23 Carat Ruby?? Is this for real?

[Pendant2013]

Your opinion requested at earliest convenience

Found this lovely looking pendant (see pics of front and back), but seems too good to be true...It's being sold for around 600 pre-owned. Claims it's 23 carats
Is there any way to tell just from the photos whether it has been filled/ composite? This is my main concern.
It is stamped 14k with .80 cts diamond. I'll bet the setting is worth something.

Seller was told stones are natural. There is a certificate that comes with it, but that seems too vague to be useful in any way.
I know that I can't expect even close to estimated retail value, but I'm wondering if it is worth the sale price.

If you can tell me anything from the pics, I would appreciate it!
Thanks

 

[JewelFreak]

This is one place where common sense is your first evaluator: a 23-ct ruby & gold setting supposedly worth $5400 for $600? Ever wonder why?

I've never heard of US Gemological Laboratory -- a google search shows it was opened in 2010 with 3 people. The "certificate" is a purported price appraisal & tells you very little -- and what it says, compared to your photos, isn't true. The stone does not have "good" clarity -- it looks opaque in your pics. The color is not "good." It also appears to have been faceted only on one side, which is strange.

A 14K stamp on the setting is no guarantee it's really 14K gold, unfortunately -- anybody can stamp pot metal & claim it's the real deal. I'm skeptical just based on the stuff about the ruby.

It's impossible to tell from a photo what the makeup of a gem is, or even whether it's synthetic or genuine -- only a real testing laboratory, such as AGL, can give you that info. For examples (and prices) of rubies, browse through the sticky of Recommended Vendors at the top of this page.

You were using your head to come here for advice -- mine is to hang onto your wallet. Miracles don't happen on eBay! Good luck.

--- Laurie

 

[Lady_Disdain]

My guess, from the photo, is that it is an opaque massive ruby instead of a transparent, sparkly gem. The price would be basically for the pendant.

 

[Lisa Loves Shiny]

A few years back there was a seller on ebay who used to sell these types of rings with these USGL reports. His auctions were advertised selling large, genuine stones, set in gold and diamonds. I don't remember his name, but he had tons of bad feedback for selling heavily included, highly treated stones that were basically worthless. Then he closed shop. This pendant has the same "look" to it that his rings had. I would be very suspect.

 

[chrono]

The setting is hollow so I doubt you'll even get $600 for the metal alone. The ruby is too highly included and would appear lifeless due to the opacity.

 

[minousbijoux]

Um, clarity listed as "good"?!!! First of all, its not, and second of all, that is not the terminology of a true lab report.

 

[apropos]

Opaque ruby with a weird cab/facet hybrid.

I guess it would make a reasonable paperweight.

 

[apropos]

Well, to be fair to USGL, it is "good" compared to a lump of coal...

 

[minousbijoux]

Well, to be fair to USGL, it is "good" compared to a lump of coal...

True that!

 

[LD]

See the photo below? These were given to me as a "free gift" by an Ebay Vendor! Not only are they opaque BUT they are hideously dyed and over time the dye has been leaking out!

As others have said, you're paying for the setting and even then, I suspect you'd be paying too much (sorry).