Let's play a game: Who finds the most undisclosed redials in the November Antiquorum auction? I haven't looked at all lots, but already found three watches where the dial is described as very good and they give no indication that the dial is a redial... I start with the most obvious one: https://catalog.antiquorum.swiss/en/lots/record-188-18-lot-317-5?page=1 Edit: pic
Under dial it say's "very good, HANDS original" So... they put "hands" in capitals. Is that their clever way of saying the rest of the dial isn't original? Scurvy dogs. There's a guy who sell watches on a website up here in Ontario, been at it for ages. Sometimes I'm tempted, but it'll say the the dial is original to the watch in the description but then say its been professionally redone in the next line. Same kind of crap, you always have to read between the lines for the whole truth. Sure the metal... the base material of the dial is original.. So yes, the dial is original to the watch.. but the friggin paint isn't Semantics! Its a friggin redial! So if he'll lie about that what else isn't the truth?
https://catalog.antiquorum.swiss/en/lots/certina-ref-5601-113-ds-lot-317-17?page=1 ...Ehm, no. Hands are wrong and the dial has been cleaned and are now devoid of lume. The bezel insert is "alternative" too.
Several lots state that the dial is refinished. It is either a strategy to declare some redials and others not or their competency is... For example: https://catalog.antiquorum.swiss/en/lots/longines-ref-4572-13-zn-lot-317-535?page=1&q=longines Interestingly, hands are declared as original. Imho the minute counter hand is too short...