Specifications for vendors to remain on recommended list

[deskjockey]

I really love the idea of a consumer reports type rating system, but on a forum like this I think it's far too ambitious.

Someone would have to keep a database somewhere and then users would have to be diligent about sending in their ratings/reviews.

Would there be a way to update the list with "typical experience" type comments instead? Like if 3/4 of the buyers find the stones slightly darker than pictured, that information could be added? Or if 4/5 buyers were especially impressed by speed of communication, or whatever else. Just to give some idea of the general experience people have? I know when I started here I pretty much treated everyone on the list equally and didn't understand some of these nuances (thank goodness I didn't have loads of money to spend, LOL).

Actually I can see that being problematic too, so maybe not.

 

[T L]

I really love the idea of a consumer reports type rating system, but on a forum like this I think it's far too ambitious.

Someone would have to keep a database somewhere and then users would have to be diligent about sending in their ratings/reviews.

Would there be a way to update the list with "typical experience" type comments instead? Like if 3/4 of the buyers find the stones slightly darker than pictured, that information could be added? Or if 4/5 buyers were especially impressed by speed of communication, or whatever else. Just to give some idea of the general experience people have? I know when I started here I pretty much treated everyone on the list equally and didn't understand some of these nuances (thank goodness I didn't have loads of money to spend, LOL).

Actually I can see that being problematic too, so maybe not.

Well, we can always point out in the list to do a search for the vendor name before committing to purchasing from them. If that's the case, there are a myriad of reviews in this forum.

 

[distracts]

I honestly am fine with vendors being on the list that don't meet some of those. Or maybe there should be a section for vendors-used-that-don't-meet-these-requirements. Because I would still be fine with the Jewelryhoo type stores for settings despite the communication issues - I think we already knew about communication issues anyway? The only really alarming parts of the post is that OP are that unsure if he is getting his stones back and seems to have been banned from communicating with them.

I think a three strikes rule sounds fair except in cases of totally egregious behavior (e.g., Leon holding that one stone hostage). I mean, when the DanielM stuff started up, look how many strikes he got immediately. Perhaps also a three-recs rule to get them put on the list. I think given the level of activity of the forum, more than three seems kind of unfair, but less than three could conceivably be just a series of mistakes. And I mean, like, three in a six month period maybe? Or, wait, it gets complicated, because if only three people have bought from them but all three transactions were dissatisfactory, that's very different than three dissatisfactory transactions but thirty people bought from them. You know? So I dunno.

I definitely support the current format of the list where the most-updated is in the last post but the other posts are still up, because that way we can see what has changed.

I honestly don't think photos should be an issue - for instance, many people here like Jeff Davies, but my experience with buying from his is that his pictures are wildly inaccurate and that he does not provide enough description to make up for it. But I personally still consider purchasing from him.

I really don't think we need "typical experience" blurbs or ratings or anything. I mean, just use the search function, jesus christ. It's what I do when I'm buying from a vendor I haven't previously bought from. It's not hard and everyone is capable of doing it. Plus, I wouldn't like that stuff cluttering up the list, which I like as just a list of links.

 

[T L]

I honestly don't think photos should be an issue - for instance, many people here like Jeff Davies, but my experience with buying from his is that his pictures are wildly inaccurate and that he does not provide enough description to make up for it. But I personally still consider purchasing from him.

Distracts,
Thank you for your opinion.

On your point above, I would assume he has accurate photos, and I never knew this, based on all the people that are happy with him. I would then buy from him, and then have a hassle having to return a stone, and be out more money shipping it back. I think the list should be there to avoid hassle and aggravation. To me, the issue of accurate photography is a huge one. What is the point of having a recommended vendor list at all if we tolerate these things?

I cannot also, in good part, recommend the ebay vendors, or any vendor for that matter, if their communication is poor. While language barriers are understandable, at least to me, I appreciate prompt and polite communication.

Maybe there should be a disclaimer as well like this,

"This list represents vendors that people have had good experiences with. That does not mean your experience will be the same. It is highly recommended you search the forum for reviews, comments and opinions about these vendors before considering them."

 

[sparkleismyfavcolor]

Thank you for the idea. IMO, it might be too ambitious to give vendors such "consumer report" or "star" type ratings in the list.

I really love the idea of a consumer reports type rating system, but on a forum like this I think it's far too ambitious.

Gosh, you guys are so right! The logistics would just be too much unless we somehow had a board of PS'ers that did the reviewing/rating or secret shoppers (me! me! lol) that report their findings. Sounds too complicated. Can we nominate a group of seasoned PS'ers to come up with a new vendor list? Then if someone wanted to add someone they could start a thread to ask for it to be considered. This is tough stuff! Wish the poll thing would work, but the anonymous part ruins that.

I know when I started here I pretty much treated everyone on the list equally and didn't understand some of these nuances (thank goodness I didn't have loads of money to spend, LOL).

Me too, luckily I didn't have loads of money to spend either, and was afraid to buy anything at first and then there's the whole researching everything. I'm still over here trying to figure out the vendors you guys were referring to earlier in the thread that maybe should be removed! I wholeheartedly agree with everyone above who said that just because one person says they had a good experience with a vendor doesn't mean they should go on the list.

Well, we can always point out in the list to do a search for the vendor name before committing to purchasing from them. If that's the case, there are a myriad of reviews in this forum.

Excellent point. There will still be those who take the recommendations and run with them. As they say though, "buyer beware", especially with something like gemstones.

I'll keep thinking! (for what that's worth!)

 

[distracts]

Maybe there should be a disclaimer as well like this,

"This list represents vendors that people have had good experiences with. That does not mean your experience will be the same. It is highly recommended you search the forum for reviews, comments and opinions about these vendors before considering them."

Doesn't the list already have a disclaimer more or less like that?

I mean, I'm pretty satisfied with the way the list works now. And the point remains that I think one strike is certainly not enough to get someone removed from the list. I mean, I have this issue with the one vendor's photography, but I have only ever seen one other person comment on it before. Dan Stair is recommended a lot but his stones often look washed out and weird in pictures compared to real life. I've heard people comment on Jeff White's photography before as well. In the grand scheme of things, though, they're still better than more than 99% of the sellers out there and still deserve to be on the list for that reason. And isn't the fact that most people are happy with their purchases proof enough? There's never going to be a vendor that EVERYONE has good experiences with.

 

[T L]

Maybe there should be a disclaimer as well like this,

"This list represents vendors that people have had good experiences with. That does not mean your experience will be the same. It is highly recommended you search the forum for reviews, comments and opinions about these vendors before considering them."

Doesn't the list already have a disclaimer more or less like that?

I mean, I'm pretty satisfied with the way the list works now. And the point remains that I think one strike is certainly not enough to get someone removed from the list. I mean, I have this issue with the one vendor's photography, but I have only ever seen one other person comment on it before. Dan Stair is recommended a lot but his stones often look washed out and weird in pictures compared to real life. I've heard people comment on Jeff White's photography before as well. In the grand scheme of things, though, they're still better than more than 99% of the sellers out there and still deserve to be on the list for that reason. And isn't the fact that most people are happy with their purchases proof enough? There's never going to be a vendor that EVERYONE has good experiences with.

This is the actual disclaimer,
"We're happy to know that this vendor list is helpful! Please refrain however, from commenting on how it worked for you or providing feedback on vendors in this thread. Please start a new thread for that. Thanks. This is a pinned thread meant to help newcomers with a frequently updated list only. Also note that this is the collective wisdom of the group and represents more than one individual's transactions. This list is meant to be used as a guide. While we hope that these vendors work for you, the list does not provide a guarantee of a good transaction. As always, we welcome you to start your own thread with your opinions on a vendor, or discussion of your experiences."

It says nothing about searching for reviews.

I also think the disclaimer should also be bolded so people don't miss it, or highlighted with a different color. I don't know if I would call it the "collective wisdom" of the group either, as there are individuals on there recommended only by one person. It makes me feel responsible for what's on there.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Maybe a shot from left field, but what about a new vendor thread with all the vendors listed in the first post and a list of review questions re: experience, communication, etc at bottom. After PSers make a purchase, they can quote & repost the list with a thumbs up or down smilie beside that vendor's name and answer the customer experience questions. Then, next PSer comes in, has an experience with another vendor, quotes the latest list update - which keeps the previous thumbs up/down by all vendors names - much like is done today to add/remove vendors, and replaces the customer experience responses from the previous poster with their experience.

Besides, we NEED a thumbs up/down smilie anyway.


So, kinda like this:

Initial thread post

Vendor A
Vendor B
Vendor C

Name of vendor

Rate communication of the vendor

Accuracy/description of item

Other comments

 

[the_mother_thing]

Initial thread post

Vendor A
Vendor B
Vendor C

Name of vendor
Vendor A

Rate communication of the vendor
5

Accuracy/description of item
1

Other comments
Very courteous seller, had to return item but very smooth transaction.

 

[FrekeChild]

Maybe there should be a disclaimer as well like this,

"This list represents vendors that people have had good experiences with. That does not mean your experience will be the same. It is highly recommended you search the forum for reviews, comments and opinions about these vendors before considering them."

Doesn't the list already have a disclaimer more or less like that?

I mean, I'm pretty satisfied with the way the list works now. And the point remains that I think one strike is certainly not enough to get someone removed from the list. I mean, I have this issue with the one vendor's photography, but I have only ever seen one other person comment on it before. Dan Stair is recommended a lot but his stones often look washed out and weird in pictures compared to real life. I've heard people comment on Jeff White's photography before as well. In the grand scheme of things, though, they're still better than more than 99% of the sellers out there and still deserve to be on the list for that reason. And isn't the fact that most people are happy with their purchases proof enough? There's never going to be a vendor that EVERYONE has good experiences with.

This.

From what I see, it's just a list of vendors. I think adding a disclaimer of "These are vendors that other people have had decent purchasing experiences with, understand that you are doing so at your own risk, and please do a search for specific reviews regarding said vendor" or whatever should be added and highlighted, but I think the old adage of "don't fix whats not broken" applies here.

I think if someone wants to start a ratings system and implement it, I think it has the potential to create a lot of tension and disagreements. Typically I think that new posters post threads and then more experienced posters chime in with "Well, hey, maybe you should do a search for reviews" for example, anytime someone posts about NSC.

So I don't know that the additional information is sustainable or really all that productive.

Maybe something like this: "These are vendors that other people have had generally favorable experiences with, in the following categories:

- Good Communication
- Good Customer Service (timely responses; notification/response to problems/changes)
- No Hassle Refunds
- Accurate Photographic Representation
- Fair Retail Pricing
- Ethics

Should you choose to patronize these vendors, please understand that you are doing so at your own risk, and please do due diligence and search for specific reviews regarding said vendor."

 

[the_mother_thing]

Vendor A
Vendor B
Vendor C

Name of vendor
Vendor C

Rate communication of the vendor
2

Accuracy/description of item
1

Other comments
Horrible experience, pictures did not match the item, slow to return my stones.

 

[T L]

Maybe something like this: "These are vendors that other people have had generally favorable experiences with, in the following categories:

- Good Communication
- Good Customer Service (timely responses; notification/response to problems/changes)
- No Hassle Refunds
- Accurate Photographic Representation
- Fair Retail Pricing
- Ethics

I like changing or updating the disclaimer, and noting that one should search the forum for reviews. I just don't like the last part noting the categories because, maybe its just me, but it sounds too positive, and people might think all the vendors on there adhere to those things, when clearly, as people have stated, many do not.

Maybe state,

"These are vendors that other people have had generally favorable experiences with, in one or more of the following categories, but not necessarily all of these:"

 

[the_mother_thing]

The only problem with telling ppl to do a search for vendor reviews on here is that it isn't always easy. Because some PSers are on a first name basis with with some sellers, or refer to them with initials or acronyms, it's not easy to locate consistent reviews. And a relative newb won't know who to correlate with what "vendor" name. Also, the search function, unfortunately, isn't really great.

Something like what I suggested to some degree consolidates reviews making it a little easier to find in one thread. Just a suggestion or perspective. Won't be offended if it's not what is needed.

 

[T L]

The only problem with telling ppl to do a search for vendor reviews on here is that it isn't always easy. Because some PSers are on a first name basis with with some sellers, or refer to them with initials or acronyms, it's not easy to locate consistent reviews. And a relative newb won't know who to correlate with what "vendor" name. Also, the search function, unfortunately, isn't really great.

Something like what I suggested to some degree consolidates reviews making it a little easier to find in one thread. Just a suggestion or perspective. Won't be offended if it's not what is needed.

Good point, but I don't think its possible to consolidate the reviews. Almost all of this colored stone forum is made up of reviews, or positive/negative comments. Almost every time a person gets a colored stone, they mention a vendor, and that's considered a review if they like or dislike the gem.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Good point, but I don't think its possible to consolidate the reviews. Almost all of this colored stone forum is made up of reviews, or positive/negative comments. Almost every time a person gets a colored stone, they mention a vendor, and that's considered a review if they like or dislike the gem.

So what if the "review post" is only "high level" numerical ratings on purchase experience (aforementioned rating factors from earlier in this thread on communication, customer service, etc) and a link to the PSers detail thread showing off their stone, discussion, etc.

So, JocoJenn comes into CS with her new stone from XYZ vendor, posts a thread about it, and the lovely TL suggests/reminds JCJ to go post a review and link to this thread in the vendor review thread.

When I was new here, I admit, I was overwhelmed when it was suggested to "read some reviews" because there are so many threads, and I didn't really know what to search for, or who, how, etc.

So the questions' responses could be on a scale of 1-5, and have the disclaimer at the top of list, instructions, etc.

 

[sparkleismyfavcolor]

Vendor A
Vendor B
Vendor C

Name of vendor
Vendor C

Rate communication of the vendor
2

Accuracy/description of item
1

Other comments
Horrible experience, pictures did not match the item, slow to return my stones.

JoCo Jenn, I like this idea as it's own thread idea (whether related to the recommended vendors list or not)! I agree that searching for vendor reviews is not always easy. To keep it simple, one vendor experience could be in each post of the thread. Kind of like the thread with vendor vs PS'ers pics. I give it thumbs up!

 

[sparkleismyfavcolor]

And just to be the teeniest bit "controversial," I'm guessing most experienced PS'ers don't even need to look at the recommended vendors list anymore, so maybe it should be more geared toward the less experienced among us. I hate to say it's a responsibility, but being a consumer forum many will assume that anyone put on the list is good because PriceScope says so. Their problem if they don't search further, yes, but that's why I for one like that TL is looking for specifications to be on the list as recommended by PS'ers. Just my 2 cents!

 

[T L]

Good point, but I don't think its possible to consolidate the reviews. Almost all of this colored stone forum is made up of reviews, or positive/negative comments. Almost every time a person gets a colored stone, they mention a vendor, and that's considered a review if they like or dislike the gem.

So what if the "review post" is only "high level" numerical ratings on purchase experience (aforementioned rating factors from earlier in this thread on communication, customer service, etc) and a link to the PSers detail thread showing off their stone, discussion, etc.

So, JocoJenn comes into CS with her new stone from XYZ vendor, posts a thread about it, and the lovely TL suggests/reminds JCJ to go post a review and link to this thread in the vendor review thread.

When I was new here, I admit, I was overwhelmed when it was suggested to "read some reviews" because there are so many threads, and I didn't really know what to search for, or who, how, etc.

So the questions' responses could be on a scale of 1-5, and have the disclaimer at the top of list, instructions, etc.

That's a good idea, but not everyone is going to do it. Also, there are some people here that have had one favorable experience with a vendor and others have not, and what if only the favorable review goes up, or only the negative ones?

I really wish more people would just be honest about vendors here. It was big news to me that Jeff Davies had poor photo accuracy for example, but that's another story.

The list right now makes me so sad because I remember this one lovely lady who bought a stone from a vendor for 20x more than she could have bought it for elsewhere. She was really worried she was overpaying too, but I was too afraid too say anything for fear of retribution. There wasn't anything more special about it then similar gems elsewhere, and this gem is untreated, and abundant. To make a long story short, she eventually tried to resell it to no avail. I hate seeing stories like this over and over again. This is a recommended vendor as well.

Well, long story short, I do think that the list should be updated, but since that's not easy to do, I think important disclaimers and warnings should make buyers think a little more clearly and not so gung ho with the list, one would hope. There are some wonderful vendors on that list, that have made A LOT of PS'ers happy, it's just unfortunate they're lumped in with some less than stellar vendors.

 

[marymm]

Yanno, I think the list, with a modified, bolded disclaimer, is fine for what it is - a helpful list of vendors/websites to check out if you're looking for Colored Gemstones/jewelers.

People are responsible for their own purchases - and to the extent they choose to do research, comparison shop, check for reviews, thoroughly scour vendor policies including shipping/return/restocking/etc., there is a wealth of info available here on PriceScope without ever having to register as member.

And, (can't resist) "people vary" - as others have noted, some people are willing to pay more to complete their purchase right now rather than having to take time to look further/email around. And, some people fall onto a bargain without even knowing it. Some people see reddish-pink, some people see it as pinkish-red. Monitors vary; savvy varies - and consumer preferences/values vary.

And, there is at least one person who has bought 3-4 gemstones from Jeff Davies who does consider his pics/videos representative of said gems (that would be me).

Personally, I regard the entire Colored-Stones Forum as the most complete, objective, and up-to-date CS guide (including a plethora of reviews and datapoints specific to CS/vendors) available to consumers -- and IMHO there is nothing wrong/unhelpful with responding to repetitive threads with a "if you do a PS search, you'll find many threads responsive to your issue" post.

Just my 2 cents...

 

[dk168]

My 2p from a relative newbie.

We often only hear/read one side of the story, usually from the consumer, when something goes wrong.

I do believe some peeps have an somewhat unrealistic and unhealthy attitude that "I am the customer, therefore, I must be right."

The list of Respected Vendors is only a guide, and one should perform one's own due diligence when choosing a vendor for one's projects, e.g. by searching for information relating to the vendor, on PS or otherwise.

Some consumers are a lot easier to please than others, and vendors are unlikely to be able to please everyone all the time. The perception of what constitutes towards good or bad products and/or services varies hugely from one person to another.

Lastly, I would like to express my thanks and gratitudes to those who take time and effort to help and guide the newbies, and for upkeeping the list of Respected Vendors.

DK

 

[sparkleismyfavcolor]

marymm and DK make excellent points which have me thinking. When re-reading the first posts of the "can we start a list of respected vendors" thread, there were lots of concerns then about who should go on a recommended list and what factors would be used since everyone's buying experience can be so subjective. Some even said instead of being a recommended list, it should just be a list with contact info - maybe this is the easy answer? Just make it a contact list of vendors, not necessarily a recommended or respected list? Then a note in bold could be added saying that everyone's experiences are subjective and to do your due diligence and search for other's experiences before buying? That being said, the buyer beware thread that started this one makes it very clear that vendors need to be ethical to be on the list, and if any breaches or deal-breakers happen (like that buyer beware thread) then the vendor needs to be removed. So, back to specifications that keep vendors on the list...

 

[digdeep]

I, too cannot type fast enough........trying to think at the same time!

Some vendors have come on here to share their 'side of the story' when there has been a negative post; but that isn't something everyone can nor will do. Ultimately there are some vendors that I would remove because of the 'ethics' issues which I don't believe are that difficult to assess--although for people new to CS it is indeed very difficult to navigate information about the gem they want, the realistic price range, etc etc. There are many variables in any transaction, but much higher prices with misleading photo's and deceptive descriptions is definitely not a level playing field with other vendors who do their best to present the gems they are selling in a transparent manner. So 'just a list' that would keep those vendors would lessen the integrity of this forum, IMO. However, just a list without them would be OK with me!

And on Jeff Davies........I've only bought one stone from him and I agree the photo didn't represent what I received.......the stone I received was MUCH better than the photo! So he's still on my personal 'good vendor' list..............

 

[sparkleismyfavcolor]

Some vendors have come on here to share their 'side of the story' when there has been a negative post; but that isn't something everyone can nor will do. Ultimately there are some vendors that I would remove because of the 'ethics' issues which I don't believe are that difficult to assess--although for people new to CS it is indeed very difficult to navigate information about the gem they want, the realistic price range, etc etc. There are many variables in any transaction, but much higher prices with misleading photo's and deceptive descriptions is definitely not a level playing field with other vendors who do their best to present the gems they are selling in a transparent manner. So 'just a list' that would keep those vendors would lessen the integrity of this forum, IMO. However, just a list without them would be OK with me!

Definitely agree!

 

[dk168]

And on Jeff Davies........I've only bought one stone from him and I agree the photo didn't represent what I received.......the stone I received was MUCH better than the photo! So he's still on my personal 'good vendor' list..............

Another satisfied customer of JD here, and I have always found his photos and vids to be good representation of his stones. I would go as far as to say that most of the stones I have bought from him exceeded my expectations.

DK

 

[Garnet Gimlet]

As a real newbie, I check this site daily, but I don't really post. I come to listen and learn, and I don't post because i can't really add to the conversation. But hopefully this will be genuinely useful as it is the perspective of a real novice.

When I first found this site, I visited every recommended vendor site. As I followed the forum, the knowledge of everyone here solidified my faith in the recommended list. But the more I visited each site, I could not account for vastly different pricing on what looked to be (to my new eyes) on pretty commensurate stones. As I followed the forum more, I realized that there are "recommended" vendors and "more recommended" vendors. Some sites are known to be overpriced, while others are known to be more fairly priced -- something I would not have thought of a few months ago. Perhaps there should be a "recommended" and "preferred" category in the new system?

As a newbie, I also use my common sense to take pictures with a grain of salt -- monitor color and resolution varies, so I tend to rely on description more that photo accuracy.

It would be important for me to know about return shipping policy and insurance. Honestly those are things that wouldn't have crossed my mind to ask about as a new buyer.

I do think consistency over time is really important. It is always understandable to have one or two star crossed transactions, but it would be nice to know how long they have been "recommended"

I don't have any bright ideas about how to track this, but just wanted to let you know some of my concerns. As of yet, I have only bought one stone since I've found you all. It's a beautiful sunstone from Dan Stair, and I'm really happy with it. But as of yet, I'm still waiting and learning before I bite the bullet and buy a higher priced stone -- I really want a bright teal, round or oval Afghan tourmaline -- but when I do, I know it will be from the recommended list.

 

[kitsunegrl]

I love my Jeff Davies sapphires and I felt the photos were very accurate. Even my jeweler was Impressed with them.

 

[T L]

Some vendors have come on here to share their 'side of the story' when there has been a negative post; but that isn't something everyone can nor will do. Ultimately there are some vendors that I would remove because of the 'ethics' issues which I don't believe are that difficult to assess--although for people new to CS it is indeed very difficult to navigate information about the gem they want, the realistic price range, etc etc. There are many variables in any transaction, but much higher prices with misleading photo's and deceptive descriptions is definitely not a level playing field with other vendors who do their best to present the gems they are selling in a transparent manner. So 'just a list' that would keep those vendors would lessen the integrity of this forum, IMO. However, just a list without them would be OK with me!

Definitely agree!

+2

 

[cm366]

As DK and marymm have said, updating the disclaimer seems like a good idea. I think requiring vendors to fit a list (which will grow) of ideal consumer specs will inevitably narrow the field to the two or three favorite vendors of long-time members, and end up creating an artificial atmosphere that won't serve new members well. Folks who aren't used to CS need to be confronted with price variability, they should be confronted with different styles of photography, and they should be acquainted, early, with the idea that buying CS online is a lot like buying South American real estate online.

We don't only recommend 'trade ideal' stones because not every consumer has the money to buy a $50k/ct untreated Burma ruby, or even a 'deal' on a $10k/ct Mahenge spinel. It's no less ridiculous to tell people that a handful of vendors are 'preferred' when there are posts all over the forum bragging about eBay finds or wicked deals from vendors who don't appear on the list because people are concerned about their return shipping instructions or packaging.

I think it's a fairly open secret that some posters have had remarkable success with specific vendors, and been offered some remarkable opportunities by those vendors which aren't available to the general public. That's a reality of the business - there aren't enough 5ct, vivid, eye clean Mahenge spinels for everyone who wants one to get one, and so they get offered to regulars, old friends or collectors who are known to pay over the mark. Those experiences aren't representative of what can be offered to the casual buyer stopping in to get a CS engagement ring because they're 'cheaper than diamonds', or replace their grandmother's synthetic ruby with a natural 5ct one, on a $500 budget, because the ring has sentimental value. Those vendors still don't get outed, or twitted about violating some nebulous code of fairness. PS recommends vendors who serve US buyers well and openly refuse international customers - should we de-list vendors on that basis? What if they encourage non-secure methods of payment, or don't respond to enquiries in trochaic tetrameter?

Let's acknowledge that the list isn't a perfect or unanimous guarantee of service - let's be open about why people were listed or de-listed, and let's encourage people to research their vendor as carefully as they research what colour and treatments they're okay with.

 

[dk168]

With regard to non-local/international buyers, I am one such buyer, and I see it as my own responsibility to read up on how to deal with custom/import and handling charges, and what to do/expect if something is not entirely satisfactory.

I choose to import from abroad, knowing there is an element of risk, and for each potential new vendor, I weigh up the risks to decide if it is worth to engage them before parting my well-earned pennies.

For me, good communication and accurate listing and representation are key.

DK

 

[MollyMalone]

I am opposed to "fair retail pricing" as a criterion for being included on the list. Think that's best addressed, as happens now, when people either ask about a specific stone or for leads.
* I've seen some vendors offer certain colored stones at what strikes me as lower than the current range, but others in their inventory are priced higher. Would that kind of "mixed bag", so to speak, mean a vendor offers fair or unfair retail pricing?

* Most importantly, colored stones aren't interchangeable widgets that are being manufactured for a fixed price. They even are inherently much less of a quantifiable commodity than diamonds, where are extensive, and frequently updated, data bases for both those in the trade and consumers. There are no CS counterparts to Rapaport's weekly-monthly reports & PS's own Search and Compare Diamond Prices from Multiple Vendors feature.

* Many of the CS vendors we collectively patronize are buying their own rough & cutting it. Are some vendors to be left off the list because they are selling stones at a price sufficient to cover the anticipated cost of replacement rough rather than the lower price of rough when (presumably) purchased? (I was stunned to read criticism of that here awhile back; altho' I certainly appreciate it when prices reflect old rough, I sure don't see why any businessperson should be expected to eat his/her costs of replenishing inventory).

A thought re the Vendor pictures and owner pictures of PS stones "sticky": how about if we ask Ella if there's a way to establish sub-folders for each of the vendors represented to date (and offer us the ability to also add new sub-folders)? Sorting the presently existing, pictorial posts (and eliminating the "beautiful stone!" kind of comments in the current sticky) would make it a more useful visual aid/assessment tool (perhaps even serve as a more direct influence on the vendors themselves) -- and yeppers, I'd volunteer to help get that started.