More Gemporia BS!

So, Angeline was on hyping up a "brand new stone, never seen before on the channel" that was coming up at 2pm. It was so spectacular, it caused a "traffic jam in the office" because of people wanting to see it (Angeline's exact words). Apparently Dave Troth, Toby Cavill and Jake Thompson all went in especially to see it.

Well, Troth never seems to go home anyway, and Jake is Managing Director - so you'd expect those to be in anyway. Plus all three of them are the buyers, so surely they saw it when they bought it?............

At 2pm, it appears on screen...............

An assembled 'Queensland Opal' that looks identical to their 'Crystal Opal on Ironstone'..........

Angeline, surprisingly, openly admitted that it was assembled. She explained that it had a resin backing, a thin slice of opal, and a Quartz cap to protect it.

Nice and honest for a change, right?

Wrong.

The graphics appear. Carat weight - 2.07cts. Except that it isn't 2.07cts of Opal. That carat weight includes the resin backing and Quartz cap.

Final price? £399.

£399 for a light weight, 1.9 grams, cheese wire gold setting, and probably around 1.90 to 2.00 carats of resin and Quartz. The actual weight of the Opal will be minimal because its a very thin slither.

Reported to the ASA over the misleading carat weight. Not that the ASA will do anything other than give them their 308th 'final warning'.

TheManWithNoName said:

So, Angeline was on hyping up a "brand new stone, never seen before on the channel" that was coming up at 2pm. It was so spectacular, it caused a "traffic jam in the office" because of people wanting to see it (Angeline's exact words). Apparently Dave Troth, Toby Cavill and Jake Thompson all went in especially to see it.

Well, Troth never seems to go home anyway, and Jake is Managing Director - so you'd expect those to be in anyway. Plus all three of them are the buyers, so surely they saw it when they bought it?............

At 2pm, it appears on screen...............

An assembled 'Queensland Opal' that looks identical to their 'Crystal Opal on Ironstone'..........

Angeline, surprisingly, openly admitted that it was assembled. She explained that it had a resin backing, a thin slice of opal, and a Quartz cap to protect it.

Nice and honest for a change, right?

Wrong.

The graphics appear. Carat weight - 2.07cts. Except that it isn't 2.07cts of Opal. That carat weight includes the resin backing and Quartz cap.

Final price? £399.

£399 for a light weight, 1.9 grams, cheese wire gold setting, and probably around 1.90 to 2.00 carats of resin and Quartz. The actual weight of the Opal will be minimal because its a very thin slither.

Reported to the ASA over the misleading carat weight. Not that the ASA will do anything other than give them their 308th 'final warning'.

View attachment 29118

Click to expand...

How they can say it's new. I, and I don't doubt many others, have bought opal on ironstone before from this channel. TBH, as nice as it looked, it was very petite, to put it politely. A bit like Ammolite. I know I can't afford huge stones, but that's not the point

Black opal triplet. They missed the triplet part in the description as “assembled” isn’t sufficient in the description. Triplets are less valuable than doublets or pure opals.

TheManWithNoName said:

So, Angeline was on hyping up a "brand new stone, never seen before on the channel" that was coming up at 2pm. It was so spectacular, it caused a "traffic jam in the office" because of people wanting to see it (Angeline's exact words). Apparently Dave Troth, Toby Cavill and Jake Thompson all went in especially to see it.

Well, Troth never seems to go home anyway, and Jake is Managing Director - so you'd expect those to be in anyway. Plus all three of them are the buyers, so surely they saw it when they bought it?............

At 2pm, it appears on screen...............

An assembled 'Queensland Opal' that looks identical to their 'Crystal Opal on Ironstone'..........

Angeline, surprisingly, openly admitted that it was assembled. She explained that it had a resin backing, a thin slice of opal, and a Quartz cap to protect it.

Nice and honest for a change, right?

Wrong.

The graphics appear. Carat weight - 2.07cts. Except that it isn't 2.07cts of Opal. That carat weight includes the resin backing and Quartz cap.

Final price? £399.

£399 for a light weight, 1.9 grams, cheese wire gold setting, and probably around 1.90 to 2.00 carats of resin and Quartz. The actual weight of the Opal will be minimal because its a very thin slither.

Reported to the ASA over the misleading carat weight. Not that the ASA will do anything other than give them their 308th 'final warning'.

View attachment 29118

Click to expand...

1.9 grams of gold? An absolute Rip-off!

I have one, only. This 1976 Britannia silver pendant. Very nice weight of silver, the opal is sparkly & dark - sold explicitly as a doublet. Bought it because it's design was so of the period. £99. Not cheap but I like it.

TheManWithNoName said:

So, Angeline was on hyping up a "brand new stone, never seen before on the channel" that was coming up at 2pm. It was so spectacular, it caused a "traffic jam in the office" because of people wanting to see it (Angeline's exact words). Apparently Dave Troth, Toby Cavill and Jake Thompson all went in especially to see it.

Well, Troth never seems to go home anyway, and Jake is Managing Director - so you'd expect those to be in anyway. Plus all three of them are the buyers, so surely they saw it when they bought it?............

At 2pm, it appears on screen...............

An assembled 'Queensland Opal' that looks identical to their 'Crystal Opal on Ironstone'..........

Angeline, surprisingly, openly admitted that it was assembled. She explained that it had a resin backing, a thin slice of opal, and a Quartz cap to protect it.

Nice and honest for a change, right?

Wrong.

The graphics appear. Carat weight - 2.07cts. Except that it isn't 2.07cts of Opal. That carat weight includes the resin backing and Quartz cap.

Final price? £399.

£399 for a light weight, 1.9 grams, cheese wire gold setting, and probably around 1.90 to 2.00 carats of resin and Quartz. The actual weight of the Opal will be minimal because its a very thin slither.

Reported to the ASA over the misleading carat weight. Not that the ASA will do anything other than give them their 308th 'final warning'.

View attachment 29118

Click to expand...

I saw that and thought it was the same ring they were selling a few months back calling it Midnight Opal which I've never heard of.

TheManWithNoName said:

So, Angeline was on hyping up a "brand new stone, never seen before on the channel" that was coming up at 2pm. It was so spectacular, it caused a "traffic jam in the office" because of people wanting to see it (Angeline's exact words). Apparently Dave Troth, Toby Cavill and Jake Thompson all went in especially to see it.

Well, Troth never seems to go home anyway, and Jake is Managing Director - so you'd expect those to be in anyway. Plus all three of them are the buyers, so surely they saw it when they bought it?............

At 2pm, it appears on screen...............

An assembled 'Queensland Opal' that looks identical to their 'Crystal Opal on Ironstone'..........

Angeline, surprisingly, openly admitted that it was assembled. She explained that it had a resin backing, a thin slice of opal, and a Quartz cap to protect it.

Nice and honest for a change, right?

Wrong.

The graphics appear. Carat weight - 2.07cts. Except that it isn't 2.07cts of Opal. That carat weight includes the resin backing and Quartz cap.

Final price? £399.

£399 for a light weight, 1.9 grams, cheese wire gold setting, and probably around 1.90 to 2.00 carats of resin and Quartz. The actual weight of the Opal will be minimal because its a very thin slither.

Reported to the ASA over the misleading carat weight. Not that the ASA will do anything other than give them their 308th 'final warning'.

View attachment 29118

Click to expand...

Not defending them in any way, as it's a rip-off price for a rubbish stone, but if they are advertising Queensland Opal at 2.07cts, while openly stating that Queensland Opal is an assembled stone composed of a sliver ('slither' is what snakes do) of opal with a resin backing and a Quartz cap, then that is clearly NOT misrepresenting anything, as the legal definition of a gem includes all its constituent parts (as, say, a cultured pearl is still referred to by a millimetre measurement, exactly the same as a natural pearl, regardless of the fact that the cultured one may contain quite a large irritant bead). Fissure-filled rubies are still sold as rubies based on carat weight despite being largely composed of high-lead glass. Compressed turquoise includes quantities of epoxy and dye. Follow my drift?

Solent Warship said:

I saw that and thought it was the same ring they were selling a few months back calling it Midnight Opal which I've never heard of.

Click to expand...

Midnight Opal is a marketing name that Gemporia use for Ethiopian Opal that has been dyed to give it a very deep blue / almost black colour.

As always, in true Gemporia style, they like to price compare it to natural Black Opal - which is very rare and very valuable.

Gemma Rose said:

Not defending them in any way, as it's a rip-off price for a rubbish stone, but if they are advertising Queensland Opal at 2.07cts, while openly stating that Queensland Opal is an assembled stone composed of a sliver ('slither' is what snakes do) of opal with a resin backing and a Quartz cap, then that is clearly NOT misrepresenting anything, as the legal definition of a gem includes all its constituent parts (as, say, a cultured pearl is still referred to by a millimetre measurement, exactly the same as a natural pearl, regardless of the fact that the cultured one may contain quite a large irritant bead). Fissure-filled rubies are still sold as rubies based on carat weight despite being largely composed of high-lead glass. Compressed turquoise includes quantities of epoxy and dye. Follow my drift?

Click to expand...

Whilst I take your point about filled Rubies, compressed Turquoise, etc, being sold by carat weight (which is a massive gripe I have with the industry), the NJA guidance states that Fissure-filled Rubies are assumed to be treated because they are so common. The same applies to compressed Turquoise.

That guidance does not apply to Opals because Opals are assumed to be natural unless otherwise stated.

Under Consumer Protection laws, Gemporia ARE misleading with the Queensland Opal because the components of the 'Assembled' treatment are not clearly detailed on their website.

Consumer Protection laws state that the components of the treatment must be detailed. Gemporia's detailing of the 'assembled' treatment is vague. It simple says "Enhancement by assembling other substances over or under a gemstone to improve durability and size." Even their own presenters are unclear - with some presenters saying that the backing is resin - and others saying it is Ironstone. If their own staff are unclear, how can a customer be clear of what they're getting?

Gemporia DO, however, clearly state on their website that fissure-filling is composed of glass fillers, and that impregnated/reconstituted Turquoise contains resins, etc. Therefore, they are complying with Consumer Protection laws by detailing the 'components' of those processes.

Brand new lows, and I don’t mean prices. They are sky high for dyed stones that have no value. Some set in gold

Anything becomes a gemstone if you add "ite" to the name, even sh...

Jojo1 said:

Brand new lows, and I don’t mean prices. They are sky high for dyed stones that have no value. Some set in gold

Click to expand...

Although the Green Agate is dyed, it is fairly reasonably priced at £29.99 - but the gold rings are daylight robbery.

The opals look hideous and stand out a mile that they are dyed. They have little to no value, and the gold weight is just 1.9 grams.

I've just used an online calculator to work out the price of 1.9 grams of 9k gold at wholesale prices - and its coming back at just short of £50. At £249, there's a very healthy profit in those rings.

Obviously they exist to make profit, which is fair enough, but there's a difference between making a profit and taking the Mick.

TheManWithNoName said:

Whilst I take your point about filled Rubies, compressed Turquoise, etc, being sold by carat weight (which is a massive gripe I have with the industry), the NJA guidance states that Fissure-filled Rubies are assumed to be treated because they are so common. The same applies to compressed Turquoise.

That guidance does not apply to Opals because Opals are assumed to be natural unless otherwise stated.

Under Consumer Protection laws, Gemporia ARE misleading with the Queensland Opal because the components of the 'Assembled' treatment are not clearly detailed on their website.

Consumer Protection laws state that the components of the treatment must be detailed. Gemporia's detailing of the 'assembled' treatment is vague. It simple says "Enhancement by assembling other substances over or under a gemstone to improve durability and size." Even their own presenters are unclear - with some presenters saying that the backing is resin - and others saying it is Ironstone. If their own staff are unclear, how can a customer be clear of what they're getting?

Gemporia DO, however, clearly state on their website that fissure-filling is composed of glass fillers, and that impregnated/reconstituted Turquoise contains resins, etc. Therefore, they are complying with Consumer Protection laws by detailing the 'components' of those processes.

Click to expand...

"That guidance does not apply to Opals because Opals are assumed to be natural unless otherwise stated". The guidance you refer to seems to be the NJA, an organisation I'm unfamiliar with, and which doesn't appear on a web search. The closest match is the National Jewellery Awards, an Indian-based outfit that has no powers in UK law. And 'guidance' is not law, anyway.

So, "assumed to be natural"... since when, and by whom? Doublets were in use during the Victorian period, and triplets were very common by the time I started work in the jewellery industry in the mid-1960s.

It's also perfectly possible that some Queensland opal is backed with resin, and some with ironstone. Potch, vitrolite, black industrial glass or even hard plastic are also used.

My point stands: there is no legal requirement to subtract these other elements from the stated carat weight of the stone, which was your original point, and the reason for your reporting Gemporia to the ASA ("over the misleading carat weight") .

Gemma Rose said:

"That guidance does not apply to Opals because Opals are assumed to be natural unless otherwise stated". The guidance you refer to seems to be the NJA, an organisation I'm unfamiliar with, and which doesn't appear on a web search.

Click to expand...

NJA was a typo - it's actually the NAJ.

Gemma Rose said:

"That guidance does not apply to Opals because Opals are assumed to be natural unless otherwise stated". The guidance you refer to seems to be the NJA, an organisation I'm unfamiliar with, and which doesn't appear on a web search. The closest match is the National Jewellery Awards, an Indian-based outfit that has no powers in UK law. And 'guidance' is not law, anyway.

So, "assumed to be natural"... since when, and by whom? Doublets were in use during the Victorian period, and triplets were very common by the time I started work in the jewellery industry in the mid-1960s.

It's also perfectly possible that some Queensland opal is backed with resin, and some with ironstone. Potch, vitrolite, black industrial glass or even hard plastic are also used.

My point stands: there is no legal requirement to subtract these other elements from the stated carat weight of the stone, which was your original point, and the reason for your reporting Gemporia to the ASA ("over the misleading carat weight") .

Click to expand...

1. Gemporia have listed their treatment as 'assembled'. They have not listed it as a doublet or triplet. They have separate treatment codes for those - which they have chosen not to use. Therefore, customers buying from their website have no way of knowing what the components consist of because they are not listed. If they had chosen to use the treatment code for doublet or triplet, then the components WOULD have been disclosed.

2. You said "'Guidance' is not law, anyway."

Correct. But Gemporia are members of the National Association of Jewellers (NAJ). The NAJ terms of membership state that members have to follow their guidance. Which Gemporia do not appear to have done.

3. You said "assumed to be natural"... since when, and by whom?

The NAJ and the GIA. The GIA website says "opals should be assumed natural or untreated unless stated otherwise. This is because opals have traditionally been treated less frequently compared to other gemstones, and many treatments can be detected through gemological testing."

You've told us you're a gemmologist and been in the trade for 50 years - so I'm surprised you are not aware of this. You can find this information very easily simply by looking at their website.

4. You said "It's also perfectly possible that some Queensland opal is backed with resin, and some with ironstone. Potch, vitrolite, black industrial glass or even hard plastic are also used."

Yes, that is very true - but not on the same item! Gemporia have sold the same ring on at least four occasions - with Jess Foley saying it has a "resin backing", and Lindsey Carr it has an "ironstone backing!".

TheManWithNoName said:

Although the Green Agate is dyed, it is fairly reasonably priced at £29.99 - but the gold rings are daylight robbery.

The opals look hideous and stand out a mile that they are dyed. They have little to no value, and the gold weight is just 1.9 grams.

I've just used an online calculator to work out the price of 1.9 grams of 9k gold at wholesale prices - and its coming back at just short of £50. At £249, there's a very healthy profit in those rings.

Obviously they exist to make profit, which is fair enough, but there's a difference between making a profit and taking the Mick.

Click to expand...

Exactly. They are taking the Michael big-time now, the prices are just off the wall. And 1.9 grams gold in a ring is ridiculously thin - how they can even mention (in hushed tones of reverence) that it's set in gold, as though it was such a great deal, I cannot believe (although yeah, perhaps I can). Anyone who keeps an eye on the price of gold online can work out for themselves the profit the channel must be making.

Yep, it's all BS. Gemporia formal response to a customer calling out their silver gram price comparison just about confirms it because we all know that this is not a one-off presentation error...

AndyW said:

Yep, it's all BS. Gemporia formal response to a customer calling out their silver gram price comparison just about confirms it because we all know that this is not a one-off presentation error...

View attachment 29699

Click to expand...

Generic reply. If it were an intentional reply to an actual customer, it would be, Dear Fred, or Dear Mildred. Not Dear Customer. Wouldn't be at all surprised if it didn't come with a 'do not reply to this email' somewhere on it.

They seem to have a lot of 'miscommunication' and 'errors' on their sales spiels................

Someone cynical might think it was done deliberately to mislead. I'm sure they wouldn't do that though. It's not like they've ever had warnings from the ASA.................

'Our goal is to provide accurate and valuable information to our viewers...'

Need to work on scoring more goals, then.