Hi guys, new here though I spent the last week or two trying to read every post in this forum. Trying to learn as much as I can before pulling the trigger on something ...

What's the verdict on this one coming up next week? What's a fair price for it?
http://www.antiquorum.com/catalog/lots/universal-ref-22297-3-lot-280-42

 

I'd vote redial, but wait for more informed opinions.

 

the "tachymetre" section looks out to me-would be suspect I think.-------------------------

 

I am going for original but I am still learning. Comparing to one from member, Noodia.

 

That looks like one beautiful, original dial!

For what it's worth, this particular dial layout with the deep set subdials would be extremely difficult to re-dial. Indeed, it was extremely difficult to get right in the factory. Notice that the numerals extend slightly over the edge of the subdials on Noodia's example. I'm looking at my own example and it's just the same... though notably, my dial is simply marked "SWISS" at six oclock, omitting the T. Perhaps mine (or theirs) is a service dial.

 

Which is what threw me off. Never seen a tachymeter inset so far - usually they're closer to the rehaut / edge. Thanks for the lesson!

 

Another good bidding competition for tri compax. This one sold including 25% premium at 6000USD ish. Too dear for me, will keep looking. all the best to the lucky winner today (i bidded up to 32k Hkd but didn't have the heart to go beyond that).

 

Dose the T Swiss T for universal geneve also referred to luming (First T for hour marker, second T for hands?)

 

Excellent question... anyone care to comment?

 

A bit of housekeeping...

It appears that the Antiquorum featured above has an incorrect caseback. This watch is otherwise completely consistent with reference 222100.

Also discussed here.

This is quite a lapse from Antiquorum, as even a cursory internet search of the reference should have raised enough doubt to look into this further.

 

Upon furtherrrrrr review:

 

So it looks like AQ is guilty of sloppy copy writing; they've copy and pasted auction descriptions from a wholly unrelated lot. In this case, they apparently got the reference correct: 222100, but then copied over all the incorrect reference numbers (22297) from an old lot.

As I was not in HK that day, nor tuned into their auction feed, I have no idea which reference number was referred to by the auctioneer. Though, based on the fact that the entire URL is based on the incorrect reference number, I guess that it was called as 22297.

And BTW, has anyone ever seen a watch with "correctors on the band." These people were having a bad day (best case) or are total morons.
For the buyer of this lot, I have to think that he went home with a correct ref 222100, even though his paper work is likely wrong. Hope he didn't insure the piece based on the wrong reference numbers. That could be an expensive mistake if there was ever a problem.

 

Yes. Both mine and AQ. Had told myself I will not buy another from them but oh well.

 

Congratz Gavin, a warranted trip to Singapore looks necessary to try on this one
Indeed you live your reputation as The quiet snatcher