Polerouter Sub - Another one seems to have appeared ....

Posts
1,076
Likes
1,787
Look bottom line is that no one is claiming a sub transitional or special variation. The facts are that the dial design, dial texture, “universal” font and color, geneve font and color and the “cross hair” line color are all a perfect match. There is even a exact gap size where the polerouter sub would fit. I have shown this watch to over a dozen watch makers and collectors and there is no doubt about its authenticity. So why would it be so far fetched to accept that the dial came out of the factory as a manufacturing error that was missed by quality control. The missing “polerouter sub” and logo are a different font and color and could have just been missed during the silkscreen process.
 
Posts
1,195
Likes
1,981
Great story, has value but with issues. I have a Tri-Compax Eric Clapton with no Lume hands or dial. Cool watch but atypical elements. It is what it is. If you like it, wear it ! Sell it, and it will be a somewhat difficult sale for less than a standard UG Polerouter Sub. Accept that and move on.
 
Posts
1,195
Likes
1,981
I would rather have one of these !
Dean (Diabolic) is very knowledgeable about UG, I value his opinion as well as Lou. Why do you think fake Polerouter has it's own sub heading on UG forum ? It's very likely a Frankenstein ?
 
Posts
1,076
Likes
1,787
Obviously you are speculating and ass kissing if you don’t know what your talking about, then don’t comment.
 
Posts
1,195
Likes
1,981
I've been collecting for 40 years, and have over 20 UG pieces. I know more than you for sure. Your rude and should listen to collectors who research and collect many more legit UG pieces than your Franken Polerouter Sub. Is it in the Sala UG book ? I would not even want it in my collection ! Give some legit documentations on your wrong dial Polerouter Sub and we will deliberate. Calling me a kiss ass just shows us how emotional and immature you really are with buyers remorse on a watch that probably isn't factory. Man up and accept that it is probably not a good example of a UG Polerouter Sub.
 
Posts
1,076
Likes
1,787
Again your way off subject and trying to justify your ignorance on the topic, and the only franken is your momma.
 
Posts
1,195
Likes
1,981
I love your level of your maturity, if you don't want opinions and or analysis from collectors from around the world with experience, why did you post on Omega Forums in the first place ? Send pictures of your watch to auction houses such as Christies and Antiqorum and get their opinion. Or try to sell it on the open market and that will tell you if there is any interest in your watch at all ! With your attitude nobody else on Omega Forums cares to even respond now. I've said enough, this will be my last response Frank, oh I'm sorry Fred !
Edited:
 
Posts
1,202
Likes
3,050
It's always unfortunate when these threads get personal. I'll stop cringing and try to bring some sanity back to the discussion.

I do agree with @rolokr that the watch would be more difficult to sell than a Polerouter Sub with a conventional dial. In the same way that I have a very early Polarouter (it's the earliest 20214 serial that I am aware of) without the Polarouter text on the dial. It is of great interest to me but may not be to everyone.

However, do I think that this Polerouter Sub dial with the missing text is a redial or something that was created to deceive? No, I do not.

Given the images we've seen (link to relevant thread below), I think it was a factory dial, just one that was not finished for some reason or a service dial.

https://omegaforums.net/threads/pol...st-for-clarification.50244/page-2#post-618497
 
Posts
1,076
Likes
1,787
Mazoue, thank you for stepping in and for your input. Just for clarification I have no intention of parting with the watch, all I have stated from the beginning is that be what it may be, I am 100% sure that the dial came out of the factory. And I am willing to send it to anyone here for verification at me expense. In closing the watch will stay with me and my apologies to all who I may have stepped on their toes.
 
Posts
1,475
Likes
3,067
Yes, quite unfortunate that threads should go on tangents and statements that are at best antagonising, should be made on a public forum. It just show a lack of maturity and respect.

Going back to the watch, I stand by my original evaluation of what I consider to be very odd indeed and really not something that was born in the universal geneve factory. The dial may have been printed by UG and discarded as one or a batch that were not up to scratch and then somehow found their way into the market.

Bottom line is that it was was certainly not something that would have left the UG factory looking like that.
 
Posts
1,202
Likes
3,050
Going back to the watch, I stand by my original evaluation of what I consider to be very odd indeed and really not something that was born in the universal geneve factory. The dial may have been printed by UG and discarded as one or a batch that were not up to scratch and then somehow found their way into the market.

Bottom line is that it was was certainly not something that would have left the UG factory looking like that.

I don't think I disagree with anything you've said.

You say that it was "really not something that was born in the universal geneve factory" and then say "The dial may have been printed by UG" - I just wanted to understand this apparent contradiction.

I think you are saying that the dial itself was most likely created by UG (albeit not finished for some reason) but that you are certain that the watch as a whole did not originally leave the factory this way. Is that right?
 
Posts
1,076
Likes
1,787
Everyone is speculating and guessing. Standard protocol is to destroy items parts that do not meet quality specifications. These dials weather just the dial or a complete watch we’re simply missed by the quality process, happens all the time. Great example coins minted, errors occur and released and when they are noticed they are destroyed.
 
Posts
1,475
Likes
3,067
I don't think I disagree with anything you've said.

You say that it was "really not something that was born in the universal geneve factory" and then say "The dial may have been printed by UG" - I just wanted to understand this apparent contradiction.

I think you are saying that the dial itself was most likely created by UG (albeit not finished for some reason) but that you are certain that the watch as a whole did not originally leave the factory this way. Is that right?

Yes. Quite right ...