When did the FTC outlaw ''Blue White'' diamond usage?

[Haven]

I love it when you all start talking about things like this. Just wanted to say I appreciate being able to "listen in" on this convo. Thanks!

 

[oldminer]

Oily-hazy caused by what we believe to be UV fluorescence. Not caused by other reasons such as graining, knaats, etc.

Very Strong blue 4% or less (and the effect visible may be quite slight)
Strong Blue 2% or less (and the effect visible may be quite slight)

Medium Blue 0

Faint any color 0

A Premier effect is not so much oily or hazy, but sort of a very light blue cast, a tiny bit hazy, but not much, added to the colorless appearance on the diamond when lit with some UV in the lighting environment. Such as a nice sunny summer day at mid-day.

When the Premier effect is moderate it might command a slight premium from someone who desires the effect. I used two of these as side diamonds in my wife''s engagement ring. It was my special effects package for her. She could care less.

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/9/2008 1:39:10 PM
Author: oldminer

A Premier effect is not so much oily or hazy, but sort of a very light blue cast, a tiny bit hazy, but not much, added to the colorless appearance on the diamond when lit with some UV in the lighting environment. Such as a nice sunny summer day at mid-day.

When the Premier effect is moderate it might command a slight premium from someone who desires the effect. I used two of these as side diamonds in my wife''s engagement ring. It was my special effects package for her. She could care less.

But I do remember some "Premier effects" did have a minimum touch of yellowish tint on the edges of the Diamond when profiled...

 

[kcgunesq]

Date: 5/8/2008 2:11:54 PM
Author: niceice


I believe what Derek is saying is that his interpretation of the wording of the law in plain English is that it may not be illegal or prohibited to refer to a colorless diamond (DEF) that has a strong enough degree of fluorescence to make it appear ''blue white'' in color when viewed in direct sunlight as a ''blue white diamond'' because as a colorless diamond, it does not exhibit ''any [other] color or any trace of any color other than blue or bluish'' [as a result of the fluorescence]. However the term would not be appropriate for a diamond like the 1.70 carat, SI-1 clarity, H color with Very Strong Blue fluorescence that we currently have in inventory because although it exhibits a distinct yet subtle hint of lavender blue when viewed in direct sunlight (a very pretty effect, I might add) the diamond is also an ''H'' color and thus does exhibit a body color which is other than blue or bluish.


That said, I don''t think we''ll be marketing any colorless diamonds with blue fluorescence as ''blue white'' any time soon because it''s just asking for the FTC to wander in and deliver an @zz Whooping right before they make (whoever) the Poster Child for the 2009 I was Dumb Enough to Call it ''Blue White'' Award Conference

Keep in mind that one of the original reasons (read ''the story I heard'') for creating the guideline was that the demand for ''blue white'' diamonds had grown to the extent that jewelers were having trouble selling their non-blue fluorescent diamonds and had resorted to using blue light bulbs in their sales presentation to create the effect of a ''blue white'' diamond in a non-fluorescent diamonds to make it appear ''blue white''. I suppose that it''s kind of like rolling back the speedometer on a car, of course not all used car dealers resort to such tactics, but laws are created for the few who do in an effort to protect the masses from being defrauded.

Exactly what I was trying to say. Thank you for saying it better than I did!
I agree that just because it might be legal, doesn''t mean its wise to use the term. As the term has so many negative associations, there isn''t any benefit to use the term except perhaps as between honest, well acquainted industry insiders who through a course of conduct knows what the other means.

Thank you again for helping me explain my thoughts.