They seem to be misaligned, and that is a sign of redial usually. Better focused pics of the text (with the hands out of the way) are also needed.
Mmh - I'm not convinced. Could you produce sharper pictures of the dial, with the hands not covering any of the text?
Agreed it looks good initially, but the mentioned minute ticks / failed MOY-test / distancing of the letters / extent of the serifs make me long for better pics to be certain. Also calling @hoipolloi , probably one of our best members to spot a good redial, and @Peemacgee , the expert on those recessed crown Connies who doesn't accept this title. 😁
Looks very similar to mine (same case and dial except mine is the "T" version with lume to go with the different hands) - the failed MOY-test at least is not a warning flag on this particular case-dial combination, they are all like that.
Looking closely I can see that mine also has the minute markers just very slightly off in the same way relative to the 12 o'clock marker, but to a lesser extent.
Just noticed though that the "OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED" is lined up differently. Could this be a differencve between the T and non-T versions of this dial?
Here's mine for comparison. Sorry, camera has focussed on the hairs on the glass! 😀
It seems to me that some of the others are misaligned, too. 7-12 especially seem to have the minute markers rotated slightly clockwise from the hour markers. I make no comment about what this means, if anything, because I don't have enough experience.
Well, regardless of where it was done, I think we can agree that the dial is quite poorly executed. It's ironic that the OP originally mentioned the 12 o'clock marker, because 9, 10, and 11 look much worse to me.
