Split Lab Reports on A Kashmir Sapphire Ring from Magnificent Jewels at Christie's Auction

[memorystation]

I spotted this gorgeous Kashmir sapphire ring from Magnificent Jewels of Christie's auction coming in April 16.

https://www.christies.com/lotfinder...7994&sid=b1c6b412-7ad9-43f6-b735-682db5729aec

The sapphire comes with three different lab reports:
SSEF, 2019, report no. 105688: 10.884 carats, Madagascar, no indications of heating
AGL, 2017, report no. 1084367: 10.88 carats, Kashmir, no gemological evidence of heat or clarity enhancement, accompanied by a JewelFolio
GIA, 2011, report no. 5131173673: 10.88 carats, Kashmir, no indications of heating, accompanied by a monograph for 'The Jewel of Kashmir'

My question for the gemstone collectors/dealers here is: what is your take on these split results? Both AGL and GIA are highly regard in the industry, esp. in the U.S. And they both state the stone is Kashmir origin. However, SSEF has a drastically different result (Madagascar origin), which can significantly change the value of the stone. Thanks and I look forward to your thoughts!

 

[T L]

I would call AGL and GIA and ask them why they came to that conclusion, and show them. I wish Christie’s would show the actual reports, so origin could be verified, and there wasn’t a mistake.

For the record, Madagascar produces some gorgeous sapphires, rivaling Kashmir.

 

[memorystation]

I would call AGL and GIA and ask them why they came to that conclusion, and show them. I wish Christie’s would show the actual reports, so origin could be verified, and there wasn’t a mistake.

For the record, Madagascar produces some gorgeous sapphires, rivaling Kashmir.

Thank you and I agree some Madagascar sapphire can rival Kashmir in quality. However, I think we would agree a big part of the value is driven by the rarity of Kashmir stones.

As a separate note, it appears that it is an error in the listing description and it has been fixed. Here is the updated listing:
https://www.christies.com/lotfinder...7860&sid=b1c6b412-7ad9-43f6-b735-682db5729aec

I believe Christie can provide the actual reports upon request. Beyond this incident, it has happened in the past that a sapphire that came to an auction with split lab reports (one indicating Burma and the other indicating Kashmir). I remember there was a related thread here on PS a while back. Even in this same auction, another sapphire ring was offered with split lab reports:

https://www.christies.com/lotfinder...7853&sid=841ec7a7-4ead-4375-95f8-a96eeb9791ed
Octagonal step-cut sapphire of 50.55 carats, baguette-cut diamonds, platinum, ring size 6
AGL, 2019, report no. 1099032: 50.55 carats, Ceylon, no gemological evidence of heat or clarity enhancement
Gübelin, 2010, report no. 1010576: 50.55 carats, Burma, no indications of heating

I understand the difference is not as drastic as Kashmir vs. Madagascar. For the purpose of learning and discussion, I wonder how the market would value a gem based on this kind of split results?

 

[T L]

I remember that one sapphire with split origin reports. To be honest, I would think it would affect value negatively, especially if the report with the less valuable country of origin was AGL. There is a reason that world class expensive colored gems that come up for auction often have multiple lab reports, because of these discrepancies.

For the record, I’ve seen very overpriced Kashmir sapphires that are only $$$$ because of origin, and I’ve seen undervalued African stones that are much nicer. One should always evaluate color first and foremost, and if Kashmir and origin has special importance, it better also have those beautiful qualities that make that origin important. I wouldn’t buy an inferior Burma ruby either.

I’m glad Christie’s caught their mistake.

 

[T L]

Btw, here’s what a Kashmir sapphire should look like. When I saw this, I knew instantly, “Kashmir.”

 

[Bron357]

Apparently top quality Madagascan sapphires are eerily similar to Kashmir sapphires. However there some very subtle differences in terms of types of inclusions, iron content and the characteristics and positioning of the fine silk clouds.
Any report I’ve read only gives an “indicative origin”, it’s never guaranteed.
Me, I would discount the GIA report because it’s old and there have been technological advances since 2011 and GIA doesn’t specialize in coloured gems.
But you’d have to know what level and types of testing were done by AGL and SSEF, to understand what test and result indicated a Kashmir to AGL while something else (or absence thereof) indicated a Madagascar origin to SSEF.
There is a huge premium attached to a Kashmir sapphire (and whether or not that is warranted is debatable) so it will affect its price. In many parts of the world, purchasers are more likely to be swayed by the SSEF report.