Hello Guys, I saw this watch online and can use some 2nd opinions on it. My questions include: 1. The 204503-2 I could find pictures online all seem to have the word "Microroter" below "Automatic". This one does not. 2. Is the bubble effect on the dial a fair aging result? 3. The lume plots all wore off and became circles, but do they look too identical to each other? 4. Seller says everything is original other than the crystal. Asking price is $1200 shipped. Thanks in advance!
I would be careful about this one. Looks like a possible redial. The cross hairs and some of the text looks too thick to me, the texture of the black paint looks odd, and overall it just does not look quite right to me, though I am not sure. I have seen many Polerouters that have lost their lume, to reveal only painted circle plots, but usually there is some trace of the lume. Here there is none. I have also seen these micro-rotor Polerouters without "Microtor" on the dial, but that, too, raises a question. Better, sharper, closer-up photos are needed. Let's see what others think.
rotor has been rubbing on the caseback and movement looks a bit grungy, so factor a service cost in as well.
Does not look like a redial to me. If you look in the reference tables, the 204503-2BD is listed: https://universalgenevepolerouter.com/reference-tables/reference-table-steel-gold-plated/ and another example: https://www.visionvintagewatches.com/product-page/universal-genève-polerouter-velvet Unusually, on your example the movement has a 218 balance, but says 215-2 on the plate. 218-x/69/1-69 are usually associated with automatic only dials, and 215 are microtor dials.
At the very least we need better photos. Compared to the "Velvet Caramel" example you have linked to here, the one in question very much looks like a redial to me. Look at the last two S's in Swiss, and how thick the white printing is, and the lack of luminous at all in the circles.
I agree on the need for better photos. In my experience, thicker printing like this can often be an artefact of the camera used, and looks much finer and in person. The OP example looks to be zoomed in from a phone camera, whereas the VVW one is clearly done with something a bit more professional. The lume is gone in the circles and the hands - could have just been removed at once...