Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Omega Swatch Speedmaster

swatch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 142 posts

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#31

Post by CydeWeys »

pkulak wrote: post #7
maxclark wrote: post #5

I don’t get why Omega would do this - my initial reaction is it’s dilutive to their brand and I’m happy I’ve never bought one.

Huh. So you're glad you didn't buy a really expensive watch that people may no longer think is really expensive?

There's no mistaking the Swatch for the Omega for anyone who has any clue about watches at all. The Swatch has a plastic case and comes on a Velcro strap, for starters.

But even beyond that, many people who're into watches really don't care what other people think about them.

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#32

Post by russellbeattie »

In Spain, it's traditional for couples to give each other engagement presents, not just for the woman. The woman gets an expense ring and the man gets an expensive watch. (People will immediately ask you to show it off when they find out you're getting married, like they do with engagement rings, it's fun.) My ex-wife spent around 8,000€ like 20 years ago for my Omega Speedmaster because I grew up in the time when Astronaut moon watches were the pinnacle of cool.

In fact the first thing I did when I got an Android Wear watch was create a custom face which looked like a Moonwatch (Omega is twitchy about it, so you can't just buy one, apparently.)

Am I converting the price correctly? Are these less than $300!?! [Edit, Yep, $260] Wow. It sorta makes my watch - now owned by my son who has never worn a watch in his life - a little less special, but hey. If more people can own one, I'm all for it.

Here's an article in Wired: https://www.wired.com/story/omega-and-swatch-moonswatch/

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#33

Post by jp0d »

buryat wrote: post #12

used to wear lots of automatic watches but switched to apple watch completely 4 years ago

I have a few quartz watches. I have a bunch of stuff from Apple as well but never could live with an Apple watch. For some weird reason I've always thought that I need to know the time reliably if I even get lost somewhere. I live in the city and there is almost 0% probability of that happening. hahahha..

So I went with a Garmin Instinct Solar watch that lasts nearly a month even with basic tracking. With all those smart features turned off it can theoretically run forever just with solar power. :)

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#34

Post by CydeWeys »

nimbius wrote: post #23

these watches are gorgeous, but so are "real" omega watches. unpopular opinion but crossing over these brands only makes sense if you think youre capable of targeting a lower income customer without risk of damaging your existing luxury brand, or if your existing luxury brand is floundering. I suspect its the latter, and i suspect its confirmation that the last decade of rennaisance for Rolex is starting to impact th…

> unpopular opinion but crossing over these brands only makes sense if you think youre capable of targeting a lower income customer without risk of damaging your existing luxury brand, or if your existing luxury brand is floundering. [...] I suspect its the latter, and i suspect its confirmation that the last decade of rennaisance for Rolex is starting to impact the bottom line at Swatch.

You've actually got it precisely backwards here. Omega, like most other Swiss luxury watch brands, has been absolutely killing it these past two years. Profits are up substantially. Omega is doing fantastic*. What isn't doing fantastic is Swatch -- their numbers are down substantially over the past decade. Smart watches are really killing them. An Apple Watch is not a replacement good for a $6k mechanical work of art, but it absolutely is a replacement good for a similarly priced quartz watch with fewer features, which is exactly what Swatch makes.

So I view this as a successful attempt at leveraging the brand value of Omega to prop up their lower-end brand.

> call me a cynic, but mark my words...in 10 years time youll see the same phenomenon with these watches as you saw with Timex. repair shops wont touch them, and they exist as a valueless testament to disposable faux luxury.

You're being over-dramatic here. And you don't generally repair cheap quartz watches like a Swatch anyway; you replace the battery as needed, and eventually in some number of decades they stop working entirely and that's that. You could do a movement swap at that point if you really wanted.

* See https://watchesbysjx.com/2022/03/morgan-stanley-watch-indust...

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#35

Post by asjldkfin »

throwmeariver1 wrote: post #30
asjldkfin wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but to be fair: 1. It has generated significant attention- which has value. 2. Like a BMW 1-series, I imagine the idea is that once people have the "beginner" version, they'll aspire to upgrade to the real thing. It gets people "on the boat". 3. Rolex sells a cheaper version of their flagship watch under the Tudor brand- it's virtually identical and hasn't diluted Rolex's brand value. 4. The funky colors is…

Salty about what exactly? Put it in words please.

Because it’s a marketing stunt involving an investment I made; an investment I made with the implicit understanding there’ll be some protection for the brand’s dignity.

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#36

Post by serf »

CydeWeys wrote: post #31
pkulak wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. So you're glad you didn't buy a really expensive watch that people may no longer think is really expensive?

There's no mistaking the Swatch for the Omega for anyone who has any clue about watches at all. The Swatch has a plastic case and comes on a Velcro strap, for starters. But even beyond that, many people who're into watches really don't care what other people think about them.

>But even beyond that, many people who're into watches really don't care what other people think about them.

that's been precisely opposite of every interaction I've had with watch enthusiasts.

in fact, that's been opposite of every interaction I've had with any luxury-goods enthusiast, cars/watches/planes/art , you name it; if it was expensive and rare you're likely going to hear about the purchase at lunch.

people don't tend to want to bring up their new 9 dollar Casio or their 1997 Corolla, go figure.

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#37

Post by throwmeariver1 »

asjldkfin wrote: post #35
throwmeariver1 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Salty about what exactly? Put it in words please.

Because it’s a marketing stunt involving an investment I made; an investment I made with the implicit understanding there’ll be some protection for the brand’s dignity.

How would the brand lose "dignity" by doing a coop with their mother brand? Do you perceive the value of a OMEGA watch by the marketing instead of the watch making?

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#38

Post by tyxodiwktis »

GrifMD wrote: post #25
buryat wrote: post #12

used to wear lots of automatic watches but switched to apple watch completely 4 years ago

I have a two nice mechanical watches, one which used to be a daily wear. Once I got my Apple Watch I just never wear them anymore. The few times I'm at a black tie event and wear the nicer mechanical one I feel slightly limited. It's a dumb little problem, but I kinda feel like my Apple Watch ruined other watches for me. I've got a few bands I rotate on it to make it feel a little more special though.

Interestingly, I went the other way. Once I found myself ‘addicted’ to screens I got a nice automatic to check time with, and found that it really helped wean me off screens (I can set down my phone now and not look at it all day, and my quality of life and sleep have improved)

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#39

Post by CydeWeys »

maxclark wrote: post #5

I don’t get why Omega would do this - my initial reaction is it’s dilutive to their brand and I’m happy I’ve never bought one.

A real Omega moonwatch is so different from the moonswatch that it's not a substitutable good at all. No one who was previously interested in buying a real $6k+ moonwatch is going to instead buy the 1/25th price Swatch and call it a day. The Swatch is an homage to the real thing. Homages are common in the watch industry (look at, e.g., the Invicta Pro Diver vs the Rolex Submariner), and here we see a conglomerate leveraging its lower-priced brand to profit off an homage to its own brand rather than leaving that exclusively to others (see e.g. the Pagani Design Speedmaster).

Re: Omega Swatch Speedmaster

#40

Post by CydeWeys »

serf wrote: post #36
CydeWeys wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no mistaking the Swatch for the Omega for anyone who has any clue about watches at all. The Swatch has a plastic case and comes on a Velcro strap, for starters. But even beyond that, many people who're into watches really don't care what other people think about them.

>But even beyond that, many people who're into watches really don't care what other people think about them. that's been precisely opposite of every interaction I've had with watch enthusiasts. in fact, that's been opposite of every interaction I've had with any luxury-goods enthusiast, cars/watches/planes/art , you name it; if it was expensive and rare you're likely going to hear about the purchase at lunch. people…

I guess we hang in different crowds then. It sounds like you're hanging out with people who are big on showing off and projecting wealth, rather than real watch nerds who are in it for the "love of horology".
Post reply on HN