Forums Latest Auctions Members

Universal Geneve Watches On Ebay

  1. LouS

    LouS Mrs Nataf's Other Son Staff Member Mar 20, 2014

    Posts
    6,975
    Likes
    18,235

    Total BS. Gold-plated until the seller shows you a hallmark on the back of the lug or the side of the case opposite the crown.
     
  2. Andyc319

    Andyc319 Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    Hi
    I am a member of the TZ-UK forum and was guided to here for help with a polerouter sub that I am about to purchase on ebay. The link to the page is below:

    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rare-S-S-U...ht_1148wt_1275

    It is located in Israel and seller has 98% feeback, but it appears he only sells watches on ebay and has a shop.

    Ebay is a risk and i am at a point where i can back out if necessary

    any comments would be appreicated

    Thanks

    Andyc
     
  3. pliesj

    pliesj Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    6
    Likes
    4
    The 1945 Tri-Compax did not sell for failing to meet reserve. The seller has relisted it today for another 24 hour auction.

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/221398715224?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

    I sent the seller a message stating that his description might be misleading because: (1) solid 18KT cases did not have steel backs, and (2) the reference number beginning with "4" indicates a gold-filled case. I asked if he could provide photos of the hallmark. Will be interesting to see if he does anything - I'm guessing not.
     
  4. pliesj

    pliesj Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    6
    Likes
    4
    Well, I did receive an angry response from the seller, in which he states:

    "Thank you for the accusation, and you are are wrong. I have stated that the case back is not original and that it is made of stainless steel. Also that being the case back not of this watch, the serial number of the watch is not the one you are referring to, it then belongs to another watch. Also note that up until 1950 Universal did not print the serials on the inside rather on the outside of the watch. Yet by the size, lugs, dial, numerals, crown and hands you know this watch belongs to the 1944 up to 1947 manufacturing lots, since 1948 the Tri-Compax had a revision in the dial: imdicators for numerals, arrowhead hands for arrow hands, tear shape lugs for column chamfered logs, revised logo on the crown, and new color for the tachymeter. So please get some knowledge."

    So the story appears to be that the case back is not original and therefore the fact that it is steel and has a reference number beginning with a "4" is irrelevant. In response, I have asked the seller where in his eBay description it says that "the case back is not original" and if he can provide photos of a hallmark. Indeed, his description implies that the case back is original by relying upon the serial number to date the watch. Note, how he backpedals in his response and starts relying on other features to date the watch. The posted eBay description says:

    "Universal Geneve Tri Compax in yellow gold 18K with steel back side. The watch is in perfect condition and all parts are in working order (day, date, moon phase, month and chronograph). It has some scratches in the back and some patina around the crown from age. The watch has had two owners including us. The dial is white and rare: the moon phase is in gold to match the overall case and is very rare -all others are plain blue-. The watch comes with a suede dark brown strap. Case size is 37mm. Polycarbonate crystal. White diial and Arabic numerals in yellow gold. Serial number refers to circa 1945. Mechanical with power reserve for about two days. Case back in steel. Lug to lug is 19.5mm however fits 20mm straps easily. Cleaned and maintained completely, three weeks ago. Movement has no replacement parts."
     
    ELV web and gemuzz like this.
  5. pliesj

    pliesj Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    6
    Likes
    4
    For those who might be interested, I received a response from the seller to my last query concerning the case back being original. Here it goes:

    "Are you bipolar? First you accuse then you are sorry then accuse again. Ok here it is: NOBODY knows if the caseback is original to the watch or not, because UG doesn't even know this. I know this because I people still work ere.

    Second that serial number does refer to a 1945 dated watch and SO DOES the other elements which I have explained to you. If that is the caseback or not, the material of the watch IS INDEED 18k gold -your main pain to the world it seems- why we know this? Because we checked the case with a metal denser -used to measure the micro plaque of metal plated objects- also the weight and the design. Now I am on a plane to Basel, and would love to keep chatting with you explaining the basics of vintage watches from UG but you simply insult and infer that people are dishonest. Does it show that on my 100% feedback? Sorry but you are WRONG AGAIN."

    I have sent the following reply:

    "Interesting. So your eBay description implies that the case back is original by relying on the serial number to date the watch. Then in your first response to me you flatly admit that "the case back is not original" and claim to have "stated' that in your eBay description, which you did not. Now your story is that no one knows (not even UG) if it is original or not? So which of these three things is true: (1) it is original, (2) it is not original, or (3) no way to know? You have alleged all three although your eBay description strongly implies only that the case back is original.

    Can you cite any examples of an authentic solid 18kt gold Tri-Compax with a steel back and reference number beginning in "4"?

    If I am crazy, as you contend, then please post all of our correspondence in the "Questions and Answers" section of your eBay listing. I am happy to have the public see how crazy I am and how reasonable and honest you are.

    Also, you do not have 100% feedback.

    Finally, my apology was conditional on you pointing out where in your eBay description you had informed buyers that the case back is not original. Since you have not pointed to any such statement that I missed, and in fact are now taking the different position that "nobody knows," you did not fulfill that condition precedent."
     
    Mothra and ELV web like this.
  6. ELV web

    ELV web Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    2,771
    Likes
    23,820
    Too many dishonest sellers out there. The world of vintage watch is going to always have some element of caveat emptor. Thanks for putting a good amount of effort to show these people they just can't expect to fool innocent and passion driven buyers all the time.
     
  7. Andyc319

    Andyc319 Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    I just wanted to add to my thread above, I have been looking for a sub for sometime and the prices have risen dramatically on these over the last 18 months. Finally managed to track one down on the bay, but want to check if it is or appears to be genuine? I am not sure if I could spot a fake, so any help/opinions/advice would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks again

    Andyc
     
  8. LouS

    LouS Mrs Nataf's Other Son Staff Member Mar 21, 2014

    Posts
    6,975
    Likes
    18,235


    Andy, had a look at this thread? http://omegaforums.net/threads/polerouter-sub-a-typology.3624/

    I think it's OK for a first execution, second generation, although it looks as if its seen hard use.
     
  9. Andyc319

    Andyc319 Mar 22, 2014

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    Thanks - I wasn't aware of that thread, a very useful read!
    Do you know of anyone who could refurbish it or would I need to send back to universal?

    Kind regards

    A
     
  10. LouS

    LouS Mrs Nataf's Other Son Staff Member Mar 22, 2014

    Posts
    6,975
    Likes
    18,235

    I'm not even sure that Universal still has the mojo to refurbish this. It is a faint shadow of its former self, and I don't know the track record for restoration of vintage pieces.

    Does anyone have any recent experience?
     
  11. gemuzz

    gemuzz Mar 23, 2014

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    0
  12. LouS

    LouS Mrs Nataf's Other Son Staff Member Mar 23, 2014

    Posts
    6,975
    Likes
    18,235
    gemuzz likes this.
  13. gemuzz

    gemuzz Mar 23, 2014

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    0

    That would make more sense... Think I'll pass this time, thanks!
     
  14. cicindela

    cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Mar 23, 2014

    Posts
    14,619
    Likes
    21,840
  15. woodwkr2

    woodwkr2 Mar 23, 2014

    Posts
    1,463
    Likes
    813

    'Course if this was featured as a 'tropical' dial on Hodinkee, it'd sell out overnight ;)
     
    lenny likes this.
  16. JohnSteed

    JohnSteed Mar 23, 2014

    Posts
    4,047
    Likes
    4,991
    a h m e n And the more visits to this forum will see more minds set free... To trust. Himself/Herself more
     
  17. haga888

    haga888 Mar 24, 2014

    Posts
    446
    Likes
    1,594
    JohnSteed likes this.
  18. SpikiSpikester

    SpikiSpikester @ ΩF Staff Member Mar 24, 2014

    Posts
    2,992
    Likes
    3,071
  19. gemuzz

    gemuzz Mar 25, 2014

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    0
    Thoughts on this?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Movement looks right to me... and the style seems to match up with others I have seen. Biggest concern is potential redial based on condition and no accent above the E in 'GENEVE' with probable replacement hands as well.. Oh and no view of the crown.

    But I did stumble upon this which looks quite similar: http://www.poshtime.com/bigpic-arc.php?id=3017.004

    Just trying to test my fake spotting skills and curious what others think.

    Currently at £250
    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Universal...s_MensWatches_GL&hash=item2a39f5708f#viTabs_0
     
  20. hoek

    hoek Mar 25, 2014

    Posts
    1
    Likes
    0
    Hi Guys may get some input on this triple date moonphase. I can't seem to find another other UGs with such dial or hands. I'm not so sure about the crown as well. Here's the watch.

    UG triple date.jpg