okay I will educate you.
Omega watches have:
1) 15.000 gauss magnetic resistance (Rolex magnetic resistance is under 1000 gauss).
2)Two barrels in series which help the maintenance of the accuracy after 24h.
3)METAS certification (which tests the watch as a whole with 8 tests and not only the uncased movement).
4)By far better decoration - finishing(that's why Omega watches have transparent cases).
5)Co Axial escapement
6) 6 positions adjusted (not 5 as Rolex)
7)Better power reserve,water resistance,shock resistance and silicon hairsprings.
Rolex watches have:
1)Fake waitlists
2)Overpriced watches
3)No movement decoration
4)No movement innovation
5)The best resale value
But people are still buying them. Do you know why?Marketing is the answer.Also design is subjective but movement innovation is objective.
JAY JAY I don't hate Rolex,in fact my best 4 luxury watch companies are Omega,Longines,Rolex,Panerai but we must admit the superiority of Omega movements.
Very well said 🤙🏽
@@iliastasikas9553 also, I don't understand how you can compare two things (the time teller comparison) without stating some criteria first. The only thing he mention is the fact that Omega has a larger watch model base... and this is a bad thing?! I understand if you are a watch geek that wants to buy ALL possible models, then is complicated indeed... but how man people like these are in the world?
Ilias Tasikas From what u listed for omega, it doesn’t prove their watches are better. It’s just simply better value for money. Rolex has been keeping things simple for quality and durability given that they have categorized most of their watches as tool for professionals, making subtle improvements to existing designs. As a watch geek, u should know better.
There is no denying the Rolex is the more well know and desired between the two.
However, once you remove general brand recognition and hype, I personally prefer Omega, for three reasons.
The first reason is that I prefer their watches. I like most of their designs, especially those twisted lugs, and as I have a large wrist the larger size and thickness on average doesn’t bother me as much as it might some. I like their bracelets, their cases, their dials, and especially their movements. I personally think the 8900 and 8800 are the equal or better to any Rolex movement, and the 9900 blows the Dayton movement away.
Secondly, as someone who appreciates brand history, I appreciate the history of Omega more. The brand strives for the pursuit of excellence like few others, which can be seen in their results during the Chronometer trials before the Quartz Crisis. Once this brand ethos gets taken into account, it becomes easier to forgive them for diving headfirst into Quartz technology, because advancement in watchmaking is what they’re all about. By comparison, Rolex’s decision not to do so was a massive gamble that they’re are simply lucky worked out.
Appreciating the brands overall history is also part of the reason Vacheron Constantine is my favourite high horology watchmaker.
Finally, I prefer Omega to Rolex because of the hype that Rolex has. While I can definitely appreciate that Rolex’s are phenomenal watches, I don’t think they are good enough to warrant the reaction they garner. When a new Rolex is released the wait list stretches to years within months, and then resale for 50-100% over retail. Rolex’s are almost always worth their retail value and no more (sometimes they’re even a little overpriced). I feel the admiration Rolex has within the watch community is deserved, but the pedestal they get put on in the general community is not. For this reason I prefer Omega, as I find them to be the equal to Rolex, only without the unnecessary hype, and often accompanied stigma. It also doesn’t hurt that this also makes Omega much easier to acquire.
The third reason was probably the main reason I started looking at Omega over Rolex, but the more I looked, the more the other two reasons rose to prominence. Rolex’s hype is now very much a minor reason, compared to their design and history, to prefer Omega for me now.
Actually the apology of an Omega owner. Had the same one. But let's cut to the chase. You own a Rolex, everybody knows, you own an Omega, almost nobody gives a shit or you get surrounded by Moonwatch fanboys. Yeah as I said too their movements are impressive so is a Tesla. But still you want the Porsche.....if you own an Omega, you mostly own it for yourself to pamper. You own a Rolex, you get pampered, mostly with envy or somebody will cut your hand off :D
Reason number three was pretty much 90% for me why Omega will always be > Rolex 😅
I feel that both Rolex and Omega should be held at same standard. I personally feel Omega is better personally and prefer their willingness to try new things.
I'm more of an Omega man, but I do like Tudor a lot. Omega is certainly a lot more than the Speedmaster.
Rolex is not better than Omega. They have better marketing. But the one pushing the boundaries is Omega.
Totally agree with you on this that Omega made too many random watches but now they have narrowed down their catalogue and Omega is definitely comparable to Rolex.
Have 3 Omegas and other brands. Next one will be Omega again. :)
3??? Bro buy me one
As a Swiss-American that visits the CH a lot, consensus is that Omega and Rolex are both "entry level, lower mid tier" watches. In fact, my Grandpa use to hate on Rolex because it not even a an OG Swiss product (Rolex was founded in London). Me, I love both companies and own them both. I do think the tide is turning against Rolex and Omega closes the gap with their new Omega SMP 300 2018. I do agree, Omega saturated their lines and put way too many out there. But they are trimming the fat. Rolex...well I think they're trying to be like PP, AP, VC but they are failing miserably. Not to mention, people in the West aren't very patient. If Rolex spent their money in ramping up production instead of marketing then no problem. But those wait lists are getting annoying and people are moving on to other watch brands. Just my 2 cents
Nope, people are buying second market at a premium.
That only makes Rolex even more desiderable.
Regarding the SMP 300M, it is such an overdesigned, (for me) ugly watch, toyish looking thing.
Sorry but the SMP 300m is not going anywhere near on killing the Sub. I can see much more the Seamaster 300 doing that, but not the M version.
What is a mid tier brand you’d recommend over those two?
@@johnrooney507 Can't go wrong with JLC or Cartier. Try looking at some of the German Watch Makers too. Anything Glasshute is good to goo
@@bber45 Cartier looks too unisex for me.
I honestly don't care....both are amazing watch brands, they both had their off-days in watches but still make the best, most iconic and influential watches. The subby the speedy the seamaster the seadweller just to name a few...they're all great. Stop comparing them, they're different.
Kristóf Máthé exactly.
When I started to get into watches I wanted to buy a submariner date but when I realize that I had to wait at least 4 years to get one I informed myself about an alternative. That was how I discovered the omega seamaster line. Eventually I bought a seamaster profesionell 300m date black dial and I couldn't be happier about my purchase. They are mechanically superior to the sub and even cheaper and easier to get. I think that rolex is better at marketing but omega is better as watchmaker.
But deep down you know it's not a Sub)))
@@smashexentertainment676 Rolex don’t need me, so I don’t need them. Great product-awful attitude, and I’m surely not going to butter up to any fancy shop assistants to get something that I pay hard earned money for. For me Rolex doesn’t exist.
@@John-g1v8s I would love to own a few Rolex watches some day, but I also love to keep my hands intact, since expensive stuff in my country makes me a constant target for burglars. I made a wish list of watches I'd get if I ever score a jackpot, and none of the watches on a list have a 'more available' alternative. If I want a watch, I'm not gonna be replacing it with another watch, coz it will always bug me that it's not THE WATCH. All the watches I own were picked for all the good reasons other than alternative to the watch I wish I had.
Making customer wait is them trying to show high want and exclusivity to justify the high prices they charge. These are juts watches I don’t collect them, don’t need to “impress” anyone with the brand I wear or need any status behind what’s on my wrist so Rolex is not even an option for me. I want bets bang for buck, if I were going to spend Rolex- Omega money I would go Omega but I personally would look other brands like Longines, Nomos, etc. over both as these offer quality at a better price points.
You should have qualified at the start what you mean by “better”. If you you remove the relative “go to market” strategies of both companies and just focus on just the characteristics, quality at price point you may come out with a different outcome...
You seem to have ignored that Omega was a much more respected brand in say the 20's to 70's. They did stuff things up in the 80's and since. But an Omega from the 60's or 70's is a much better watch than a Rolex, it's not even close!
I like that I can walk into any Omega boutique and hand the sales person cash, and walk out with the model of my choice.
There’s no chance in hell I can ever walk into a Rolex AD, hand the sales person cash, and walk out with the Rolex model I desire.
I have respect for Rolex and would love to own one some day, but I put that out of my head a long time ago due to their crappy games.
Rolex is better at marketing and at finding business opportunities, it was created by a business man.
Omega has always been the better watch, from movements to reliability, it was created by horologists.
Rolex is better at the subjective game - plays with peoples emotions, making them crave their products and making them believe they have something unique and great on their wrist with their watches.
Omega is better at the objective game - makes a better product and at an affordable price, great bang for your buck so to speak.
Rolex is catching up in the objective game with better movements, and Omega is catching up in the subjective game with marketing in movies and working in NASA campaigns.
Definitely an interesting battle between these two horology titans, I do feel however that Omega is catching up faster than Rolex at each others game.
Like someone wrote before and I agree with the analogy: Rolex-Omega like Apple-Samsung. I'd love to have a Seamaster rather than a Submariner.
Very well said and I agree 💯
I wish I could give you my honest opinion, but unfortunately I don't have the money to own an Omega or a Rolex... But if I could one day buy one of them I'll definitely go for an Omega Seamaster 300!! Just what my heart and mind telling me…cheers Jory… Have a successful weak everyone!!
Same here bro, in everything you wrote.
Yeah omega should just concentrate on consolidating their best references and making them better, insted of introducing a whole plethora of random references.
I've been able to enjoy 5 different Omegas and for me that is why I prefer them to a Rolex. You can actually enjoy them and attain them and benefit from the savings that can be made in the second hand market. For me Omega is more fun as an enthusiast...Rolex is too serious due to their MRSP.
I like them both. But, I tried to wear Seamster and Sub (I don't own them), and wearing SM I felt cool. I didn't get that feeling from Sub. So, slight advantage to Omegas "cool" factor.
So why did NASA picked Omega?? You didn’t discuss reliability . My dads rolex broke down not his sea master😵
it was a while ago since men been on the moon, and yes at the time Omega was superior to Rolex, but today is another story.
If you are comfortable in who you are then you will be happy with either. For me that is a seamaster, a speedmaster and a constellation.
I totally agree. I am a Rolex Fanboy however, I did purchase me THE GREAT WHITE and couldn't be happier.
Omega makes a tourbillon movement the most valuable complication.
I really like Omega because it is very elegant and low-key. It seems to tell you that I am a gentleman. Rolex's style is very powerful and strong. show off. Trying to tell people that I am rich
👏👏👏👏👏🙌🙌🙌🙌
I love both brands but have actually owned Omega and never had a Rolex. 2nd had Omegas cost less than new, that’s how it should be! The current situation with Rolex sports watches is stupid! 3k or more over retail for 2nd hand just because you can’t buy new is strange to me! They could sell more if they wanted to! 🤔
Two words - moonwatch (just Omega were on the Moon), tourbillon (which Rolex has newer made) ..
The Omega Speedmaster was the first watch on the moon. Later though, several astronauts wore personal Rolex GMT Masters to the moon, and thus Rolex has been there. Omega was there first though.
As for the two brands - both are very nice. I do find it interesting though that it’s always Omega fans trying to compare themselves with Rolex (and never the other way).
Two words- earrings and diaries (both of which Omega now make)
"Is Omega better than Rolex" is a rare question, cause the answer is obvious-everyone knows which of the two made it to the moon!
Just Bought a planet ocean chrono. I paid 6k for it and it's a 600m wr chrono.... What kind of Rolex would you get for that money? Yes a beat up submariner.... They are just overpriced for what they are
BTW yes its a junky Boi but I'm too so it looks okay
Rolex vs Omega, Ford vs Chevrolet, or Mercedes vs BMW, both sides can build an argument to support their favorite. As a collector, I have both Omega and Rolex. Where Rolex clearly WINS over Omega is in value retention in the long term.
Rolex did not create the function of the Oyster...they bought the patent from someone else.
I could be wrong but Rolex put it into practice. The oyster or at least the screw down only existed as a concept. (I think) literally I could be misremembering haha
Ben King you are right. It was a technological article not put into practise in an industrialised setting. Rolex is the first to successfully implement that thought in that paper that was yet to be proven.
Rolex or Omega, both watch brands have that certain something. Both have made history, both have a big name, I prefer Omega watches because they have more love for detail. My favorite watch clock is the Speedmaster, the older the watch was the more character it shows is like a Jaguar E Type :)
Rolex is Apple and Omega is Samsung. Depending on how you feel about one set of those companies will say a lot about the other...
I know right. Perfect analogy.
And that's exactly why I'd buy an Omega rather than a Rolex. Besides, they are more affordable ;)
Just my feelings- I’m an Apple fan and also have a Rolex and not an Omega as a disclaimer. Apple and Rolex were the original innovators but these days have stayed safe and left the actual innovation to Samsung/Omega. However, the amount of polish and refinement that goes into Apple/Rolex is unmatched, and they generally won’t release things that are not perfect (I said GENERALLY so calm down lol), whereas you have Samsung with the Galaxy Fold and exploding Note7 as recent examples and the complaints that I have personally (and anecdotally, sure) seen about Omega quality control and finishing issues. Of course Apple/Rolex has quality issues here and there (new MacBook keyboards, Bendgate, etc), but generally they’re known to be reliable and consistent. Another difference is the over saturation of limited editions that dilute their brand (the many Moonwatches, Samsung Galaxy S10 Active Extreme Edition etc), whereas Rolex/Apple keep their product line predictable but buyer-friendly.
I am more curious about these manufacturer's customer service. Is one more responsive than the other, how is the turn around time, does their servicing reflect "good or appropriate" value?
I feel the story does not end after purchase, rather it merely begins. Maybe I am just philosophically optimistic.
All fair points T3. :-)
Apples and oranges.
Inverse to Omegas strategy, Rolex hate their customers and don't release enough product in order to drive high prices and the inflated aftermarket. Also with Rolex, design increments are glacially slow and conservative and while we are on the subject, why is it a given that only releasing the same calibres over and over is a good thing?
Omega offers choice and choice is good. Bottom line, the design language of Rolex is a bit stuffy.
Omega offers contemporary design and first class engineering at a much better price point. Full stop. Buying watches as an 'investment' is balderdash.
Buy what you love.
Well....I sold the Rolex Sub I had, but can’t even consider flipping my SMP or PO. Personally, I think Omega compares nicely with Rolex. I am not concerned with having people know what watch I am wearing. In fact, my SMP might help me not get robbed.
Disclaimer - I own neither. However, before I knew about watches, I had a negative view of Rolex because it permeates pop culture excessively. This isn’t about trying to be contrarian, but because I knew of Omega less coming into the hobby, I had a more favorable view of them, and learning about watches hasn’t done enough to change my perception.
There are more Omega models I drool over compared to Rolex
Jim Beam proportionately the designs omega saturates of course u have more designs u liked from omega it’s only natural.
Rolex’s designs carry its own identity so it’s not for everyone while Omega is trying hard to cater for the mass with its massive collections.
Personally, I find Omega's offerings more interesting than Rolex. Rolex had always been pretty boring to me, but over the past few years I have been interested in the OP39, Explorer II, and Air King.
I think if we compare modern Omega and Rolex, some Omega with antimagnetic movements are better than modern Rolex.
You made very good points, but I will add one thing in Omega’s defense. Rolex has historically been very innovative (leaders in water resistance, date mechanism) but in the modern era Omega’s co-axial escapement is a big innovation, and Omega’s movements are more anti-magnetic than Rolex’s (1,000 Guass in the Milguass vs 15,000 guass for most Omega Coaxial movements)
I recently bought an omega seamaster 300m a week ago.. I have the money for a Rolex too but i choose the omega. It looks better than the submariner, its more available and has a better movement. I also don't need to send it to another freaking country to get it serviced if i want to.
Not buying it for flipping it like most people that are Rolex fans do. Feels like that is the ultimate goal with it. IDK. Just my feeling when it comes to collectors.
Rolex is simply the only recognized luxury brand of the masses. Somehow, somewhere Rolex became the “only luxury watch” and the general public has never heard of other options. I was one of those prior to my developing an interest in watches years back. They’re tool watches and certainly a well made watch, but I believe even watch guys buy primarily for the satisfaction of someone noticing they have a “Rolex” on their wrist.
Omega is always chasing after Rolex in terms of brand awareness, but I think Omega makes better products than Rolex and for less money. Also you can actually buy an Omega if you go to an AD.
I own a lot of watches from a lot of different brands (Rolex, Omega....and even Patek, ALS, AP, JLC, etc). The one that gets the most wrist time from me is my Omega 42mm Planet Ocean in titanium. It simply checks all the boxes - beautiful, robust, waterproof, built like a tank, versatile in all situations, the list goes on an on. And the best part is that in a world where it seems like everyone wears a Submariner, this stands out from the crowd.
Very nice Video as always!
Just a different question, I can’t finde the Time Away Channel anymore.. Has it been deleted or was it just renamed to Time 2 Drive?🤔
Cheers!
Two thoughts: First, Tim Mosso just did an extensive and sophisticated Watchbox commentary on Omega and Swatch Group about a week ago. If Omega’s strategy and historical problems interest you, then that’s the video to watch.
Second, product placement and the Ian Fleming novels aside, Omega makes more sense as the watch worn by James Bond. Omega was an important supplier of watches to the RAF during World War II, and was publicly commended by the British government later on for its support during the war. The current Seamasters still have some of the DNA of those early military watches. And that’s the kind of thing “Commander” Bond would surely know about.
Hi first post love your channel,
I am hopefully getting a Omega sea master 300 this week, Rolex I just don't like looks out dated.
You ignore the fact that Rolex has gotten ridiculously overpriced, maybe because you're evaluation is from the business rather than consumer perspective.
Bongo Nutty how’s is Rolex being ridiculously overpriced when Omega is selling just slightly lower? And as of now, Omega’s watches are priced almost on par with Rolex. I was surprised that even at this price, some of their parts are not even pure gold but gold plated instead.
Rolex = Ferrari - Anyone and everyone knows the brand and is synonymous with Luxury/Performance.
Omega = Porsche - More niche markets, appreciated by enthusiasts that know the same performance can be had at a better bang for your buck, albeit at depreciation cost.
Watching this with my Orient Bambino and never even touched an Omega or a Rolex in my life, one day i will have both to compare by miself... one goddammit day...
Let me tell you. I have both and I couldn't be any more happier. Best of Both Worlds.
I have a no date Submariner and have owned the new Seamaster 300 (blue dial) for about six months. I prefer the oyster bracelet to the Omega and wish the Seamaster would lose the He escape valve- but otherwise the new Omega Seamaster 300 is a better watch inside and out, and certainly a much better value. Omega really upped its game with the new SMP.
Ah no! To many videos out there showing macro videos that Rolex quality is significantly 2nd tier compared to GS, Omega, Etc.
TRUE LIBERTY So true. And on watches that sell for nearly high Horology prices.
Grand Seiko absolutely makes better, more highly detailed watches than Rolex- however that was not the comparison being assessed in this episode. 👍👍
The Time Teller I think from the videos I’ve seen specifically Horology House and the poor quality control they are just overwhelmed running shifts day and night.
@Mark Michael Chris at Horology House isn't making fake UA-cam videos, or fake Gram Posts, nor is he publishing fake Gram Pictures. Lol. Rolex isn't even at ORIS levels of execution or QC right now. The Crown can't even throw a rock and touch Omega. I've seen many Omegas at 20X; consistently better than Rolex pieces. And, believe it or not, the best Rolex pieces I've seen are 41mm Datejusts (relatively affordable).
Not fair comparison, anything looks like amateur compared to GS )) Tho I've seen a lot of Rolex close ups and never seen a single flaw. But ofc everything has a limit where enough magnification is gonna show imperfections.
I will take a contrarian view. I see both these brands are flawed. Omega makes too many references and has too many limited editions. Both issues dilute the brand equity. Rolex has too high of a markup and creates artificial scarcity. Rolex spends too much money on promotion and houses that cost on to the consumer. Rolex breaks the cardinal rule of the free market by not meeting demand of the consumer.
I personally believe that the game has flipped between the brands over the years. Omega used to play catch-up with Rolex, then vice versa. More recently though, the brands just seem to be sticking with their foundational material. Only difference being that Omega seems more comfortable with being a little outside of the box, but only a little. I wouldn’t say Rolex is playing it safe. It’s more of a “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” kind of situations. However I do agree that over the years, Omega has made way too many obscure and odd pieces.
Reading comments here saying Rolex is all marketing. Well, duh. ALL luxury items are marketing. Marketing is another thing omega sucks at.
In France (I would say it generalize to most of Europe), having a Rolex is considered sooo douchy as It is seen as a display of wealth (which is seen pretty negatively over there). However, as many watchmakers consider Rolex as their go to watch, it is hard to put down. On the other end, I think the constellation globemaster and deVille lines from Omega are more refined compared to their counterparts at Rolex.
It feels like in most cases, Rolex guys are only one watch collectors, meanwhile Omega guys use multiple watches depending on the occasion
Wearing my Scuba Dude Vostok Amphibia regulated to ±2 sec/day error. Can't afford a Rolex or Omega.
I have both and like both in my collection.
I give edge to omega for price, available, mechanics and variety
Rolex beat omega with prices. It was strategic increase of prices (when both were about the same price). That made rolex feel more luxurious.
Hi Jory, after my first comment, earlier on today, I'd like to add something else. You can't simply compare Rolex and Omega as they're two completely different things in my opinion. Rolex is just high-end products, where luxury meets technology; conversely, Omega it's simply where top-notch technology gets embedded with "affordable" luxury. Somebody says that a Rolex timepiece equals a solid "check" on your wrist and I somehow agree. On the other hand, Omega watches - apart for few limited editions, especially targeted to diehard collectors - are just like cars: the moment you drive them out of the dealer's premises, their value starts decreasing and..., speaking of watches, you can immediately find them online at much cheaper prices.
So, once again I'd like to stress that Rolex is a must-have product to pose with and probably invest your money quite sensibly, while any Omega product is just nice, fun to wear and intriguing to research and study right before buying it.
The lever escapement, which is used in the vast majority of watches, was invented some 250 years ago by Thomas Mudge. Although it has been adopted universally, it has one fundamental flaw; it requires oil. That means regular servicing.
In the 1990s Omega were looking for a product differentiator. They bought the rights to use the co-axial escapement of George Daniels, an English watchmaker who had been pedalling his invention around the watch world since the late 1960s. The supposed advantage of this escapement was the lack need for lubrication.
This was seen as the answer to low maintenance quartz watches, especially the new eco drive models, which required zero lifetime servicing.
Omega fitted it into the 2500 movement and all hell broke loose.
The first problem was Pallet Fork Shifting. A slight shift in the escapement and it was enough to bring everything to a halt. It occurred whenever a watch contain the movement faced a shock. This was a result of poor testing in development and omega had to come up with a new shock system that stops the balance wheel from moving sideways under shock.
No sooner had this problem been resolved than another one reared its head. Lubrication. With the Mudge escapement lubrication is needed to avoid wear on sliding parts. In theory the co-axial escapement doesn’t slide therefore it should need no lubrication. But any good engineer will tell you that impact involves slide and slide involved impact. I worked as an engineer in the tribology area where this is well recognised.
Omega watches were now stopping not due to Pallet Fork Shifting, but due to something else. It turned out to be the impact itself. The Lubrication on the Mudge system not only reduced wear, it absorbed impact. Without it the coaxial escapement was hammering itself to pieces.
The answer was two fold: slow down the beat speed and add lubrication.
The beat speed determines a watches long term accuracy. The faster the beat the more accurate the movement (and the smoother the second hand movement). Omega had to drop it to 25,200 from 28,800.
That was NOT a good move.
Adding lubrication was a problem because the movement was not designed for it. Omega found they needed 30 oiling points on the 2 tier coaxial escapement. 10 on the escape wheel and 20 on the intermediate escape wheel teeth.
So much for an oil free serviceless movement!
And during that time watch lubrication improved to the point where watches could go for at least ten years without a service, making the whole point of the coaxial movement debatable.
And what about reliability? How often these watches end up being serviced?
Would you say Rolex is to Porsche as Omega is to Mercedes Benz?
Also, If James Bond wears both brands, doesn't that say enough?......
I’d actually argue that Rolex is to Omega as Mercedes-Benz is to BMW. Mercedes/Rolly is definitively the more ‘luxe’ builder and both their designs and range stay beautiful and relatively consistent for decades. Bimmer/Omega chases after performance above all else - sometimes at the price of timeless design - and are far easier to get your hands on. They’re also not as afraid to get _weird_ with it (see: 15,000m dive watches, the folding car concept etc.) as the competition.
Despite these philosophical differences, though, to a layman they’re perceived as roughly on the same ‘tier’ of car-/watch- making.
I prefer omega. I think they are better value as a watch (rolex better investment) due to the coaxial and METAS certified movements. The only thing is they are too big and too thick.
But you got your facts right and i respect that. Keep it up!
I walked into a main UK watch dealership on Friday and bought an Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean Chronograph. It cost £7800. The big thing here it is nearly half the price retail than it’s competitor Rolex watch and I was able to buy the watch. I saw the watch and experienced the joy of choosing my watch and being able to buy it. On the other hand the Rolex was not available and I was told that I am ineligible to go on the Rolex list because they are not taking any more new potential customers. That says it all. Even if I want to buy a Rolex I can’t unless I pay an exorbitant amount to a re-seller. Fuck that and fuck Rolex. I’m buying to keep not sell and to pass on to my children. So thank you Omega for creating and producing great timepieces.
I love watches from both brands. I have watches from both brands. I think people are too obsessed with "is that better than that?". We are watch lovers in this beautiful community. Our love for time pieces connect us to each other. I feel we all should feel privileged we live in an era with so many choices of watches and brands. I appreciate reviewers like you and anyone else whom share our passion for watches.
Thank you for your dedication.
Excellent rant Jory. I think these are two very different watch companies with very different marketing strategies. Rolex tightly controls the scarcity of their watches and Omega sells as many as they can, hence the number of models (limited edition, etc). Rolex's model generates a lot of free advertising and desirability where Omega generates profit through volume. Both make excellent watches. I like Omega a little more because they have higher quality for the price and less name recognition (probably not the norm).
I find myself leaning towards Omega. Nothing wrong with Rolex in any respect. I just like the Speedmaster from Omega.
Watch industry.. The only industry where being stationary is actually rewarded. Rolex is worse than Omega for the same reason that AP is worse than A Lange and Sohne. Brands that focus on only one line should be considered boring.. Because that's what they are.
and guitar industry
Rolex don’t need to change. You can’t improve on perfection. A simple date just is enough.
Rolex isn't perfect far from it. I had a Submariner that had a catastrophic mechanical failure with the spring. Came back from servicing to discover that they did not pressure test it properly and there were two noticeable dust particles under the glass. It was enough to turn me off from Rolex.. I stick to Breitling & Omega. I have yet to have failures/qc issues with those. Hell.. I have yet to have any QC issues with two Orients that I have owned for 4 years.
@@solidarnosc9663I found this dude again 😂
Didn’t you just make a comment on someone buying his new Rolex Submariner and criticizing it instead of being happy?
And I thought you owned a Datejust, not a Submariner? And I thought you sold the Datejust instead lol. You never mentioned this magical Submariner you happened to have. Unless you never actually owned either.
Rolex makes better watches 🤷♂️
More accurate, better power reserve, better tick rates, better clasps, better bracelets, better finishing, better materials, better brand.
Let me know if you need proof of my collection. I’ve owned the watches and can actually speak on them.
@@fj7509 The Rolex marketing team now stalks and nags me on UA-cam because a) they didn’t like the criticism and b) I did not list my entire watch collection (both present and prior). Plenty of people have had issues with Rolex’s customer service and QC, me being one of them. You need validation from me to be happy with you wristwatch? And save the supercilious tone for your wife, no one here cares.. oh and be sure to send me proof of your collection because you actually think I care about you.
@@fj7509 “Found this dude again.” Which suggests you are following me on UA-cam hence, you need many years of therapy.
To answer yourr question. Omega is winning in terms of quality and innovation.
Rolex is destroying in "Brand Recognition". Omega is the first watch on the moon, deepest watch ever, official time keeeper of olympics, james bond watch. Also they are co axial and master chronometer - big feats. Yet to the normal person, rolex build that reputation. They could sell you a plastic watch, but if it says "Rolex" on it, it will sell for a lot.
So bottomline, Omega, quality, watch making and innovation, they are king.
Rolex - god marketing.
You are welcome.
When I was younger I had no interest in watches but I knew a brand called Rolex existed. I didn’t know of any other brands and even referred to my dads seamaster as a Rolex watch.
Every brand wants people to make a connection between their name and product. If a person then unknowingly makes that connection they will instantly think of that brand name when they think of their product. Rolex has nailed their marketing and that’s why they’re the most famous watch brand in the world.
The first luxury watch I ever owned was an Omega Seamaster Chrono Titanium. I've owned several Rolex since then, Sub, DJ41, YMII and the one watch that I still wear more than those is my Omega. Comfortable, understated and it means more to me when an Omega wearer makes a comment about my Omega.
Despite personal preferences... This video is awesome. And you gave yourself a much more professional image than usual. I really loved it
Thanks
I fell the best thing to do after this is watch watchfinder and co’s vid on this topic to get both sides. Such a fun topic as it leans on the long heritage of both brands. I feel recently omega has started to climb back on top ;)
Good point. Another alternative is to watch some of Tim Mosso's reviews and comparisons between Omega and Rolex, *and read the comments below. People are recognizing Omegas' "turnaround" (proper phrase? Awakening?) and quality step-up along w/the IMHO better Co-Axial movement. Omega seems to be streamlining their brand a bit more as well, at least relative to the past. I own one of each (42mm PO and 14270 Explorer) and to me they compliment vs compete against each other. Both are somewhat Bond-related as well, so that's a push at the end of the day. ⌚👍
No board members and shareholders pushing for more profit making Rolex go in directions they otherwise may not go in. This is where omega suffer and is the key difference in the brands. Continuing to produce more watches striving for greater profit had damaged the brand and continues to do so. Tim Mosso did a great video on this as well.
Valid points all around regarding the business model's affect on brand equity. But what's your opinion if you just compare watch for watch wrt quality, design, and innovation?
Who makes the most accurate movement? One of them must hold better tolerances in their gears and assembly of them.
I think better pertains more to marketing and supply management... the watches on a stand alone basis are certainly comparable as you've attested... I believe you've mentioned it yourself in so many words, enjoy the watch for yourself, not others...
The main problem I think is the marketing and product line applied by both of the companies. Throughout the years, Rolex marketing strategies has successfully planted their products in consumer's mind and even for non watch enthusiasts, the first thing you asked them bout Rolex, they might tell you is a gold shinny watch, and some of them might even answer Submariner. For omega if you asked the same way, I don't think people could answer even one of their products.
Who is better Ferrari or Lamborghini? None! Is matter of taste and preference, although I will concede that Rolex still has that generally accepted higher status, is just relative to personal style and value. I can't imagine somebody looking at me down, for wearing a stunning Seamaster, just because he flaunts a Submariner.
Rolex will always be considered better because it is not based on whether it is a better product but simply brand perception and how the public feels about Rolex. That is something you cant dispute, fight, debate the product over. Once a brand name is stuck in the minds of the public, it just never goes away. Some examples which even effect what we call the item; bandage vs bandaid (the brand), in-line skates vs Rollerblades (the brand), petroleum vs Vasceline (the brand).
To me, Rolex is better with marketing and brand value, while Omega is better with innovation and design.
Hmm. Perhaps people will turn to Omega when they get tired of waiting for Rolex supply and feel paying for a Rolex might be financially irresponsible. Two of the reasons why I picked up a Speedmaster instead of a Submariner. Doesn't help that I've always wanted a Submariner since I was a kid, and I'll probably still get one in the future.
I am interested to see what it would cost to be a paid sponsor in one of your UA-cam videos. Is this possible?
Thanks. Hope to hear back from you.
Great video. Hackneyed advice I know but best to wear what you like (brand obsession is for teenagers), but buy at a fair price
I would say not directly comparable. I would say both have their own individual identities. Personally, I would rather have the vast majority of the Omega catalogue (as it stands right now) as they suit my tastes better. Though I do like the Rolex OP in Red Grape a ton! But of all of the luxury watches I'm getting a Grand Seiko Golden Snowflake before anything else.
I disagree about Basel. I think Omega made a bigger splash releasing their watches on their own this year because they weren’t overshadowed.
You are right about too many variations though.