lisa c
Perpetual Pearl Student
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 3,600
Wow, Jersey! Sizzling hot response, alnost a full decade later, and I still get a chill!
Natural Pearl Necklace Sells for World Auction Record $5.1 Million
- Thread starter Jacques
- Start date
lisa c
Perpetual Pearl Student
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 3,600
Thank you, Blaire! It’s still very exciting and moving, a decade later.Thank you, Pattye, for writing and getting this splendid answer. We learned so much more than expected.
I want to point out that Jacques removed his thread after Dave's first post, assuming that Dave was right on first examination of what was said. (Even Dave would have said that more investigation was warranted, rather than dismissing the pearls out of hand.) So I reactivated the thread. What a wonderful payoff!
Pearl-Guide is a terrific place where we are all free to challenge assumptions and freely discuss the aspects and potentiality of any and all pearls. And we get to share the beauty of pearls through our fabulous photos. We are a community and I hope to see more interesting subjects explored in the future.
I started my day by going to a tourmaline mine two hours away, then I rushed back, changed out of my dirt-encrusted clothes and headed over to GIA for the "Responsible Sourcing Panel", which was awesome. Then I talked to Robert Weldon about the photography for a G&G article on John Tu's pearls, and then I came home to this wondrous thread! What a great day!!! Thank YOU!
lisa c
Perpetual Pearl Student
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 3,600
Dear Pattye, another home run! Thank you
Lagoon Island Pearls
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 2,101
The difference between the auction prices then and now is quite stark. $5.1M down to $1.25M (USD). That's an enormous liability. I have no idea of the circumstances which brought this piece back into the market, but I'd suspect an estate sale or asset seizure because it's doubtful the seller could expect a profit from resale, especially once the auction premium was factored. If this were true, it goes to show how fickle the luxury market can be. Ten years ago, inflation was much less. Couple that with a global pandemic, it's no wonder the price point ended where it is.
It's still bewildering why the origin of these pearls was not disclosed initially, but revealed subsequently dispelling much of the skepticism. Imagine if you will, perusing a classic car auction which only stated an antique car absent of the model and year. It makes no sense, especially at such a high price point.
Christie's did mention the origin of these pearls in the latter sale and a couple of factual points on colour, but not without some unreasonable pretext:
"The colours of pearls are also influenced by factors like environmental conditions and the presence of minerals or pigments in the surrounding waters."
We've had this discussion many times on this forum and the general consensus concur this is a myth, especially where healthy, otherwise productive oysters are concerned. Perhaps they're merely flowery in their description, but it's problematic where premium items are concerned.
To this date, I have no reason to suspect anything untoward by the original artist or seller, thus accepting their explanation at face value. However, had we not known the provenance from which it was created, I'd still stand by my assertion the lab report is inadequate. It's subjective conjecture in nearly complete absence of irrefutable objectivity. While natural origin may be presumed by the size of each piece, it does not definitively preclude the existence of keishi pearls in the construction. Nowadays and irrespective of the producer, elaborate fakes must always be considered when examining ultra high end items. Ignoring this point may give rise to the perception of confirmation or ignorance biases or even fraud.
The solution is simple. Pearls should be examined and certified prior to construction wherever possible.
Sending a finished piece to a gem lab greatly inhibits the ability to properly identify it's parts. The pearls in this piece were obviously selected from a much larger pool, thus other exemplars in the lot could have been analyzed and cross referenced to the assembled parts in several ways. In this day and age and in the interest of public health and safety, most market ready shellfish types are immediately traceable to their sources. It's the law. Even fruit and vegetables are packed in containers marked by the farmer. It's not an overly costly process for items worth a few dollars, no less millions.
It's still bewildering why the origin of these pearls was not disclosed initially, but revealed subsequently dispelling much of the skepticism. Imagine if you will, perusing a classic car auction which only stated an antique car absent of the model and year. It makes no sense, especially at such a high price point.
Christie's did mention the origin of these pearls in the latter sale and a couple of factual points on colour, but not without some unreasonable pretext:
"The colours of pearls are also influenced by factors like environmental conditions and the presence of minerals or pigments in the surrounding waters."
We've had this discussion many times on this forum and the general consensus concur this is a myth, especially where healthy, otherwise productive oysters are concerned. Perhaps they're merely flowery in their description, but it's problematic where premium items are concerned.
To this date, I have no reason to suspect anything untoward by the original artist or seller, thus accepting their explanation at face value. However, had we not known the provenance from which it was created, I'd still stand by my assertion the lab report is inadequate. It's subjective conjecture in nearly complete absence of irrefutable objectivity. While natural origin may be presumed by the size of each piece, it does not definitively preclude the existence of keishi pearls in the construction. Nowadays and irrespective of the producer, elaborate fakes must always be considered when examining ultra high end items. Ignoring this point may give rise to the perception of confirmation or ignorance biases or even fraud.
The solution is simple. Pearls should be examined and certified prior to construction wherever possible.
Sending a finished piece to a gem lab greatly inhibits the ability to properly identify it's parts. The pearls in this piece were obviously selected from a much larger pool, thus other exemplars in the lot could have been analyzed and cross referenced to the assembled parts in several ways. In this day and age and in the interest of public health and safety, most market ready shellfish types are immediately traceable to their sources. It's the law. Even fruit and vegetables are packed in containers marked by the farmer. It's not an overly costly process for items worth a few dollars, no less millions.
Similar threads
