Ruby article by Wink Jones

[Upgradable]

https://www.pricescope.com/journal/lead-glass-ruby-nightmare-keeps-giving

Here's is a journal article by Wink Jones from High Performance Diamonds. He is one of our Trade Members, a long time contributor, and an all around great guy! I think it is very topical with all of the Ruby threads of the moment.

 

[Starzin]

Great article, thanks for the link. I'll add this one which is from GIA with a 5 min video at the bottom http://www.gia.edu/research-resources/news-from-research/gia-global-dispatch/index.html#

 

[Upgradable]

These articles are kinda like Scared Straight: The Gemstone Edition.

 

[Starzin]

You got that right!

It really does point up though, what a valuable resource PS is to be able to collect all this information in one place. At least it makes it accessible and then it's up to the potential buyer to use it to their advantage.

 

[chrono]

Another timely caution with all the ruby threads currently present in CS.

 

[corundum_conundrum]

Some of the labs should really have a "partially synthetic corundum" designation when identifying some of these stones.

 

[corundum_conundrum]

"manufactured product" as per the GIA is okay I guess. "Part-ruby part-glass" would I suppose really be the most accurate identification.

 

[chrono]

The problem lies when it is more part glass than part ruby.

 

[Upgradable]

They do. It is called a "composite" stone.

 

[corundum_conundrum]

My ideal identification would have it that a). labs would identify the substance accurately and b). in such a way that it was very clear to an untrained person what the substance was and c). that all merchants would have to label the substance according to the labs identification.

"Part-glass part-ruby" I think meets these criteria. "Manufactured product" both may neglect the fact that there is a bit of real Ruby in it, and its really not identifying the substance very accurately, failing to meet (a). That is, it is a terribly unspecific identification. Both my Hello Kitty key-chain and a glass-filled Ruby are manufactured products, but this doesn't really accurately capture what they are made of.

Uppy: do any labs use the label "composite ruby"? Its pretty accurate, although I would worry that it still may be confusing to the average consumer. If merchants or labs call these things "composite rubies" it stil may sound too much like we are qualifying what kind of ruby it is, when really its not a ruby--its just made from ruby parts.

 

[Starzin]

If merchants or labs call these things "composite rubies" it stil may sound too much like we are qualifying what kind of ruby it is, when really its not a ruby--its just made from ruby parts.

Actually most are not made from bits of ruby stuck together - even though that may be the general effect of some - more like a lot of spackfiller applied to the mucky ruby base. Chris Smith explains the reasoning for the wording AGL uses in the PDF "Disclosure wording for heated rubies" that you can download from here http://www.aglgemlab.com/Default.aspx

 

[Starzin]

A nice 3ct ruby at £5000 p/ct bought a year ago cannot be bought for less that £10,000 p/ct at present.

From a March 2012 Market Report by R.M.Weare https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=252003374886165

Their February report noted that

Prices for high quality ruby are up 50% in the past year and have double over the past 2 years.

Might be time to get the jools revalued goils

 

[corundum_conundrum]

The AGL fast-track report looks pretty good on these. I think it would be even better, however, if the identification was really transparent that you are getting a part-ruby, part-glass substance. Then if they were labeled by merchants in that way, people not very knowledgeable about treatments would be alerted to exactly what they were getting. $.02

 

[chrono]

I think "hot" sapphires like ruby and blue sapphire has gone up significantly in pricing from a year ago.

The thing is that not all the labs agree on the same nomenclature, which makes it difficult to come to a standardized description. Not only that, some labs are fairly small and do not put much info on their memos. This is why I often suggest AGL and use them almost exclusively myself.

 

[Starzin]

I literally tripped over this site while doing some searching yesterday so I thought I would throw the link in here as it's a comprehensive (though old it's still relevant I think) explanation of the AGL reports.
http://www.preciousgemstones.com/grading.html