[asjldkfin]

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 probably less to do with style and more a guarantee it'll never be confused for the "real" version.

That all said, I would definitely still be salty if I owned a Speedmaster. But I applaud Swatch for making bold and interesting moves- which doesn't exactly happen much in the luxury industry.

[affyboi]

I own a speedmaster, I don’t feel salty at all. I think these look pretty cool

[thematrixturtle]

Omega is a subsidiary of the Swatch Group, it's all the same company.

[jeffbee]

Next you're going to try to tell us that Lamborghinis are made by VW.

[pengaru]

This isn't the greatest analogy, post-Murcielago they largely are made by VW/Audi - even the V12.

[throwmeariver1]

Salty about what exactly? Put it in words please.

[asjldkfin]

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.

[throwmeariver1]

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?

[asjldkfin]

Let's not be naive, if the market gave a shit about substance over marketing, we'd all be wearing Seikos and driving Toyotas.

[2muchcoffeeman]

That's like saying selling prints of an artwork devalues the original artwork.

Unless you're saying the entire watch collectors market is a scam driven by companies and not collectors.

[asjldkfin]

I don't really understand what you're talking about- but yes, the watch industry- like all luxury industries, is primarily driven by marketing. It's not a scam, it's just the nature of the industry.

[biztos]

Are we not?

I have a more expensive watch but my daily d(r)iver is a Seiko SKX009. Indestructible and with a bracelet upgrade it looks great. And here in Asia you see a lot of marketing for Seiko, and tons of shops. And there’s always Grand Seiko if you want to make watch snobs STFU. Or mods if you want to out-nerd the watch nerds.

I don’t own a Toyota yet but I probably will buy one soon!

[throwmeariver1]

I still don't understand what you mean with the loss of dignity what is the loss of dignity? Do you mean that the arbitrary value you put on OMEGA watches should not be compromised by offering a cheaper version?

[asjldkfin]

I'm not sure what there is to not understand? But yes, Swatch should not have released a cheaper facsimile if they wanted to maximize Omega's brand value.

[wdb]

Investment in what way?

[asjldkfin]

In the way that it's an asset that you derive value from.

[CydeWeys]

And how is the value you derive from it being lessened by the existence of this Moonswatch?

[asjldkfin]

by the simple fact that nobody will think more of Omega with this collaboration, some people will think less of it. Net-of-net, it'll be a decrease in general opinions, which leads to a general decline in market value.

[dagw]

Rolex sells a cheaper version of their flagship watch under the Tudor brand

Cheaper in this case means starting at around 3-5k$ not 300$. Also you have to be pretty into watches to know that Tudor is a Rolex brand. It's not really something they advertise.