Many jewelers feel that their competition is the guy next door. We at NGL have seen a marked increase in jewelry returning from cruise line purchases. According to one client, "Our sightseeing tours made the local jewelry stores out to be 'points of interest.' I was angry!"
The items of interest seem to center around total weight pieces such as tennis bracelets, colored stone rings and other items of promotional nature, all which can be found here. While the prices paid are generally fair, they are not necessarily better than at home. The quality of some articles left a lot to be desired and a few clients have returned their jewelry for refunds or replacement.
Loose tanzanite seems to be cruising out the doors as well, with merchants selling their customers on the idea of an imminent rise in its value.
Friday, July 1, 1994
Fracture-filled: fact, fiction, future
It has been seven years since Zvi Yehuda was credited with the process that fills surface-reaching fractures in diamonds, giving them an apparent clarity improvement.
What have we learned since then and how will the industry handle the on-going debate aver its use?
Over the past five years, NGL newsletters have reported on the process, its telltale signs and ethical concerns as has the GIA and numerous trade publications.
As gemologists, we are concerned over the grading aspect. If a fracture is filled it hasn't gone away. It may be less visible but its true nature hasn't appreciably changed.
It's like clarity grading with the naked eye and saying "If you can't see it, it doesn't count."
There is no standard industry position on the fracture-filled diamond. Some labs will grade them - some will not. GIA will not. EGL did but now does not.
NGL's position is as it was in the beginning. We will identify the treatment and issue a report as such but not assign a clarity grade or value [Editor's Note, 2008: NGL will offer appraisals to the end consumer only on fracture-filled stones. It will include a visual-only clarity grade along with a disclaimer and a value for insurance purposes only.]
What sets this policy for us is the fact that it is not stable in a diamond's normal environment. Everyday wear is fine, steam cleaning and an ultrasonic may even be OK for some, but a "normal" environment for a diamond includes being subjected to the heat of the jeweler's torch and under those conditions the process is highly unstable.
The effects are obvious and the consequences for the unsuspecting jeweler are not pleasant. It cost one jeweler his life and may cost others their livelihood.
What have we learned since then and how will the industry handle the on-going debate aver its use?
Over the past five years, NGL newsletters have reported on the process, its telltale signs and ethical concerns as has the GIA and numerous trade publications.
As gemologists, we are concerned over the grading aspect. If a fracture is filled it hasn't gone away. It may be less visible but its true nature hasn't appreciably changed.
It's like clarity grading with the naked eye and saying "If you can't see it, it doesn't count."
There is no standard industry position on the fracture-filled diamond. Some labs will grade them - some will not. GIA will not. EGL did but now does not.
NGL's position is as it was in the beginning. We will identify the treatment and issue a report as such but not assign a clarity grade or value [Editor's Note, 2008: NGL will offer appraisals to the end consumer only on fracture-filled stones. It will include a visual-only clarity grade along with a disclaimer and a value for insurance purposes only.]
What sets this policy for us is the fact that it is not stable in a diamond's normal environment. Everyday wear is fine, steam cleaning and an ultrasonic may even be OK for some, but a "normal" environment for a diamond includes being subjected to the heat of the jeweler's torch and under those conditions the process is highly unstable.
The effects are obvious and the consequences for the unsuspecting jeweler are not pleasant. It cost one jeweler his life and may cost others their livelihood.
Could this happen to you?
Various appraisal and jewelers organizations are currently looking into a recent case that many believe exemplifies the need for regulations on the practices of jewelry appraisers.
The case goes something like this: A local jeweler is given a rather large color-change stone in a ring mounting for repair work. No documentation exists on the article (which was an inheritance) and at the time was though to be of minimal value by the customer, according to the jeweler.
When stolen from the jeweler however, the article with no identity becomes a nine carat rare and expensive natural alexandrite chrysoberyl.
At least this is according to the appraiser who never saw the ring, but through a series of questions with the client made this determination and wrote a document stating an absolute conclusion with a value in the neighborhood of $50,000.
When contacted concerning this matter, several of the area's top Graduate Gemologist/appraisers had turned down the proposition of providing such a document. There was no proof of the stone having ever been documented as natural and since its original place of purchase was stated to be Mexico in the 1960s, when very few nine carat alexandrites existed, the possibility of such was deemed very remote. Add to this, the fact that synthetic color-change sapphire is commonly sold as "alexandrite" throughout the world, and has created one of the most common misnomers known to the jewelry industry to date.
Well...
The case went to trial. The judge heard testimony of two Graduate Gemologists who believed the likelihood of the stone being natural was remote. The judge read the report of the appraiser saying it was natural as well as heard the plaintiff's testimony describing the correct color-change attributes for natural alexandrite.
In the end, it was the plaintiff's testimony that won out - a judgement in the vicinity of $50,000.
The plaintiff's lack of tangible proof of what was owned was apparently not important. The burden of disproving what they may have had was on the defendant.
The plaintiff's failure to hire an expert with a gemological degree was also apparently not important in the eyes of the law. Since the state of Washington has no regulations on jewelry appraisers and therefore no requirements of them, the plaintiff's expert was considered as valid as the defendant's.
What can be learned by this case? Most assuredly, a customer can make any claim and put the burden of proof on the jeweler. Without documentation, one might think the plaintiff had little chance. But it was this lack of evidence that worked to their benefit.
While this once again stresses the importance of proper job take-in procedures, this alone won't solve the problem. The jeweler needs to qualify a customer's expectations, anticipate potential problems (however remote) and act to prevent them.
It also wouldn't hurt to utilize the services of an independent and reputable gemological laboratory when the need arises.
The case goes something like this: A local jeweler is given a rather large color-change stone in a ring mounting for repair work. No documentation exists on the article (which was an inheritance) and at the time was though to be of minimal value by the customer, according to the jeweler.
When stolen from the jeweler however, the article with no identity becomes a nine carat rare and expensive natural alexandrite chrysoberyl.
At least this is according to the appraiser who never saw the ring, but through a series of questions with the client made this determination and wrote a document stating an absolute conclusion with a value in the neighborhood of $50,000.
When contacted concerning this matter, several of the area's top Graduate Gemologist/appraisers had turned down the proposition of providing such a document. There was no proof of the stone having ever been documented as natural and since its original place of purchase was stated to be Mexico in the 1960s, when very few nine carat alexandrites existed, the possibility of such was deemed very remote. Add to this, the fact that synthetic color-change sapphire is commonly sold as "alexandrite" throughout the world, and has created one of the most common misnomers known to the jewelry industry to date.
Well...
The case went to trial. The judge heard testimony of two Graduate Gemologists who believed the likelihood of the stone being natural was remote. The judge read the report of the appraiser saying it was natural as well as heard the plaintiff's testimony describing the correct color-change attributes for natural alexandrite.
In the end, it was the plaintiff's testimony that won out - a judgement in the vicinity of $50,000.
The plaintiff's lack of tangible proof of what was owned was apparently not important. The burden of disproving what they may have had was on the defendant.
The plaintiff's failure to hire an expert with a gemological degree was also apparently not important in the eyes of the law. Since the state of Washington has no regulations on jewelry appraisers and therefore no requirements of them, the plaintiff's expert was considered as valid as the defendant's.
What can be learned by this case? Most assuredly, a customer can make any claim and put the burden of proof on the jeweler. Without documentation, one might think the plaintiff had little chance. But it was this lack of evidence that worked to their benefit.
While this once again stresses the importance of proper job take-in procedures, this alone won't solve the problem. The jeweler needs to qualify a customer's expectations, anticipate potential problems (however remote) and act to prevent them.
It also wouldn't hurt to utilize the services of an independent and reputable gemological laboratory when the need arises.
So, What is retail anyway?
As appraisers of fine jewelry and gemstones, NGL has been asking that question a lot lately as have many customers and jewelers alike.
By definition, retail means the price paid by theultimate consumer, but with traditional jewelers' practices out the window in today's marketplace, retail ain't what it used to be.
In the "old days" the retail environment was relatively stable. One could apply standard mark-ups to cost and arrive at values that very often stood up to the comparables in their marketplace. Today, comparables researched through market data (which is the preferred and most representative method of appraising) have brought retail figures down to leave some jewelers out of the mainstream.
The appraiser's first job is to accurately identify and describe the article being appraised. The process of applying standard gemological procedures in a consistent nature gives tha appraiser credibility in this evaluative process. To accurately describe the quality of a given gem and the mounting it is contained in are the basis for the appraisal and certainly the most important component in the insurance replacement process.
When the subject of "value" comes up, however, most jewelers feel the appraisal is only a vehicle to facilitate the sale. As long as the appraised prices reflects a "savings" to the customer, it is considered a sales tool.
To satisfy their impression of what makes a customer happy, many jewelers seek out the appraiser who will report their perception of "suggested retail price" regardless of what the item sells for. This they feel, implies the selling price as being a bona fide discount. All too often the opposite is true, if a comparable item is readily available at the new price and offered elsewhere for a similar amount it can be argued that the advertised price has now established a new retail for that item.
In the end, all the discounting game really acomplishes is either a false customer satisfaction or confusion. By reporting a value reflective of a "regular price" that never really existed, the jeweler and appraiser both are not only doing a disservice but are courting disaster in the eyes of the Federal Trade Commission and the office of the Attorney General.
With guidelines currently being written for appraisers, leading to licensing and regulations, this issue is at the forefront of discussions.
The jewelry appraiser who reports "value" to be that of a price unsubstantiated by actual sales will find themselves under a watchful eye.
By definition, retail means the price paid by theultimate consumer, but with traditional jewelers' practices out the window in today's marketplace, retail ain't what it used to be.
In the "old days" the retail environment was relatively stable. One could apply standard mark-ups to cost and arrive at values that very often stood up to the comparables in their marketplace. Today, comparables researched through market data (which is the preferred and most representative method of appraising) have brought retail figures down to leave some jewelers out of the mainstream.
The appraiser's first job is to accurately identify and describe the article being appraised. The process of applying standard gemological procedures in a consistent nature gives tha appraiser credibility in this evaluative process. To accurately describe the quality of a given gem and the mounting it is contained in are the basis for the appraisal and certainly the most important component in the insurance replacement process.
When the subject of "value" comes up, however, most jewelers feel the appraisal is only a vehicle to facilitate the sale. As long as the appraised prices reflects a "savings" to the customer, it is considered a sales tool.
To satisfy their impression of what makes a customer happy, many jewelers seek out the appraiser who will report their perception of "suggested retail price" regardless of what the item sells for. This they feel, implies the selling price as being a bona fide discount. All too often the opposite is true, if a comparable item is readily available at the new price and offered elsewhere for a similar amount it can be argued that the advertised price has now established a new retail for that item.
In the end, all the discounting game really acomplishes is either a false customer satisfaction or confusion. By reporting a value reflective of a "regular price" that never really existed, the jeweler and appraiser both are not only doing a disservice but are courting disaster in the eyes of the Federal Trade Commission and the office of the Attorney General.
With guidelines currently being written for appraisers, leading to licensing and regulations, this issue is at the forefront of discussions.
The jewelry appraiser who reports "value" to be that of a price unsubstantiated by actual sales will find themselves under a watchful eye.
Saturday, December 1, 1990
Diamond enhancement stirs controversy
The latest technological breakthrough in gem enhancement - the "Yehuda" treatment for diamonds is sure to spark controversy throughout the industry, as these enhanced stones filter into the marketplace and cause concern over their disclosure and evaluation.
The Process
The treatment developed by inventor Zvi Yehuda of Israel is not unlike modern emerald oiling in that a foreign substance is forced into surface fractures to stabilize and enhance appearance. In emerald, the material is an oil, but in the Yehuda process, a glass-like substance is introduced under extreme pressure. Since the substance replaces air within the stone, the inclusion becomes much less visible to the naked eye, - and virtually invisible if its refractive index approximates its host
Although some secrecy surrounds the process itself, the effect can be readily observed by the trained gemologist.
Microscopic examination may reveal the flow structure, trapped bubbles and an overall crackled texture, or characteristic flash. The filler's color may also be darker than the host diamond.
The dilemmas
These factors cause great concern to those involved in the evaluation of such diamonds. Stones tested by both the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) and American Gemological Laboratories (AGL) showed many graded higher in clarity when filled. Should appraisers grade on the treated appearance or try to "backtrack" to the prior condition? If the filled material imparts color (tests reveal commonly one grade lower than when untreated) how do we judge the new product?
In fact, color causes its own grading problems. The nature of the process and type of inclusions being altered often creates a "directional" color in the diamond. A single specimen appears to grade differently depending upon the angle of observation.
What the "big guys" say
The stance of the GIA is to currently refuse evaluation of Yehuda-treated diamonds. AGL advocates the development of a system to grade such stones realizing that conventional techniques are stretched to the limit and require modification to accommodate these stones.
Jewelers have their own problems. Although Yehuda-treated diamonds are accompanied by a disclosed pledge for the dealer when returned from their treatment facility, Diascience, INC. in new York when the diamonds change hands, the disclosure aspect often gets lost in the shuffle and may be sold as untreated. A retail customer not made aware of this fact has recourse when the truth is known and the reflection is certainly upon the jeweler, not their suppliers. And, the unaware bench jeweler repairing an article with such a treated diamond may unknowingly release the filler material through the heat from their torch, returning the diamond to its original condition. What will the diamond's owner say when it is returned to them?
Conclusions
Since the Northwest market is not yet familiar with these diamonds, this is the time to investigate the issues raised and form a basis for evaluation. As the major appraiser of fine jewelry in this market, NGL is in the process of forming a policy concerning these diamonds. We welcome your opinions on this issue and will publish some of those comments as well as our findings in future issues.
The Process
The treatment developed by inventor Zvi Yehuda of Israel is not unlike modern emerald oiling in that a foreign substance is forced into surface fractures to stabilize and enhance appearance. In emerald, the material is an oil, but in the Yehuda process, a glass-like substance is introduced under extreme pressure. Since the substance replaces air within the stone, the inclusion becomes much less visible to the naked eye, - and virtually invisible if its refractive index approximates its host
Although some secrecy surrounds the process itself, the effect can be readily observed by the trained gemologist.
Microscopic examination may reveal the flow structure, trapped bubbles and an overall crackled texture, or characteristic flash. The filler's color may also be darker than the host diamond.
The dilemmas
These factors cause great concern to those involved in the evaluation of such diamonds. Stones tested by both the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) and American Gemological Laboratories (AGL) showed many graded higher in clarity when filled. Should appraisers grade on the treated appearance or try to "backtrack" to the prior condition? If the filled material imparts color (tests reveal commonly one grade lower than when untreated) how do we judge the new product?
In fact, color causes its own grading problems. The nature of the process and type of inclusions being altered often creates a "directional" color in the diamond. A single specimen appears to grade differently depending upon the angle of observation.
What the "big guys" say
The stance of the GIA is to currently refuse evaluation of Yehuda-treated diamonds. AGL advocates the development of a system to grade such stones realizing that conventional techniques are stretched to the limit and require modification to accommodate these stones.
Jewelers have their own problems. Although Yehuda-treated diamonds are accompanied by a disclosed pledge for the dealer when returned from their treatment facility, Diascience, INC. in new York when the diamonds change hands, the disclosure aspect often gets lost in the shuffle and may be sold as untreated. A retail customer not made aware of this fact has recourse when the truth is known and the reflection is certainly upon the jeweler, not their suppliers. And, the unaware bench jeweler repairing an article with such a treated diamond may unknowingly release the filler material through the heat from their torch, returning the diamond to its original condition. What will the diamond's owner say when it is returned to them?
Conclusions
Since the Northwest market is not yet familiar with these diamonds, this is the time to investigate the issues raised and form a basis for evaluation. As the major appraiser of fine jewelry in this market, NGL is in the process of forming a policy concerning these diamonds. We welcome your opinions on this issue and will publish some of those comments as well as our findings in future issues.
Critical Angle - The case of the lumpy diamond
As you are aware, diamond prices have increased considerably over the past twenty-four months. What you may not have noticed is a change in the availability of goods and standards to which they are cut.
Recently the U.S. dollar lost ground in the world market. Since the Central Selling Organization (CSO) transacts all diamond parcel sales in U.S. dollars, this decline has given the U.S. less buying power while increasing buying power abroad. To equalize this effect, the CSO raised rough diamond prices.
The significance of this phenomenon in the U.S. market is clear. We pay more for diamonds while finding the selection meager to say the least. U.S. jewelers are finding it difficult to swallow these increases creating strong resistance throughout the country.
Diamond cutters, to regain from plummeting profits, have started cutting to retain more weight from the rough crystal. as a result, we are seeing "lumpy" stones with unusually thick girdles. Good to very good proportions seem to be tossed by the wayside.
Although this solution does offer those sought-after size points (i.e. 1.00ct, 0.50ct, etc) at a reduced price, some beauty is sacrificed. In addition, it should be noted that these stones appear smaller due to a smaller diameter. From an appraiser's standpoint these "lumpy" stones cannot be valued the same as a properly cut diamond of similar quality. In some cases we are seeing as much as 25%-30% deduction in per carat price.
Some experts argue that these lumpy stones could become a standard. I, for one, appreciate the unique beauty of a well-cut diamond and would hate to see the industry accept these "inferior" cuts as a standard. If enough people in the industry demand better cut diamonds, we may see a reversal of this trend. For now, these lumpy stones are a reality and the bottom line is you are paying more for less.
Recently the U.S. dollar lost ground in the world market. Since the Central Selling Organization (CSO) transacts all diamond parcel sales in U.S. dollars, this decline has given the U.S. less buying power while increasing buying power abroad. To equalize this effect, the CSO raised rough diamond prices.
The significance of this phenomenon in the U.S. market is clear. We pay more for diamonds while finding the selection meager to say the least. U.S. jewelers are finding it difficult to swallow these increases creating strong resistance throughout the country.
Diamond cutters, to regain from plummeting profits, have started cutting to retain more weight from the rough crystal. as a result, we are seeing "lumpy" stones with unusually thick girdles. Good to very good proportions seem to be tossed by the wayside.
Although this solution does offer those sought-after size points (i.e. 1.00ct, 0.50ct, etc) at a reduced price, some beauty is sacrificed. In addition, it should be noted that these stones appear smaller due to a smaller diameter. From an appraiser's standpoint these "lumpy" stones cannot be valued the same as a properly cut diamond of similar quality. In some cases we are seeing as much as 25%-30% deduction in per carat price.
Some experts argue that these lumpy stones could become a standard. I, for one, appreciate the unique beauty of a well-cut diamond and would hate to see the industry accept these "inferior" cuts as a standard. If enough people in the industry demand better cut diamonds, we may see a reversal of this trend. For now, these lumpy stones are a reality and the bottom line is you are paying more for less.
Sunday, October 1, 1989
Appraisals getting welcomed investigation
The days of the one line generic jewelry appraisal are numbered. The insurance industry is becoming more involved in the type of appraisal their clients obtain and sending them to independent laboratories for complete and accurate gemological descriptions - like the ones NGL has offered for over a decade.
In addition, diamonds individually valued at over $10,000 often require a diagram of their internal characteristics. This service is always available through NGL and although we recommend a loose diamond for such inspection, mounted diamonds can be plotted as well.
The most significant changes in the appraisal business are going to be coming from new legislation, however. In both the US Congress and Washington state legislature, bills to regulate the appraisal industry are being reviews and will be seeing action soon. First affected will be the real estate business, long a target for congressional scrutiny, but next will be personal property appraisers, such as those of fine jewelry. We at NGL welcome this intervention, but only hope sufficient requirements and limited "grandfathering" for appraisers is also enacted.
In addition, diamonds individually valued at over $10,000 often require a diagram of their internal characteristics. This service is always available through NGL and although we recommend a loose diamond for such inspection, mounted diamonds can be plotted as well.
The most significant changes in the appraisal business are going to be coming from new legislation, however. In both the US Congress and Washington state legislature, bills to regulate the appraisal industry are being reviews and will be seeing action soon. First affected will be the real estate business, long a target for congressional scrutiny, but next will be personal property appraisers, such as those of fine jewelry. We at NGL welcome this intervention, but only hope sufficient requirements and limited "grandfathering" for appraisers is also enacted.
