shape
carat
color
clarity

A good orange sapphire

corundum_conundrum|1363549297|3407252 said:
I think all the moregems oranges are listed as heated.

I am as wary as minou--even at sub $ 500, I personally would ask for a memo or at least a guarantee that after I sent the stone to AGL, if anything other than heat was found, back it goes.

My apologies - guess it was my wishful thinking ;))
 
I've never seen a really good orange sapphire, so I'm interested to see if your friend finds something. Please share it if they do!
 
erinl|1363582823|3407583 said:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GRS-Certified-Vivid-Fanta-Orange-Sapphire-Perfect-Oval-16ct-EyeClean-Srilanka-/121076595317?pt=Loose_Gemstones_1&hash=item1c30ba3a75

I thought it looked familiar. :bigsmile: It's heated though.
 
The one in ebay is cheap. I happen to have a friend who has an orange sapphire. He claimed to have paid $110k for it 8.87ct. No diffusion. He wanted to sell to me at cost, I wanted to buy at $11k which was downright rejected. ;)

orange887nold.jpg
 
Hi Kenny,

The real question here is do you care about a heat only orange sapphire (which is a traditional treatment that most sapphires in Ceylan go through, and Ceylan is producing most good orange sapphires) or do you want „no evidence of heat enhancement“ (which, if from Madagascar meant probably heated but not detectable) or do you want genuinely and 100% sure completely unheated and then you’re in a lot of trouble.

These are 3 different things with 3 different prices. The latter is a pure colector item and will be extremely expensive. Orange sapphire from Madagascar/Africa isn’t too uncommon, neither is heat only Ceylon.
There are a few other rare sources, like Thailand, which produces nice orange sapphires, without Berylium but treated at high temperatures.

You first need to know exactly what you are looking for.
Do you accept the idea of a heated with no remaining evidence sapphire ? Do you really mind heat only ? (I wouldn't since it would be excluding most of the nice stones around)

Appart from that, excellent choice, orange sapphires are lovely.
 
eastjavaman|1373959226|3483823 said:
The one in ebay is cheap. I happen to have a friend who has an orange sapphire. He claimed to have paid $110k for it 8.87ct. No diffusion. He wanted to sell to me at cost, I wanted to buy at $11k which was downright rejected. ;)

Beautiful stone! Natural and unheated?? I could believe the price if it is. Don't know what you mean by "no diffusion".
 
No diffusion means it did not undergo beryllium diffusion treatment.
 
colorchange|1373977950|3483861 said:
Hi Kenny,

The real question here is do you care about a heat only orange sapphire (which is a traditional treatment that most sapphires in Ceylan go through, and Ceylan is producing most good orange sapphires) or do you want „no evidence of heat enhancement“ (which, if from Madagascar meant probably heated but not detectable) or do you want genuinely and 100% sure completely unheated and then you’re in a lot of trouble.

These are 3 different things with 3 different prices. The latter is a pure colector item and will be extremely expensive. Orange sapphire from Madagascar/Africa isn’t too uncommon, neither is heat only Ceylon.
There are a few other rare sources, like Thailand, which produces nice orange sapphires, without Berylium but treated at high temperatures.

You first need to know exactly what you are looking for.
Do you accept the idea of a heated with no remaining evidence sapphire ? Do you really mind heat only ? (I wouldn't since it would be excluding most of the nice stones around)

Appart from that, excellent choice, orange sapphires are lovely.

First off, this is an old thread and I'm fairly certain the point is moot at this stage. But I still want to point out that many of us sapphire collectors do not make such absolute distinctions that you make regarding location. I would say that the vast majority of us on this board care about treatment level and color/size/clarity way ahead of location/origin. Saying it another way, I care about quality and treatment first. If it meets my standards, I don't care whether its from Sri Lanka, Madagascar, East Africa or Burma. In fact, contrary to what you believe (I think), I think most of us would rather have a finer quality sapphire from Madagascar than a lesser quality Burmese.

You know your business, but I would suggest you relax your focus on origin as the number one criterion. :))
 
Thanks all.

Yes, this is an old thread, also the orange sapphire was not for me.
As stated in my OP, I started this thread for a friend who was too shy to post.
 
it is heated, or should I say fortunately? I reckon unheated with that kind of color will even be more. I have looked at the stone, the color distribution is fairly even. I will save another 10 years and buy it.

Kenny, you sure you are not into orange? you profile picture is an "Orange" Shrimp
 
Jeff Davies has this one
04097 - 3.14ct orange Sapphire - Madagascar
9.31 x 6.49 x 5.41 mm
eye clean, nice cut,
heat only, no beryllium
$2650 shipped
1001703_10151772348564357_1630588239_n.jpg
 
eastjavaman|1374033115|3484540 said:
it is heated, or should I say fortunately? I reckon unheated with that kind of color will even be more. I have looked at the stone, the color distribution is fairly even. I will save another 10 years and buy it.

Kenny, you sure you are not into orange? you profile picture is an "Orange" Shrimp

I love my shrimp.
My avatar is a pic I took of a baby Red Cherry Shrimp that I raised from an egg. :appl:
How many people can say that? ;))

Frankly I'm more of a colored diamond guy.
Pure natural orange is very rare in diamond too. :naughty:
 
minousbijoux|1374011987|3484275 said:
Saying it another way, I care about quality and treatment first. If it meets my standards, I don't care whether its from Sri Lanka, Madagascar, East Africa or Burma. In fact, contrary to what you believe (I think), I think most of us would rather have a finer quality sapphire from Madagascar than a lesser quality Burmese.

All I was saying is that “No evidence of heat enhancement” means just that. Unfortunately, when it comes to orange sapphires, this isn't much.

If you want to be sure that your sapphire hasn’t been heated, you need to have some inclusions in it sensitive to heat. Unfortunately labs won’t state “no evidence of heat enhancement but moderate heat wouldn’t have been detected” because it would reduce their aura.
I actually have an orange sapphire from Andilamena that received such a statement but I know GIA for instance don’t write this sort of things, but just “no evidence etc”.
It's twice the size of another, very similar, orange sapphire from Ceylon, that is (that one) really unheated and the same price.

Most “unheated” Madagascar orange sapphires, in my experience, are simply heated sapphires that didn’t have the proper inclusions. And most “Sri Lanka” orange sapphires sold in Bangkok or Sri Lanka are from Madagascar.

Different people have different concerns, but origin is a serious concern to many collectors and most are willing to compromise on the quality for that, be it only, sometime, because a Burmese “unheated” sapphire is almost sure to be unheated while some other “unheated” are more likely to be heated than not.
 
I happen to agree with this renowned gemstone professional's opinion:
Mines produce a wide variety of gemstones, usually of low to medium quality, with the finer gemstones forming only a “tiny fraction of the whole production,” including those which are found at the most prestigious sources. The precious gemstones, ruby, sapphire, and emerald, may show price variations and some command premium prices based on their provenance since part of the colored gemstone marketing and branding concept includes origin, even though these stones may not always be of high quality. “Origin” should not be used to reflect a certain quality of colored gemstones, nor should it be used as a description of a color type (Hughes, 1990, A Question of Origin, [6], n.p.).
 
Chrono|1374066703|3484629 said:
(Hughes, 1990, A Question of Origin, [6], n.p.).


Things have only got a lot worst since. Over the past 5 years, origin premium have increased all over the place.
And some collectors now like to know from what deposit some stuff comes from, to the few km, (and often get completely made up information).
 
The question is who is driving this? Who stands to make the most money out of this? Marketing by the trade. Sadly, I don't see this changing any time soon as there's huge profits to be made. Who suffers for this? The regular consumers who aren't as knowledgable and buy subpar material at a higher price because they are told that origin is highly important.
 
Consumers are driving that. Because they are not knowledgeable, they actually refrain from buying un-usual gems, and need a lot of convincing by end sellers (if they happen to be buying from an honest one) that a ruby from Madagascar can actually be worth more than $100.

There is no such a thing as an association of Burmese gem dealers trying to manipulate prices.

Today, Chinese buyers are a significant factor of the increasing premium on Burmese gems for instance. It’s not that they don’t know they are paying for a premium, it’s just they want Burmese, whatever quality but Burmese.
Many now travel to Burma, and gems are imported (including some fine Ceylon sapphires) to satisfy their demands as there isn’t that much Burmese sapphires around.

Gem traders don’t make more money here, because they pay more when they buy too. It’s actually making life harder for most if anything.

To give you an example, the price of an 8 Ct, slightly greenish blue, medium quality unheated Burmese sapphire has gone up more than 3 fold in the past 5 years. Better quality hasn’t moved that much, but many who can’t afford a good Burmese rather have a bad Burmese than a good Madagascar.
 
Is it that the unknowledgable consumer needs to be convinced or that the seller has an easier sale if he sticks with status quo? After all, he's going to have an easier time procuring low quality "insert famous origin" than trying to get a high quality gem from some other place. I am not discussing Burma specifically in this case but origin as a whole. Obviously there is no such thing as a Burmese Gem Association but as you say, there is incentive to move gems faster and for more to the point where some vendors will attempt to pass off stones from other origin as from the famed location. An unfair example is Mong Hsu and Mogok rubies; are both not Burmese? :tongue:

Place a top blue next to an ugly blue sapphire. Tell the consumer the ugly blue costs 2x more and it's from Burma. Do you really think they'll pick the ugly blue over the top blue because origin matters that much?
 
# Is it that the unknowledgeable consumer needs to be convinced or that the seller has an easier sale if he sticks with status quo?

It's both. Many consumers are so stressed they feel screwed for nothing. And a jeweller don't want to sound like he's screwing his client by selling him an inferior "African" gem.

# After all, he's going to have an easier time procuring low quality "insert famous origin" than trying to get a high quality gem from some other place.

No. So many good African gems, so few of the most sought after origins (even medium quality).

# Place a top blue next to an ugly blue sapphire. Tell the consumer the ugly blue costs 2x more and it's from Burma. Do you really think they'll pick the ugly blue over the top blue because origin matters that much?

Because there are few decent Burmese, it doesn't take most of the consumers to act in this apparently stupid way to move the prices. And actually there are not just a few : Look at jewellery auctions in HK (jewellery ordered by gem dealer to sell their gems straight to end clients). You'll see, next one to each other a bad 5 Ct Sri Lankan padparadsha sell for twice a much better 5 Ct Madagascar one. The buyers have seen both and do prefer the origin to the quality. It's way worst on rubies.

Personally, I still buy a lot of Burmese star rubies because I can't see a replacement for these, but a lot less of the rest than I used to.
 
This is a great thread. At this point, I would invite some of our well known sellers/trade members to voice their experiences and opinions as well. It would be interesting to see if this is a universal experience, or depends on location, or on clientele...
 
Because I have a limited budget, I have bought madagascar pink sapphires, australian blue sapphires, demantoids from Namibia, and used to own a Zambian emerald (but have since sold it). I wanted to own a Winza ruby (but kept getting outbid!)

I do think it's interesting to know the origin, it is part of the story, but the stone's appearance trumps over origin.

Another thing I don't get hung up over is what is supposed to be the "top color" of a particular gem. Supposedly Burmese sapphires are more highly valued by their royal blue and silk that holds their color better. I happen to personally like the lighter hues and brighter sparklier look of a ceylon sapphire. Doesn't hurt that it is less expensive as well.
 
I work in a retail store in Canada, and coloured stones are our specialty. No one asks the origin. Occasionally they will ask if they are conflict free, but that is it. We pretty much only get asked the origin of our diamonds, actually, as Canadians want Canadian diamonds. (And why the heck not, as we have a boat load of them up north.)

Not that I think this is representative of the international market, but our customers don't care, nor do we.
 
Argyle mine in Australia for pink diamonds.
Kashmir for blue sapphires.
Cuzo mine in Columbia for emeralds.
Burma for rubies.
Paraiba Brazil for windex-colored tourmaline.

Whether you feel it is justified or not, location can and does affect price because customers are willing to pay extra for it.
 
I don't care if my pink is from the Argyle mine or elsewhere as long as my GIA memo shows it s untreated and is the colour it is supposed to be. As you know, the Argyle mine is now producing less fine material that sells for more than it used to. We all know there's good and crappy blue sapphires from Kashmir. Ditto for Muzo emeralds and Burmese rubies and Brazilian cuprians.

The question is akin to the egg or chicken; are customers willing to pay more because marketing says location counts regardless of quality or that customers don't have a choice because options are limited or that customers just don't know any better? Way back when, I thought origin mattered a lot but as I learned more, I realized that it should only matter IF the quality is there in the first place.

The next question is this: if enough customers are educated on this, will origin matter less (on regular or non fine material)? If it matters less, pricing will change to reflect this, right? Somehow I doubt this although theoretically it is supposed to work this way. Why? Just look at all the overpriced cuprian sold on the basis of copper content only. Light green garnets are now sold as tsavorite with tsavorite pricing. It is what it is I suppose. :(sad
 
Chrono|1374109543|3485135 said:
if enough customers are educated on this, will origin matter less (on regular or non fine material)?

In my view, essentialism is what drives the gem market.
Why buy a genuine ruby when you could buy a synthetic?
Why buy an unheated ruby when you could buy a heated one ?
Some of you guys stop there.
But others will draw the same distinction with the “proper” origin of a gem (Burma for ruby, for instance). To them a Burmese ruby will be more “genuine” than a Madagascar one, it’s all.

The goal of gem buyers is to buy a gem as close to the “essential” gem as they can afford. How one defines it varies.
Many can get over ugliness (which “just” a functional deficiency) the same way that I rather have 17th century oak furniture than Ikea, despite the lack of functionality and higher cost.

BTW, I'm very much an "essentialist" myself, in a sense that if I buy, say, a pink sapphire from Sri Lanka/Mogok/Vietnam, I want it to look very much like the idea I have of how a Sri Lankan/… pink sapphire should look like.
I matters a lot to me. I like gems to looks like what they are.
 
Chrono|1374109543|3485135 said:
Are customers willing to pay more because marketing says location counts regardless of quality or that customers don't have a choice because options are limited or that customers just don't know any better? Way back when, I thought origin mattered a lot but as I learned more, I realized that it should only matter IF the quality is there in the first place.

The next question is this: if enough customers are educated on this, will origin matter less (on regular or non fine material)? If it matters less, pricing will change to reflect this, right? Somehow I doubt this although theoretically it is supposed to work this way. Why? Just look at all the overpriced cuprian sold on the basis of copper content only. Light green garnets are now sold as tsavorite with tsavorite pricing. It is what it is I suppose. :(sad

I could not have said it/asked it better; these are great questions. I would say if this forum is any indication, people often come here looking for something specific like a Burma ruby because that is what they've heard about. But when they see various options and realize there are so many other origins for beautiful rubies, they often walk away with the perfect (for them) stone from another location. But I freely admit that folks on here are different than the average consumer. :))
 
Chrono, as an expert here, what do you think is the acceptable price for my friend's piece 8.87 ct, orange, eye clean, heated.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP

Featured Topics

Top