Best gemstones for investment

[JTM]

Id be interested to know what the community here thinks about the best stones for investment.
Assume 10 year hold period- the stones that will do the most capital growth in that timeframe.

I know it will all depend on supply and demand. The demand factors i see as the 4c's.
Supply being about rarity.

Looking forward, i think that some of the 'semiprecious' ones like tanzanite and black opals, and imperial topaz will do the best.
I am not too sure about diamonds- supply seems plentiful to me, and demand will depend on the fantastic marketing machines of De Beers , tiffany etc. Pink diamonds are probably more an exception here i think, as they do have genuine rarity.

 

[boerumbiddy]

Everyone I respect tells me to buy gems for beauty, not for capital gains. Once a stone is sold retail, there is a significant discount on resale. Unless it's the Sunrise Ruby or something like that!

 

[kenny]

Gems are not an investment, and not a commodity.
Unlike gems, gold is a commodity that's bought and sold at one universally agreed-to price around the globe, plus a relatively small sales commission.

We have to pay retail for gems, but sell them at wholesale.
If wholesale price is half of retail, gems would have to double in value just to break even.

So much for gems being an investment.

 

[Seaglow]

Tanzanite prices are volatile at wholesale level. One time it is way up, the next time way down. Black opals are usually Australian in origin, and you have to store properly to avoid cracking. Imperial topaz may not have guaranteed demand.

Unless you have big museum and auction pieces quality rubies, emeralds, and sapphires which are mainstream stones with constant demand, gemstones are not for investment. Even for sapphires, pink and blues are the salable ones, not so for other colors. Maybe some over the carat nice color change alexandrite or very bright nice-sized demantoid.

If you want to keep for investment, gold is the way to go. Easy to liquidate and historically up on charts with fluctuation here and there which you could monitor in case you want to earn a profit in between those 10 years.

Stones that shot up in price and demand drastically these past few years are purple rhodolites, spinels (especially the neon reds and pinks), and Paraiba ( down a bit these past few months though).

Gemstones you have to buy wholesale to win. At retail level, you're lucky to get half the price and it's reasonable for retailers to charge so given website or store maintenance, travel and shipping costs, time spent on selection, guarantees, lab reports, etc. It's really 2x, 4x, 10x from wholesale prices depending on the retailer. At 4x to 10x, goodluck getting your capital back.

 

[Arcadian]

Gemstones can be a crapshoot for investment. I mean sure, if you had bought paraibas when they were dirt cheap, you could be rolling in dough right about now. flip the script and if you had bout a lot of that red and green labradorite when it was being hawked from here to kingdom come you might have lost your shirt.

Investment pieces are pieces that will be sold at places like Sothebys'. As mentioned unless you do it at the true wholesale level, forget about investment pieces.

I can tell you that an "investment" paraiba tourmaline will set you back what it cost for my house. I do not have that kind of money just laying around (you might though...and if so, I'm available for adoption...lol) But the reality is, get what you will enjoy. Gemstones are more emotional than anything. Sure they're fun and if the stars align you COULD make a profit, but for most of us, no. We lose more than we pay out frankly.

If you did want to invest in something, go with the precious metals.

 

[JTM]

I'm fully aware gems are not for investment (by far the majority of cases); they are rather for your enjoyment.
My story is that I bought a long time ago at wholesale prices. My stone has done well since then, easily increasing over what I paid back then. Still, the worst investment I agree..horrible liquidity and just lucky the quality was great and so we're the colour, cut, clarity, size, rarity and overall beauty. These are the reasons why it's increased substantially - percentage wise .and I did take a fair amount of risk to buy at a good price.
I'm tossing up whether I should ask a auction house to sell it (they have already agreed, should I agree to list it with them ) or hold for say 10 years. The estimated $ from the auction house is good but not great (sizeable % return from what I bought -and I have seen comparable sales with similar figure), so I'm pretty sure estimated price from the intl auction house is roughly on the mark.
I'm trying to determine how much will it do in say 10 years.
(it's an imperial topaz by the way)
Reasons for.sellimg it:
1 crystallize gains. Cash is king!!!!
2. Can put proceeds of sale to use (more liquid). Less risk and more assurance.
3. In the future, if this auction house says no..I don't know.where I would go to.sell it - I need their networks, distribution channels etc. The offer is there now..it will be sold..

Reasons to hold and not sell:
1. Beauty, rarity size etc...a real chance it will do even more in future. Surely, this stuff will grow nicely (assuming demand is constant).
2. Beauty- hand it down/significant other..probably worth as much yo me as the estimated proceeds of sale.
3. I am not desperate for the money (but you never know in the future)

 

[theredspinel]

I'm fully aware gems are not for investment (by far the majority of cases); they are rather for your enjoyment.
My story is that I bought a long time ago at wholesale prices. My stone has done well since then, easily increasing over what I paid back then. Still, the worst investment I agree..horrible liquidity and just lucky the quality was great and so we're the colour, cut, clarity, size, rarity and overall beauty. These are the reasons why it's increased substantially - percentage wise .and I did take a fair amount of risk to buy at a good price.
I'm tossing up whether I should ask a auction house to sell it (they have already agreed, should I agree to list it with them ) or hold for say 10 years. The estimated $ from the auction house is good but not great (sizeable % return from what I bought -and I have seen comparable sales with similar figure), so I'm pretty sure estimated price from the intl auction house is roughly on the mark.
I'm trying to determine how much will it do in say 10 years.
(it's an imperial topaz by the way)
Reasons for.sellimg it:
1 crystallize gains. Cash is king!!!!
2. Can put proceeds of sale to use (more liquid). Less risk and more assurance.
3. In the future, if this auction house says no..I don't know.where I would go to.sell it - I need their networks, distribution channels etc. The offer is there now..it will be sold..

Reasons to hold and not sell:
1. Beauty, rarity size etc...a real chance it will do even more in future. Surely, this stuff will grow nicely (assuming demand is constant).
2. Beauty- hand it down/significant other..probably worth as much yo me as the estimated proceeds of sale.
3. I am not desperate for the money (but you never know in the future)

JTM. You can't say all that and then not show us a picture?!

 

[Muhammad_Ali]

Id be interested to know what the community here thinks about the best stones for investment.
Assume 10 year hold period- the stones that will do the most capital growth in that timeframe.

I know it will all depend on supply and demand. The demand factors i see as the 4c's.
Supply being about rarity.

Looking forward, i think that some of the 'semiprecious' ones like tanzanite and black opals, and imperial topaz will do the best.
I am not too sure about diamonds- supply seems plentiful to me, and demand will depend on the fantastic marketing machines of De Beers , tiffany etc. Pink diamonds are probably more an exception here i think, as they do have genuine rarity.

I have to agree with the people here, unless you are buying 7 figure stones from Sotheby's signed by Cartier or VCA, and holding it for a few decades, your stone won't appreciate against inflation.

The real profit in gems is the rough to cut. Rough stones are generally 10-40% of cut stones. Unless you're an experienced lapidary, I'd stay away from this market. It's very hard to tell the quality of the final product from the rough.

 

[Arcadian]

Well its different if you already HAVE a piece. an excellent resource
http://www.palagems.com/topaz-buyers-guide#buying_guide

But still you never know whats going to actually happen and its a bit of a crapshoot really. If they find no more deposits and it gets mined out, of course price will go up as material gets scarce in the market, this happened with paraibas and also in particular red and vivid pink spinels, particularly those from Africa and Yuc Len. I won't even discuss the vivid cobalt blues of Yuc Len because they've always been semi unicorns.

If it were considered investment grade per se, then I'd want it looked at by an independent lab if you haven't already. In higher end stakes location matters.

So at best, if you know you could sell it now for a profit, you might want to. The future has a lot of unknowns to it. If you do plan on holding on to it, it you'll need to understand how well they're mining it, where deposits are being depleted, and where new ones are being found. Your location will matter as with many stones some locations sell better than others. You'll also want to pay very close attention to any treatments known for the species.

 

[normanintheskywithsapphires]

Buy what you love and keep it for much longer, and nothing less than untreated, or low heat-only.

 

[Ceaho]

I think the best stones for investment are the big ones, but not too huge. I mean 5 - 20ct are the best, preferably for use as pendant, emerald cut for men/women and heart/marquesee cut for women; with at least reasonable color/clarity/saturation. A green, blue, pink or watermelon tourmaline at 10ct+ size with a probe shape will be a very desirable stone; same to spinels, tsavorites, aquamarines, topazes and almost all. Other investment stones are 2 or 3+ct with superb color/saturation and the best cut for a ring(in my opinion round/marquesee/emerald for women and emerald for men.

 

[LocaLaPerla]

I have to agree with the people here, unless you are buying 7 figure stones from Sotheby's signed by Cartier or VCA, and holding it for a few decades, your stone won't appreciate against inflation.

The real profit in gems is the rough to cut. Rough stones are generally 10-40% of cut stones. Unless you're an experienced lapidary, I'd stay away from this market. It's very hard to tell the quality of the final product from the rough.

(Mods, please let me know if this should perhaps be a new thread. Thanks very much)

Hi all,

I have read this forum from time to time and have just read this thread with interest (not because I am interested in which stones are best investments - I have some trade qualifications / involvement already), more so because I, like JTM, am considering whether an international auction might be the right move / manner of selling some top quality stones.

I have been doing some research as to this area of the market, however Muhammad Ali's comment above touched on a point of interest to me - hence my first ever Pricescope post! (Hopefully many more to come, now that I have started! Thank you all for the wonderful input and discussions!)

I've noticed that many of the finest stones (including record breaking fancy coloured diamonds, top unheated rubies & sapphs and unfilled emeralds, and other important pieces) all tend to be set in jewellery signed by a top design house. (I too, if asked, would have said Cartier and Van Cleef and Arpels as the two I have noticed as most frequently appearing in pieces that do not seem to be pre-worn or from a particular date / collection / estate etc. I also see Harry Winston appear frequently in simple designs.)

No doubt many pieces are previously purchases from design houses, however for some of the simply large or notable stones (although not immediately obvious 'record breakers' - such as the Sunrise Ruby, which was mentioned above), I query whether these are being made by the design houses with the knowledge of the house that they are intended to be put for auction (in which case, does anyone have any idea as to the fee structure / or whether prices are hugely inflated?) and whether particular houses (i.e. Cartier, VCA) are more amenable to this, due to the publicity it brings them?

Alternatively, does anyone have any insight as to whether design houses like this are open to customers bringing a fine stone to them for setting, as it is clearly a customer's prerogative as to what they then do with the piece afterwards? (If immediately auctioned, however, would this lead to a negative future relationship with that customer and refusal to work for them again, is my thinking?)

Finally, any ideas or thoughts as to the extent to which a designer setting from the likes of one of these houses would (or may not) really increase the likelihood of a higher hammer price (as compared to the much higher production cost)?

I'd be very grateful for any advice or input anyone may have.

Many thanks in advance!

 

[Muhammad_Ali]

(Mods, please let me know if this should perhaps be a new thread. Thanks very much)

Hi all,

I have read this forum from time to time and have just read this thread with interest (not because I am interested in which stones are best investments - I have some trade qualifications / involvement already), more so because I, like JTM, am considering whether an international auction might be the right move / manner of selling some top quality stones.

I have been doing some research as to this area of the market, however Muhammad Ali's comment above touched on a point of interest to me - hence my first ever Pricescope post! (Hopefully many more to come, now that I have started! Thank you all for the wonderful input and discussions!)

I've noticed that many of the finest stones (including record breaking fancy coloured diamonds, top unheated rubies & sapphs and unfilled emeralds, and other important pieces) all tend to be set in jewellery signed by a top design house. (I too, if asked, would have said Cartier and Van Cleef and Arpels as the two I have noticed as most frequently appearing in pieces that do not seem to be pre-worn or from a particular date / collection / estate etc. I also see Harry Winston appear frequently in simple designs.)

No doubt many pieces are previously purchases from design houses, however for some of the simply large or notable stones (although not immediately obvious 'record breakers' - such as the Sunrise Ruby, which was mentioned above), I query whether these are being made by the design houses with the knowledge of the house that they are intended to be put for auction (in which case, does anyone have any idea as to the fee structure / or whether prices are hugely inflated?) and whether particular houses (i.e. Cartier, VCA) are more amenable to this, due to the publicity it brings them?

Alternatively, does anyone have any insight as to whether design houses like this are open to customers bringing a fine stone to them for setting, as it is clearly a customer's prerogative as to what they then do with the piece afterwards? (If immediately auctioned, however, would this lead to a negative future relationship with that customer and refusal to work for them again, is my thinking?)

Finally, any ideas or thoughts as to the extent to which a designer setting from the likes of one of these houses would (or may not) really increase the likelihood of a higher hammer price (as compared to the much higher production cost)?

I'd be very grateful for any advice or input anyone may have.

Many thanks in advance!

The majority of these houses are open to commission and I have to imagine many top stones were set in designer settings simply to boost their appeal at auction. This is just my guess.

 

[Debbie K]

This is something that I've given a lot of thought. I belong to another forum/newsgroup that has to do with investments and money. Folks talk about gold, silver, crypto-currency, stocks and bonds, but practically never about precious gemstones.

I believe that high-quality untreated larger gemstones will always be a store of wealth. I think the same about gold and silver. Rubies, sapphires, emeralds and diamonds are historically the stones that hold more value. Some of the collector stones are rare and valuable right now, but that doesn't mean that some huge find in the future won't decrease their value. Many folks don't know that peridots used to be the most valuable stone, until they were discovered in abundance in Burma.

The synthetic diamonds worry me about the future value of diamonds. Millennials seem to really like them, especially the "conflict-free" aspect of them. They have the potential to be a real market disruptor.

I agree with LocaLaPerla said about design houses, especially in the case of exceptional gemstones. These designers add value to the stones and metal. Think of Faberge, Lalique, Vever and Louis Comfort Tiffany pieces and what they fetch these days. Another art nouveau designer, Phillipe Wolfers, had a penchant for using large, exceptional gemstones in his pieces. Most of them were destroyed to remove the stone and reset in hideous deco pieces. His original pieces would be far more valuable than what they got reused for, but how were these folks to know how much the value would escalate?

If someone asked for my advice about this subject, my answer would depend on what they wanted to achieve. Store of wealth? Return on investment? Heirlooms? Because the strategies would change depending on what their goals would be.

Debbie K

 

[LocaLaPerla]

Thanks very much to Muhammad_Ali and Debbie K for your interesting thoughts and information..

Debbie K, I tend to agree that in the case of exceptional stones, that would likely sell themselves on their merits at auction anyway, a top designer adds an element of prestige and desirability (and therefore, hopefully, value) to the metal and stones.

(The same concept can be seen in the price differential in general between a top, well established boutique, jeweller making by hand, using the same metals, diamonds and top quality stones, and those of the high jewellery design houses - sometimes for pieces using much cheaper stones as well, such as amethyst, tourmalines, onxy (dyed black chalcedony), rose quartz etc., but I digress. The big houses do have much higher marketing costs, I acknowledge).

I am very interested to know whether you / others think, in the short term, for example, for ROI at auction, you think that engaging these types of houses to set a stone would add significant value (i.e. over and above the additional cost of commissioning them, essentially for the signature? And beautiful work of course)

I am not entirely sure of the costs but I do not imagine that they would be insignificant. I also imagine that one might be required to buy side diamonds directly from the house? Does anyone have any experience / further information?

Much appreciated in advance!

Best regards

 

[Debbie K]

It is my belief, and let me stress that, my belief, that historically there are three things that make jewelry valuable. This is assuming that the quality of the workmanship is exemplary, both for the metal work and the stone finishing.

1. The intrinsic value of the components, be it gold, platinum or silver, along with the gemstones. Things are worth more or less at different times, but these things will always have some value.

2. How aesthetically pleasing it is to a majority of people.

3. It's provenance. This includes the maker, a certain period in time, or whoever wore it. This is the biggest crap shoot of all three, because you are betting on it's "popularity", and things that are hot now may not be hot 5 years from now.

I've looked at a lot of the different jewelry auctions for higher end jewelry, and this seems to hold true for most of the pieces. If you can achieve the trifecta, you will certainly more that make your money back, most especially if someone famous wore it and it's made by a great maker.

I have no idea how much the major houses would charge for setting stones and marking it with their names, and don't know if they would even do it. So with this huge unknown, I can't speculate.

The things that have the largest return on investment seem to fall in the last category. But in the case that you are positing, even with using a major house you are incorporating your own stones. If it's something simple like a solitaire, I doubt that it matters much who makes it. Would you also want control over design? If so, it would be a one-off and anomalous, which could make it worth more or less. Also, which major house? How do we know which one will considered desirable in the future?

I would never advise anyone about what to do in regards to investing. If I were any good at it, I'd already be rich! But as a maker of things, I have given it thought and researched the subject, though not in a very scholarly or professional way. I always tell people to buy what they love and that way they'll always be happy with it.

Debbie K
http://dlskdesigns.com/

 

[OreoRosies86]

Pics please!!!

 

[binay1702]

In Gemstones , Ruby and high quality sapphire will never go out of popularity.There will always be the buyer for such gemstones. But the the problem is how to get them at wholesale price or at least 20-30% margin.I am still looking for the solution of this problem.
Hehehehehehee.

 

[crescentgems]

In Gemstones , Ruby and high quality sapphire will never go out of popularity.There will always be the buyer for such gemstones. But the the problem is how to get them at wholesale price or at least 20-30% margin.I am still looking for the solution of this problem.
Hehehehehehee.

The price of gems depends on the risk and cost incurred. ( at least part of it )

The miner has to dig a pit and invest his money to mine and fine Stones. so by the time stone comes out of the earth it Already has a cost attached. lets say he gets 100 g of rough and cost him $ 10,000

This he sells to a cutter , the cutter buys the full lot at $ 12,000 and for calculation purposes we will say all rough is 100% cuttable ( this is rarely the case ). so the cutter cuts this $ 12,000 worth of Stones and get a 20% yield. 20g is costing US $ 14,000 with cutting charges , that's $ 700 a gram or $ 140 per ct ,He has taken the risk and Effort so to compensate he keeps a margin of lets say 50%
So selling price is US $ 210 per ct.

Wholesaler buys lots , He pays $ 210 x 100 ct = 21,000 to Buy and Sells piece by piece breaking the lot. he knows it might take 5 years to sell the entire lot, so he charges 50% margin for his money tide up ,price now is $ 315 per ct remember he has to cover $ 21,000

As you see each person Adds value and that has a cost.
If a person wants to buy cheaper He has to add value ( buy wholesale and be willing to sell to few stones at a time and also be prepared to keep the balance stones )

A person can directly go to the mines and buy too , But still he has to bear the cost of loss of wastage , loss on Inclusions in stones , Loss on treatments going wrong, Loss on bad stock, loss on learning the trade . Ultimately the cost will be equal to buying the finished Stones.

If anyone doubts what I say I would like to give you a way to test it.
Go to ebay and buy a lot of rough . Send it to a cutter and see the results .
Do the math and see if you can get it cheaper than what dealers are selling for ....

As a Sri Lankan based professional in the gem field for over 20 years , I have gone through it all.
I am sorry I have gone off topic , But this is regarding pricing of gemstones.

wishing you all the best

 

[binay1702]

Totlly Agreed Sir.
I understand that.

The price of gems depends on the risk and cost incurred. ( at least part of it )

The miner has to dig a pit and invest his money to mine and fine Stones. so by the time stone comes out of the earth it Already has a cost attached. lets say he gets 100 g of rough and cost him $ 10,000

This he sells to a cutter , the cutter buys the full lot at $ 12,000 and for calculation purposes we will say all rough is 100% cuttable ( this is rarely the case ). so the cutter cuts this $ 12,000 worth of Stones and get a 20% yield. 20g is costing US $ 14,000 with cutting charges , that's $ 700 a gram or $ 140 per ct ,He has taken the risk and Effort so to compensate he keeps a margin of lets say 50%
So selling price is US $ 210 per ct.

Wholesaler buys lots , He pays $ 210 x 100 ct = 21,000 to Buy and Sells piece by piece breaking the lot. he knows it might take 5 years to sell the entire lot, so he charges 50% margin for his money tide up ,price now is $ 315 per ct remember he has to cover $ 21,000

As you see each person Adds value and that has a cost.
If a person wants to buy cheaper He has to add value ( buy wholesale and be willing to sell to few stones at a time and also be prepared to keep the balance stones )

A person can directly go to the mines and buy too , But still he has to bear the cost of loss of wastage , loss on Inclusions in stones , Loss on treatments going wrong, Loss on bad stock, loss on learning the trade . Ultimately the cost will be equal to buying the finished Stones.

If anyone doubts what I say I would like to give you a way to test it.
Go to ebay and buy a lot of rough . Send it to a cutter and see the results .
Do the math and see if you can get it cheaper than what dealers are selling for ....

As a Sri Lankan based professional in the gem field for over 20 years , I have gone through it all.
I am sorry I have gone off topic , But this is regarding pricing of gemstones.

wishing you all the best

 

[LocaLaPerla]

Thanks all for your advice.

Debbie K - I agree with your 3rd point: it's really an intangible 'something else' isn't it?! Which makes me wonder whether it might be worth going back to a name / brand that has stood the test of time at least.

One doesn't seem to see a lot of loose gemstones being auctioned in recent years. (Maybe I haven't looked enough). I wonder if this is for insurance reasons - as insurance generally will only cover jewellery but not loose gemstones.

I also agree with Paragon International - prices for pink diamonds (as well as blue) have been spiralling quarter by quarter for the last 3 or so years, even compared to all other fancy coloured diamonds, and continually setting records at auctions.

Their high sales prices are reflected consistently back down the value chain though. They are not the type of investment that one might make now in the hope that they might take off in a few years time - i.e. a steal to buy because no one anticipates at the moment that prices will go crazy.

They should be extremely expensive to buy in comparison to almost anything else, and any 'good deal' should make you highly suspicious. Both can be and are regularly produced as synthetics. In fact, I saw just yesterday or the day before that GIA has seen a CVD produced pink diamond with the same composition of nitrogen impurities as would normally produce a yellow diamond for the first time. These kinds of synthetics (any many other treatments) cannot be detected without sophisticated laboratory equipment, so do be cautious if investing in fancy coloured (or, really, any) diamonds.

In terms of gemstones that might be a 'steal to buy' now - I've thought about this a lot. Very rare gemstones did get me excited for a while, but it is so hard to know when or whether a new deposit might be uncovered, essentially devaluing one's investment. One trend to take heart from, however is that serious collectors still seem to value stones from original deposits (e.g. Single Crystal Rhodochrosite from Colorado, despite the find in China - I think South Africa possibly also; Russian Alexandrite over the newer deposits etc.,) so original loose stone purchases in good condition may still retain some intrinsic value in the case of a new find. (Unless it were of infinitely better quality).

 

[Seaglow]

A new deposit does not usually devalue a rare stone. Take the case of spinel. It has been in the back seat for quite a while. It is rarer than rubies and sapphires yet was under appreciated historically until new strikes in Mahenge and Luc Yen who produced the electric reds, pinks, and blues were found, which placed the spotlight on spinel. Same with tourmaline, which used to be so affordable but the Paraibas being tourmaline, had somehow carried up the prices of the rest of the colors.

For colored diamonds, it's true, the price increases dramatically, but diamond is a controlled item, with rapaport prices. It's not like you hunt them and get a deal. Most likely you get the current market price and keep it then sell it in a number of years. I'm also noting how good the synthetics are getting.

Rarity is a one thing, demand is another. Rarity with little demand won't shoot the price up. There are so many rare minerals that are very affordable because people have not heard of them and they are truly rare to make them commercially viable. It is difficult to market a stone with no steady supply, which is the true essence of rarity, unless historically, it had made its mark like padparadschas.

If I'd bank my money on gemstones, I'd stick to big stones with constant demand. Blue and pink sapphires, padparadschas, emeralds, imperial jade, and rubies.

If I am gambling to make a steal, I'll look at the garnet group, spinels, and some fantastic colored tourmalines. Color is key when making a gamble on "the other stones". This made paraibas, tsavorites, grape rhodolites, Fanta spessartites and mahenge spinels get noticed.

 

[PrecisionGem]

Over the past 20 years, Apple Stock has greatly surpassed any gemstone as an investment, and the stock can within minutes be turned into cash if needed. Gemstones are bad investments.

 

[Arkteia]

when people look at my rings and ask if they are "investment", I seriously say that only the setting, the gold, is redeemable. Someone, many years ago, posted something about stones being "illiquid assets", like houses. Too many conflicting factors. I would say, if you yourself "really like" the stone, find it pretty, chances are, someone else may like it, too.
Looking at what is moveable, it seems that still, diamonds are easiest to resell, but it can change as sapphires, rubies, chrysoberyls, spinels and other hard enough stones come in fashion for e-rings. But anyhow, I would not view any of my stones as investments.

 

[PrecisionGem]

You see currently see all these ads on TV to buy gold an silver. Give it a try. You buy a few ounces, then go to sell them. The dealer you bought them from will buy them back, but only at 80% of what you paid for them.
Diamonds are even way worse. I have seen people upgrade their diamonds at the store they originally bought them from, and get 1/3 of what they paid for the stone originally.
I go to Canada every year for the fall, and the left over Canadian currency I have each year has proven to be a better investment.

 

[theredspinel]

I think it's about where in the world you are too. Here in the UK and probably pretty much in all western countries, you'd be hard pressed to even get 80% of the spot price of gold! So even gold with it's accepted intrinsic value is difficult to sell for a "fair" price as everyone wants the best deal they can get. So what if the spot price is x amount, if you need the money you'll take whatever anyone gives you - and they know that.

HOWEVER, it's a totally different world outside of western countries. I've regularly brought and sold and traded my gold pieces in Dubai for example, and I always get the going price for gold.

It's amazing. You can wear a ring or jewellry item for 10 years, have it all scratched up and etc... then go to a jewellers in Dubai and get back the whole amount of the gold for it (you obviously lose whatever markup you paid for it but usually the markup is only a tiny amount on top of the raw gold price).

If I could I'd save everything and get it set abroad on holiday haha, but seeing as we can only afford to go as a whole family every few years or so... I can't wait a few years to have new jewellery!

It does kill me a little inside knowing what I have set here in silver... I could get more then double it's weight in 21kt gold over there... and be able to sell/trade it for what it's actually worth *sigh*!

 

[arkieb1]

A gemstone is only ever going to be worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Something becoming rarer like untreated decent coloured rubies of a good size will always go up in value, but one person might consider that a "good investment" another not a "good investment." I figure if it's something that brings you enjoyment that just happens to go up in value as well then that is a bonus.

 

[valeria101]

GIA writes: WWW

 

[Sagebrush]

Gemstone investment is a subject to be approached with fear and trembling. Just about every negative comment made above is true. Liquidity, market access, overcoming the gap between wholesale and retail are all concerns. However, it is also a fact that gems have increased dramatically in value since I became active in the trade some 37 years ago.

I recall a Sotheby's auction I attended in 1984. There were two 20+ carat Kashmir sapphires on offer. Hammer price approximately $250k each. Today's price at auction: $200-250k PER CARAT. I recall another opportunity I had (and missed) to purchase a major color diamond at a knockdown price. It was a seven figure buy and my client passed. The appreciation on that gem alone would have made for a nice retirement.When I decided to liquidate my inventory and retire to writing a few years ago, I sold a few of my finest stones to clients, but most went on the wholesale market and all brought a nice return. To be a successful gem investor you must be very savvy, extremely patient and buy only the best.

 

[Arkteia]

You see currently see all these ads on TV to buy gold an silver. Give it a try. You buy a few ounces, then go to sell them. The dealer you bought them from will buy them back, but only at 80% of what you paid for them.
Diamonds are even way worse. I have seen people upgrade their diamonds at the store they originally bought them from, and get 1/3 of what they paid for the stone originally.
I go to Canada every year for the fall, and the left over Canadian currency I have each year has proven to be a better investment.

I do not mean gold for resale value. I mean gold or silver in case of hyperinflation. Coins would do, actually.
Diamond market seems "somewhat" stable because of the job done by the gatekeepers. But to me it appears shaky in general. I wonder if I am the only one, but what I see to come will be huge changes in the marriage institution, and with this, the value of diamonds.
Canadian dollar is a good idea. in fact, I still keep my NZ 20 dollars, not sure whether it is for sentimental reasons or just don't want to exchange it for US currency