Quartzite Jade REALLY!

[TheManWithNoName]

Not true.

In your opinion.

As it happens, out of curiosity, I watched David Troth for myself, yesterday, in a lunchtime pitch with a presenter named Angeline Davies, selling two items of quartzite jade - a "red jade" bangle, and a two-dragon engraved pendant on a long beaded necklace.

And?

Both openly said that the GIA stance has changed, and it now acknowledges quartzite jade as jade.

and

Frankly, I don't see how they could make such a statement without risk if being prosecuted if it were a falsehood.

Gemporia say a lot of things that has been considered false or misleading by a regulatory body - and they've had numerous warnings for it and been forced to change their presentations as a result.

So they absolutely do take risks - and they do get warnings for it.

This is the same channel that, until I reported them to the ASA, were trying to sell a stone called 'Ruby Quartz' - implying that it was a new hybrid gemstone. It was found to be misleading, and they were told not to use that name again under any circumstances.

If you believe what the presenters say, more fool you.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

I'm aware on at least one Gemporia customer who (like you) was suspicious, and took her purchases for independent testing at a very well-respected Western laboratory, where they were independently confirmed as jade (at considerable cost to that customer).

The Gemporia customer I referred to who had her jade independently certified as jade (I believe with Anchor Cert, part of the UK Assay office) stated that a number of her items were indeed quartzite jade.

I thought this was the customer you were referring to yesterday - but you've more or less clarified it today.

This customer, and her certificates, has been discussed on here in the past by other forum members. This customer was not querying whether her Jade was was actually Jade at all, as you imply. She was actually querying the TYPE of her Jadeite.

She bought what Gemporia had described as Type A Jadeite, but she was suspicious that it was treated Type B or Type C Jadeite - so she sent it off to the Assay Office to have it lab tested.

The Assay Office confirmed that it was what she bought - Type A Jadeite.

She then sent her certificates into Gemporia - and Dave Troth has taken great delight in showing them on numerous Type A Jadeite sales presentations since.

Ironically, those certificates said that the material had received 'wax' treatment though - yet Gemporia have ignored that and continued to sell it as 'not enhanced'......

Nobody has questioned the Type A Jadeite. What people have questioned is the other dubious stones that have hade 'Jadeite' added to their name, despite not being Jadeite.

If there is a separate, additional sales pitch where a customer has provided proof that her Quartzite Jade has been certified as a genuine type of Jade, then I haven't seen it - and nobody else on this forum has ever mentioned it either. Considering the amount of times that Dave Troth is on flogging 'Quartzite Jade', I would imagine that other people other than yourself would have seen it - so I suspect you're getting mixed up.

 

[historymystery]

Having read this far down the thread and deciding to comment on your piece for convenience. I'm not too keen on seeing arguments back and forth, as interesting as the points may be. But, and it's probably been said elsewhere, have you (generic, not necessarily personally) noticed, a lot of complaints about Gemporia pertain to 'the recent incarnation'.

Granted I haven't been through 1000s of posts long past, but no one 'seems' to complain about the jewellery of the past past, only the recent past. Lessening quality and the likes. And, agreeing with you, it seems to be way that the company and its on-air presence, is currently being operated that 'rattles more bones' than even the jewellery. Again, a repeat, but 'bigging up' cheaper items is part of how it's run and that rubs people up the wrong way. Especially those 'oldies' (not age, but longest serving customers) who have a better knowledge and understanding of gems, jewellery and the associated quality of years past, including the production (TV) quality and how they have both degraded.

As I've said elsewhere on here, I have jewellery bought years ago from Gemporia that I'm happy to praise - and have done so. Good weights of metal, beautiful stones, innovative design. I would be happy to still praise Gemporia if the quality was there, but wafer-thin metals (in a ring, the shank would most certainly bend if you caught it on anything), poor quality stones and extravagant (and often incorrect) claims, combined with the shrieking presenters and lack of useful information/clear and accurate descriptions (I don't count 'wow!', 'what are we doing here?' and 'this is just wrong!' as useful information) means I haven't bought anything for years. And quite simply, after receiving two items that in my view were of a different quality to what had been shown on the screen, I sent the items back and stopped buying.

Re: your comment about 'bigging up cheaper items is part of how it's run', we all know that presenters have to sell - that's their job, nobody's disputing that. But there is a line you don't cross - and part of my definition of this would be (a) if a presenter (who is supposedly trained) repeatedly gives incorrect/misleading information and (b) if supposed 'price comparisons' are shown, where items differ in their composition from what is being sold on the screen - so are therefore not a true comparison - trying to pull the wool over people's eyes is a phrase that springs to mind. This might have occasionally happened in the past, I certainly wasn't watching the channel 24/7, but posters on here who have watched Gems for years know beyond doubt that these days it's a very regular occurrence - price comparisons have been mentioned on here many times, and even if you only watch the shows now and again, you'd be hard-pressed to miss it. Treating customers like idiots is the reason why most of us are no longer buying.

 

[User 31547]

I thought this was the customer you were referring to yesterday - but you've more or less clarified it today.

This customer, and her certificates, has been discussed on here in the past by other forum members. This customer was not querying whether her Jade was was actually Jade at all, as you imply. She was actually querying the TYPE of her Jadeite.

She bought what Gemporia had described as Type A Jadeite, but she was suspicious that it was treated Type B or Type C Jadeite - so she sent it off to the Assay Office to have it lab tested.

The Assay Office confirmed that it was what she bought - Type A Jadeite.

She then sent her certificates into Gemporia - and Dave Troth has taken great delight in showing them on numerous Type A Jadeite sales presentations since.

Ironically, those certificates said that the material had received 'wax' treatment though - yet Gemporia have ignored that and continued to sell it as 'not enhanced'......

Nobody has questioned the Type A Jadeite. What people have questioned is the other dubious stones that have hade 'Jadeite' added to their name, despite not being Jadeite.

If there is a separate, additional sales pitch where a customer has provided proof that her Quartzite Jade has been certified as a genuine type of Jade, then I haven't seen it - and nobody else on this forum has ever mentioned it either. Considering the amount of times that Dave Troth is on flogging 'Quartzite Jade', I would imagine that other people other than yourself would have seen it - so I suspect you're getting mixed up.

Your assumption is incorrect. I'm not a regular Gemporia viewer and have no knowledge of the presentation you refer to, and I am certainly not 'getting mixed up'. The individual I mention was/is a private client of a colleague of mine, also a gemmologist and auction valuer.

GIA professional guidelines clearly state "Type A jadeite is that which has not been treated in any way except surface waxing". It's a routine treatment which does not in any way compromise the nature or the integrity of the material. It would appear from your own observations that the Assay Office agrees with that stance - so why should Gemporia not just accept that at face value?

I note with interest that, following your assertion that "Dave Troth himself has said, on-air, that "the GIA do not recognise Quartzite Jade". So either Dave Troth is wrong, or you are wrong. Which is it?", you have failed to address my observation that this is not true, and that David Troth said exactly the opposite, live on air, just yesterday (6th September 2024, at around midday) - that the GIA stance has changed, and it now acknowledges quartzite jade as jade. It seems that Mr Troth and I are in complete agreement, after all.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

Your assumption is incorrect. I'm not a regular Gemporia viewer and have no knowledge of the presentation you refer to, and I am certainly not 'getting mixed up'. The individual I mention was/is a private client of a colleague of mine, also a gemmologist and auction valuer.

So, you have no proof to post on here that 'Quartzite Jade' is in fact a type of Jade then? Quelle Surprise.

And to clarify, you said that this person sent their Quartzite Jade to the assay office - but now you're saying that this same person is a client of a colleague of yours? Why didn't they ask your colleague to test it rather than sending it to the assay office? Don't they have any confidence in your colleague?............

GIA professional guidelines clearly state "Type A jadeite is that which has not been treated in any way except surface waxing". It's a routine treatment which does not in any way compromise the nature or the integrity of the material. It would appear from your own observations that the Assay Office agrees with that stance - so why should Gemporia not just accept that at face value?

I agree that it does not in any way compromise the nature of integrity of the material. However, Gemporia sell other stones that are waxed - and they use a treatment code to confirm as such. When they're inconsistent in applying treatment codes, particularly with their independently proven history of misleading customers, then people, rightly, question their reasons for omitting information as and when it suits them.

I note with interest that, following your assertion that "Dave Troth himself has said, on-air, that "the GIA do not recognise Quartzite Jade". So either Dave Troth is wrong, or you are wrong. Which is it?", you have failed to address my observation that this is not true, and that David Troth said exactly the opposite, live on air, just yesterday (6th September 2024, at around midday) - that the GIA stance has changed, and it now acknowledges quartzite jade as jade. It seems that Mr Troth and I are in complete agreement, after all.

I'm not particularly interested in what Dave Troth says, or whether you agree with him because Gemporia has had multiple warnings from the ASA over the past couple of years for making misleading statements.

If you believe what they say, then more fool you.

The fact remains that there is NO evidence online, from any reputable labs or bodies, that Quartzite Jade is a real type of Jade - and all references to it on Google all point to Gemporia links. There aren't even any links to 'Eastern' websites documenting it - despite your claim that they're experts in Jade.

You've claimed that the GIA have 'changed their stance' - yet there is NO information about Quartzite Jade on their website either.

You're trying to prove that Quartzite Jade is a real gemstone by referring to hearsay, making claims that you cannot back up, and referring to the claims of TV presenters of a channel that has had repeated warnings from the ASA for misleading - and you're expecting us to take you seriously?

This is the GIA definition of Jade: “Jade” is a generic term for nephrite, jadeite, and under certain conditions green omphacite. In China, a pierced jade disk is a symbol of heaven.

Source: https://www.gia.edu/jade

No mention of Quartzite. No mention of any other materials. Simply Nephrite, Jadeite and certain Omphacites.

If you're now going to say that the GIA don't know as much as Dave Troth, Gemporia or the East, then keep in mind that this is the same GIA that supposedly gave you a qualification.............

Come back with some credible evidence that Quartzite Jade is a type of Jade, then I'll start to take you seriously. Until then, I can't take you even slightly seriously.

 

[User 31547]

You might want to look it up before getting arsey.

As you're incapable of having a reasoned debate, you're not worth giving a detailed response to, so go and have a mardy elsewhere.

So, you have no proof to post on here that 'Quartzite Jade' is in fact a type of Jade then? Quelle Surprise.

And to clarify, you said that this person sent their Quartzite Jade to the assay office - but now you're saying that this same person is a client of a colleague of yours? Why didn't they ask your colleague to test it rather than sending it to the assay office? Don't they have any confidence in your colleague?............



I agree that it does not in any way compromise the nature of integrity of the material. However, Gemporia sell other stones that are waxed - and they use a treatment code to confirm as such. When they're inconsistent in applying treatment codes, particularly with their independently proven history of misleading customers, then people, rightly, question their reasons for omitting information as and when it suits them.



I'm not particularly interested in what Dave Troth says, or whether you agree with him because Gemporia has had multiple warnings from the ASA over the past couple of years for making misleading statements.

If you believe what they say, then more fool you.

The fact remains that there is NO evidence online, from any reputable labs or bodies, that Quartzite Jade is a real type of Jade - and all references to it on Google all point to Gemporia links. There aren't even any links to 'Eastern' websites documenting it - despite your claim that they're experts in Jade.

You've claimed that the GIA have 'changed their stance' - yet there is NO information about Quartzite Jade on their website either.

You're trying to prove that Quartzite Jade is a real gemstone by referring to hearsay, making claims that you cannot back up, and referring to the claims of TV presenters of a channel that has had repeated warnings from the ASA for misleading - and you're expecting us to take you seriously?

This is the GIA definition of Jade: “Jade” is a generic term for nephrite, jadeite, and under certain conditions green omphacite. In China, a pierced jade disk is a symbol of heaven.

Source: https://www.gia.edu/jade

No mention of Quartzite. No mention of any other materials. Simply Nephrite, Jadeite and certain Omphacites.

If you're now going to say that the GIA don't know as much as Dave Troth, Gemporia or the East, then keep in mind that this is the same GIA that supposedly gave you a qualification.............

Come back with some credible evidence that Quartzite Jade is a type of Jade, then I'll start to take you seriously. Until then, I can't take you even slightly seriously.

Deary me... for someone who recently told ME not to get 'arsey' and said "As you're incapable of having a reasoned debate, you're not worth giving a detailed response to, so go and have a mardy elsewhere", I'm certainly getting a 'detailed response' now!

The client I mentioned didn't come to my colleague for testing of the jade, but came to him afterwards, with other items that required valuation for insurance purposes and was not disposed to pay the astronomical prices paid previously, elsewhere, on the jade.

You claim you're 'not particularly interested in what Dave Troth says' - yet you were happy to quote him to shore up your argument (which he doesn't, as I heard for myself yesterday). I've never said I believe him on any subject at all, as I am not familiar enough with him or what he says - it's simply that his opinion in this matter does confirm my own experience when in correspondence with the GIA.

To further quote your assertions:
"You're trying to prove that Quartzite Jade is a real gemstone..." I'm not trying to prove anything. I offered a professional opinion, based on several decades of experience, on a 'take-it-or-leave-it' basis. You choose to leave it; that's perfectly fine by me.
"by... referring to the claims of TV presenters..." It was not I who first quoted Mr. Troth, but you.
"- and you're expecting us to take you seriously?" That question is a bit rich, given your latest, prolonged and rather overwrought posts. I couldn't care less whether you take me seriously. But as it was you who quoted him first, by extrapolation of your own argument, how do you expect ME to take YOU seriously?
"If you're now going to say that the GIA don't know as much as Dave Troth, Gemporia or the East, then keep in mind that this is the same GIA that supposedly gave you a qualification..." It's kind of you to put my argument for me, but, actually, I wouldn't dream of saying such a thing about such an august body, and particularly so when I'm not terribly familiar with Mr. Troth and his opinions. The point is that I didn't "supposedly" qualify with the GIA at all (and never said I did) but with The Gemmological Association of Great Britain - generally considered to be more rigorous academically, with more of a scientific emphasis.

And I'M the 'arsey, mardy' one, 'incapable of reasoned debate'? I'll leave it for others to judge the irony of that statement.

 

[Sazza]

So, you have no proof to post on here that 'Quartzite Jade' is in fact a type of Jade then? Quelle Surprise.

And to clarify, you said that this person sent their Quartzite Jade to the assay office - but now you're saying that this same person is a client of a colleague of yours? Why didn't they ask your colleague to test it rather than sending it to the assay office? Don't they have any confidence in your colleague?............



I agree that it does not in any way compromise the nature of integrity of the material. However, Gemporia sell other stones that are waxed - and they use a treatment code to confirm as such. When they're inconsistent in applying treatment codes, particularly with their independently proven history of misleading customers, then people, rightly, question their reasons for omitting information as and when it suits them.



I'm not particularly interested in what Dave Troth says, or whether you agree with him because Gemporia has had multiple warnings from the ASA over the past couple of years for making misleading statements.

If you believe what they say, then more fool you.

The fact remains that there is NO evidence online, from any reputable labs or bodies, that Quartzite Jade is a real type of Jade - and all references to it on Google all point to Gemporia links. There aren't even any links to 'Eastern' websites documenting it - despite your claim that they're experts in Jade.

You've claimed that the GIA have 'changed their stance' - yet there is NO information about Quartzite Jade on their website either.

You're trying to prove that Quartzite Jade is a real gemstone by referring to hearsay, making claims that you cannot back up, and referring to the claims of TV presenters of a channel that has had repeated warnings from the ASA for misleading - and you're expecting us to take you seriously?

This is the GIA definition of Jade: “Jade” is a generic term for nephrite, jadeite, and under certain conditions green omphacite. In China, a pierced jade disk is a symbol of heaven.

Source: https://www.gia.edu/jade

No mention of Quartzite. No mention of any other materials. Simply Nephrite, Jadeite and certain Omphacites.

If you're now going to say that the GIA don't know as much as Dave Troth, Gemporia or the East, then keep in mind that this is the same GIA that supposedly gave you a qualification.............

Come back with some credible evidence that Quartzite Jade is a type of Jade, then I'll start to take you seriously. Until then, I can't take you even slightly seriously.

Deary me... for someone who recently told ME not to get 'arsey' and said "As you're incapable of having a reasoned debate, you're not worth giving a detailed response to, so go and have a mardy elsewhere", I'm certainly getting a 'detailed response' now!

The client I mentioned didn't come to my colleague for testing of the jade, but came to him afterwards, with other items that required valuation for insurance purposes and was not disposed to pay the astronomical prices paid previously, elsewhere, on the jade.

You claim you're 'not particularly interested in what Dave Troth says' - yet you were happy to quote him to shore up your argument (which he doesn't, as I heard for myself yesterday). I've never said I believe him on any subject at all, as I am not familiar enough with him or what he says - it's simply that his opinion in this matter does confirm my own experience when in correspondence with the GIA.

To further quote your assertions:
"You're trying to prove that Quartzite Jade is a real gemstone..." I'm not trying to prove anything. I offered a professional opinion, based on several decades of experience, on a 'take-it-or-leave-it' basis. You choose to leave it; that's perfectly fine by me.
"by... referring to the claims of TV presenters..." It was not I who first quoted Mr. Troth, but you.
"- and you're expecting us to take you seriously?" That question is a bit rich, given your latest, prolonged and rather overwrought posts. I couldn't care less whether you take me seriously. But as it was you who quoted him first, by extrapolation of your own argument, how do you expect ME to take YOU seriously?
"If you're now going to say that the GIA don't know as much as Dave Troth, Gemporia or the East, then keep in mind that this is the same GIA that supposedly gave you a qualification..." It's kind of you to put my argument for me, but, actually, I wouldn't dream of saying such a thing about such an august body, and particularly so when I'm not terribly familiar with Mr. Troth and his opinions. The point is that I didn't "supposedly" qualify with the GIA at all (and never said I did) but with The Gemmological Association of Great Britain - generally considered to be more rigorous academically, with more of a scientific emphasis.

And I'M the 'arsey, mardy' one, 'incapable of reasoned debate'? I'll leave it for others to judge the irony of that statement.

You both need to stop sniping at each other and agree to disagree, if you can't then put each other on "ignore"

 

[User 31547]

You both need to stop sniping at each other and agree to disagree, if you can't then put each other on "ignore"

I've already said "I offered a professional opinion, based on several decades of experience, on a 'take-it-or-leave-it' basis. You choose to leave it; that's perfectly fine by me." That WAS an agreement (for my part) to disagree. Quite how that qualifies as 'sniping' escapes me, I'm afraid.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

Deary me... blah blah blah

This is my final response to you because you're going around in circles and choosing to be selective in your reading.

1. You came onto the forum with a polite response to my original post - and you got a polite response back. However, I pointed out a flaw in your reasoning for the ASA not taking any action - and you took objection to it. You then became passive aggressive in your next response (including an unjustified and nonsensical accusation of me being 'abusive' to another forum member). In return, I gave you passive aggressive responses back.

When people are polite to me, I'm polite back. If they choose to go down the attitude route, then they get attitude back. That's how I work - online and in real life. It's no skin off my nose.

2. Regarding the response you took objection to (when I picked upon the flaw in your reasoning), I'll take things back to the very beginning.

In post #12, you said, rather 'matter of factly', and I quote, "firstly, jade is not at all well understood in the west, and secondly, the very term 'jade' is an umbrella term for a number of materials. It used to be (broadly speaking) just jadeite and nephrite, but recently other materials have been deemed to have characteristics that qualify them for a place under that umbrella, too. Dulong jade is one of these 'new jade' materials (a quartz-based material formerly called Du Long Yu) not always considered a jade. but now it is. Similarly with quartzite, and specifically that from Burma - which, since 2013, laboratories in the East have begun to certify as a jade."

In post #26, you said, also rather 'matter of factly', I quote, "I suggest you take quartzite jade to the GIA (not just A Western lab, but THE Western lab) for testing. They are now accepting and endorsing Eastern lab classifications, regardless of their earlier stance on the matter."

You also said, in post #40, in an attempt to further strengthen your claim, I quote, "Both openly said that the GIA stance has changed, and it now acknowledges quartzite jade as jade."

Your reasoning was flawed, quite simply, because you were wrong. In the gemmological and geological world, only two types of Jade exist - Jadeite and Nephrite. You said that Jade used to be Jadeite and Nephrite. However, there have only ever been two types of Jade - and that still remains the case. Any other gemstones that have had the name Jadeite or Jade added to them are not real Jade - and it's been done simply as a marketing gimmick to mislead people.

Now, based on your previous responses, no doubt you will still believe you are right. So, again, I will provide proof that you are wrong - and that only two types of Jade exist.

The GIA say: “Jade” is a generic term for nephrite, jadeite, and under certain conditions green omphacite".
SOURCE: https://www.gia.edu/jade

The Gemmological Association of Great Britain (Gem-A) say: "Jadeite and Nephrite are recognised as two distinctly different materials which are both known as ‘Jade’."
SOURCE: https://gem-a.com/jade-and-its-importance-in-china/

Gemdat says: "In strict gemmological terms, jade relates to two minerals jadeite or nephrite found as tough fine-grained rocks ideal for carving. Differentiation between jadeite and nephrite is based on properties, but the term Jade is used as a description of both."
SOURCE: https://www.gemdat.org/gem-10403.html

Mindat says: "Many different rocks and minerals have been marketed as jade, especially jadeite, nephrite and serpentine, but also green quartz, vesuvianite (californite), carbonates (carbonate jade), Hornfels etc. Gemmologists, however, usually restrict the name to just jadeite and nephrite, both characteristically forming very tough, fine grained rocks. Nephrite is much more common than jadeite, and is a tremolite and/or actinolite-rich rock, and this is why it has been classified here as a type of metamorphic rock rather than a generic term."
SOURCE: https://www.mindat.org/min-10403.html

Still not enough proof for you? Lets go with another lab.......

The Swiss Gemmological Institute / Swiss Foundation for the Research of Gemstones (SSEF) say: "As a gemmological laboratory with a scientific approach, we strictly use mineralogical and chemical parameters to identify jade, either as jadeite-jade or nephrite-jade and to disclose any treatments applied on these stones."
SOURCE: https://www.ssef.ch/reports/jade/

3. In post #26, you had the audacity to snipe "I also never mentioned serpentine - at all. Or maw-sit-sit. Or Jasper. It might help your argument if you were able to read what is actually said, and respond to that, rather than twist what was said, and introduce non sequiturs in order to back up a weak line of reasoning."

However, in post #12, YOU mentioned "New Jade" - which I responded to in post #22. You claim to be a qualified gemmologist with 50 years experience, so YOU will know that 'New Jade' is the marketing name for Serpentine. So it was YOU that referred to the marketing name of 'New Jade'. So I DID read what you said - and I responded accordingly. YOU either forgot that you mentioned 'New Jade' - or you do not know that 'New Jade' is a marketing name for Serpentine. Don't snap at others for either forgetting what you typed, or not knowing commonly used industry gemstone names.

Again, want proof? Here you go:

SOURCE 1: New Jade (Serpentine)
SOURCE 2: New Jade (Serpentine)
SOURCE 3: New Jade (Serpentine Jade)
SOURCE 4: Green Serpentine (New Jade)

There's no point having a go at others when you talk nonsense and don't like being called out on it. Those are the facts above, all from reputable sources - whether you like it or not.

 

[Marietta]

What your granddaughters will get is a collection of jewellery lovingly put together by their grandmother and I’m sure you’re hoping they won’t sell but instead will wear and enjoy. The good thing about jewellery is that although it goes out of fashion it always comes back in again. Jewellery is definitely not suitable for short term speculative buying. I look on it like a car. As soon as you buy it the value drops by a large amount. On the other hand if you wanted to start your granddaughters collection off would you have paid more if you had gone to the high street. I don’t like to see their items sell so cheaply on other auction sites either but it’s difficult to see an alternative other than not buying jewellery at all. Unfortunately their standards have come down as their prices have gone up which is what really annoys me. Using less and less gold and smaller and smaller stones of poorer and poorer quality. Where they always used to give a colour grading for diamonds for example now they say white. I mean we can see that for ourselves.

Your granddaughters will, I'm sure, love and appreciate the jewellery, because it was yours and you bought for them. Nothing can change that.

Agree with you, Marietta. I have jewellery bought from Gems over 15 years ago, and I still wear the pieces regularly and love them, and never a stone has dropped out (and some I have had checked over by a jeweller - all fine). Gold and silver weights are excellent, I have one silver ring with over 7 grams and bought for a song. I also bought for presents and the recipients still wear them regularly, innovative designs and some lovely stones. OK, we know that the world's changed and prices have taken a hike, but it's not just this, the whole ethos of the organisation seems to have changed as you've said - no humour, no fun, no really informative stuff about the gemstones from the presenters - it's just a contest as to who can shout the loudest and make the wildest claims. I'd be very happy to praise Gemporia if the praise was deserved.

Thank you history mystery, my thoughts exactly.

Having read this far down the thread and deciding to comment on your piece for convenience. I'm not too keen on seeing arguments back and forth, as interesting as the points may be. But, and it's probably been said elsewhere, have you (generic, not necessarily personally) noticed, a lot of complaints about Gemporia pertain to 'the recent incarnation'.

Granted I haven't been through 1000s of posts long past, but no one 'seems' to complain about the jewellery of the past past, only the recent past. Lessening quality and the likes. And, agreeing with you, it seems to be way that the company and its on-air presence, is currently being operated that 'rattles more bones' than even the jewellery. Again, a repeat, but 'bigging up' cheaper items is part of how it's run and that rubs people up the wrong way. Especially those 'oldies' (not age, but longest serving customers) who have a better knowledge and understanding of gems, jewellery and the associated quality of years past, including the production (TV) quality and how they have both degraded.

It's a different beast now Ant7t. When Greed comes in the door, morals and decency fly out the window.

 

[AndyW]

Setting aside personal aesthetics on what Gemporia is flogging as "jade", the issue for me remains one of trust. As a hobbyist and from whom quite large sums of money are being asked by TGGC on trust, it matters little what subtleties have been nuanced into the language of gemstones in the comparatively rarified world of lab-certified minerals.

As a pleb then, for me it remains the case that:

a) Jade is a term that has been used for two forms of mineral only. For years. I don't believe that the luxury goods market will entertain anything else in any of our lifetimes.

b) Jade in the classic senses is utterly beautiful and Chinese carvings can be jaw-dropping in their complexity and evident skill. TGGC uses examples constantly to provide ridiculous price comparisons, from 1stDibs masterpieces to the Barbara Hutton strand.

c) "New Jade" sounds like - and almost certainly is - a marketing term, which is a boon to David & Harry Jewels. (Think New Labour, here in the UK.). I find it dismaying that gemmology would collaborate in this.

d) Gemporia still advertises itself as "the home of genuine gemstones" (an Ellis Ward voiceover). As a pleb, marketing Serpentine or Quartzite with the word "jade" just, frankly, smells off. Just like their range of "Naturally Coloured" pearls.

Finally, attached is an image of a piece I bought from China, as a Christmas gift for a young, budding Gerald Durrell, from a reputable site directly (not a marketplace such as eBay, Etsy, Temu or Wish). It was sold as Green Quartz - neither Jade, nor "New Jade" nor Serpentine, nor Quartzite "Jade" nor "Dulong Jade", etc. So I also remain somewhat unconvinced that the Chinese in general are on board with this re-branding, except insofar as some unscrupulous vendors are happy to dump inferior material on a gullible Western market.

 

[rubia]

Having read this far down the thread and deciding to comment on your piece for convenience. I'm not too keen on seeing arguments back and forth, as interesting as the points may be. But, and it's probably been said elsewhere, have you (generic, not necessarily personally) noticed, a lot of complaints about Gemporia pertain to 'the recent incarnation'.

Granted I haven't been through 1000s of posts long past, but no one 'seems' to complain about the jewellery of the past past, only the recent past. Lessening quality and the likes. And, agreeing with you, it seems to be way that the company and its on-air presence, is currently being operated that 'rattles more bones' than even the jewellery. Again, a repeat, but 'bigging up' cheaper items is part of how it's run and that rubs people up the wrong way. Especially those 'oldies' (not age, but longest serving customers) who have a better knowledge and understanding of gems, jewellery and the associated quality of years past, including the production (TV) quality and how they have both degraded.

The jewellery of the past is superior to what is dished out today. Yesteryear they cared, now it's how much can they make from the tat they sell! My opinion only, I have no experience in the gem world.

 

[recoveringgemaholic]

Whilst it’s true that all jewellery drops in value with time, I still see branded pieces selling at decent prices second hand e.g Cartier. I truly regret not investing in a couple of branded pieces which I could pass down rather than multiple Gemporia pieces. It wouldn’t have cost me anymore unfortunately and would’ve been a less foolish decision.

 

[AndyW]

Whilst it’s true that all jewellery drops in value with time, I still see branded pieces selling at decent prices second hand e.g Cartier. I truly regret not investing in a couple of branded pieces which I could pass down rather than multiple Gemporia pieces. It wouldn’t have cost me anymore unfortunately and would’ve been a less foolish decision.

You don't need to feel regretful, at all. As Always Complaining has said on this thread and I, with others, have said over the last six or seven years on other threads, the pieces you have now should be enjoyed. Those to whom you leave them will not care one jot about Gemporia, only the memory of you that is imbued in the item because it was yours.

And don't be distracted by the big names - they are just that. They may have currency because they spend a shedload on marketing and people buy into brand names. More fool them, I say. Remember one of the oldest, most prestigious banks - Barings? No? Well, there you go. If I was left a thin, cast piece of Ratner's "crap" (to quote him) by a dear, loved one, I would treasure it, not caring an iota that it was Ratners.

 

[rubia]

Whilst it’s true that all jewellery drops in value with time, I still see branded pieces selling at decent prices second hand e.g Cartier. I truly regret not investing in a couple of branded pieces which I could pass down rather than multiple Gemporia pieces. It wouldn’t have cost me anymore unfortunately and would’ve been a less foolish decision.

Rest assured you are not in your own. I too feel the samecway.

 

[rubia]

You don't need to feel regretful, at all. As Always Complaining has said on this thread and I, with others, have said over the last six or seven years on other threads, the pieces you have now should be enjoyed. Those to whom you leave them will not care one jot about Gemporia, only the memory of you that is imbued in the item because it was yours.

And don't be distracted by the big names - they are just that. They may have currency because they spend a shedload on marketing and people buy into brand names. More fool them, I say. Remember one of the oldest, most prestigious banks - Barings? No? Well, there you go. If I was left a thin, cast piece of Ratner's "crap" (to quote him) by a dear, loved one, I would treasure it, not caring an iota that it was Ratners.

You do make a valid point!

 

[Ant7t]

Your granddaughters will, I'm sure, love and appreciate the jewellery, because it was yours and you bought for them. Nothing can change that.


Thank you history mystery, my thoughts exactly.


It's a different beast now Ant7t. When Greed comes in the door, morals and decency fly out the window.

To the first comment, it reminds me of 1000 years ago, when I was knee high to a grasshopper (that's about 1 foot shorter than I am now ) But seriously, when I was a child, where I lived there was a reasonable amount of sandstone. What, pray tell has that got to do with anything regarding your comment? Well, I remember carving, by hand, or at least with very minimal tools a piece of that sandstone into a heart and gave it to my mother. She still has it. Granted, not on show, but that's not the point. So, to bring the point back, whether you spend 50p in a charity shop or £5000+ in Harrods or any of the other upper end shops, if you gift it, price is 'nothing', it's the sentiment behind it.

And the second, which is the third Yes, greed takes over everything, but only if you have that mentality to begin with. Even if those who begin by helping: be it cheap stuff or charity, if it gets to the point of me me me, all goodness goes down the drain. Sadly.

 

[Ant7t]

The jewellery of the past is superior to what is dished out today. Yesteryear they cared, now it's how much can they make from the tat they sell! My opinion only, I have no experience in the gem world.

I am far far far from an expert gem-watcher (stones, not tv) but I know what I like: that's my expertise. Having said that, when 'novices' (me) notice the downgrade in quality that proves they have definitely downgraded. IF someone who knows nothing notices...... But my point of 'notice' was the Jillin Peridot I bought with a band so narrow it could almost act as a cheese wire.

 

[AndyW]

Gemporia simply don't stand by their jewellery - unlike other companies. I've used this example before, but Gemporia often like to price compare against Monica Vinader - but they never tell you that Monica Vinader provide a 5 year warranty on their jewellery, whereas Gemporia offer 6 months.

I might be reading this incorrectly but this Gemporia response implies that a repaired item could end up having even less than 6 months warranty, after a repair?!

 

[Ant7t]

I might be reading this incorrectly but this Gemporia response implies that a repaired item could end up having even less than 6 months warranty, after a repair?!
View attachment 29700

I read that as only 3 months too. And, I am not the grammar police, or whatever they're called, but YOU'RE welcome and IT'S (or sounding better, IT HAS only THREE months (no Got) ) Those are the two I noticed immediately. In fact, looking at it, I'd completely re-write it.