Great vid, but you shouldn't compare Rolex's investment potential to gold. It's more like US government issued bonds. In fact, gold is pretty much the worst possible comparison. Gold prices fluctuate wildly and high gold prices indicate a bad economy (unlike luxury items like wristwatches). Rolex performs like bonds: boring as an investment, but practically no downside, not huge room for growth in standard models, but slow, steady predictable growth. As Rolex increases prices a little each year, pre owned values come up as well. Gold was worth about $850 an ounce in 1980. Adjusted for inflation that's almost 3k today... by the late 90s/ early 2000s it had lost about 90% of its value and sold for under $200 per ounce... it came back up to "record" prices of 1900/oz in 2011 before dropping to around 1100... if the economy continues to improve, gold will continue to drop (easily to half its current price). I put "record" in quotes because adjusted for inflation: that $850 in 1980 still represents more purchasing power than 1900 in 2011... so gold has never regained the value it had in 1980. Had you bought gold in 1980, it would be worth about half what you paid (adjusted for inflation) 40 years later. ...bottom line: buying a Rolex is nothing like buying gold. It will never be a good investment- like stocks, but the downside is also absent: like bonds.
Here's the chart of the no date Submariner's price history. The black line shows the price history, the red one is adjusted for inflation. www.ablogtowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Rolex-Submariner-No-Date-Price-Increase-Chart-1.jpg
Guess I'm not going to buy gold anytime soon. Thank you for the info and write up. I appreciate it. I will reframe from making that statement. Thanks again.
KITTY MEOW BOO ...lol: gold hater?? 😂 I know how much it was in the early 00s, I was buying it then. I've made A LOT of money in gold... buy low, sell high is the point... gold is EXTREMELY volatile. Its intrinsic value is overstated: unless you plan on eating gold. The catastrophic doomsday scenario that would lead to gold prices skyrocketing would also mean absolute anarchy... suffice it to say that gold won't help very much. ...you can't just pick two random days and say: look it went up. What if you bought in 2011 at $1900. It dropped about 40% in 2 years. It's up a little bit now because if fears caused by Trump and North Korea. So buying today you'd be buying HIGH... I wouldn't touch gold until it's under $600 an ounce, which WILL happen soon enough... common sense should tell you that gold won't save you in a nuclear war- so in the event that tensions rise more and gold starts to approach 1700 or 1800, I'd advise you to sell. (In fact I'd sell now if I were you; I personally sold almost all my gold in 2011). ...back to the point: the only point I made was that the performance of Rolex and that of gold aren't comparable. I posted a link to the Submariner's price chart. You can compare that to gold if you'd like. Most relevant is the adjusted for inflation line. A Rolex will show, slow, steady predictable growth and NEVER goes down (except the small depreciation when you take the stickers off of you buy new)... a gold chart for that period is all over the place. Sometimes you make 1000% like I have. Other times you lose 90% or more of your money, no offense: like people like you do, who think gold just goes up and up forever. Why'd you start in the 00s when it was worth $350? Why didn't you start in 2011 when it was (briefly) worth 1900... or in 1980 when it was worth the equivalent of about 3k adjusted for inflation?? ...again, that's was my entire point: if you pick any 2 time periods on the chart the Rolex will have experienced linear growth, never really dropping at all; whereas gold might grow 10x or drop by 90% in the timeframe of a decade. Not only is the performance not comparable- it's the polar opposite in terms of stability vs volatility.
KITTY MEOW BOO ...I should also clarify: I'm certainly not telling anybody to buy a Rolex as an investment. It isn't an investment, it's a watch; a tool. We didn't even discuss maintenance costs- in that same hypothetical period of let's say- 30 years, that watch may have needed 4 full services...there go all the profits. Then there's risk of loss. Stocks and bonds don't get stolen or destroyed. If you have a serious collection you might want to pay for insurance or a bank safe... I'm not calling watches an investment, I'm simply stating a fact: that the closest comparison to how a Rolex will hold its value is bonds. Occasionally some models go up more than expected and if you sell at the time you'll make money some money, maybe double your money. If you're lucky enough to be able to buy a new Daytona for retail price, you can immediately flip it and make a few thousand dollars... but those aren't the typical ownership experience. What the typical owner can expect however, is an accurate, tough, reliable watch that holds its value. It can be sold quickly and easily anywhere in the world for fair value. Including service cost, you should be able to break even or make a small profit, should you need to sell in the future...and since we know money is supposed to lose value to inflation, a Rolex definitely performs better than cash in a savings account. We agree there, don't we?
Super Dude ...you obviously didn’t read the thread. That was discussed. I explicitly stated multiple times not to treat it as an investment. A watch is a watch... I simply pointed out that bonds are a much closer comparison if you want to chart it out... this isn’t the first time you’ve trolled me so I know your intentions. If you actually care, read it again. If not, please don’t talk to me again.
I own both of these watches. The Omega on bracelet is VERY comfortable -- and the leather strap is sublime. On the strap, my Seamaster 300 gets 5x the wrist time of my Rolex. Having said that, my Rolex gets ogled more. Plus the Rolex GlideLock system is wonderful. I paid $4400 for my Omega and $8000 for my Rolex. If I could only have one -- I'd go Omega.
How is the bracelet "extension" adjustment on the Seamaster 300 compared to the Rolex glidelock system? I'm about to pull the trigger on one and was wondering. My wrists tend to fluctuate in size quite a bit.
As bracelets go, the Omega's bracelet is phenomenal. I did a ton of research before buying the Omega. As I understand it, Omega introduced its bracelet extension before Rolex introduced Glidelock (correct me if I'm wrong). For a while, the Omega was thought to have a better bracelet. But frankly, the new Glidelock is flat-out better. It doesn't blow the Omega bracelet away exactly, but the Glidelock bracelet is noticeably better. Mine hasn't stretched out at all -- which may speak to the fact that it's made with 904L steel. Plus let's be honest: High-end watches are like peacock feathers in the sense that their primary job is to impress members of the opposite sex. Having been married for 25 years and liking my watches on a leather strap, the $4400 Omega was a more practical choice for me personally. But if I were a younger man, I'd buy a $7500 Rolex no date Sub (especially if straps aren't your thing). The no date Submariner offers a classic look that everyone appreciates. It's like a dark blue suit: It's never going out of style and might even appreciate in value. The Omega Seamaster 300 on a strap is extremely gratifying to wear -- but it's no chick magnet.
Harry Joiner I definitely don't want a chick magnet. Lol I have a wife as well. I actually buy watches for the enjoyment of the art and engineering of mechanical watches (with a special love for the durablity of dive watches). I'm glad to hear the adjustment system is solid. That should help a lot. Cheers.
cool. then you might really like the omega with the display back. the omega is a first rate watch with a first rate bracelet that looks KILLER on a (real omega) clasp / strap. it would be one of the very last in my collection to go. some watches i buy to sell ... some watches i buy to wear ... of the ones i buy to wear, some i wear for others. some i wear for myself. i wear my omega for ME.
Harry Joiner I'm glad to hear it. I'm heading to an AD to check it out tomorrow...then I'll be ordering online. 😉. Thank you so much for sharing your experiences with the piece. It really helps hearing another's perspective and experience. I'm also contemplating the Jaeger LeCoultre Master Control date with the sector dial. So understated and beautiful. And it's JLC.
I love the omega! So manly yet elegant. I prefer the centre polished links over the brushed version on the limited bond edition. Brings out the glam and complements the watch very well. It wears so comfortably. The Rolex is just so typical. Everyone is wearing one that looks similar, with the saw-like bezel edge and chunky round look. They are very different in looks. Omega is understated yet so elegant. Love it!
I love Omega because they acknowledge that people like some of their vintage models and they actually indulge us by giving us those reissues. Rolex however is very stubborn and is essentially only living through past with Tudor. I think everyone that collects watches would like to see Rolex release smaller case sizes that more closely resemble the older watches. People are wearing smaller watches now. It's obvious when you see the smaller case sizes of watches selling out sooner than the larger ones. But Rolex would never be able to admit they're behind with the times and downsize their line. It's a tough position they're in now.
i just love that seamaster 300. I think it looks fantastic, and it does stir my emotions. It's one of those watches that I just want to have. Rolex sub never has that effect on me..
its like its playing with my head , so simplistic yet soo sooo desirable , want to have it so bad , my 2 favorites are GS and this omega , kudos to rolex , but here for me it doesn't stand a chance
Just picked up the Seamaster 300 a few days ago... Loving it! It looks good especially on the Omega nato strap.. I currently have it on the Bond nato.. Looks so good!
This is a very good video. Thanks. I own a 116618LB and Seamaster 300 Master Co Axial. Both great watches. Maybe I have a hint for you. Try to put the clasp on the Omega in the middle of the bracelet ... so that on both sides the same amount of links are mounted. That should help with the comfort of wearing the watch. I had the same issue and it helped. In the video I see your clasp sits strong on one side and not in the middle. Go on with these videos. Regards Stefan
I own both of these watches. The Omega is NOT uncomfortable. It's very comfortable on the bracelet -- and EXTREMELY comfy on the strap. I did not know the bit about the aluminum ring. Interesting. Great video. Thanks for sharing!
I hate to break iit to you, but owning a Rolex generally means nothing to the general public, it's only in the eye of the beholder & it's special to the watch community. Also, they're both beautiful watches & just about as many people recognize Omega as they do Rolex. Cheers
Disagree. People notice Rolex. So much so that they get the bad connotation of being fake when worn by your everyday Joe. To my knowledge, no one suspects/assumes a fake Omega
I had a 114060, sold it (tax issue) then later bought the SM300, then bought the Sub again. Now I have *both*, and I love to swap between them. They are two examples of iconic design. They bring me so much pleasure. Thank you for this comparison!
I don't know if you have access to the 42mm Planet Ocean blue titanium, but I think it is the most direct comparison to your date ceramic sub. The PO retails for US $8600 and your Rolex retails for US $8500. Both represent the most modern version of of each company's mainline dive watches. It would be great to see a comparison of these two. Like my comment below, I have both models and I have my opinion, but you do this so well, I would enjoy seeing what you have to say.
Great video! Interesting to find I’m the complete opposite on the case back. As long as I’m spending good money on a mechanical watch I don’t really need- I can get the time from my phone. Then please let me see and enjoy the beautiful movement I’m paying for! Also, I am a huge fan of the 20 to 18mm tapered bracelet 👍. However, since I can’t find a Rolex Sub at this time without spending a small fortune I opted for a really nice Omega 300m on the used market so it should hold its value reasonably well too as I enjoy wearing it.
What is interesting about this watch is that aluminium ring between crystal and bezel can't be polished and its integrated with bezel so if you scratch that inner ring and want to get it scratchless again, you have to change the bezel which is very costy because its liquid metal. Crazy.
Rolex is like the Porsche of the watch world, simplistic with nothing much changing in design at all. Omega is like the Ferrari where they experiment, play around and look fantastic doing it. It depends on who you are as to which you prefer to wear. some people love Porsche’s and others prefer the Ferrari. Just pick one, enjoy the hell out of it and pass it on to your kids so it becomes a family heirloom to be enjoyed again and again.
I have both watches. I wear the omega on my days off with the nylon James Bond strap and the Rolex at work mainly because it has the date and hides under the cuff better.
Great video. I have both and I agree that the all-brushed bracelet not only looks better, but it also holds its looks longer. The Spectre edition 300 has an all-brushed bracelet. I purchased the Spectre bracelet and put it on my 300. I like it much better. I think the 300 dresses up much, much better than the Rolex. I have no problem wearing the 300 with a suit, so it is more versatile to me. BTW, the 300 clasp uses ceramic closers in the clasp too. I also agree that the Rolex bezel movement is slightly better, but I think my Bremont Supermarine bezel movement is superior to both.
I own the new SMP300M, which I love, and got my SubC (Nodate) yesterday. Even as an Omega fan I have to admit that the finish, overall quality and feel when you hold the watch in your hand is so much better on the Rolex. Putting the other specs aside... Also it's one thing that you say one should imagine that the cyclops is gone in the video but it does not do justice to the reality of how much better the Nodate Sub looks. One has to see and experience it. It's more of an institution than the Bank of England and an alltime classic. For me many Omega watches are more like fashion products and the countless limited and special editions are just ridiculous. The Nodate Sub is understated and perfect. The Sub is Rolex at its best.
In my opinion the seamaster 300 looks a lot nicer . It's a re issued and changed design with all different style changes . Rolex don't bother with new design at all they mostly rely on there name to sell watches and you cannot say I'm wrong
I have both but I prefer Omega diver 300 coz of the classic look. Also they both are very comfortable equally and I have no idea why you say the Omega one is incredibly uncomfortable!? but indeed it is very versatile and comfortable daily wear.
yes...but you can't buy a sub at retail. so you need to spend 2-3k over retail...when the bubble bursts, which it will, you will end up losing money. not a lot - but money will be lost.
I have to go with the Omega. I think the design is just much bolder and more attractive. The Rolex sub makes it looks too feminine and doesn't suit my taste. The price point is also quite acceptable compare to the Sub that has a sky high pricing.
That Seamaster 300 is probably Omega's best current watch. The only one I really like that they do these days. But they lose value so badly. Whereas a submariner, not so much. So it's really a clear choice. If you can afford the sub, that is what you bye. If not, get the Seamaster 300 gray market. 40% off is hard to pass up.
I'm actually a huge fan of the Dark Side of the Moon. I do agree with Stevens. I'd like to see Omega go further. Maybe the Planet Ocean would be a better comparison. The Planet Oceans are closer to the SUB. I'd like to buy one. Thanks for the comments.
I have the Planet Ocean, but the first iteration with the 2500 movement. The newer ones have better fit and finish, but are insanely thick for my wrist. I can't pull them off. I also really hate the new numbers font used on the brand new Planet Oceans. They closed the loops and it just looks off.
I agree with you guys 100%. Omega really missed their chance with positioning the PO as a viable Sub competitor. It's the thickness of the new models that really upsets me.
The problem with selling a sub on the grey marker for a profit, you'll struggle to get another one unless you pay top dollar again..and there goes your profit
Thanks for making this video. I was foolishly contemplating selling my no date Submariner to buy the Seamaster. But seeing them next to each other really helped.
Not really. It's all a matter of opinion. They are both excellent watches, but if were forced to pick between the two, I would keep my 300 without a second thought.
Looks like a Seiko, and I own a Turtle 6309-7049, since 1984,so not a hater. I own an Omega 300m, so maybe a little biased, but I could have bought the Rolex, so... i paint mega yachts, and I see bushels of subs. It's a look at me watch. Great watch, I was torn, but the Omega 300m, I believe, will give me the performance, I need, I live on my sailboat, i dive often, though,with computers, they're redundant as a dive tool, unless your battery dies,which is why i set it when i dive. Computer failure, no big deal,work the dive tables. I've never seen the 300m in the wild, so maybe a resale value down the road. I'm not a collector, I have no intention of selling the watch,so no big deal. I bought it grey market for 50% retail. I'll be ok. My 84 year old father has a GMT Pepsi, he bought in 1975,so i may have both down the road. Good video. Fair comparison. Capt.Bob, SV 27th Chance, Tampa Florida P.S. if you don't scratch it up,you probably don't wear it everyday. I'm sorry,you can't make that prediction. If you're right all the time? Send me your lotto numbers. Just sayin,my Seiko is probably older than you. Lol... ok,so you buy a watch to sell it,and buy what ? A watch ? Lol...
why do u say it's a no date sub when it's obviously a date sub? anyway good video and both these watches rock. As a side note, don't buy watches thinking that they're investments, most of the time they're not.
the new one is even better than this one: tapered bracelet, bigger bezel, sandwich dial even on the numbers, two coloured lume, metas certified. go for it!
i don't think the value should be a big part of watch reviews. Sure, if you buy watches as investment pieces then that's fine and I don't blame you at all. But for me I try to buy what I like without thinking of how it retains value as much, and especially in reviews I don't care so much. We all know Rolex holds their values like nothing else, but god damn, that Omega is so beautiful it's hard to explain.
The Rolex has a much better resale value and a classic design. I can see why it would make the rational choice for some. But to me, this particular Seamaster 300 just calls out to me in terms of design. And it's kinda nice to get something a little different.
Rolex submariner with aluminum bezel are cheaper then the ceramic. From what I noticed , some are selling less then retail price of the new ones with a ceramic. If you want an ROI, invest in a good stock or index, and with the profit buy the watch you want. A watch is not a good investment. Not even a Rolex. I personally prefer the Omega. Don’t really think I want to be associated with some people who wear Rolex.
That’s similar to the watch he wore (Daniel craig) in Spectre. It is a special, more expensive version. It looks similar. differences include no number 12. The logo sits where the 12 would be. A much more elegant look.
The Seamaster dial isn't sandwiched. Looks like it is but it isn't. The lume is actually filled within the hour markers that has been cut out. Look closely and you'll see that it's filled with lume and not sandwiched.
Rolex! The stainless sport Rolex are like money. Owned many and never lost a penny. In fact I made money on every single one, sometimes allot of money. Wasn’t my intention but it’s a fact. People always seem to want them. Maybe because they don’t change much over the years. Plus Rolex regular price increases yearly makes your watch more valuable. My 1999 Sub date, ref16610 I bought slightly used with box, papers etc. for $2700 bucks. I could sell that watch or trade for $5400, pretty sure. Buy a lightly used Rolex with all accessories, wait for a deal. The newer Omega divers I’ve owned and sold I lost only a little because I bought used, but resale was definitely not as good as Rolex. Both are great brands so buy the watch that speaks to you and just enjoy it.
Just saw this video, Great comparison. (Four years later prices have gone crazy) RE: Case Back: What is Rolex hiding? You are lucky to have both a Sub and 300. I am looking for a Swiss Timepiece to round out my Average Collection. I do not want to spend a Premium for a Rolex! (If you have a Sub why would you sell it?) The Omegas are holding their value better, if thats your objective(?) The NEW Omega 300 had the bracelet with the brushed center links. A plus! The sandwich dial is beautiful. I really like the ring between the dial and Bezel!! I am leaning towards 300 or AquaTerra. If you have any Rolex it could be your everyday and one watch collection! (So many watches; Not Enough Money/Time). :-) I think the Omega is a slightly better watch because of the Coaxial escapement; 15k gauss; they are Less expensive, and AVAILABLE! My advise is Don't Sell Your Sub! To your point, If Omega in a few years again upgrades the 300 and like it better then consider selling your 300 to get the new one. Thanks again for the info it was helpful.
Normally, I find Rolex to be a bit bland and generic- just a little too stylistically conservative for my taste. But in this comparison, I've got to say that the Submariner crushes the Seamaster aesthetically. The Rolex just pops more with the way the light reflects off it and the beautifully applied markers on the dial, whereas the Seamaster's cutout dial is subdued and flat-looking. At first glance, the Seamaster's dial looks printed, which comes across as cheap for a luxury watch if you ask me. Now the new 2018 Seamster 300 and the Pierce Brosnan-era 90's Seamaster both strike me as far more interesting than the Submariner from either time period with their wave patterns on the dial, and the unique and interesting bracelet. Plus, the hour markers on those Seamasters are very similar to the Rolex, which is my biggest criticism of the Seamaster in this video. So not only do I find the other Seamasters to be better looking, but even brand new, the 2018 model is just shy of half the price of the Rolex AND has the current association with James Bond, which is important for someone who grew up in the Brosnan/Craig days.
People not all rolexes make you a profit or hold value. Only a specific model or two mostly. Sell them back through a dealer or online seller and you lose 1500-2000 off market value on every watch. It's really hard to sell them at full value and have buyers trust the purchase. Only way to get your money back is to own one of those few models like a steel submariner that appreciate in value enough over time to cover the initial trade/sell loss you would incur. For example, buy a Oyster perpetual for 5500 and bobs watches will pay you only 3500 to sell it to them. You lose 2000. Research yourself
If I told you the value of your item will decrease by more than 35-40% after you purchase would you buy? That is an omega. Same as purchasing a new car.
Sir you must compare apple with apple! A Rolex Sub. with date should compare with a Omega seamaster 300 professional model not this old model you're wearing!
We are living in time when Rolex Submariner is the best and the most valuable sports watch in the world and nothing is going to change this in the near future.
You contradict yourself, to wit, you favor the Sub even though you start the piece espousing your preference towards the 300. Watches are a passion and technical decision, not an investment. Omega has been true to the 300 from its inception. It’s also the most comfortable watch I’ve worn. It’s better to invest in other things other than watches. Watches are for pleasure. Investment as the reason to buy a watch isn’t rational. Buy a watch because you want to own it not sell it.
consumer demand determines resale value not the actual quality of the watch. That consumer demand is created by master marketing and the fabricated prestige a rolex gives you. It's marketed as the watch for "successful" people and that's what drives the demand and thus resale price
Dislike 👎.. you didn't even talk about the superiority of OMEGA's movement.. repeating the same boring resale subject .. look at you, you have two OMEGA watches .. why? Well studied Price? Availability "No dirty games from brand"? Both OMEGA watches history started before Rolex... so please stop comparing watches based on something which is not horological.. thank you for your efforts
Always go with Rolex....holds better value...its Iconic and us recognized all over the world....alot of authorized dealers wont even buy back an omega but will always will with a Rolex....trust me, been around the block on all watches....Rolex and patek phillipe are only 2 watches that always appreciate in value...dont be ignorant go Rolex....
@@lamaludwig1470 What's the point of buying it if its gonna be kept in a safe??? I will never understand that logic. A watch is meant to be worn. Omega or Rolex, just wear the heck out of it!
its true, most people who buy rolexes are trying to visibly show they are successful through perception. Omega buyers buy the watch because they want the best watch. Period.
![[UNCUT] ฝันรักห้วงนิทรา | EP.8 (4/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RDYJYiDwsj0/mqdefault.jpg)
Great vid, but you shouldn't compare Rolex's investment potential to gold. It's more like US government issued bonds. In fact, gold is pretty much the worst possible comparison. Gold prices fluctuate wildly and high gold prices indicate a bad economy (unlike luxury items like wristwatches). Rolex performs like bonds: boring as an investment, but practically no downside, not huge room for growth in standard models, but slow, steady predictable growth. As Rolex increases prices a little each year, pre owned values come up as well.
Gold was worth about $850 an ounce in 1980. Adjusted for inflation that's almost 3k today... by the late 90s/ early 2000s it had lost about 90% of its value and sold for under $200 per ounce... it came back up to "record" prices of 1900/oz in 2011 before dropping to around 1100... if the economy continues to improve, gold will continue to drop (easily to half its current price). I put "record" in quotes because adjusted for inflation: that $850 in 1980 still represents more purchasing power than 1900 in 2011... so gold has never regained the value it had in 1980. Had you bought gold in 1980, it would be worth about half what you paid (adjusted for inflation) 40 years later.
...bottom line: buying a Rolex is nothing like buying gold. It will never be a good investment- like stocks, but the downside is also absent: like bonds.
Here's the chart of the no date Submariner's price history. The black line shows the price history, the red one is adjusted for inflation. www.ablogtowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Rolex-Submariner-No-Date-Price-Increase-Chart-1.jpg
Guess I'm not going to buy gold anytime soon. Thank you for the info and write up. I appreciate it. I will reframe from making that statement. Thanks again.
KITTY MEOW BOO ...lol: gold hater?? 😂 I know how much it was in the early 00s, I was buying it then. I've made A LOT of money in gold... buy low, sell high is the point... gold is EXTREMELY volatile. Its intrinsic value is overstated: unless you plan on eating gold. The catastrophic doomsday scenario that would lead to gold prices skyrocketing would also mean absolute anarchy... suffice it to say that gold won't help very much.
...you can't just pick two random days and say: look it went up. What if you bought in 2011 at $1900. It dropped about 40% in 2 years. It's up a little bit now because if fears caused by Trump and North Korea. So buying today you'd be buying HIGH... I wouldn't touch gold until it's under $600 an ounce, which WILL happen soon enough... common sense should tell you that gold won't save you in a nuclear war- so in the event that tensions rise more and gold starts to approach 1700 or 1800, I'd advise you to sell. (In fact I'd sell now if I were you; I personally sold almost all my gold in 2011).
...back to the point: the only point I made was that the performance of Rolex and that of gold aren't comparable. I posted a link to the Submariner's price chart. You can compare that to gold if you'd like. Most relevant is the adjusted for inflation line. A Rolex will show, slow, steady predictable growth and NEVER goes down (except the small depreciation when you take the stickers off of you buy new)... a gold chart for that period is all over the place. Sometimes you make 1000% like I have. Other times you lose 90% or more of your money, no offense: like people like you do, who think gold just goes up and up forever.
Why'd you start in the 00s when it was worth $350? Why didn't you start in 2011 when it was (briefly) worth 1900... or in 1980 when it was worth the equivalent of about 3k adjusted for inflation?? ...again, that's was my entire point: if you pick any 2 time periods on the chart the Rolex will have experienced linear growth, never really dropping at all; whereas gold might grow 10x or drop by 90% in the timeframe of a decade. Not only is the performance not comparable- it's the polar opposite in terms of stability vs volatility.
KITTY MEOW BOO ...I should also clarify: I'm certainly not telling anybody to buy a Rolex as an investment. It isn't an investment, it's a watch; a tool. We didn't even discuss maintenance costs- in that same hypothetical period of let's say- 30 years, that watch may have needed 4 full services...there go all the profits. Then there's risk of loss. Stocks and bonds don't get stolen or destroyed. If you have a serious collection you might want to pay for insurance or a bank safe...
I'm not calling watches an investment, I'm simply stating a fact: that the closest comparison to how a Rolex will hold its value is bonds.
Occasionally some models go up more than expected and if you sell at the time you'll make money some money, maybe double your money. If you're lucky enough to be able to buy a new Daytona for retail price, you can immediately flip it and make a few thousand dollars... but those aren't the typical ownership experience. What the typical owner can expect however, is an accurate, tough, reliable watch that holds its value. It can be sold quickly and easily anywhere in the world for fair value. Including service cost, you should be able to break even or make a small profit, should you need to sell in the future...and since we know money is supposed to lose value to inflation, a Rolex definitely performs better than cash in a savings account. We agree there, don't we?
Super Dude ...you obviously didn’t read the thread. That was discussed. I explicitly stated multiple times not to treat it as an investment. A watch is a watch... I simply pointed out that bonds are a much closer comparison if you want to chart it out... this isn’t the first time you’ve trolled me so I know your intentions. If you actually care, read it again. If not, please don’t talk to me again.
I own both of these watches. The Omega on bracelet is VERY comfortable -- and the leather strap is sublime. On the strap, my Seamaster 300 gets 5x the wrist time of my Rolex. Having said that, my Rolex gets ogled more. Plus the Rolex GlideLock system is wonderful. I paid $4400 for my Omega and $8000 for my Rolex. If I could only have one -- I'd go Omega.
How is the bracelet "extension" adjustment on the Seamaster 300 compared to the Rolex glidelock system? I'm about to pull the trigger on one and was wondering. My wrists tend to fluctuate in size quite a bit.
As bracelets go, the Omega's bracelet is phenomenal. I did a ton of research before buying the Omega. As I understand it, Omega introduced its bracelet extension before Rolex introduced Glidelock (correct me if I'm wrong). For a while, the Omega was thought to have a better bracelet. But frankly, the new Glidelock is flat-out better. It doesn't blow the Omega bracelet away exactly, but the Glidelock bracelet is noticeably better. Mine hasn't stretched out at all -- which may speak to the fact that it's made with 904L steel. Plus let's be honest: High-end watches are like peacock feathers in the sense that their primary job is to impress members of the opposite sex. Having been married for 25 years and liking my watches on a leather strap, the $4400 Omega was a more practical choice for me personally. But if I were a younger man, I'd buy a $7500 Rolex no date Sub (especially if straps aren't your thing). The no date Submariner offers a classic look that everyone appreciates. It's like a dark blue suit: It's never going out of style and might even appreciate in value. The Omega Seamaster 300 on a strap is extremely gratifying to wear -- but it's no chick magnet.
Harry Joiner I definitely don't want a chick magnet. Lol I have a wife as well. I actually buy watches for the enjoyment of the art and engineering of mechanical watches (with a special love for the durablity of dive watches). I'm glad to hear the adjustment system is solid. That should help a lot.
Cheers.
cool. then you might really like the omega with the display back. the omega is a first rate watch with a first rate bracelet that looks KILLER on a (real omega) clasp / strap. it would be one of the very last in my collection to go. some watches i buy to sell ... some watches i buy to wear ... of the ones i buy to wear, some i wear for others. some i wear for myself. i wear my omega for ME.
Harry Joiner I'm glad to hear it. I'm heading to an AD to check it out tomorrow...then I'll be ordering online. 😉. Thank you so much for sharing your experiences with the piece. It really helps hearing another's perspective and experience. I'm also contemplating the Jaeger LeCoultre Master Control date with the sector dial. So understated and beautiful. And it's JLC.
I love the omega! So manly yet elegant. I prefer the centre polished links over the brushed version on the limited bond edition. Brings out the glam and complements the watch very well. It wears so comfortably. The Rolex is just so typical. Everyone is wearing one that looks similar, with the saw-like bezel edge and chunky round look. They are very different in looks. Omega is understated yet so elegant. Love it!
I love Omega because they acknowledge that people like some of their vintage models and they actually indulge us by giving us those reissues. Rolex however is very stubborn and is essentially only living through past with Tudor. I think everyone that collects watches would like to see Rolex release smaller case sizes that more closely resemble the older watches. People are wearing smaller watches now. It's obvious when you see the smaller case sizes of watches selling out sooner than the larger ones. But Rolex would never be able to admit they're behind with the times and downsize their line. It's a tough position they're in now.
i just love that seamaster 300. I think it looks fantastic, and it does stir my emotions. It's one of those watches that I just want to have. Rolex sub never has that effect on me..
its like its playing with my head , so simplistic yet soo sooo desirable , want to have it so bad , my 2 favorites are GS and this omega , kudos to rolex , but here for me it doesn't stand a chance
Just picked up the Seamaster 300 a few days ago... Loving it! It looks good especially on the Omega nato strap.. I currently have it on the Bond nato.. Looks so good!
Omega are beautiful, build quality equals Rolex but omegas movement’s are fantastic 😀😄
This is a very good video. Thanks.
I own a 116618LB and Seamaster 300 Master Co Axial. Both great watches.
Maybe I have a hint for you. Try to put the clasp on the Omega in the middle of the bracelet ... so that on both sides the same amount of links are mounted. That should help with the comfort of wearing the watch. I had the same issue and it helped. In the video I see your clasp sits strong on one side and not in the middle.
Go on with these videos.
Regards
Stefan
I own both of these watches. The Omega is NOT uncomfortable. It's very comfortable on the bracelet -- and EXTREMELY comfy on the strap. I did not know the bit about the aluminum ring. Interesting. Great video. Thanks for sharing!
I totally agree, it’s way more comfortable than my Rolex!
I'd take that Seamaster 300 over the Sub any day.
"You can't really argue with something that hasn't changed". Oh yes you can.
Awesome video man!
I hate to break iit to you, but owning a Rolex generally means nothing to the general public, it's only in the eye of the beholder & it's special to the watch community. Also, they're both beautiful watches & just about as many people recognize Omega as they do Rolex. Cheers
Disagree. People notice Rolex. So much so that they get the bad connotation of being fake when worn by your everyday Joe. To my knowledge, no one suspects/assumes a fake Omega
I had a 114060, sold it (tax issue) then later bought the SM300, then bought the Sub again. Now I have *both*, and I love to swap between them. They are two examples of iconic design. They bring me so much pleasure. Thank you for this comparison!
You can have Omega brush the center link. A good local jeweler could do it also. That's really all it needs.
I don't know if you have access to the 42mm Planet Ocean blue titanium, but I think it is the most direct comparison to your date ceramic sub. The PO retails for US $8600 and your Rolex retails for US $8500. Both represent the most modern version of of each company's mainline dive watches. It would be great to see a comparison of these two. Like my comment below, I have both models and I have my opinion, but you do this so well, I would enjoy seeing what you have to say.
Great video! Interesting to find I’m the complete opposite on the case back. As long as I’m spending good money on a mechanical watch I don’t really need- I can get the time from my phone. Then please let me see and enjoy the beautiful movement I’m paying for! Also, I am a huge fan of the 20 to 18mm tapered bracelet 👍. However, since I can’t find a Rolex Sub at this time without spending a small fortune I opted for a really nice Omega 300m on the used market so it should hold its value reasonably well too as I enjoy wearing it.
What is interesting about this watch is that aluminium ring between crystal and bezel can't be polished and its integrated with bezel so if you scratch that inner ring and want to get it scratchless again, you have to change the bezel which is very costy because its liquid metal. Crazy.
What brand is the mesh strap?
Rolex is like the Porsche of the watch world, simplistic with nothing much changing in design at all. Omega is like the Ferrari where they experiment, play around and look fantastic doing it.
It depends on who you are as to which you prefer to wear. some people love Porsche’s and others prefer the Ferrari. Just pick one, enjoy the hell out of it and pass it on to your kids so it becomes a family heirloom to be enjoyed again and again.
LoL! Worst attempt at a comparison ever!
Fail
Omega cannot hold a candle to Rolex.
End of Story#cant compete
@@williamstalvey6920 umm yes they def can.
I have both watches. I wear the omega on my days off with the nylon James Bond strap and the Rolex at work mainly because it has the date and hides under the cuff better.
How is the watch today? Still liking it?
Great video. I have both and I agree that the all-brushed bracelet not only looks better, but it also holds its looks longer. The Spectre edition 300 has an all-brushed bracelet. I purchased the Spectre bracelet and put it on my 300. I like it much better. I think the 300 dresses up much, much better than the Rolex. I have no problem wearing the 300 with a suit, so it is more versatile to me. BTW, the 300 clasp uses ceramic closers in the clasp too. I also agree that the Rolex bezel movement is slightly better, but I think my Bremont Supermarine bezel movement is superior to both.
John Doe, where did you find the all-brushed bracelet for your Omega 300?
Both beautiful pieces. Can't go wrong with either.
Keep going 👌🏻
What's the most comfortable watch you've ever worn?
wise words, thanks
I own the new SMP300M, which I love, and got my SubC (Nodate) yesterday. Even as an Omega fan I have to admit that the finish, overall quality and feel when you hold the watch in your hand is so much better on the Rolex. Putting the other specs aside... Also it's one thing that you say one should imagine that the cyclops is gone in the video but it does not do justice to the reality of how much better the Nodate Sub looks. One has to see and experience it. It's more of an institution than the Bank of England and an alltime classic. For me many Omega watches are more like fashion products and the countless limited and special editions are just ridiculous. The Nodate Sub is understated and perfect. The Sub is Rolex at its best.
In my opinion the seamaster 300 looks a lot nicer . It's a re issued and changed design with all different style changes . Rolex don't bother with new design at all they mostly rely on there name to sell watches and you cannot say I'm wrong
Benendes C there is a reason why a lot of company's copy the look of a rolex its a classic why would they want to change what they already master.
You’re wrong
@@davidofglenbrook4487 You’re wrong. I am Spartacus.
Robert Gray Nuh-uh. You are that thing.
@@davidofglenbrook4487 Oh Yeah. Be the Thing.
The omega looks fabulous. Rolex should make a ceramic version of the sub 5513 the propositions of this version don’t do it for me.
Nice stuff
I have both but I prefer Omega diver 300 coz of the classic look. Also they both are very comfortable equally and I have no idea why you say the Omega one is incredibly uncomfortable!? but indeed it is very versatile and comfortable daily wear.
I love the Omega but I agree it is uncomfortable to wear even with the adjustments.
Doubtful the inner ring is aluminum. And the Rolex is made of a softer steel, easier to scratch. 316L used in the omega is superior in my opinion
yes...but you can't buy a sub at retail. so you need to spend 2-3k over retail...when the bubble bursts, which it will, you will end up losing money. not a lot - but money will be lost.
I have to go with the Omega. I think the design is just much bolder and more attractive. The Rolex sub makes it looks too feminine and doesn't suit my taste. The price point is also quite acceptable compare to the Sub that has a sky high pricing.
That Seamaster 300 is probably Omega's best current watch. The only one I really like that they do these days. But they lose value so badly. Whereas a submariner, not so much. So it's really a clear choice. If you can afford the sub, that is what you bye. If not, get the Seamaster 300 gray market. 40% off is hard to pass up.
Matt Stevens You're not a Speedmaster MOTM fan?
Dutzu Miho I am but I consider it vintage since it really hasn't changed at all over the years.
I'm actually a huge fan of the Dark Side of the Moon.
I do agree with Stevens. I'd like to see Omega go further. Maybe the Planet Ocean would be a better comparison. The Planet Oceans are closer to the SUB. I'd like to buy one.
Thanks for the comments.
I have the Planet Ocean, but the first iteration with the 2500 movement. The newer ones have better fit and finish, but are insanely thick for my wrist. I can't pull them off. I also really hate the new numbers font used on the brand new Planet Oceans. They closed the loops and it just looks off.
I agree with you guys 100%. Omega really missed their chance with positioning the PO as a viable Sub competitor. It's the thickness of the new models that really upsets me.
The problem with selling a sub on the grey marker for a profit, you'll struggle to get another one unless you pay top dollar again..and there goes your profit
I personally don’t like anything Rolex makes other than the Datejust. I love Omega’s dive watches. The Submariner just doesn’t do it for me sadly
Thanks for making this video. I was foolishly contemplating selling my no date Submariner to buy the Seamaster. But seeing them next to each other really helped.
American Jedi That would have been a huge mistake........
Not really. It's all a matter of opinion. They are both excellent watches, but if were forced to pick between the two, I would keep my 300 without a second thought.
Anyone else notice the Sub stop ticking at 4:26?
Power reserve ran out lol
Looks like a Seiko, and I own a Turtle 6309-7049, since 1984,so not a hater. I own an Omega 300m, so maybe a little biased, but I could have bought the Rolex, so... i paint mega yachts, and I see bushels of subs. It's a look at me watch. Great watch, I was torn, but the Omega 300m, I believe, will give me the performance, I need, I live on my sailboat, i dive often, though,with computers, they're redundant as a dive tool, unless your battery dies,which is why i set it when i dive. Computer failure, no big deal,work the dive tables. I've never seen the 300m in the wild, so maybe a resale value down the road. I'm not a collector, I have no intention of selling the watch,so no big deal. I bought it grey market for 50% retail. I'll be ok. My 84 year old father has a GMT Pepsi, he bought in 1975,so i may have both down the road. Good video. Fair comparison. Capt.Bob, SV 27th Chance, Tampa Florida P.S. if you don't scratch it up,you probably don't wear it everyday. I'm sorry,you can't make that prediction. If you're right all the time? Send me your lotto numbers. Just sayin,my Seiko is probably older than you. Lol... ok,so you buy a watch to sell it,and buy what ? A watch ? Lol...
why do u say it's a no date sub when it's obviously a date sub? anyway good video and both these watches rock. As a side note, don't buy watches thinking that they're investments, most of the time they're not.
Just picked up the 2021 version of this Seamaster 300 will the lollipop hand. Put it on a Omega nato.
What about the movement? Who is more reliable & robust and who is more accurate ?
Both are very consistent in how much they gain or loose per day, which is the important thing. And both can be adjusted to be stone accurate.
Omega is far better. Modern twin barrel movement, anti magnetic etc etc where rolex is not in the same league
I'm looking at the new 300 model, because unfortunately I can't get a Sub, they're just not available. Fed up waiting for that AD phonecall
the new one is even better than this one: tapered bracelet, bigger bezel, sandwich dial even on the numbers, two coloured lume, metas certified.
go for it!
I just got the new 300… it’s great. Go for it
Omega looks much beautiful than Rolex.
i don't think the value should be a big part of watch reviews. Sure, if you buy watches as investment pieces then that's fine and I don't blame you at all.
But for me I try to buy what I like without thinking of how it retains value as much, and especially in reviews I don't care so much. We all know Rolex holds their values like nothing else, but god damn, that Omega is so beautiful it's hard to explain.
This is especially true if you buy the Omega on the used / grey market. You can find these at 30-40% off retail.
The Rolex has a much better resale value and a classic design. I can see why it would make the rational choice for some. But to me, this particular Seamaster 300 just calls out to me in terms of design. And it's kinda nice to get something a little different.
Rolex submariner with aluminum bezel are cheaper then the ceramic. From what I noticed , some are selling less then retail price of the new ones with a ceramic.
If you want an ROI, invest in a good stock or index, and with the profit buy the watch you want. A watch is not a good investment. Not even a Rolex.
I personally prefer the Omega. Don’t really think I want to be associated with some people who wear Rolex.
Make sure you buy grey market for an omega. They are like Panerai, you will taken to the shed on resale. Yes, all collectors resell watches.
where i live (sweden) its the opposite, rolexes dont have a good second hand market but the omegas have a great second hand value.
fredrik johannes You must live in an area populated by .....
@@georgiebungle2252 ..... geniuses with awesome taste.
Which seamaster did james bond wear it didn't look like that one there though. I know it started as rolex then went omega.
That’s similar to the watch he wore (Daniel craig) in Spectre. It is a special, more expensive version. It looks similar. differences include no number 12. The logo sits where the 12 would be. A much more elegant look.
The Seamaster dial isn't sandwiched. Looks like it is but it isn't. The lume is actually filled within the hour markers that has been cut out. Look closely and you'll see that it's filled with lume and not sandwiched.
Thank you, I did not know this.
Watches are a poor investment, buy what you will enjoy the most.
That doesn’t make sense and also it’s generally not true.
You dont need to see everything as an investment.
4:12 got me
Rolex! The stainless sport Rolex are like money. Owned many and never lost a penny. In fact I made money on every single one, sometimes allot of money. Wasn’t my intention but it’s a fact. People always seem to want them. Maybe because they don’t change much over the years. Plus Rolex regular price increases yearly makes your watch more valuable. My 1999 Sub date, ref16610 I bought slightly used with box, papers etc. for $2700 bucks. I could sell that watch or trade for $5400, pretty sure. Buy a lightly used Rolex with all accessories, wait for a deal. The newer Omega divers I’ve owned and sold I lost only a little because I bought used, but resale was definitely not as good as Rolex. Both are great brands so buy the watch that speaks to you and just enjoy it.
Go to 17:33 for an inconvenient truth.
Just saw this video, Great comparison. (Four years later prices have gone crazy) RE: Case Back: What is Rolex hiding? You are lucky to have both a Sub and 300. I am looking for a Swiss Timepiece to round out my Average Collection. I do not want to spend a Premium for a Rolex! (If you have a Sub why would you sell it?) The Omegas are holding their value better, if thats your objective(?) The NEW Omega 300 had the bracelet with the brushed center links. A plus! The sandwich dial is beautiful. I really like the ring between the dial and Bezel!! I am leaning towards 300 or AquaTerra. If you have any Rolex it could be your everyday and one watch collection! (So many watches; Not Enough Money/Time). :-)
I think the Omega is a slightly better watch because of the Coaxial escapement; 15k gauss; they are Less expensive, and AVAILABLE! My advise is Don't Sell Your Sub! To your point, If Omega in a few years again upgrades the 300 and like it better then consider selling your 300 to get the new one. Thanks again for the info it was helpful.
Meh, the Omega looks much better.
Omega owners can scratch their ring. The newer SM300 heritage has a slightly smaller ring. Less scratchy.
Good 👍
Normally, I find Rolex to be a bit bland and generic- just a little too stylistically conservative for my taste. But in this comparison, I've got to say that the Submariner crushes the Seamaster aesthetically.
The Rolex just pops more with the way the light reflects off it and the beautifully applied markers on the dial, whereas the Seamaster's cutout dial is subdued and flat-looking. At first glance, the Seamaster's dial looks printed, which comes across as cheap for a luxury watch if you ask me.
Now the new 2018 Seamster 300 and the Pierce Brosnan-era 90's Seamaster both strike me as far more interesting than the Submariner from either time period with their wave patterns on the dial, and the unique and interesting bracelet. Plus, the hour markers on those Seamasters are very similar to the Rolex, which is my biggest criticism of the Seamaster in this video.
So not only do I find the other Seamasters to be better looking, but even brand new, the 2018 model is just shy of half the price of the Rolex AND has the current association with James Bond, which is important for someone who grew up in the Brosnan/Craig days.
Omega!
I don't understand where the value comes from? Aren't they just steel?
People not all rolexes make you a profit or hold value. Only a specific model or two mostly. Sell them back through a dealer or online seller and you lose 1500-2000 off market value on every watch. It's really hard to sell them at full value and have buyers trust the purchase. Only way to get your money back is to own one of those few models like a steel submariner that appreciate in value enough over time to cover the initial trade/sell loss you would incur. For example, buy a Oyster perpetual for 5500 and bobs watches will pay you only 3500 to sell it to them. You lose 2000. Research yourself
"The nicest steel I have ever seen" 😂😂😂😂🙈
If I told you the value of your item will decrease by more than 35-40% after you purchase would you buy? That is an omega. Same as purchasing a new car.
would still buy. Omega is a better WATCH. Rolex is a better marketed. If you need to sell your watch and pay your bills buy a Rolex.
Sir you must compare apple with apple!
A Rolex Sub. with date
should compare with a Omega seamaster 300 professional model not this old model you're wearing!
Old model?
We are living in time when Rolex Submariner is the best and the most valuable sports watch in the world and nothing is going to change this in the near future.
Roman Grom you mean the Patek Philippe Aquanaut which sells 10.000EUR premium
You contradict yourself, to wit, you favor the Sub even though you start the piece espousing your preference towards the 300. Watches are a passion and technical decision, not an investment. Omega has been true to the 300 from its inception. It’s also the most comfortable watch I’ve worn. It’s better to invest in other things other than watches. Watches are for pleasure. Investment as the reason to buy a watch isn’t rational. Buy a watch because you want to own it not sell it.
Both great watches. Resale Rolex wins hands down.
consumer demand determines resale value not the actual quality of the watch. That consumer demand is created by master marketing and the fabricated prestige a rolex gives you. It's marketed as the watch for "successful" people and that's what drives the demand and thus resale price
Omega wins
Dislike 👎.. you didn't even talk about the superiority of OMEGA's movement.. repeating the same boring resale subject .. look at you, you have two OMEGA watches .. why? Well studied Price? Availability "No dirty games from brand"? Both OMEGA watches history started before Rolex... so please stop comparing watches based on something which is not horological.. thank you for your efforts
"it's so fat and kinda ugly looking" haha
Watches are not investments, they are just jewelry
La Seamaster a un calibre bien plus élaboré que celui de la Submariner !
Rolex
Thank God I stop watching at min 4.
RoLEX All Day and twice on Sunday!
Allways Rolex
Omega better
Always go with Rolex....holds better value...its Iconic and us recognized all over the world....alot of authorized dealers wont even buy back an omega but will always will with a Rolex....trust me, been around the block on all watches....Rolex and patek phillipe are only 2 watches that always appreciate in value...dont be ignorant go Rolex....
Rolex for the safe, Omega if you want something nice.
@@lamaludwig1470 What's the point of buying it if its gonna be kept in a safe??? I will never understand that logic. A watch is meant to be worn. Omega or Rolex, just wear the heck out of it!
@@imranbecks I agree Imran, but not everybody does.
You lost me when you started on about resale value. I don’t buy watches for that so didn’t watch past 10mins.
ROLEX is for people who have money to spend, but no taste or education !
OMEGA is for people that seek to be something better!
its true, most people who buy rolexes are trying to visibly show they are successful through perception. Omega buyers buy the watch because they want the best watch. Period.
how dare you? how dare you call my rolex a fat fat, fat fat ugly watch`. ;)
You constantly run your fingers through your hair. Looks oily. Are your watches all smudged?
The submariner lugs are an abomination ...
Opinions and ass holes, everyone has one and they all stink. Most of the video is subjective.
The Rolex is boring
Sub. The other is a glorified Swatch watch..
siedzisz i pierdolisz jakieś kocopoły zamiast położyć je obok siebie i porównać wymiary