WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

Why OMEGA prices are not appreciating?

29K views 167 replies 95 participants last post by  MJM 
#1 ·
In the past 10 years or so, OMEGA has come a long way in improving their image and cementing their position in the Swiss Watch making companies all this thanks to their success in introducing new fine watches with Grade A in house movements, improved certification and control (Metas), better presentation and more boutiques...

However, despite all of the above one thing they were not able to achieve is exclusively and better retention of their values in secondary market... Their new watches can still be purchased with steep discounts to this date and comparing to some other brands they seems far off...

Few years back the price difference between Omega and some of the other high end Swiss brands was not so huge so why Omega failed (if I may say) to enjoy the same demand and enthusiasm despite their continuous efforts to upscale the brand? I know that watches are not investment but it would make us happier and more appreciative of the brand. In today's value Omega prices remain very low across their whole portfolio even the most desired models and I do not think they are helping the brand to gain / maintain the type of momentum they are lusting for...
 
#4 ·
It's also supply and demand, like any market. You can't go into an AD and buy a Rolex SS sports watch, so second hand market prices rise. But anyone can buy any Omega at retail or even at a discount, so prices for pre-owned will naturally be lower and depreciate.

If Omega wanted prices of new and pre-owned watches to rise, they would need to be ok with selling far fewer watches and restrict availability like Rolex does.
 
#38 ·
Not even in the Top 10. Maybe for watches, but not for "anything." The most recognizable brand is Apple. Other brands on the list include Samsung, Mercedes, Microsoft, Coca Cola, Google, Amazon, Toyota, McDonald's, and Disney. (From a 2019 article.)

 
#6 ·
Brands that typically do very well don't have to go a long way to improve their image. They start out the gate with a winning formula, and present themselves as discreetly improving for the sake of improvement, remain cutting edge and diversify their upper echelon offering as consumer preferences shift (as opposed to moving downstream to make the brand accessible). In the auto industry, think of Porsche.

Presenting the image of needing to improve makes any brand appear to be struggling to figure it out. Also, it's debatable but the Moonwatch is signature model among WIS while the Seamaster is what the non-WIS knows (due to James Bond). The former is utterly outdated and banks on watch fans who actually prefer handwinding and plastic crystal. Non-watch people who want one luxury watch absolutely do not want that. The latter SMP has maintained the same design language but failed to stop changing in 20+ years. Compare that to how many times the Rolex Sub has been overhauled in the last 60 years.

Last point I'll throw out there is WIS make up a fraction of a fraction of people who buy watches. While watch freaks generally find the Datejust utterly boring, it's exactly what 99% of luxury prospective watch buyers actually want. They want a GADA watch that goes casual to dress, not sport, as they are more likely wearing an Apple Watch, Fitbit, or none. It's still a single core offering but 3 variable details being the bezel, dial and bracelet let people feel a strong sense of personalization without being overwhelmed by 50 different models.
 
#39 ·
Spot on, most people who buy luxury watches are not watch enthusiasts and want a watch that is versatile, timeless, and wearable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 135922
#8 ·
It comes down to supply and demand really... but also Omega has this knack of releasing 45 versions of the same watch in different metals/colors/features which doesn't help with the exclusivity and continuity of the models. For example lets look at the Rolex Sea-Dweller. Rolex has the standard Stainless and the Two-Tone models on bracelets - that's it. Let's use the Omega Planet Ocean - it's got a Stainless steel variant, a Precious metal variant, a ceramic variant, a titanium variant... and within those it's got different colors/bracelets/straps/availability. With so many permutations and volume of them sold it's easier to acquire but then the depreciation is felt when you buy one new/used because the market has tons of them already.

I've owned my share of Omegas over the past few years and honestly you should be happy with their technology and features but quickly come to realize you're going to be loosing value as you wear it where as most Rolexs (modern SS ones from what I've seen) can be worn and maybe even sold at the same price years later.

Just my thoughts.
 
#10 ·
you actually hit the nail on the head
there is nothing wrong with the construction
the focus is something for everyone, the world enjoys that but does not "value" it

but you also have to give the folks at Rolex credit for their advertising genius, I mean they actually twist facts as well as a politician and do it so well people line up to vote with their wallet
 
#13 ·
Perhaps I am simplifying things, but the easiest way for Omega to help improve its brand equality and subsequent resale value is to produce less watches. They are on the wrong side of the supply/demand curve. Instead of making (I'm going to make up some numbers) 250,000 Seamasters, make 100,000. Instead of making 150,000 Speedmasters, make 75,000, etc.

They are currently making too many watches for their ADs and Boutiques to bear (sell at or near retail) in the immediate-term to make enough profit to keep their shops open. So instead, they sell off to Grey dealers or the end-consumer at a steep discount to move inventory so they can afford the next allotment of product from Omega. If Omega reduced their output, then there wouldn't be a constant flooding of the market with discounted product.

If both Rolex and Omega produce around 1,000,000 watches annually, I'd argue, Rolex could afford to produce maybe 1,250,000 and still retain brand equity while Omega needs to sell maybe 500,000-750,000 to come close to the price control that Rolex (or AP or Patek) have established.
 
#14 ·
In my opinion so long as Omega continue to allow AD’s to discount the brand up to around 40%, potential customers will hold off buying at retail. Now, how would you feel having bought at retail a month ago and now seeing the same item, sold by the same AD at a couple of grand less?
The result of this is that second hand prices will remain weak as the secondary market need to factor in their purchase price and margin at a price below where AD’s will discount down to. The result is that the watch owner loses out at resale unless they can sell it on privately.
Personally I think it’s all unnecessary as Omega now make some fantastic timepieces that will genuinely stand comparison against more expensive brands based on their full retail price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#15 ·
Maybe they need an entry level Omega like Tudor is to Rolex. Tudor pushes Rolex values up even if their own value in resale is similar to Omega resale. Bottom line Omega makes too many versions of the same watch. I agree with the poster above who posted not all Rolex rise in value.
 
#16 ·
This may not be representative of the Omega brand as a whole but the Seamaster 2264.50 (quartz) is selling for more at this time than it did new. The only reason I use this as an example is because I had been watching the prices for several years and they had been steadily rising so I bought one for around $1250 last year. Prices for the 2264.50 are now around $2000 or greater. The watch sold at retail for $1900 new.
Most watches sold by major brands do not appreciate, depreciation is the norm.
 
#18 ·
Well I'll talk about my self, as a customer I'm not happy losing too much money on every Omega watch I purchase. There is no watch in Omega line up for the past 5-8 years that have increased in price dramatically to the point that 2nd hand value overcome its original retail price.

4-5 years ago, I used to get a lot of discounts on all Rolex models with one exception SS Daytona. Today in order to be able to buy a new Rolex you need have an excellent relation with the AD and when you get a watch (this is also applicable to PP & AP however they are on different league), there is certain exclusivity and excellent value retention which makes you feel that even if you spent a lot of money it is gonna be worth it. Omega on the other hand is too easy to get and you can walk to any AD and negotiate a discount with no previous purchase history 99% of the time.

Market practice has changed and Omega needs to change in order to maintain its luster and appeal otherwise it will lose its place. It is no longer acceptable to spend too much money on a watch that does not provide exclusivity and good value retention if not appreciation.
 
#19 ·
I think Omega is doing fine. They have a rich history, build excellent watches and in my experience the after market customer service is excellent. Most people are not expecting a watch to appreciate in value, and the vast majority of people would like to walk into an AD and purchase a watch without having to buy unwanted merchandise and hope for the good graces of the staff to be able to be put on a waiting list in order to maybe buy the watch they want. As for exclusivity goes buy a Sinn and you have a watch that is about as exclusive as you can get. I like Rolex and they have fine watches but at this time the rigmarole to buy one is not worth the end result.
 
#22 · (Edited)
I'm not saying that Omega should follow Rolex foot steps however, there is nothing wrong with exclusivity. OMEGA have a very big selection and combinations per each line which makes the watch lose its identity and sometimes it feels like Lego land!
 
  • Like
Reactions: swissra and Pietros
#20 ·
I think you need to be more specific. Because some models of Omega like the snoopy and the Alaska project have appreciated quite a bit. At the end of the day it all comes down to demand and supply. If Omega control supply on the Aqua Terras, it will be a hot model within no time. Youtubers will start complaining about waiting lists, the engagement will go through the roof and the grey dealers will jack the prices up. I am very glad Omega isn't doing that.
 
#23 ·
Both watches you mentioned are LE if they weren't they might not be able to retain their value and desirability. Personally, I believe Snoopy is one hell of a watch, my favorite Omega watch. I wish if OMEGA focus more on making such watches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msds
#21 ·
I mostly agree with the supply and demand part but it's really not that simple. Like all markets there are so many factors (competitors, brand loyalty, pricing power) that affect things.

Omega has done a great job positioning itself as a Rolex alternative. However, Rolex has such a unique place in the luxury watch market that they can restrict supply and still have the demand. The luxury watch market is mature and relatively stable. It's not like tech. So changing a brand's positioning is not that easy.

I'm not sure if the demand for Omegas is as inelastic as Rolex. If supply was less would Omega buyers pay more or move to an alternative brand like Tudor? Same question if AD's reduced discounts that Omega buyers are now use to getting. Would having less special editions actually decrease demand? I don't know the answers to any of these questions, but I am sure Omega has ample market research to support their decisions.

Put yourself in the position of the Omega marketing team where your brand and products are already successful (as far as we know). Right now, you have a mature market, predictable demand, your ADs are fine with the discounts they give, and you have sales revenue that you are happy with. Would you risk your success by restricting the supply? I see more negative things that can happen than positive.

Omega is my favorite watch brand and I would love if my watches are worth way more in the used market place. Increasing prices would also affect my desire to buy another one. In the ideal world I would love the Omegas I own to go up in value, but still get large discounts on new ones. That is not typically how it works.
 
#30 ·
Thank goodness most new & pre-owned Omega models are more affordable than Rolex. Does anyone think the 2x-4x price difference between a Seamaster 300M and Submariner reflects quality difference? It's purely perception & brand exclusivity. And that's one of the many reasons that some Rolex prices have appreciated (retail practices being another reason worth mentioning). Just few years back, used Subs and GMTs were also selling well below retail prices. Daytona is an outlier, best way to look at it. It's become 'the chronograph'. For the fans of Speedmaster, that's just fine, I'll take rich history and affordability over exclusivity.
 
#35 ·
Thank goodness most new & pre-owned Omega models are more affordable than Rolex. Does anyone think the 2x-4x price difference between a Seamaster 300M and Submariner reflects quality difference? It's purely perception & brand exclusivity. And that's one of the many reasons that some Rolex prices have appreciated (retail practices being another reason worth mentioning). Just few years back, used Subs and GMTs were also selling well below retail prices. Daytona is an outlier, best way to look at it. It's become 'the chronograph'. For the fans of Speedmaster, that's just fine, I'll take rich history and affordability over exclusivity.
I would say neither does anything my $120 Tough Solar G-Shock Square doesn't do better. We shouldn't pretend spending $3-5K for a mechanical jewelry trinket isn't already a pretty insane practice of vanity and self-indulgence. I say this as an owner of the LVc, SMPc and GShock.
 
#31 · (Edited)
I think the bigger picture tells a different story. It is all dependent on the time frame you are considering. Omega has been steadily increasing prices for years and years. Two 6% price increases last year, at least one this year as well. The watches in their portfolio have increased tremendously in price. Nearly doubled since the early 2000's. The perceived brand value that comes with it has now also trickled down to the second hand market. With, interestingly, older models having increased in prices in the second hand market at a similar pace as the new MSRP.

My view is that Omega is making a conscious effort to move more upmarket. You can see it in their marketing, their investment in R&D, and the kind of watches they are releasing. The 321 Speedmaster 'Ed White' is a perfect example. Steel sports watches at 14k was not a territory that Omega used to be in. I believe that when you increase your prices as aggressively as Omega has been doing, the market value will always lag behind. They are fighting and dragging the market behind them to build their brand equity. In some respects it is quite a tour de force that is only possible because of their position within Swatch group.
 
#33 ·
The stronger the graymarket is - the softer the prices (new and pre-owned) are, which is why Omega has a strong focus on combating graymarket.


When they tighten the distribution, and will make own AD's as the main distribution channel - they can lifting up the prices (which seems to be happening anyway). Higher retail prices of new watches will leverage the prices of older/vintage watches.

Long story short - if you are Omega collector, just don't buy new on gray market:)
 
#36 ·
my cal 861 speedy pro cost me more than a modern would have--albeit, it came with papers so I assume much of the value was there..

I think there's still might be some appreciation, it's just not as immediate like Rolex with its limited production.
 
#40 ·
However, despite all of the above one thing they were not able to achieve is exclusively and better retention of their values in secondary market... Their new watches can still be purchased with steep discounts to this date and comparing to some other brands they seems far off...

Few years back the price difference between Omega and some of the other high end Swiss brands was not so huge so why Omega failed

I know that watches are not investment but it would make us happier and more appreciative of the brand..
What brands are you comparing to? If it is Rolex or any of the Big 3 it is an unfair comparison. Rolex is an anomoly and Patek and the rest are a different category. Compared to their peers, excluding Rolex, I dont see much difference in Grey discounts or pre owned prices compared to new. I recently saw a few different Glashutte models for 40% off on Joma and Breitling, their closest competitor it seems, retains about the same values.

Like others I also have an Omega, 1998 Seamaster GMT 50th Anniversary, that is holding and maybe gaining value from what I paid and assume what it originally sold for in 98.

To the last point, as a enthusiast or collector, I dont see how higher prices would make me happier or more appreciative of Omega. They are one of my favorite brands and I like that i can get most models at or below MSRP and used at a much more logical price than Rolex. Maybe I would feel different if i flipped or was in the business.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top