Nav Ad Widget - Mobile

Collapse

Nav Ad Widget - Desktop

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Omega Price Increase

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Omega Price Increase

    Hi,
    I heard that Omega is increasing its prices on 1 July 2012. Can someone confirms this?
    Thanks,
    Watchfun2

  • #2
    I went to one of those omega distributors and he also said it's going to increase. Roughly july period likely will increase.
    Beep Beep!!!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Discount will also drop from 8% to 5%

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by watchfun2 View Post
        Hi,
        I heard that Omega is increasing its prices on 1 July 2012. Can someone confirms this?
        Thanks,
        Watchfun2
        Originally posted by leonmike View Post
        Discount will also drop from 8% to 5%
        Omega trying to be a Haute Horology brand.... good luck !!!

        Their Co-Axial Mv't is a con also..... !
        ROLEX.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Dfive View Post
          Omega trying to be a Haute Horology brand.... good luck !!!

          Their Co-Axial Mv't is a con also..... !
          I am new to watches but what make you say their movement are a con?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by noeyedeer View Post
            I am new to watches but what make you say their movement are a con?
            SEE LINK fro more info -
            Omega and their Daniels Co-Axial escapement promise that almost no lubrication is needed compared to a traditional escapement design. If Omega's watches ran at the same balance wheel beat speed (as seen in the Omega 1120, Rolex 3135, and dozens of other calibers) of 28,800 BPH, I'd believe it. But every watch movement that I've seen Omega equip with the Co-Axial escapement runs at a significantly lower beat speed than 28,800. The Omega caliber 2500 (the first Omega Co-Axial equipped caliber) has a beat speed of 25,200. Same with the all in-house Omega 8500. So why is this a big deal? There are two problems with lowering the beat speed to 25,200 from 28,800.

            If the Coaxial (Daniels) escapement performed as advertised, why is there any need at all to lower the beat speed of the watch? Watches with a traditional escapement design, traditional lubrication, and a 28,800 beat speed have been performing admirably for decades. If you have to lower the beat speed of the watch movement to accommodate the Co-Axial escapement, thereby lowering wear and tear on the movement, in my mind the Daniels Co-Axial escapement fails in the most fundamental function it was designed for, and should be abandoned. Either the Co-Axial escapement simply does not fully and entirely remove the need for traditional lubricants to be able to run at 28,800, or Omega is simply too afraid of the potential and unknown long term effects on the life of a movement to let a Co-Axial equipped movement run at 28,800. Either way, the Co-Axial escapement simply does not offer a true engineering advantage over using a traditional escapement and traditional lubricants.


            I'll let someone else explain their marketing gimmick:
            http://www.luxurytyme.com/movement/index.html
            ROLEX.

            Comment


            • #7
              well, i guess that explains why omega is not quite in the same tier as rolex after all these years of competition
              and in the same light, rolex is not in the same tier as patek or AP

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by skydweller_sg View Post
                well, i guess that explains why omega is not quite in the same tier as rolex after all these years of competition
                and in the same light, rolex is not in the same tier as patek or AP
                There is a lot more than just movement to explain whether Omega actually want to be in the same tier as Rolex. Swatch group carries many brands and there is a brand to target each market segment. They may actually want Omega to target the segment just below Rolex, who knows.
                My Current

                Rolex Daytona 116515
                Rolex Submariner 16610
                Rolex Submariner 116610
                Rolex Date 1550
                IWC Spitfire Chronograph 371705
                IWC Portuguese 7 Days 500107
                Omega Ocean Planet 22015000
                Bell & Ross Heritage BR126
                Grand Seiko GMT SBGM021
                Seiko Sumo SBDC001
                Seiko Sumo SBDC003
                Seiko Marinemaster SBDX012
                Seiko Brightz SDGZ013 Chronograph

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Dfive View Post
                  SEE LINK fro more info -
                  Omega and their Daniels Co-Axial escapement promise that almost no lubrication is needed compared to a traditional escapement design. If Omega's watches ran at the same balance wheel beat speed (as seen in the Omega 1120, Rolex 3135, and dozens of other calibers) of 28,800 BPH, I'd believe it. But every watch movement that I've seen Omega equip with the Co-Axial escapement runs at a significantly lower beat speed than 28,800. The Omega caliber 2500 (the first Omega Co-Axial equipped caliber) has a beat speed of 25,200. Same with the all in-house Omega 8500. So why is this a big deal? There are two problems with lowering the beat speed to 25,200 from 28,800.

                  If the Coaxial (Daniels) escapement performed as advertised, why is there any need at all to lower the beat speed of the watch? Watches with a traditional escapement design, traditional lubrication, and a 28,800 beat speed have been performing admirably for decades. If you have to lower the beat speed of the watch movement to accommodate the Co-Axial escapement, thereby lowering wear and tear on the movement, in my mind the Daniels Co-Axial escapement fails in the most fundamental function it was designed for, and should be abandoned. Either the Co-Axial escapement simply does not fully and entirely remove the need for traditional lubricants to be able to run at 28,800, or Omega is simply too afraid of the potential and unknown long term effects on the life of a movement to let a Co-Axial equipped movement run at 28,800. Either way, the Co-Axial escapement simply does not offer a true engineering advantage over using a traditional escapement and traditional lubricants.


                  I'll let someone else explain their marketing gimmick:
                  http://www.luxurytyme.com/movement/index.html
                  I think that is a personal view. Here is another link showing both are equal.

                  http://www.fratellowatches.com/omega...lex-movements/
                  My Current

                  Rolex Daytona 116515
                  Rolex Submariner 16610
                  Rolex Submariner 116610
                  Rolex Date 1550
                  IWC Spitfire Chronograph 371705
                  IWC Portuguese 7 Days 500107
                  Omega Ocean Planet 22015000
                  Bell & Ross Heritage BR126
                  Grand Seiko GMT SBGM021
                  Seiko Sumo SBDC001
                  Seiko Sumo SBDC003
                  Seiko Marinemaster SBDX012
                  Seiko Brightz SDGZ013 Chronograph

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by lthg25 View Post
                    I think that is a personal view. Here is another link showing both are equal.

                    http://www.fratellowatches.com/omega...lex-movements/
                    It's more that they say theirs is more durable, longer lasting..... yet it beats at a slower rate - IF it beats at the same rate WOULD they last or have longer servicing interval... I doubt so.... It's all on placing things on fair and equal level.... they do not state these facts to the public.

                    They have doubled their pricing in the last few years... all staked on their CO-AXIAL being the ducks nuts and dog bollocks of movements, but not justified again I say.

                    Tag have done the same thing..... their so called Manufacture 1887 movement is actually a rebuilt SEIKO movement !
                    ROLEX.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Dfive View Post
                      It's more that they say theirs is more durable, longer lasting..... yet it beats at a slower rate - IF it beats at the same rate WOULD they last or have longer servicing interval... I doubt so.... It's all on placing things on fair and equal level.... they do not state these facts to the public.

                      They have doubled their pricing in the last few years... all staked on their CO-AXIAL being the ducks nuts and dog bollocks of movements, but not justified again I say.

                      Tag have done the same thing..... their so called Manufacture 1887 movement is actually a rebuilt SEIKO movement !
                      So are you saying Rolex movement is not as good as Seiko Grand since some have a higher beat rate and are testing to 6 position instead of 5 for rolex? I don't see higher beat rate as any advantage unless it is more accurate.
                      My Current

                      Rolex Daytona 116515
                      Rolex Submariner 16610
                      Rolex Submariner 116610
                      Rolex Date 1550
                      IWC Spitfire Chronograph 371705
                      IWC Portuguese 7 Days 500107
                      Omega Ocean Planet 22015000
                      Bell & Ross Heritage BR126
                      Grand Seiko GMT SBGM021
                      Seiko Sumo SBDC001
                      Seiko Sumo SBDC003
                      Seiko Marinemaster SBDX012
                      Seiko Brightz SDGZ013 Chronograph

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lthg25 View Post
                        So are you saying Rolex movement is not as good as Seiko Grand since some have a higher beat rate and are testing to 6 position instead of 5 for rolex? I don't see higher beat rate as any advantage unless it is more accurate.
                        I never even mentioned Grand Seiko.

                        But - If you want best testing JLC 's 1000 Hrs program is as good as it gets as I know. ( some 41+ days )

                        Accuracy wise a higher beat IS more accurate as I know.... esp with Chronographs.
                        ROLEX.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          i guess you could be right
                          its up to swatch strategy to put the brands they prefer to compete with rolex

                          Originally posted by lthg25 View Post
                          There is a lot more than just movement to explain whether Omega actually want to be in the same tier as Rolex. Swatch group carries many brands and there is a brand to target each market segment. They may actually want Omega to target the segment just below Rolex, who knows.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Dfive View Post
                            I never even mentioned Grand Seiko.

                            But - If you want best testing JLC 's 1000 Hrs program is as good as it gets as I know. ( some 41+ days )

                            Accuracy wise a higher beat IS more accurate as I know.... esp with Chronographs.
                            You were staying Rolex movement is better than omega because? Higher beat rate shouldn't be factor.
                            My Current

                            Rolex Daytona 116515
                            Rolex Submariner 16610
                            Rolex Submariner 116610
                            Rolex Date 1550
                            IWC Spitfire Chronograph 371705
                            IWC Portuguese 7 Days 500107
                            Omega Ocean Planet 22015000
                            Bell & Ross Heritage BR126
                            Grand Seiko GMT SBGM021
                            Seiko Sumo SBDC001
                            Seiko Sumo SBDC003
                            Seiko Marinemaster SBDX012
                            Seiko Brightz SDGZ013 Chronograph

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by lthg25 View Post
                              You were staying Rolex movement is better than omega because? Higher beat rate shouldn't be factor.
                              I never stated such a thing, with exception to agreeing with the link I posted.
                              ( In fact this is all co-axial mvm'ts compared to ALL other manufactures of normal 28,000 beat mvm'ts.... Omega don't have proof they will last longer right. )
                              ROLEX.

                              Comment

                              Footer Ad Widget - Desktop

                              Collapse

                              Footer Ad Widget - Mobile

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X