Hi Maurice, Doug, Richard...and whoever else.
You bring up some good points about different things being given certain names and such, and I think that plays into the "price game".
For instance, mandarins and spessertites tend to have variant meanings depnding on who you talk to. I could make similar comparisons to Kashmir sapphires, and Tsavorites vs. grossular garnets, and as Maurice was bringing up, andesine vs. laboradite. Maybe that last one has a more scinetifict definition than any of the other ones, but I''ll clarify that later on in this post as to what I mean.
I think that the industry as a whole has expanded the meaning of "mandarin" garnet since that original find in Namibia. Now, there are some people who will take any garnet that is anywhere between very slightly orangey yellow and strong orangey red, and they call it a mandarin. I have seen some hessonites that look a lot like spessertites that have been dubbed mandarins. I have seen some places online that use the term "mandarin garnet" and then you read on and it''s a hessonite. I have also seen on online store who showed a picture of a stone that was a gorgeous orange. Then you see the independent report and the picture with that. The stone is a red spessartite with 75% tone.
I don''t care what definition you use, that doesn''t fit it.
I remember seeing one show in particular where the guy was selling some rings, and he showed the tag say "mandarin", but he said that''s not the case. He sold those things as red spessartites, and rightfully so.
Here is my beef about the marketing though. While what was in Namibia has been dubbed the term "mandarin" originally, I think it''s unfair to some other orange spessartites. I have seen things from Namibia that look peach instead of orange, and they are milky as all hell. Personally, I don''t care for those. Now if there is a spessartite that has a orange as the dominant color in it, it''s not the same and it''s not as desirable?
I think starting with that Nigerian find, all the jewelers said look at that stuff from Namibia, and look at the same material with a variant color range. Either way, it''s still a spessartite. There is a scientific classification for that. I think this whole true mandarin vs. spessartite thing has just added a lot of confusion and a lot of ragging room from one retailer to the next to help market whatever they have. However, regardless of what you call it, people still pay rediculous amounts of money for those things. If what one likes is truly a matter of preference, then from the standpoint of a seller, should there really be a price difference then?
The Tsavorite thing, I am starting to wonder if there is some hype on that too. Granted, a Tsavorite might have certain specific qualities about it that trademark it to Kenya. Like anything else, they come in lighter and darker shades. Now, if anyone found a grossular garnet from some other part of the world, the list prices are radically different. Is that Tsavorite so truly different from any other grossular garnet? Does the fact that Tiffany & Co. found that deposit (or a consultant for them actually) make it any better? It''s still a grossular variety of garnet. Personally I like those things, but my pocket is pretty dry.
I am wondering about the stories I am hearing about that too. Sometime last year, it was mined out or close. Then the prices started to jump, and then suddnely there was good news! There was supposedly another deposit within a few miles of there. Now, I am hearing the "its almost mined out" story. I have also heard rediculously low production of 1000 carats a year now. For 3 carats a day, do you think anyone could make a profit on that mine if this was the case? So is this another case of let''s create some story to drive up the price? I wonder if the oil companies run these mines.
Now with Kashmir sapphires, granted they are no more. If there are anymore in that neck of the woods, I don''t see anyone going there to dig for them amidst the fighting going on there. I remember seeing a price guide on Kashmir sapphires online, and the prices were disproportionately rediculous. If it''s a true Kashmir, it can go for as much as 11K a carat supposedly. Now, those things have a certain silk to them and certain characteristics that someone could definitively say, this stone came from the old Kashmir mine. Fine.
Now, if I found a stone that is that same color, no silk and clean, it''s maybe 3 grand a carat? It''s still corundum. Talk about a price hike, that''s one hell of a hike. However, you look at an emerald. One comes from Columbia, one comes from another part of the world. If they are the same quality and same color, is there a price differnce? I have yet to see it.
Now with the andesine vs. laboradite part, I don''t know a whole lot about that, but some of what I have read on this thread about that illustrates my point. Granted, there is a technical definition for andesine. There is a specific standard for that, so that resolves the name issue. Now, we start to hear stories about that. We hear one thing, and then as it''s been pointed out here, there is some mine in or around Tibet that is news to some of us. Maybe there is some misinformation on that too, who knows. Maybe someone just got their stories mixed up from one person talking to the next, and then nobody knows whats going on. People panic, and hey! Let''s drive up the price on that too.
I am not saying anyone is out to defraud anyone or anything like that on any of what I am speaking of. I just think that there are several examples of hype or things that I can only question as being hype that in turn drive up prices.
You bring up some good points about different things being given certain names and such, and I think that plays into the "price game".
For instance, mandarins and spessertites tend to have variant meanings depnding on who you talk to. I could make similar comparisons to Kashmir sapphires, and Tsavorites vs. grossular garnets, and as Maurice was bringing up, andesine vs. laboradite. Maybe that last one has a more scinetifict definition than any of the other ones, but I''ll clarify that later on in this post as to what I mean.
I think that the industry as a whole has expanded the meaning of "mandarin" garnet since that original find in Namibia. Now, there are some people who will take any garnet that is anywhere between very slightly orangey yellow and strong orangey red, and they call it a mandarin. I have seen some hessonites that look a lot like spessertites that have been dubbed mandarins. I have seen some places online that use the term "mandarin garnet" and then you read on and it''s a hessonite. I have also seen on online store who showed a picture of a stone that was a gorgeous orange. Then you see the independent report and the picture with that. The stone is a red spessartite with 75% tone.
I remember seeing one show in particular where the guy was selling some rings, and he showed the tag say "mandarin", but he said that''s not the case. He sold those things as red spessartites, and rightfully so.
Here is my beef about the marketing though. While what was in Namibia has been dubbed the term "mandarin" originally, I think it''s unfair to some other orange spessartites. I have seen things from Namibia that look peach instead of orange, and they are milky as all hell. Personally, I don''t care for those. Now if there is a spessartite that has a orange as the dominant color in it, it''s not the same and it''s not as desirable?
The Tsavorite thing, I am starting to wonder if there is some hype on that too. Granted, a Tsavorite might have certain specific qualities about it that trademark it to Kenya. Like anything else, they come in lighter and darker shades. Now, if anyone found a grossular garnet from some other part of the world, the list prices are radically different. Is that Tsavorite so truly different from any other grossular garnet? Does the fact that Tiffany & Co. found that deposit (or a consultant for them actually) make it any better? It''s still a grossular variety of garnet. Personally I like those things, but my pocket is pretty dry.
Now with Kashmir sapphires, granted they are no more. If there are anymore in that neck of the woods, I don''t see anyone going there to dig for them amidst the fighting going on there. I remember seeing a price guide on Kashmir sapphires online, and the prices were disproportionately rediculous. If it''s a true Kashmir, it can go for as much as 11K a carat supposedly. Now, those things have a certain silk to them and certain characteristics that someone could definitively say, this stone came from the old Kashmir mine. Fine.
Now, if I found a stone that is that same color, no silk and clean, it''s maybe 3 grand a carat? It''s still corundum. Talk about a price hike, that''s one hell of a hike. However, you look at an emerald. One comes from Columbia, one comes from another part of the world. If they are the same quality and same color, is there a price differnce? I have yet to see it.
Now with the andesine vs. laboradite part, I don''t know a whole lot about that, but some of what I have read on this thread about that illustrates my point. Granted, there is a technical definition for andesine. There is a specific standard for that, so that resolves the name issue. Now, we start to hear stories about that. We hear one thing, and then as it''s been pointed out here, there is some mine in or around Tibet that is news to some of us. Maybe there is some misinformation on that too, who knows. Maybe someone just got their stories mixed up from one person talking to the next, and then nobody knows whats going on. People panic, and hey! Let''s drive up the price on that too.
I am not saying anyone is out to defraud anyone or anything like that on any of what I am speaking of. I just think that there are several examples of hype or things that I can only question as being hype that in turn drive up prices.