Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Is the Seamaster still worth it?

  • 21-11-2024 6:28pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭


    I have been made 2 offers on chrono24 for the seamaster diver 300m 42mm .. one with the black dial, the other with the white dial. Both offering 4700EU. Both claim to be unworn and come with all the paperwork, this makes them 2000EU less than the AD price. Do people think this is a good deal?

    Have read through some old threads where people have scoffed at the idea of any Omega being worth >2k, but at the same time I've been looking to make my first luxury watch purchase, I really like the watch, and the Rolex ADs aren't exactly forthcoming with anything (I also refuse to pay thousands extra for them on the grey when I feel like I can buy an Omega with a bit more dignity).



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,921 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    I can never detach Rolex watches from Saudi Princes and rappers. Some of them are lovely but the name is just tainted to the point where I'd never wear one, even if I could afford one (!). I'd just feel like Mr.Bling.

    Omega always just seemed like a more dignified brand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 686 ✭✭✭fulladapipes


    I hear you, but they're not all bling. Although this is possibly the least blingy model.

    Post edited by fulladapipes on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    It really depends if you think Omega is a luxury brand .They are not at Rolex brand level imo and would be more equivalent to Tudor. Lots of us here have had seamasters and I’d say more of us have sold them on than kept them.

    The price you mentioned seems to be the going rate and selling it on you’ll get a little over €4k .If going for omega I’d suggest the moonwatch instead but again lots sell them on as well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,534 ✭✭✭Oafley Jones


    If you don’t consider Omega a luxury brand, then who do you? IWC, Panerai, Breitling… are they luxury brands? Tudor just aren’t anywhere near Omega in terms of movements or finish. To say they are is like a r/watches hot take. It’s nonsense. And I currently own two of the things.

    To my eye Omega makes the best movement of the three brands you’ve mentioned. They’re only really Let down by a lack of confidence in design. There’s this desperate energy where they try to stay too current, resulting in designs that date a bit too quickly (as well having far too many variants). Their marketing is nowhere as on point as Rolex. And let’s face it, this is what really sets Rolex apart.

    Also own Rolex and Omega btw.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh



    If you don’t consider Omega a luxury brand, then who do you?
    Omega are an everyman brand , the first good watch people buy when they want a nice watch after Tag.Lots of us have done it- Seiko, Tag then omega , in the same way a submariner is the first watch people buy when they have some cash to spend.Iwc would be more of a luxury brand to me.Look at omegas discounts ,Panerai and Cartier don’t discount to that level ,of course Breitling do so yeah Breitling and omega would be similar level for me but as a rule, luxury brands don’t discount.If someone wants a dive watch this weekend for between €5 -7k that puts them at omega and Tudor level ,not Rolex so again shows who omega are competing with.
    To my eye Omega makes the best movement of the three brands you’ve mentioned. 

    I didn’t mention movements or finish did I?Main part of comment was ‘Omega are not at Rolex brand level ‘ which you responded with Their marketing is nowhere as on point as Rolex. And let’s face it, this is what really sets Rolex apart. , So you agree with me.

    Also own Rolex and Omega btw.
    I also have a few of the mentioned brands



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    The problem with Rolex is I can't get the one I want (submariner or GMT II). I also stubbornly refuse to pay the grey market premiums for them because I think it's stupid money. The next best thing would appear to be the seamaster. I was curious what people thought of a new one for 4.7k? 2k below the AD, any hope of lower?

    I have no interest in Breitlings, every instagram pilot appears to be wearing one and that turned me off. IWC is a classical style I perhaps can' get into.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    The next best thing would appear to be the seamaster.
    That describes the seamaster and Omega perfectly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,183 ✭✭✭ironictoaster


    I recently got a Seamaster in Japan and I love it. It’s my second “expensive” watch I got. I love how I can read the time at a glance so I see this as a casual watch.

    Rolexes are cool..I always wanted the sub that Sean Connery wears in Dr No with the nato strap..one day :)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    However, I would add I am fairly new to the scene. I've been looking into watches a year now and had enough of sitting on the sidelines. My point is my opinion isn't worth much 😂 .. im sure some experts can prove the omega perhaps has better internal movements than a rolex

    I also like the fact omega seem to not have the snobby attitude that Rolex ADs have. A Rolex AD told me "they know what they have, and we know what we have". Whilst perhaps true, I found that attitude towards a prospective customer incredibly arrogant and downright rude.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    I couldn't decide between the white and black face, I've decided if I do get it, it'll be the black :D



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,805 ✭✭✭Neilw


    I have a black one on rubber strap I would sell if interested?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    Thanks for the offer. I was however looking for the steel bracelet one to make it appropriate to more formal settings. I will probably later get the rubber strap if I wanted to swap around for the more casual look.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,820 ✭✭✭mailforkev


    I like a Seamaster, it's an honest watch, if now a bit pricey. The new one where they've gone back to an aluminum face and bezel is pretty tasty.

    As for the comments about the positioning of the Omega brand above, I have a Seamaster, I can't think of any situation that would make me want to buy a Tudor. Not even close.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    I have a Tudor & a Seamaster in my own current line up and the Seamaster is a far better watch. Their being on the same tier is a bit ridiculous IMO.

    I can't really give a rounded opinion on the Sub V Seamaster debate as I've not owned a sub, I've handled them of course and I'd certainly lean towards the version of the Seamaster I own, the 2535.80 being a better finished and more interesting watch. It's certainly IMO a better watch than the Explorer II I plumped for it instead of.

    The Rolex however does carry far better cachet and residuals. Rolex are as others have often mentioned here, the premier marketing company in the world and have been for decades.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    if they are not on the same tier , why are they in the same price point ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,921 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    You seem a little obsessed with price points.

    Have you factored in marketing and hype?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Because price isn't and shouldn't be the arbiter IMHO. Much as an argument can be made for value, quality and that amorphous bang for buck in terms of any brand versus any other? I'd argue that when it comes to quality of watch, quality of finish and effort to innovate in terms of design (& movement too TBH) that Omega are far ahead of Tudor.

    Tudor's primary pricing is set by it's big brother with full knowledge that for a huge slew of their customer base, that Tudor's are an ersatz Rolex and are very often part of the "relationship building" that goes into buying a Rolex at RRP.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    Are you aware of the fundamentals of branding ?The comment that started this discussion was “It really depends if you think Omega is a luxury brand .They are not at Rolex brand level imo and would be more equivalent to Tudor.” Marketing and hype and one of the key metrics of brand building.

    Because price isn't and shouldn't be the arbiter IMHO
    But price is an arbiter in the real world.Retail Prices are set based on how customers perceive the brand and product .A Skoda is just as good as an Audi but its tier position is governed by its pricing point.


    I'd argue that when it comes to quality of watch, quality of finish and effort to innovate in terms of design (& movement too TBH) that Omega are far ahead of Tudor.

    I have posted many times and said that I think the seamaster is technically a better watch than even a sub but it’s misses that bit that makes it a bit more special and that is the bit that makes the majority of people want a sub over a seamaster and hence why there are at different levels .Pricing then puts the seamaster against Tudor.

    But back to the original question of “Is the seamaster worth it as a first luxury watch purchase “. Do you consider it luxury firstly , if not then it’s no good as a first luxury watch but if yes then go for it .

    My first luxury watch was a Tag heuer but I wouldn’t class it as luxury now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭H_Lime


    Luxury!!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,561 ✭✭✭893bet


    Tiers is always interesting. Very subjective.

    From a quality perspective I think Omega is above Rolex largely in many aspects. But miles behind in terms of desirability and residuals.

    I think many people would put an order roughly as “Tag Omega Cartier Rolex”. Personally I put them all in the same bracket of “affordable luxury brands with deep history”. Sitting in 5-15k bracket for the most part. Though all the brands will have more expensive models but their core is largely around that.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    YouTube algorithm is very accurate with me today.

    FWIW ,he doesn’t think omega is luxury either .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    Not to argue one way or the other, but the comments (and sheer amount of likes) suggest most people seriously disagree with him



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    I'm afraid I have to disagree with him too. I've not owned a Rolex, but I have owned a Vacheron Constantin, Blancpain, Breitling and others, and I currently have an IWC, a Tudor, a few Sinn and an Omega in my rotation.
    Omega is, in my opinion, a luxury brand and a mid-tier of such.
    Please don't get too tied up on the arguments as to the hows and why what brand is where it is in the hierarchy.
    Focus instead on two things, the watch you want.
    & 2 the price you pay.
    Omega is still chasing Rolex in terms of where they believe they can price a watch.
    They are wrong; apart from a couple of outliers, such as the Silver Snoopy, all Omega are available reasonably quickly from ADs and with a discount.
    The discounts are even more significant if you forgo the AD experience and buy your Omega on the grey market.

    My opinion isn't "right", it isnt definitive and indeed Schwarz' or 893's are just as valid and probably more so as they've handled more "quality" than I have.
    My take is, I love my Omega 2535.80 I had a choice when I bought of a Rolex Explorer 2 or the Omega.
    I went with the Omega, saved 4k and have a much a nicer watch that will still return at least what i paid for it when I decide to move it on.
    Of course, the Rolex would have done the exact same thing and with better residuals but, with far more capital tied up.
    In a watchbox of luxury, I think Omega has a place whereas my Tudor?
    Lovely as it is, would likely be the 1st I move on out of my current lot (unless I need a quick sale).

    Post edited by banie01 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    would you say 4700EU for an unworn seamaster on a steel bracelet is a fair price? I’ve seen the new release in the last 48 hrs, other than a missing date and steel vs ceramic bezel, I can’t quite tell the difference/reason for the surcharge?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Are you referring to the latest version of the seamaster? The no-Date on mesh?
    If its the one you mean, €4700 grey versus €6600 retail is a big difference.
    It does highlight the issue with Omega v Rolex though in that Rolex do an exceptional job of driving demand via their enforced scarcity, whereas Omega just keep releasing new variants.
    If you want a no date Seamaster on a mesh? Its a fantastic watch and is in around its par value at the grey price IMO.
    I think the steel/aluminium bezel is nicer than the ceramic albeit more fragile.
    Personally, I prefer the full bracelet to a mesh and would lean towards the 2022 black or white release (As I already own a blue.)
    The new Monochrome version is lovely, have you tried it on?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    Tudor , omegas , Breitling , They are all great watches - Can’t go wrong with any of them. None of the watches in my pic below look cheap or poor quality . As Banie said buy what you like and make sure you think it is worth it . €4700 for a seamaster seems to be market price . I sold mine for €4k earlier this year and haven’t seen one new at that price yet to buy it back .




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 204 ✭✭breadmond


    Caring about "tiers" and what's luxury and what's not is pretty silly imo, chasing something as a status symbol rather than just buying a watch you like and that suits you. If a watch is well made and you like it then go for it I say. Omegas are undoubtedly very good watches, there are loads that I'd love to own (although not the modern seamaster I think it's hideous personally)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,561 ✭✭✭893bet


    nothing screams luxury like steep discounts……..

    https://www.pragnell.co.uk/watches/omega/mens?f=t&sortby=ourfavourites



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,820 ✭✭✭mailforkev


    Omega is deffo a luxury brand. Not a particularly high end one, that makes a number of crappy models to go with the nice stuff, but luxury all the same.

    Most luxury brands still have relative shitters that take advantage of the brand equity. Mercedes Benz is rock solid luxury but will still sell you a Renault engined 1.3 A Class, their equivalent of an ETA movement I guess.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Rowley Birkin QC


    Agree 100%.

    This discussion is a pretty fascinating study on insecurity and projection.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,295 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    I don't agree with that at all. Great if you are in a position to just buy what you want and not having to worry about resale value. Power to you. But for many people, myself included, I could not afford to own a luxury watch like that. Silly me. I can afford to own a Rolex bought at full RRP, but not an Omega.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭H_Lime


    What happens if when wearing your rolex you clobber it off the pebble dash wall or the spanner slips when working on that cool Elan by accident?

    Not a sarky question this but if your ownership of said rolex is based on the absolute eventuality of cashing in the flattened calf expecting decent resale do you actually "own" it and use it as a tool watch that it was originally designed for? Is it more an exercise in the observation of fiscal/tidal transfer based on shaky factors that influence the lux watch market.

    I don't doubt for even the slightest second you don't fully appreciate and enjoy the heritage and perfection of the piece but with such provisions attached does it own you?

    From my own perspective I'm not sure I could truly enjoy such a watch if a constraint of owning meant it had live in a bubble.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,295 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    The Rolex is insured for all risks on my home insurance. I am relaxed wearing it and I am not particularly careful with it. I wear it swimming on holidays abroad, going out for drinks into town etc. Only place in Europe I wouldn't wear it is London.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭H_Lime


    Question asked and question answered, fair play, it seems you have struck a good balance so.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,295 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    The way I see it is that the money in the Rolex is basically part of my savings / pension. But unlike a pension that I can't touch and savings that have near zero return, I am hoping for a modest return over time and even if that doesn't happen, I have something lovely to wear without it costing me anything really apart from insurance premium



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭H_Lime


    I think financially speaking that's about the best possible way to own one for someone such as myself (but not for a while anyway with young kids).

    You have the ability to use the watch without constant fear of damaging it and can enjoy the piece.

    Ps want that Elan!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,295 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    I can take a luxury watch or two as a trade in 😁

    BTW older kids are far more expensive than younger ones 😂 College fees, Erasmus programme studying abroad, driving lessons and insurance, health insurance once they hit 18, braces, etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,921 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    And if you ever get stuck behind enemy lines you can use it as a bartering tool 😁



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,958 ✭✭✭C0N0R


    Interesting, I don’t look at watches at all in that way, I see it as a purchase and the minute the money is spent it’s gone, is your view the general consensus?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    With you on that .I only spend what I can afford to lose on a watch . Nice to retain value in a watch but certainly don’t view it as a store of value . No harm though I suppose.But that said god forbid hard times might arrive in the future I suppose my attitude will change towards getting some cash out of them .



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    I've a similar view tbh. My "nice" watches are jewellery that I "rent". Yes it would be lovely to have them act as a store of value and to even have them gain value but that's not at all why I buy. If and when I sell them getting my money back would be great, getting more is a bonus.

    Going into owning watches with anything more than that as your aim? Requires quite a bit of capital, some luck and a lot of optimism IMHO.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭scwazrh


    I think the store of value is a bit optimistic now bar very few models .An OP I sold this year I only got retail for it , each Tudor I sold lost about a grand on each one and I’d say I’d take a serious loss if I sold any of the Cartier ,panerai ,Breitling or Grand Seiko.

    Buy only when you can afford to lose it is the best mindset for me



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,295 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    I wish I could be like that but unfortunately I have a beer income but I like a champagne lifestyle. If I would only buy watches that I could afford to lose, I would still be stuck with a couple of €400 Seikos and Steinharts. Not that there is anything wrong with that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 630 ✭✭✭Pablo_Flox


    Lets be honest, no one here buys, sells and trades as many watches as you do @unkel. It's not unusual for you to have a watch for less than 24 hours before you are looking to flip it.

    Your way of collecting watches is quite unusual, and I have to think that it's as much about the bargain/ potential profit that can be extracted as it is about enjoying the watch. Nothing wrong with that per say, but it's a very different reason for collecting than most people here, and a very different way of determining the value of a time piece.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,295 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    I've sold an unusually high number of watches this year, but that was largely down to having to take multiple trade ins for several watches that I sold (because the market is dire). None of them were keepers, so they all had or still have to be sold on. I did have the James Cameron Rolex as my daily watch for 4 years and before that I had the Seamaster as my daily (and mostly only) watch for 3 years.

    But yeah I do buy the odd watch to basically "try on for free" as in it would be such a bargain that I could sell it on and be almost certain I won't make a loss on it. If this wasn't the case, I couldn't afford to buy it. Sometimes I do lose money on a watch as in the recent Casioak that I had modded specially for me with metal case and Royal Oak style integrated metal bracelet. As soon as I tried it on, I knew it wasn't for me though so it had to go



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭H_Lime


    Hey! Better than hookers and coke, pissing it away in the pub or with paddy power, or worst of all, crypto bro tulipmania.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,307 ✭✭✭dinorebel


     "BTW older kids are far more expensive than younger ones 😂 College fees, Erasmus programme studying abroad, driving lessons and insurance, health insurance once they hit 18, braces, etc."

    This describes me perfectly one in college another 18 months from it I'll get that Breitling I crave in 2030 hopefully. Until then the Steinhart will have to do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Erasmus has cost me a Blancpain so far 😉

    My bank account is very glad it's just supporting the 1 student!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,506 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Hey! As my Mrs recently said...

    Fewer watches, more Memories 😉 and hookers and coke definitely leads to better stories than getting molested by an AD to move up a wait list 😜



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,724 ✭✭✭traco


    I hear you - I'd have several nice things for what I'm paying for a bachelorette pad in London plus all the trimings that go with a masters over there. At least the other one has a scholarship in the US but that doesn't cover flights and the living it large in the US overheads. 😭



  • Advertisement
Advertisement