Independent gemologist comments on Gemporia

[Rose de France]

In July 2022 Krzysztof Stankiewicz (GIA-trained gemologist from Cracow, Poland) recorded a short video about Gemporia. In this video ("Pathology on the Jewellery Market") he speaks about his experiences with Gemporia's products, certificates, and descriptions.

These are Mr Stankiewicz's conclusions:

1) When it comes to identifications and enhancements, Gemporia rather doesn't make mistakes. Most of their certificates are good. But it's not always the case. There were incidents of selling synthetic colourless cubic zirconias (!) as natural colourless zircons.
2) Gemporia offers black diamonds and marks them as irradiated. But nowadays most of the black diamonds on the market are treated with LPHT (low-pressure & high-temperature) method. Gemporia should make sure what was really done to these jewels. If there are any inaccuracies/omissions in the descriptions, the proper corrections are necessary.
3) Regarding the carat weight of the stones, Gemporia sometimes gives conflicting information. Unfortunately, contradictions in one report make the whole thing invalid.
4) So-called "Songea rubies" offered by Gemporia look strange. They're more similar to reddish orange sapphires (treated with beryllium diffusion) than to actual rubies. Of course, it's not only Gemporia's problem. The line between corundum varieties is blurry. Depending on the laboratory or company, the same specimen can be marked as red sapphire or red ruby. It's possible to buy stones as sapphires (cheaper type of corundum) and then sell them as rubies (significantly more expensive variety). Such practices are fraudulent. The jewellery market worldwide needs regulations to stop this pathology.

Krzysztof Stankiewicz's video (in Polish):

 

[TheManWithNoName]

They cover their backs about carat weight by putting "average carat weight" - so if you've got one over the carat weight specified, then great - but if you've got one under the weight specified, then it's tough luck

I'll be fair to Gemporia - 95% of the time, the carat weights I've received are more than specified.


As for their treatment disclosure - they're not as reliable as they make out.

I once bought an 'untreated' Blue Amblygonite. It turned out to be irradiated - which is one of the harsher treatments and a long way off untreated.

I also once bought a Padparadscha Sapphire that was supposedly untreated. It came with two certificates - Gemporia's own certificate, that said "untreated" - and a GIA certificate that clearly said "HEAT TREATED". Much arguing took place between Gemporia and I - and they simply wouldn't have it that it was heat treated. Their argument was that the GIA certificate said that it was a "natural stone".

However, on GIA certificates, "natural stone" means that its a genuine gemstone - not a lab-created stone. The treatment is listed, very clearly further down the certificate. After sending a photo of the certificate, they finally accepted that the stone was heat treated - and they refunded me in full. They also said that they was going to "contact other customers that had bought the Madagascan Padparadscha Sapphires to let them know that they were heat treated". I have reason to suspect that they did not recall the stones that they had already sold out - but ever since that incident, they've sold the Sapphires as heat-treated.

There's been a couple of other instances where certificates have been incorrect too - but I cannot remember what those were now off the top of my head.

I've also told Gemporia / Jewellery Maker, literally, dozens of times across 7 or 8 years about the wrong graphics continually being shown on Jewellery Maker - yet they STILL haven't done anything about it.

JM continually show irradiated stones as (I) - but that is the code for Waxing. (IR) is the correct code for Irradiation.
JM also continually show (D) for diffusion too - but that is the code for Dyeing. (U) is the code for diffusion.

They seem to forget that JM customers buy their materials to make jewellery and sell on - so it is VITAL that the treatments shown are correct, otherwise those JM customers that are making to sell on, could also be telling their customers the wrong treatments. In my opinion, it is only a matter of time before someone sues JM. I'm amazed it hasn't actually happened yet.

I don't believe that Gemporia get everything lab tested as they make out. Has anyone seen any of the recent so-called Padparadscha Sapphires that were sold on GC? They were PURE RED! They were Rubies. Some of the other Padparadscha Sapphires they've been selling over the past few years have been PINK.

Padparadscha Sapphires should be an orangish-pink to pinkish-orange. The ones that GC have been selling have no secondary hues at all. There's also some controversy in the trade as to whether a 'Padparadscha Sapphire' should actually be called a Padparadscha - with many arguing that a true 'Padparadscha Sapphire' should only come from Sri Lanka (Ceylon).

It also baffles me how they can certify an 'Andesine'. Andesine is another controversial stone. Andesine is simply yellow Labradorite that has been diffused to give it an artificial Orangish-Red or Green colour.

Then there's the 'Bixbite' that Gemporia sold 5 or 6 years ago. It was White Rhyolite Matrix with flecks of red Bixbite in it. It should not have been sold as 'Bixbite' - it was Bixbite in Rhyolite. True Bixbite is INCREDIBLY difficult to get hold of due to its rarity. It took me around 12 years to finally get my hands on a proper Bixbite stone.

 

[AndyW]

Yes, I've come to see the certification from Gemporia similar to Geoffrey Rush's Captain Barbossa in the first Pirates of The Carribbean, when he tells Jack that the Pirates' Code is more "guidelines".

I haven't seen what I would classify as a real Papradasha (sorry Lynn ) since the days of Rocks & Co. And I think that there's a very strong argument on the naming, as you say. If it can be important that it's Brazilian copper-bearing tourmaline then it should be for this type of sapphire from Sri Lanka.

 

[TheManWithNoName]

Yes, I've come to see the certification from Gemporia similar to Geoffrey Rush's Captain Barbossa in the first Pirates of The Carribbean, when he tells Jack that the Pirates' Code is more "guidelines".

I haven't seen what I would classify as a real Papradasha (sorry Lynn ) since the days of Rocks & Co. And I think that there's a very strong argument on the naming, as you say. If it can be important that it's Brazilian copper-bearing tourmaline then it should be for this type of sapphire from Sri Lanka.

I think I've seen two on Gemporia - and they were around 10 years ago. They were both 'one of a kind' genuine Padparadscha Sapphires from Sri Lanka that were Pinkish-Orange, and they each came with a GIA ceriticate of authenticity. They were the real deal - and they sold for £800 each.

Those are the only 'proper' Padparadscha Sapphires I've seen on Gemporia. The current ones they're selling are nothing more than Pink Sapphires. If a lab has genuinely certified those as 'Padparadscha', i'd be amazed.

 

[ianrobo111]

this ties in with what I said not he Troth thread that Emporia now seem sensitive to comments like what they claim is high quality is not that. Wonder where they are getting that feedback from > Facebook ? IG ??