WATCH POP

New to the forum. I presently have a few Omega watches in my collection, the lastest being Black Face SMP GMT. Got a good deal when last in Oz on a NOS piece. When back in Singapore realised that the hour hand was dropping time. From TZ I realised that this may be a manufacturer's fault.
Off to the Omega Service Center in Singapore. Without cert or guarantee they confirmed that it was a fault and fixed the watch (in 2 weeks). Impressive especially FOC!!! About a week later it did th same thing. Rang the service center and they said to bring it in. They changed the entire engine in a couple of days FOC!! Rather than leaving me weeks without it.
Thats why I like Omega, Reliable and Stand behind their product. Not sure that Rolex would.
Does anyone have thoughts on the broad arrow moonphase, can get one for USD2450 NIB Strap not bracelet. Looks nice but don't want to give up any of the watches.
Great site and if I can work out how to use my G3 I will load up some pics of the older watches in the collection.
Full Time job eats time from my part time passions but instead opts to replace the entire movment...glad it worked out for you though but other than Tag, Omega/Swatch is the only company that I frequently hear of having to replace entire movements in order to correct issues...guess it is cheaper to do this than hire or train their staff properly at service centers. You may have missed the point a little. Not that they couldn't fix the prob but rather than inconvenience the owner they replaced the movement and sent the malfunctioning movement to HO. The service center was very helpful and said that Omega likes to have "convenience" stock in for that purpose.
BTW, I liked the service much better than when my Rolex & Tudors have been worked on. Oh and did I mention FREE OF CHARGE!!! They put the customer first, which in Singapore is an absolute rarity. I would buy again in a snap.
I will update if probs continue. Also, isn't there someone on the Rolex forum right now that said they had to take their watch to Hong Kong to have it polished correctly? Perhaps there was something wrong with the movement in the Omega, and the only way to fix it quickly was to put a new movement in it.
The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence. I'm in the business, and I see and hear complaints on Rolex repair. Why won't Rolex fix an older watch, but Omega will?
Best Regards,
Damon
without replacing anything major and I have yet to hear of them having to replace an entire movement in any piece to correct an issue.
With the vintage pieces you have a good point, but don't they only do vintage repair out of bienne? and also I wonder how long their vintage parts stores will last seeing as they no longer posess the equipment to manufacture the parts, I thought I heard someone on here complaining about Omega not having the parts to work on their watch, could be wrong though.
If this was the first, second, or even third time I had heard of the big O/Swatch swapping a movement as a fix then that would be understandable, but it seems like it is becomming more common, also the fact that they "fixed" the watch once and gave it a clean bill of health, only to have it fail a week later says something in and of itself, my issue revolved around cosmetic problems the watch itself functioned perfectly, the other instance you mentioned and Rolex also was a cosmetic issue, not one of functionality.
It also says something about the relative value of these things to me if it is cheaper and easier for them to just slap in new movements than bother trying to fix them (much like quartz), what happens to that old movement? I highly doubt they will bother to send it back for repair, and if they do then who or what watch will end up with it? I am not trying to flame, annoy, rank on or otherwise upset anyone, but aren't we being a bit childish with these threads?
I have and have had Rolex, Omega and many other fine mechanical watches, and these threads allways amaze me! Here we are, adults trying to evaluate the relative merits of a companies "customer satisfaction" policies based on Brand and what they did or did not do (on any given Sunday). Omega took a great approach to resolving the problem (IMO). They tried to fix the watch, and when not successful, they put the customer first and replaced it quickly. To say that they should have continued to send it back for repair, or to knock the person who repaired it previously is rediculous. To say that the value of or quaility of a watch is based on the "Swap out" method is also rediculous. If Rolex "swapped out" movements quickly for a customer, then EVERYONE would assume this is the BEST policy, and anything else would be Second rate. And if they did just that to make a customer happy with the service, would that then make the Rolex movements CHEAP??
Let me put it this way. if you just bought a 3K high end TV from a very reliable store, and it broke 4 weeks after you brought it home, what would you say if their answer was "we'll send it to the manufacture, and have it fixed"), and BTW, it will take about 4-8 weeks. Now if they said "we'll exchange that for you", following your logic, it would make that TV worthless and cheap. The fact that they valued your support as a customer, rather than having you wait for the repair says they are a GOOD company to purchase from. I have seen post on Rolex that bash one Service center, and prise others. Does that suggest that only certain Rolex service centers should be trusted? Do that suggest that EVRYONE who has delt with that service center was pleased with the results?
How ANY company handles their repair process is a measure of their commitment to the customer. This is not a reflection on the cost of the goods sold, or a quilty issue. For anyone to think that 100% perfection in the production process is going to happen anytime soon, their dreaming. The odds are, the higher the output, the higher the failure rate. the BIG O has a much higher volume than Rolex, and will have a higher return rate.
I restore and repair watches, and do the BEST I can to satisfied the customer, regarless of brand!  
All I can say, is that I hope you are just as critical in your (everyone) work or accomplishments as you are of the PEOPLE (they do the work) not BRAND as the posts would suggest.
Just my 4c,
Jon
: without replacing anything major and I have yet to hear of them having to replace an entire
movement in any piece to correct an issue.



With the vintage pieces you have a good point, but don't they only do vintage repair out of
bienne? and also I wonder how long their vintage parts stores will last seeing as they no longer posess
the equipment to manufacture the parts, I thought I heard someone on here complaining about Omega
not having the parts to work on their watch, could be wrong though.



If this was the first, second, or even third time I had heard of the big O/Swatch swapping a
movement as a fix then that would be understandable, but it seems like it is becomming more common, also
the fact that they "fixed" the watch once and gave it a clean bill of health, only to have it fail a week
later says something in and of itself, my issue revolved around cosmetic problems the watch itself
functioned perfectly, the other instance you mentioned and Rolex also was a cosmetic issue, not one of
functionality.



It also says something about the relative value of these things to me if it is cheaper and easier
for them to just slap in new movements than bother trying to fix them (much like quartz), what
happens to that old movement? I highly doubt they will bother to send it back for repair, and if they do
then who or what watch will end up with it? 
...the intrinsic value of ANY mass produced watch is more than $100. That includes just about every watch company out there, including Swatch and Rolex. Swapping the movement seems like the best course of action to make the customer happy.  
It also says something about the relative value of these things to me if it is cheaper and easier
for them to just slap in new movements than bother trying to fix them

Answer:

There was a bad batch of movements in the black GMTs around 2000, and Omega will replace the movement for free for anyone.
Sometimes a fix that you do may not work in the long run. It's not the lack of repair knowledge that causes it; just sometimes it just doesn't work. Have you ever tried to fix something around the house, to find out latter that it didn't work and it needed more of a repair than what you first thought? The same thing can happen in watches. The fix might look like it's going to work since the watch ran fine for 2 or 3 days on your bench, but it doesn't last too long once the owner gets it back.
I won't go into details, but a Rolex movement does not cost a lot of money to make. Think about it, when you're spitting out 800,000+ watches a year, your movements can't cost a lot of money to produce. Modern day Rolex movements are easy to repair since they really don't require any special watchmaking skills. You just replace parts, oil it, test it, and then send it on its way. What makes the repairs so expensive is because Rolex charges a lot for the parts that are replaced. 
Best Regards,
Damon
P.S. Speaking as a friend Mathew, people get tired of you reading this forum just to pounce on Omega and Swatch as soon as you see someone post something wrong with their watch. You have never given Omega a chance to see that they are really great watches and company. I have yet to see you beat up Rolex on all the post about the new Daytona movements having problems. 
The ladies Rolex is their best selling watch, and it is also the movement that has the most problems. Should you stop idolizing Rolex and bash them now since I just let you in on that?

Answer:

.... of ANY brand is an ugly thing. You'd think some of us whatchoholics owned company stock! Sometimes cross-forum posts seem to me like ultra nationalistic soccer hooliganism to me. Every brand forum has them though, and the Rolex forum is no exception.

Answer:

Mine took 3 visits to Omega Service, in SF and Lancaster, 15 weeks, and came back worse than ever. Eventually, Omega replaced the whole watch with a new one. Sure took a zillion phone calls, to increasingly responsible people, though. Glad it worked out for you!

Answer:

Finally someone who can see the forest for the trees. I was not trying to discuss the merits of Rolex vv Omega vv any other Brand. I was trying to highlight excellent problem resolution from my point of view. At the end of the day I am only worried about not having the current favorite watch to wear.  
Generally speaking I like wearing the SMP GMT 'casue it looks and feels good. And thats really the bottom line, not really worth entering into the debate over which is better because it becomes and endless loop. Given the chance we would all like to have lots of watches from many makers. Unfortunately there are more important things in life.  
It is as if the GMT is more accurate than my SeaDweller which is the same vintage because it is rare that I require split second precision. All my watches make me feel good and the amount of wrist time each gets depends on how I feel. Some don't even get worn but they still make ME happy.  
BTW accuracy wise my 1960's Seamaster auto, '50s Bumper Connie, late 60s Tissot SeaStar winding, 60s Tudor Prince and Sub, 40s Zenith Sporto, Mickey Mouse watch etc. etc. are ALL within the same tollerable range. All good watches, all serviced regularly.
Lets not slam for the sake of it. I was amazed that one little post got so many clicks. I will have to start posting more.  
Cheers

Answer:

Normally I try not to post lengthy replies on the weekend as I am trying to cut back my “net” time but I figure tonight is slow and I cannot sleep so here goes:
First off Damon, 
yes I am well aware of the bad early black GMT movements, as well as I was aware of the problematic early LE Co-Axial movements, the first series Daytona 4130 issues, and also the reverser and other various issues with the ladies Rolex movements and I fully understand that everyone has their share of problems that usually don’t show up until the product gets some real world testing.
However my concern was twofold;
First off if you know about the problems with the GMT movement, and I know of the problems one would think that Omega service would have a clue, so why did they try the Mickey Mouse fix in the first place especially if they knew that chances were they would just be seeing the watch again in the near future? To me it seems as if they really didn’t know exactly what they were doing, tried something it didn’t work so they just tossed the whole assembly for a new one…again, if they were already replacing the movement for anyone why didn’t they do it when it first came in? I am a technician, not of watches but of electronic and computer equipment, when we see a consistent problem we recognize it, diagnose the cause, and then document and repeat the process for correction on every component that exhibits signs, in a case like this you would think they would just default to replacing the movement instead of trying to fix it.
Secondly, as I said before I have noticed more than a few threads where people indicate that either their movement, or as Tyler pointed out their entire watch were swapped because the problem could not be resolved. Now I know I will not speak for everyone when saying this, but personally it does not add much to the image of “lasting quality” for me. 
JohnR brought up an interesting comparison when he mentioned high end TV sets and repair; to that I would respond with the fact that technology is seen as disposable, whereas for me at least these fine Swiss watches are supposed to represent something which is generational and lasting. Sure I would have no problem with a company giving me a new TV if mine was defective as I would end up throwing it out or upgrading it in a few years anyway, wheras with a high end watch, especially one given as a gift that had some sentimental value this might be a serious cause for concern. I personally wonder when we will get to the point where instead of doing any service on these mechanicals they just swap the movement out instead much like they do in lower end quartz watches, I am almost certain that it might even be more economical to do that now with the less complex and lower cost movements. 
Will owners of sentimental watches have to send letters accompanying their piece indicating that it is of personal value so that the company will not swap it for a new one much like fine pen owners do? (had to do that once with a pen and felt awful as it was a gift from a loved one and if it were replaced with a new one, or even repaired with new parts I knew I would feel horrible). I don’t know if it is just me, but it seems to cheapen the image, and if you look at my response I am not trying to turn this into a Rolex/Omega debate, in fact I never once mention Rolex in my response…instead I point out many other companies that do not have a policy of quickly swapping movements or product to satisfy the customers, so while the item might not be that expensive to produce as you point out in your Rolex movement example, they at least try to keep up the image that it is worth something by putting effort into fixing it or by making it somewhat difficult to have your piece exchanged for a new one, whereas like I said before I have read more than a few stories on this and other Omega boards where movements or entire watches are quickly and efficiently exchanged…if they can do that without much coercion then one must wonder how much these are really worth to the company and how soon will the time come when the components become as disposable and as cheap as their quartz counterparts…remember when buying high end you are also buying mystique and this type of practice seems to me at least like the antithesis of high end or something of value.
I am not trying to give their product a hard time per-say, just voicing my opinions on what I think they are doing to the overall image and the industry…personally if I knew there was a good chance that either my entire watch or just the movement would be swapped out I would simply opt for quartz. With the Daytona example, I have heard they corrected the issue on the pieces and did not opt to swap out anyone’s entire watch or movement, but then again Rolex keeps that on the down low so even if they did I am sure not many would know about it, and this also helps to maintain the mystique and the illusion of high end IMHO. But lets not center this solely around Rolex and Omega as many other brands are the same way, IWC, Lange, Patek, Breitling and many others are not quick to swap product for new or swap movements from what I have seen and read. I wonder if they are moving towards just hiring unskilled labor to do simple movement swaps all of the time instead of real repair and they will still charge the same amount for service??
In response to Russ,
I agree 100%, but again see my post above, this is all an illusion and the companies should IMHO be trying to put up a front that their products are worth something to them which will translate into the customer thinking they are really worth something…if they are going to swap your movement then I would be a proponent of them not telling you as that would at least keep up the illusion that they put real time into fixing your high end high dollar Swiss timepiece instead of just a wham bam thank you style Big Mac with cheese service. It is interesting to draw comparisons and parallels to other collectors groups, for example in the pen world Montblanc is constantly bashed because instead of trying to remedy problems with their pens they simply replace units with new and it is rumored they have large bins with defective and broken pens that simply get thrown away, however here it seems that this practice is seen as a positive.
In response to JohnR
Again, see my response to Damon above with the TV or other high end Techno gadget..no sentimental value, and high depreciation rate = throwaway item for me at least. I have a fear that if this type of practice and this type of mentality is praised then the high end watch industry, or at least the mid level of it will also become victim of a throwaway mentality where it is cheaper and easier to just replace instead of repair, really not what I was buying into when I look for a high end watch. With your Rolex comment, again let me remind you that I never once mentioned Rolex in my reply so I think it is interesting that it is the first brand that others bring up here, I must say that this is the one board where I read the most Rolex comparison threads on the net, almost scary. But in answer to your question, if Rolex did start this policy then I would seriously consider selling my watch as it wasn’t the image that I bought into, to me this type of activity does not scream high end or lasting quality but rather disposable modern technology, I work in the tech industry, we go though high end equipment faster than some buy new underwear, one reason I am drawn to watches is their lasting non disposable appeal….One reason I sold my Montblanc was due to this type of service practice, even though I never experienced the service I did not want to deal with a company that produced a high end high priced item that was disposable for them.
And with Re. Billhud,
Well, lets just say my interest has a tendency to peak and decline, I still read by try my darndest not to respond, however this is an issue that I feel strongly about…plus I love dispelling all of those rumors that I was banned from the forum :)

Answer:

So which is it now, during this visit? Peaking or declining? Just today at 20:07 EDT you said on the TZ PF, that 
"and with my brand loyalty don't forget Tudor and Breitling as I am a big fan of them as well, my bias only deals with Swatch products"
That can be found at
http://www.here.com/messageView.aspx?forumId=pforum&msgId=pforum081509
Evidently, it is your interested in controversy regarding Omega and stirring it up here is that has peaked.

Answer:

I do not think that the service center in Singapore or anywhere else outside the centalised service center (not sure where that is in Switzerland and don't really care) are equiped to handle major complicated repair. You are correct that these are meant to be high end items that last longer than TV and other shorter life items that are constantly chnaging due to innovation.
It is rediculous to think that a service center out in Singapore would have the very skilled technicians to carry out the repair, the fact that that tried and failed is an issue for the service manager. In retrospect I do not think that they failed anyway becasue they only had the watch for 2 weeks.
I was actually tried to highlight excellent customer interaction and great problem resolution. Unfortunately you live in a society where service is met with tips and everyone speaks the same language. Well it is definitely not the case here in Singapore, very efficient country but the service is non-existent.
They fixed my watch, without proof of purchase or anything, for free and admitted that it was a manufacturer's fault. I am a happy camper.
All i need to do now is check the accuracy of the watch as it seems to be running a little fast, but I am sure they can regulate the watch back to within COSC tollerances.
Cheers
Mark

Answer:

Mathew,
You most have very DEEP POCKETS to make a statement like that. The reason technology is "disposable" is because in the BOOM years of fast high tech advances and HIGH Salaries, people repalced things, not fixed them. This same issue forced younger people to shy away for the service industries for the more lucrative "Technology" sectors.  
I for one have ALWAYS FIXED things rather than replace them for both monetary and functional reasons. I would much rather spend $30 in parts over $$K in replacement costs anytime! However, this "throw away" society has caused a shortage of qualified repair folks, driving the cost of repair higher and higher, and makes replace seem like a better alternative to fix.
Now that the eccomony has slowed way down, I see more "I can live without" statements, and more DIY activities than I have in the past 10 years! If this continues, we might just find more folks going back to the repair industry, and hopefully lower prices.  
To say that you would prefer to purchase items especially watches from companie who ONLY have a repair policy is rather strange. It suggests that you would rather wait longer, be subjected to parts availability, to be subjected to the "repairers" qualifications and quality of work and value these triats the highest in how you evaluate a companies service polocies. I can only hope you do this ONLY in the watch industry.
As far as sentamental value, I saw nothing listed in the ORIGINAL post that stated this. In fact, it was a relatively new watch, and therefore did not have this issue. I do fully AGREE with you that sentamental items need to be fixed, not replaced or thrown out. Having said that, you are aware that OMEGA has stated this as a FEATURE for certain older models. This is something that Rolex or any orther company is not offering.
All I ask is that we understand that everyone has his or her own reasons for what they think is acceptable and GOOD, and to voice an alternative view in responce only makes the responder look Snobbish or stupid. We need to ACCEPT what other folks do, and think.
Jon
BTW, CARS have one of the higest Depreciation items, and is considered "Technology", do you throw them away when they need their first or even second service? Also, have you ever fought over the continued "we'll fix it again" issue with a Dealer? If so, were you not mad about poor service?
Jon

Answer:

You bring up cars as an example, and I would counter with look how many buy new cars instead of keeping them for extended durations...it is getting to be a rarity to see someone boast that their car has over 100K miles and they still own it, instead they will opt to finiance or lease a new vehicle.
Technology is still very much disposable in the sense that it gets obsolete very quickly and while people might keep a TV for a while it is highly unlikely that they will keep the same set their entire life and pass it on to their children, whereas Mechanical watches are Jewlery and are outdated from the get go...they are meant to be heirloom items to many and often carry with them some sentimental value...my concern is what if the industry becomes one where it is more financially feasable for companies to forego repairs in favor of replacement...it is already obvious that Swatch doesn't feel compelled to keep trained staff at all locations, instead just some one with enough skill to swap a movement. We already have a shortage of trained professionals, should someone actually need the skills of a real watchmaker the future might be bleak and the costs might be exceptionally high.
: I for one have ALWAYS FIXED things rather than replace them for both monetary and functional
reasons. I would much rather spend $30 in parts over $$K in replacement costs anytime! However, this
"throw away" society has caused a shortage of qualified repair folks, driving the cost of repair
higher and higher, and makes replace seem like a better alternative to fix. 
This puts you in the vast minoroity, many don't care enough to learn....
Now that the eccomony has slowed way down, I see more "I can live without" statements, and more
DIY activities than I have in the past 10 years! If this continues, we might just find more folks
going back to the repair industry, and hopefully lower prices.  
I as well have seen the do without statements, but not the DIY activities, maybe a few but still I know of many who would rather upgrade their existing tech items than bother fixing them or living with them.
: To say that you would prefer to purchase items especially watches from companie who ONLY have a
repair policy is rather strange. It suggests that you would rather wait longer, be subjected to parts
availability, to be subjected to the "repairers" qualifications and quality of work and value these triats
the highest in how you evaluate a companies service polocies. I can only hope you do this ONLY in the
watch industry. 
I am saying I would rather purchase from a company that encouraged repair and trained their staff correctly and appropriately, it seems as I said before that Swatch is moving towards the minimally trained service employees, try some basic troubleshooting and if that fails then swap the movement...hopefully I am wrong, hopefully they are opening new watch shools and training some masters of complications and they will first ship them to their lancaster site, but somehow I feel it might be more cost effective for them to just swap movements and or watches as necessary...and other watchmakers I have spoken with have indicated that this is the direction they see the industry headed.
: As far as sentamental value, I saw nothing listed in the ORIGINAL post that stated this. In fact,
it was a relatively new watch, and therefore did not have this issue. I do fully AGREE with you that
sentamental items need to be fixed, not replaced or thrown out. Having said that, you are aware that OMEGA has
stated this as a FEATURE for certain older models. This is something that Rolex or any orther company is
not offering. 
The sentimental issue was just thrown in there as a point to reflect on, and I am unsure what you are referring to with your statement re. Omega and older models, as far as I know their policy is to guarantee service for a piece that is 15 years out of production, anything more than that and they can only offer best effort support, Rolex offers 30 years out, and best effort after that..the only reason you see such a stock for vintage Omega parts now is becuase of the popular position they held prior to pre 1970 as they were one of the market leaders and most popular of the time, Rolex on the other hand along with LeColture and a few others were producting limited run in house movments that were not as popular...they only made enough parts to satisfy demand and didn't have the forsight to know their items would be worth what they are today on the collectors market...I have heard of Omega re running popular parts, namely for the SM300 but that only consisted of the Bezel for that watch and I believe they were selling for $300 a piece, all I can say to that is ouch.
: All I ask is that we understand that everyone has his or her own reasons for what they think is
acceptable and GOOD, and to voice an alternative view in responce only makes the responder look Snobbish or
stupid. We need to ACCEPT what other folks do, and think. 
And that is fair, I guess if I viewed my mechanical watches and high end pens or anything else that I view as having heirloom potential as just being another "thing" and not caring if they replaced it, or promoted a policy of replacing instead of repairing then I would consider this good service as well, just as I think it would be great to get a new TV or radio if my old one broke..but since my watches tend to be special I would rather have skilled professionals working on them trying their hardest to make my watch right, but that is just me.
: BTW, CARS have one of the higest Depreciation items, and is considered "Technology", do you
throw them away when they need their first or even second service? Also, have you ever fought over the
continued "we'll fix it again" issue with a Dealer? If so, were you not mad about poor service? 
Again see above, first service no, but I am hard pressed to keep a current production car over 100K miles, also where I live we are lucky enough to have the three strike law, if the dealer cannot fix it after three times they will either buy you a new car or refund your money...yes I have been upset about poor service and generally it makes me want to buy a better car with a dealer that has trained staff that know what they are doing...I used to do alot of work on cars myself and had I the time I would do all of my own work, but then again why bother buying new if your going to fix it yourself.