Input please on this Kashmir Sapphire

[kenny]

http://kashmirblue.com/Sapphire/Certs/profileRG10310.html

 

[TristanC]

Kenny, can I contact you via diamond bistro to give you all my details? Will you adopt me so that I can toy with the collection you've amassed? Thanks.

 

[TonyMontana]

Maybe a bit too much violet for my taste, but overall a great gem!!! Did you get this one?

 

[marymm]

I wish there were more photos of the stone itself, loose, before and after the recut - and I'd also be interested in seeing a 40x photo showing me those comet tails near the culet. It is a bit strange there is no straight shot of the stone/ring, though one of the side shots seems to show a nice high crown and smaller table. From what is given, though, I just am not getting a good view of the stone

I have problems with the description, in that it says "the dimensions remained the same before and after recutting" - this is a confusing statement - I am interpreting it to mean that despite the carat weight change as a result of the recut (2.07ct to 1.72ct), the physical dimensions did not change as a result of the recut. But the 2.07ct cert states the dimensions as 8.57x.7.01x3.91mm, and after the recut the 1.72ct cert lists the dimensions as 8.36x6.73x3.89mm. Neither cert state anything as to color or tone, so I'm not sure what the "intense to vivid blue Kashmir sapphire is 80% tone" representation is based on. These are things that could be clarified by the seller, but at $14k, this kind of fuzzy (and to me somewhat misleading) wording on the description would be enough to put me off. I'm also not fond of the setting at all, so as a package deal I wouldn't be interested.

I'm sure someone will chime in as to the merits and reliability of the gem lab certs.

 

[T L]

For that kind of money, I wouldn't want GRS, Gueblin, SSEF, GIA, but an AGL top of the line Prestige report. That will tell you the true quality of the gem. These other lab reports, while will tell you treatment and origin, do absolutely nothing to tell you about the true quality. Vivid color is not mentioned on the GRS, and the vendor appears to have come up with that statement, but I would want a saturation and tone level from AGL instead.

 

[VapidLapid]

I too, would want a full frontal pic. The crown is high in the profile picture and the depth is shallow from the numbers, which to me means huge window. Or it could be the stone is so dark the window looks like night, 80% tone with turbity (sic).

 

[soberguy]

Gubelin is good enough for the most prestigious gemstones sold at Christie's and Sotheby's so I think it would be sufficient...

 

[marymm]

The Gubelin report is dated 1999 and was issued for the stone at the original carat weight (2.07ct) - hard to see how it correlates to the stone in its current iteration, recut and mounted.

 

[soberguy]

From what I have seen looking at the sites, GRS is equally regarded.

 

[kenny]

Thanks all.
I would only buy the loose stone.
I feel Gueblin is reputable enough to trust their grades, but customers vary and this one would also want the additional information provided by the AGL Prestige report.
If I pursue this stone I'll also ask if it has a window and ask for face up pics.

Tristan, do you do windows?
Here's our house.

 

[T L]

Thanks all.
I would only buy the loose stone.
I feel Gueblin is reputable enough to trust their grades, but customers vary and this one would also want the additional information provided by the AGL Prestige report.
If I pursue this stone I'll also ask if it has a window and ask for face up pics.

Tristan, do you do windows?
Here's our house.

It's not that GRS, Gueblin, SSEF, GIA, etc. . . are not trustworthy, but the one thing they do not have that AGL has are color and tone quality in comparison to huge database of other material. If you are a sapphre expert, and you have a great eye and have judged zillions of sapphires from all over the world, then perhaps you don't need an AGL, but I feel that it not only provides true scientific quality, but it gives the gem extra value as well to the eyes of other gem afficionados. I simply do not think these are labs hold their weight against the prestige report.

 

[LD]

Actually if you were in Europe, GRS or Gubelin are probably the go-to Lab for coloured gemstones so I have much less concern about this. The dimensions have changed with the recut but I think they're implying that the face up size hasn't altered much.

Like others I would want to see the stone unmounted and many more photos before pulling the trigger. Have you asked about the cost of the sapphire without the ring? I'm guessing because the ring contains (presumably) natural pink diamonds, the setting might be fairly costly.

 

[Justin_Cutter]

Nice color Kenny, I am curious as well about a full frontal pic. Best of luck.

~Justin

 

[Harriet]

It's not that GRS, Gueblin, SSEF, GIA, etc. . . are not trustworthy, but the one thing they do not have that AGL has are color and tone quality in comparison to huge database of other material. If you are a sapphre expert, and you have a great eye and have judged zillions of sapphires from all over the world, then perhaps you don't need an AGL, but I feel that it not only provides true scientific quality, but it gives the gem extra value as well to the eyes of other gem afficionados. I simply do not think these are labs hold their weight against the prestige report.

Perhaps a less insulting way to phrase this is: AGL provides the Prestige Report whereas GRS et. al. do not.
PS. A true gem aficionado does not need to use the Prestige Report as a crutch. His or her 'eye' should suffice.

 

[kenny]

A true gem aficionado does not need to use the Prestige Report as a crutch. His or her 'eye' should suffice.

Eyes, even those of a "true gem aficionado", only work AFTER you get the gem in your hot little hands.

Since we are buying via the Internet rather than in person an AGL Prestige report assists true gem aficionados, and boneheads like me, in the buying decision.

BTW, the term crutch is rather condescending.
I guess you could call oxygen a crutch that is needed by those who want to live.

 

[VapidLapid]

It can take quite a while to develop a reliable, educated eye. Along the way most people rely on all sorts of assists and advices from recognized authorities and cognoscenti. Surely one can learn on one's own, from one's own mistakes, but good teachers can take the sting out of an otherwise painful and expensive education. It is also worthwhile to consider that if one is buying with investment in mind it will be useful to have supporting documents to provide to prospective buyers when it comes time to sell.

 

[kenny]

Has anyone here looked at lots and lots of sapphires in person that a respected lab graded to be of Kashmir origin?

When you looked at this one in person how did it compare?









(The sound of crickets chirping) . . .
That's what I thought.

 

[gongli]

another thing that i have yet to figure out is what are you actually buying... the lab report or the stone? if the lab report says its an awesome kashmir or if it says its a crappy, say, thai, the stone is still the same. when you take it out and look at it, why does the lab report in the drawer matter so much? if it says its awesome, i would probably sit there and look at it for a while trying to pick out what makes it so remarkable (since i actually forgot how the 3000 kashmir stones i saw looked back before i taught richard hughes everything he knows ). and if the report says its crappy then i'll probably look at it for a little while, find an inclusion or something, and then send it back without really knowing why. so now i think maybe the lab report grade is overrated. id like to think that if i had the money, id buy it, and look at it, and make the decision myself.

almost totally off topic, today i went into a jewelry shop and saw a ruby ring with a nice saturated color and the glow, 2 small black eye-visible inclusions in a corner but still a nice piece. looked at it for a while, 1.5c with 2 diamond .75tcw side stones, 14k gold, $2.5k in a bricks-and-mortar. i asked the lady if it was heated or beryllium, she stammered and said it's normally treated and heated like all rubies, and that she didn't have to disclose anything. the ruby was looked very nice, and at that price it's probably atleast heated. im not going to buy it, but i do like it, and i don't think i'd want anything more than the gembrief lab report to make a decision if i were to buy it. (i actually think that despite the fact that it's nice, it must be overpriced since its in a bricks and mortar, and i dont want the diamonds anyway.)

now with a kashmir, you're paying real money for the report to say kashmir, unless your eye can tell that it's kashmir.... but the thing is, i think your eye can actually tell in some cases. things are sometimes famous for a reason... but how different is it, and how much is that worth?

 

[kenny]

another thing that i have yet to figure out is what are you actually buying... the lab report or the stone? if the lab report says its an awesome kashmir or if it says its a crappy, say, thai, the stone is still the same. when you take it out and look at it, why does the lab report in the drawer matter so much? if it says its awesome, i would probably sit there and look at it for a while trying to pick out what makes it so remarkable (since i actually forgot how the 3000 kashmir stones i saw looked back before i taught richard hughes everything he knows ). and if the report says its crappy then i'll probably look at it for a little while, find an inclusion or something, and then send it back without really knowing why. so now i think maybe the lab report grade is overrated. id like to think that if i had the money, id buy it, and look at it, and make the decision myself.

almost totally off topic, today i went into a jewelry shop and saw a ruby ring with a nice saturated color and the glow, 2 small black eye-visible inclusions in a corner but still a nice piece. looked at it for a while, 1.5c with 2 diamond .75tcw side stones, 14k gold, $2.5k in a bricks-and-mortar. i asked the lady if it was heated or beryllium, she stammered and said it's normally treated and heated like all rubies, and that she didn't have to disclose anything. the ruby was looked very nice, and at that price it's probably atleast heated. im not going to buy it, but i do like it, and i don't think i'd want anything more than the gembrief lab report to make a decision if i were to buy it. (i actually think that despite the fact that it's nice, it must be overpriced since its in a bricks and mortar, and i dont want the diamonds anyway.)

now with a kashmir, you're paying real money for the report to say kashmir, unless your eye can tell that it's kashmir.... but the thing is, i think your eye can actually tell in some cases. things are sometimes famous for a reason... but how different is it, and how much is that worth?

No.
You are paying for the THE STONE which was determined, as much as scientifically-possible based on today's best technology, to be mined in Kashmir.
The look of a sapphire from Kashmir is reported to be distinctive to that one origin.

Fake diamonds can look much like real ones - so, what are all these young men buying for their ladies, the paper or the stone?

The paper (generated by experts in the field) just helps describe the stone.
The paper is the experts' opinion of what you are buying.
That is very valuable paper, indeed!
Asking if you are buying the paper or the stone is as absurd as asking if you are buying the paper deed to real estate or the paper pink slip of a car instead of the land or the car.

 

[T L]

Yeah, but Kenny, just because a stone is from Kashmir doesn't make it great. It can be a dud. Likewise, there are sapphires from far less premium origins that look like nice Kashmir sapphires.

Again, take a detailed look at the AGL prestige report (the more comprehensive one) on their website. They don't say, "vivid," "awesome," "royal blood blue" or anything like that. They provide numerical data on the quality of saturation and tone, and from that, it is easier to identify the true quality, which is in their overall rating. This data is compared to their huge volume of data for a particular species of gem. I know I keep repeating myself, but these other lab reports don't provide that kind of data.

 

[kenny]

Yeah, but Kenny, just because a stone is from Kashmir doesn't make it great. It can be a dud. Likewise, there are sapphires from far less premium origins that look like nice Kashmir sapphires.

Again, take a detailed look at the AGL prestige report (the more comprehensive one) on their website. They don't say, "vivid," "awesome," "royal blood blue" or anything like that. They provide numerical data on the quality of saturation and tone, and from that, it is easier to identify the true quality, which is in their overall rating. This data is compared to their huge volume of data for a particular species of gem. I know I keep repeating myself, but these other lab reports don't provide that kind of data.

Thanks TL.
Agreed!
There is no substitute for seeing it live.
And yes, origin does not guarantee you will like it.

But a person cannot buy everything to view live.
We must use tools and reports to narrow down what we buy to view live, and for a stone as this the AGL PR is the most informative report.

 

[Barrett]

Kenny your post seem to grow on me every day. Keep 'em up my good man!

 

[kenny]

Kenny your post seem to grow on me every day.

Maybe you should see a doctor for that.

 

[Justin_Cutter]

Here's my Crappy Thai Stone....















This report has proved to be priceless to me not just for my peace of mind, but for my appraisal process and insurance. Don't doubt the value of a good report. It has helped me in more ways than one. If the day ever comes and you find yourself needing to sell a beloved gem there is only one report I would want to have up my sleeve.

Kenny, if I had the chance to add a Kashmir to my collection I would be all over it, but weddings cost money
Sorry for the thread jack.
~Justin

 

[gongli]

justin, that's an incredible stone. im sure there's plenty more from thailand, and plenty of not so great kashmirs out there. my mistake to have mentioned thai as if it were bad, sorry!

kenny, all i meant was that i personally don't understand how and why the origin and expert's report matters in terms of a stone's price. if the gents buying certified diamonds for their fiancees can't pick out the stone using their own eyes and sensibility, then from my personal point of view, they are paying (a lot) for the paper of the expert who they think can. why would they do this? a few good reasons: resale, insurance, and the paper also shows the fiancee how much the fellow shelled out for her, even though perhaps neither of them can tell from the stone.

if i may say so, i think your fcd collection is incredible, and i've personally learnt alot by reading your posts when you find stones to compare with the ones in your collection. for example, you found a remarkable pair of slightly brownish pink (i think) diamonds that were much cheaper than the purely pink diamonds. i couldn't have been able to tell the difference, and i don't think the difference woud've been worth it. if someone who couldn't tell bought the pure pink because of the report, would you say they paid for the stone or the paper?

if i were collecting at your level, then i would also use lab reports, but i would only hope to have your experience, eye, and command of all the subtleties.

 

[T L]

justin, that's an incredible stone. im sure there's plenty more from thailand, and plenty of not so great kashmirs out there. my mistake to have mentioned thai as if it were bad, sorry!

kenny, all i meant was that i personally don't understand how and why the origin and expert's report matters in terms of a stone's price. if the gents buying certified diamonds for their fiancees can't pick out the stone using their own eyes and sensibility, then from my personal point of view, they are paying (a lot) for the paper of the expert who they think can. why would they do this? a few good reasons: resale, insurance, and the paper also shows the fiancee how much the fellow shelled out for her, even though perhaps neither of them can tell from the stone.

if i may say so, i think your fcd collection is incredible, and i've personally learnt alot by reading your posts when you find stones to compare with the ones in your collection. for example, you found a remarkable pair of slightly brownish pink (i think) diamonds that were much cheaper than the purely pink diamonds. i couldn't have been able to tell the difference, and i don't think the difference woud've been worth it. if someone who couldn't tell bought the pure pink because of the report, would you say they paid for the stone or the paper?

if i were collecting at your level, then i would also use lab reports, but i would only hope to have your experience, eye, and command of all the subtleties.

GIA reports are the trade standard for diamonds, and diamonds don't deviate much in price for the four C's, (cut, carat weight, clarity, color). However, colored gems, such as sapphires, rubies, emeralds, and others can vary in price by a great deal from vendor to vendor. A vendor can, for example, sell you a gem for $100,000/ct and say it's 'vivid pigeon blood red' (if it's a ruby for example). Why trust the vendor's opinion, when you can have a scientific and neutral report that delineates the true saturation and other important variables of the stone. In this case, why should we believe the vendor states this stone is "vivid" Kashmir, and what about the other aspects of the stone. That is why the AGL prestige report (as Justin kindly showed above) actually shows you what you are getting for your money. It can be the basis of online research you can do yourself to price similar quality gems.

Now, a lot of vendors grade their own stones, and have come up with their own homegrown quality scales. That's fine, but if you're spending a great deal of money on a gem, I recommend the AGL prestige report. When you're spending thousands of dollars on a gem, the report is a small price to pay, and can give you great peace of mind, and also help you and your heirs retain the value of the stone. For inexpensive gems, it's a different story.

Also, one may have a fine eye for color, but to have a respectable piece of paper back up the quality of your expensive gem, is a great asset to have, and this is especially true of fine sapphires, rubies, and emeralds (the big three of colored gems).

 

[Pandora II]

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/an-exceptional-sapphire-and-diamond/5508268/lot/lot_details.aspx?from=salesummary&pos=4&intObjectID=5508268&sid=8a8e3dc3-6be2-4622-a258-b157006cc6cd&page=1

This just sold for $145k/ct...

It comes with up to date reports from Gubelin, SSEF and AGL.

If I was in the USA I would use AGL for important stones because it's easier, since I am in Europe I would opt for SSEF or Gubelin or maybe GRS. Which I picked would be dependent on the species and what I wanted to know. Shipping to the USA and back is a big PITA compared with shipping within the EU.

Until there is an accepted way of grading colour for the coloured stone industry then I am less interested in having that, but I can see why some people would like it.

When you get into buying 'true' kashmirs with the price-tag that accompanies it, you definitely want the lab reports. Not because it makes you like a stone any more or less (although when I find out that the $5 ring I bought my kid in the junk shop is actually a $100k kashmir then I will definitely like it a LOT more! ) but because it is almost certainly an 'investment' stone and so requires the paperwork to go with that.

FWIW, one of the finest kashmirs I have seen was from Madagascar! I've also seen Sri Lankan rubies that give fine Burmese stones a good run for their money. Despite that, the market pays a premium for origin when you are talking about ultra-fine stones and while you may still love the 'Burmese' ruby that turns out to be from Vietnam, you sure as heck aren't going to like paying a 50% premium.

It's like the difference between heated and unheated - visually there's nothing to see, but a BIG mark-up in price.

I have now waffled on and will go back to nursing my terrible 2's-induced migraine...

 

[gongli]

I agree the report tells you some important scientific and color value facts about the stone you're paying for. i think the grading report also suggests a little bit about the fineness of the 4c's of a stone and therefore its resale or insurance value. but you learn the resale value only when you resell it, not from the report.

despite popular opinion, as far as i can tell the 4c's (which you can see with your eyes) are almost irrelevant in terms of individual stone value and in terms of overall market volume. the main factors are origin and treatment, neither of which you can see. a treated (or synthetic) stone can be vastly superior in the 4c's and be worth almost nothing compared to an untreated stone from a prestigious origin - which can only be determined by a lab, not by your own eyes. and the market for heavily treated stones (such as be-sapphire) seems to be huge from what i can tell, ranging from macy's to costco and even to tiffany's (see their disclosures on their websites). these stores profit from selling cheap, heavily treated stones to people who don't know about treatment, and that spread, which has nothing to do with the 4c's, seems to me to be the mainstay of the jewelry trade. (i once bought, and luckily thanks partly to PS, returned, a be-treated sapphire from macy's and that's kind of what got me started reading about gems and PS)

 

[Justin_Cutter]

justin, that's an incredible stone. im sure there's plenty more from thailand, and plenty of not so great kashmirs out there. my mistake to have mentioned thai as if it were bad, sorry!

gongli, no worries and no offense taken. I have been known on a few occasions to say that Thai material typically isn't that good myself. I posted more to show that there are anomalies with every origin, and to aid the discussion with my AGL Report.

~Justin

 

[T L]

I agree the report tells you some important scientific and color value facts about the stone you're paying for. i think the grading report also suggests a little bit about the fineness of the 4c's of a stone and therefore its resale or insurance value. but you learn the resale value only when you resell it, not from the report.

despite popular opinion, as far as i can tell the 4c's (which you can see with your eyes) are almost irrelevant in terms of individual stone value and in terms of overall market volume. the main factors are origin and treatment, neither of which you can see. a treated (or synthetic) stone can be vastly superior in the 4c's and be worth almost nothing compared to an untreated stone from a prestigious origin - which can only be determined by a lab, not by your own eyes. and the market for heavily treated stones (such as be-sapphire) seems to be huge from what i can tell, ranging from macy's to costco and even to tiffany's (see their disclosures on their websites). these stores profit from selling cheap, heavily treated stones to people who don't know about treatment, and that spread, which has nothing to do with the 4c's, seems to me to be the mainstay of the jewelry trade. (i once bought, and luckily thanks partly to PS, returned, a be-treated sapphire from macy's and that's kind of what got me started reading about gems and PS)

Quite true, and sad. It's great you found PS, despite having to deal with a be-treated sapphire. Think of how many people think they have the "creme de la creme" of sapphires, or any particular stone, without knowing that it's a heavily treated stone worth very little. You were fortunate not to fall into that trap.