Omega for Spectre?

[WJGESQ]

Anyone know which Omega will be featured in the movie?

[asadtiger]

I do not know, but I can guess that the new Seamaster 300 Master would be probably, given that its the latest and coolest IMHO, and also because Daniel Craig was wearing a vintage seamaster 300 on the recent introductory event of the movie.

[Rashid.bk]

He wore multiple in Skyfall, so will likely do the same here. So look for an AT, PO, and the new Seamaster for sure.

[THC]

Blasphemy.... When did Bond default to an Omega? "Oh James"

[Rashid.bk]

^
Have you been in a cave. At this point James has wore Omega longer than he's worn any other brand.

[Sharpie]

41 mm blue aqua terra

[BlackBay1]

Originally Posted by asadtiger

I do not know, but I can guess that the new Seamaster 300 Master would be probably, given that its the latest and coolest IMHO, and also because Daniel Craig was wearing a vintage seamaster 300 on the recent introductory event of the movie.

Sounds like a good call to me, great looking watch.

[colpol]

I guess it'll depend on how much money Omega decide to spend on their product placement & which model they want to hard market on the back of the film

[RolexPete]

Seamaster 300 re-issue has my vote. Would love to see him wear his personal Vintage Omega 300 though.

[FTX I]

I think we'll see something like
- Beautiful watch. Rolex?
- No, it's the new Omega Seamaster 300 that people claim to have faux patina but looks very sharp in person don't you think?

[RolexPete]

Originally Posted by Sharpie

41 mm blue aqua terra

Not gonna happen....

[RolexPete]

Originally Posted by THC

Blasphemy.... When did Bond default to an Omega? "Oh James"

When was the last Bond film you have seen? Been Omega for a looooonnnngggg time.

[RollieVerde]

More than likely Omega will provide a list of what watches they would like promoted and the the costume designer will pick what they want him to wear. The prop department might have some say, but since Omega has used Bond's wrist for product placement the watch will be selected from their prefered products. Then Craig will show up for work in the morning, and when getting into wardrobe will hand his Rolex (or whatever he's wearing from his collection) to the prop master who will give him the Omega he'll be wearing on set. The same will happen to any stunt doubles that are working that day. When the day is over the process will be reversed.

[joe100]

Mr Craig is a big vintage rolex guy, I'd put money on it that he's one of the members here.

He's probably reading this and thinking, "boy they got it all wrong" haha

[Sharpie]

Originally Posted by RolexPete

Not gonna happen....

That's what the lady at a flagship Omega store said, but we shall see.

[ocabj]

White Gold Tresor.

... Well, I take that back. I'm betting it'll be the 38.5mm AT or the 41.5mm AT Master Co-Axial and then a watch that isn't even out, yet.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by joe100

Mr Craig is a big vintage rolex guy, I'd put money on it that he's one of the members here.

He's probably reading this and thinking, "boy they got it all wrong" haha

Calling on Daniel .....

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

^
Have you been in a cave. At this point James has wore Omega longer than he's worn any other brand.

He probably thinks that Sean Connery is still James Bond.

[locutus49]

Shhh. You chaps want to blow my cover?

Originally Posted by brandrea

Calling on Daniel .....

[SUPERDOC]

I am predicting SM300...with a gadget

[locutus49]

When Omega strong armed the producers and lured them with huge product placement fees. Rolex would not pay as it was the watch in the original Bond books. Ian Fleming is probably rolling over in his grave at the smarmy Omega references in the new Bond movies.

Originally Posted by THC

Blasphemy.... When did Bond default to an Omega? "Oh James"

[RollieVerde]

Originally Posted by locutus49

When Omega strong armed the producers and lured them with huge product placement fees. Rolex would not pay as it was the watch in the original Bond books. Ian Fleming is probably rolling over in his grave at the smarmy Omega references in the new Bond movies.

You know what I think is really bizarre about product placement in Bond movies? I think pretty much every 007 film ever released made money. Lots of money. It's one of the most successful film franchises in history. Yet, there's always been some kind of product placement. If you want to see what I mean, watch Live and Let Die and you'll see a scene on the BQE where almost every car is a new Chevy Impala or Malibu. The Man with the Golden Gun is a veritable catalog for AMC cars. I know the production costs for these films is huge, but man. . .

[Cuts33]

Originally Posted by SUPERDOC

I am predicting SM300...with a gadget

If the gadget is a date window I'm in.

[BLACKHORSE 6]

I'd they're going to use an Omega, I'd like to see a speedmaster.

[soundserious]

PloProf in at least one scene.

[capote]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

You know what I think is really bizarre about product placement in Bond movies? I think pretty much every 007 film ever released made money. Lots of money. It's one of the most successful film franchises in history. Yet, there's always been some kind of product placement. If you want to see what I mean, watch Live and Let Die and you'll see a scene on the BQE where almost every car is a new Chevy Impala or Malibu. The Man with the Golden Gun is a veritable catalog for AMC cars. I know the production costs for these films is huge, but man. . .

The producers understood the value of product placement early on. In Live and Let Die Rolex got end credit, seeing how they worked the Submariner into the script Rolex should have had pre-title credit too. In Moonraker Bond drove by a big ass Seiko billboard. Funny thing is that every time a Rolex shows up in a movie the general TRF consensus is that it is a coincidence, yet every time an Omega gets screen time everybody screams product placement. It is not for nothing Rolex is the master of marketing.

[Ken B]

Just guessing, Darkside or grayside.

[RollieVerde]

Originally Posted by capote

The producers understood the value of product placement early on. In Live and Let Die Rolex got end credit, seeing how they worked the Submariner into the script Rolex should have had pre-title credit too. In Moonraker Bond drove by a big ass Seiko billboard. Funny thing is that every time a Rolex shows up in a movie the general TRF consensus is that it is a coincidence, yet every time an Omega gets screen time everybody screams product placement. It is not for nothing Rolex is the master of marketing.

Rolex got mention in the closing credits because the watch w/trademark was prominently used, and the film company has to get permission and this often means screen credit. To the best of my knowledge Rolex didn't show up with a suitcase full of money offering to trade cash for screen time; the film company went to them asking for help modifying the Submariner face and bezel for prop effect shots in the film. When that happens and the film company doesn't pay for it, it's considered "promotional assistance" and that usually means screen credit as well.

Rolex has never even been in the ballpark when it comes to the way Omega has bought their way into the Bond franchise. Rolex marketing strategy has always been about associating their products with real people who have achieved something (including actors), and the ambassadors for the brand are basically given a watch or watch(es) to wear and that's it. Rolex has been a master of marketing in associating their products with successful people, and they have spent their money mostly on print ads and tightly-focused TV ads. "It doesn't tell time; it tells history" is a perfect example of their approach.

Omega's approach is very different, and ever since they became part of the Swatch group I would imagine the way their watches are marketed has changed, too. If Rolex thought they needed to buy their way onto the silver screen they'd do it. They've never had to do that, so they don't. The fact that Omega sells "Bond" watches shows the lengths their willing to go to with this strategy, as they are clearly of the belief it sells watches. I think it's interesting because they're marketing to a niche of people who they think would pay thousands to have a fictitious secret agent watch. They do this at the risk of alienating some fans of the brand who think that, like the manual He valve, it actually cheapens the product's image through gimmickry. The company clearly thinks otherwise.

[Cuts33]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

Rolex has never even been in the ballpark when it comes to the way Omega has bought their way into the Bond franchise. Rolex marketing strategy has always been about associating their products with real people who have achieved something (including actors), and the ambassadors for the brand are basically given a watch or watch(es) to wear and that's it. Rolex has been a master of marketing in associating their products with successful people, and they have spent their money mostly on print ads and tightly-focused TV ads. "It doesn't tell time; it tells history" is a perfect example of their approach.

There is no point in debating who's marketing strategy is right and who's is wrong. Rolex and Omega do have differing strategies to an extent but both brands seem to be doing just fine.

The only issue I have with your post is the repeating of this fallacy that Rolex doesn't pay their ambassadors. I recall reading this in an interview with one of the higher ups at Rolex and thought it was bull then and its bull now. If anyone thinks that Tiger and Federer aren't pulling in 7 figures for sporting their Rolex's then I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.

Rolex makes a great watch. But a premier athlete isn't going to not rep a brand who would pay a huge sum of money to go with Rolex because they just personally love Rolex watches.

[RollieVerde]

Originally Posted by Cuts33

There is no point in debating who's marketing strategy is right and who's is wrong. Rolex and Omega do have differing strategies to an extent but both brands seem to be doing just fine.

The only issue I have with your post is the repeating of this fallacy that Rolex doesn't pay their ambassadors. I recall reading this in an interview with one of the higher ups at Rolex and thought it was bull then and its bull now. If anyone thinks that Tiger and Federer aren't pulling in 7 figures for sporting their Rolex's then I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.

Rolex makes a great watch. But a premier athlete isn't going to not rep a brand who would pay a huge sum of money to go with Rolex because they just personally love Rolex watches.

If they do anything like commercials or print ads they have likely been compensated for that. And the commercials that Woods and Nicklaus have appeared in I'm sure they would have been paid for, but I don't think being named an ambassador alone comes with a huge paycheck. Fair point that I don't know for sure these days, and neither do you. But seven figures? Please.

And when you say, "... a premier athlete isn't going to not rep a brand who would pay a huge sum of money to go with Rolex because they just personally love Rolex watches." It has nothing to do with love of a product, it has everything to do with promoting your brand by associating it with another prestigious brand that is far more famous that you are. Tiger Woods need to desperately salvage his reputation with the casual golf fans. Rolex is one of the best, known, most respected brands in the world and far better known than he is (even though he's obviously quite famous). By being associated w/Rolex there's no downside for him, and you're telling me he'd demand millions from them for the privilege of being considered part of the Rolex success story? Hublot pays athletes because they want their brand to be associated with winners that are more famous than they are. Rolex is in the enviable position where it's (almost) the other way around. It's much more of a mutual recognition thing.

Hey, you may be totally right and Rolex may be cutting huge checks in today's world for these people. But based on how they did things for years (a Rolex trait) I can't see Rolex spending a fortune on these ambassadors when most of them would gladly be associated with them for nothing. Omega is a fine brand, but they have a ways to go to get to where Rolex is on the world stage. My whole point is I think they are blowing it with the Bond stuff, because it's so blatantly product placement. When Bond wore a Rolex it was just part of the character as written by his creator. Now it's a way to pay the bills.