In less than 2 years, in 2017 and 2018, we had and still have three different ( or six if we include the bracelet versions ) Seamaster in platinum.
The Platinum Enamel Blue dial, first, on strap, or for 20, 000 more euros, on platinum bracelet:
This is the only limited edition ( 757 ( ! ) on strap, 357 ( !!! ) on its platinum bracelet )
Then, we had, at the end of 2018, early 2019, the malachite and the lapis versions. On strap, they are respectively 5 and 10, 000 euros more expensive than the blue enamel versions.
And I don't even mention the huge difference in price with the steel model!
Let's rather focus on the real question: Isn't it too much to have three different platinum versions of the Seamaster 300?
One would have been enough, in my opinion, and if you want to have a different dial, then opt for another metal. For example, let's have one Blue Enamel OR Lapis dial for the platinum, and one Malachite dial for the Yellow Gold.
Chromatically speaking, the Malachite goes very well with a Yellow Gold case, while Blue works very nicely with Platinum.
But even with blue dials and the platinum case, Omega plays it in two different ways.
Isn't that a bit too much? From a collector's perspective, doesn't that vulgarize a watch which should remain very confidential?
You will answer that we are speaking about Omega, and that they have a big tradition of massive limited editions. Here, we have 1114 Seamaster 300 ( ! ) in platinum with the enamel blue dial, and not limited ( but we could think very limited production ) platinum Malachite and Lapis dials... At these levels of price, isn't that a bit too ambitious?
Doesn't that give the impression that Omega is waving on the right combination?
Wouldn't it be better to just offer one platinum version, and one yellow gold version? And to forget the super heavy platinum bracelet, as the head only is already consequent in weight with its 41 mm diameter and its 14, 65 mm height?
And we could go even farther: Was a platinum or gold version of such a watch mandatory?
Was also the see through case back necessary?
I am perplexed, here...
What do you think?
Looking forward to reading your comments and thoughts,
Best.
Nicolas