Originally Posted by Caitlin

Fan-t-Z

That's priceless, Caitlin!

[smetzler]

This entire discussion may be Fan-t-Z if the Cook Islands Pearl Authority does not offer adequate leadership during the next few months, or an individual farm is not able to demonstrate an ability to consistently produce pearls that appeal to the quality niche market.

CIPA is aware of this discussion. Let's see if anyone there will have anything to add.

[Caitlin]

Fan-t-Z
That's priceless, Caitlin!

I wish I could take credit, but that is Jeremy's word.

Steve,
I hope the CIPA will encourage the kinds of pearls we have discussed here. CI pearls already have a bit of a name; now it is time to clarify it.

The CIPA should also note that getting into ecological perliculture would give them a great boost. The Cooks are a pristine piece of paradise in people's minds, and they should exploit that as a marketing strategy also. There are strong ecological movements starting up all over the place. I did a bit of research, and since last year, the number of eco-friendly products and ventures in all corners of the globe has sky rocketed. It is not a trend or marketing-spin of any kind, it is a modern day necessity. I would love to see that. I would pay extra for that. And if coupled with the unusual colours they are capable of producing---WOW!

Slraep

[smetzler]

The individuals I've chanced upon are open to these ideas (if not already considering).

Been thinking about Jeremy's hint that Josh has experimented transgrafting P. Margaritifera with P. Maculata tissue. While such restlessness is to be applauded (as inherent to the pursuit of quality) and we anxiously await his results, here we have the opposite argument: Kamoka Pearls has established itself as a superior example of a classic category (Tahitian), and there would seem to be minimal advantage to challenging the typicity of said genre.

Josh, the Cooks await you…

Originally Posted by smetzler

.... here we have the opposite argument: Kamoka Pearls has established itself as a superior example of a classic category (Tahitian), and there would seem to be minimal advantage to challenging the typicity of said genre.

Josh, the Cooks await you…

Heheheheh.

Slraep

[pernula]

This is a very interesting thread. I know nothing about branding but just an observation. For wine, you can bottle it, put a seal and label on the bottle and everyone can go get Y brand wine after reading that it scores 92 etc on Wine Spectator. For pearls, the Cook Island Pearl Authority or someone else would have to make a strong alliance with some distributors and retailers who can trace origin and proud to tell customers about originality of various pearls. Or CIPA would have to venture into a vertically integrated organization covering farming to retail themselves.

Ecologically farmed beautiful pearls, that would be a big plus.

Regarding comparing colors, I remember Josh showed some very beautiful color pearls (I love them!), so may be CIPA can show some nice pictures for comparison if they believe they have more color variety.

I do remember Josh and Douglas commented upon the low pricing of Tahitian pearls (on the farmer's side), so perhaps innovation on Josh's part in culturing techniques, hybrids, etc. can bring some unique pearls to his farm (and may be later to other Tahitian pearl farms) that help improve his/their returns.. Ecologically farmed pearls probably do cost more for the farmers...

Cheers,
Pernula

[smetzler]

Originally Posted by pernula

For wine, you can bottle it, put a seal and label on the bottle and everyone can go get Y brand wine after reading that it scores 92 etc on Wine Spectator.

Yes, labels are a distinct advantage, as well as winedom's 100-point rating system, although the producers easily manipulate this with technology. On balance, the rating system has accelerated the subrogation of individuality. Would hate to see it applied to pearls, although a 100-point Cook Islands pearl would certainly alleviate a lot of marketing drudgery!

Originally Posted by pernula

Regarding comparing colors, I remember Josh showed some very beautiful color pearls (I love them!), so may be CIPA can show some nice pictures for comparison if they believe they have more color variety.

My post early in this thread of pearls from a single farmer on a single day of 2006 harvest provides some hint of the range, in addition to my wife's keshi bracelet from another thread. But the concept of colors here has been carefully couched as more 'potential' than reality, given observations of the shells themselves, and the efforts of one man, Peter Cummings, in the 1960s and 1970s (simultaneous to the earliest efforts in Tahiti).

Originally Posted by pernula

For pearls, the Cook Island Pearl Authority or someone else would have to make a strong alliance with some distributors and retailers who can trace origin and proud to tell customers about originality of various pearls. Or CIPA would have to venture into a vertically integrated organization covering farming to retail themselves.

I do remember Josh and Douglas commented upon the low pricing of Tahitian pearls (on the farmer's side), so perhaps innovation on Josh's part in culturing techniques, hybrids, etc. can bring some unique pearls to his farm (and may be later to other Tahitian pearl farms) that help improve his/their returns.. Ecologically farmed pearls probably do cost more for the farmers...

Integrated producer/end consumer marketing is the key and one of the great advantages of labels on wine bottles, as each label is able to tell a story. Kamoka and Sea of Cortez direct market (to PP, Druzy, etc) and as such control their pricing to a great degree, while cutting out a middleman or two. They are clearly getting their message across, to a hardcore group of followers that eagerly spreads the word. I would wager that given continuity of current efforts they will each be able to raise their prices at will, alternatively offer their 'branded' pearls through conventional distribution channels.

[Nerida]

I agree - both these examples, by becoming known by their "label" become sought-after in their own right. The fact that Josh's actual product is proudly typical of type is a testament to consumers buying more than the product itself. In Australia, no-one has heard of Kamoka pearls, or probably not Sea of Cortez either - I'm not sure how ingrained these brands are in the broader market in the US. To go via regular distribution channels would probably raise their profile amongst that market, but I also fear that they (Doug, Josh) would gain more than 1 or 2 extra middlemen in the process, and that the higher prices their product would attract would be lost to the actual farmers. There would definitely be a threat of them losing control of the distribution as well - and thus of their "brand" itself.

The way they currently market - yes, they could raise their prices and the desirability of their brand would mean that the consumers would happily absorb the higher cost. For the CI farmers - unless the entire CI industry was on board then it would be more advantageous for individual farms to brand, label and control distribution of their products themselves.

[smetzler]

By 'brands' I hope it is understood that I'm not talking Paspaley here. As long as the farms can find the markets and manage their logistics in-house they would have no need for intermediaries. In the internet age, it seems that this is increasingly possible. That is the positive outlook for a resourceful individual in the Cooks.

[Nerida]

No, no - thinking Kamoka, Manahiki (Carolyn uses it), Sea of Cortez... I agree - the internet has made it increasingly possible for individual producers to reach their consumers without complex distribution channels. Josh's fabo website would definitely make me want to buy his pearls over other Tahitians -not just for the slick production and drool-worthy images, but for the story it tells.

I didn't realize the Cooks were giving Tahiti that serious a run for their black pearl money. Fiji? Fiji? Don't know if I should feel so sorry for the Cooks pearl farmer any more I think it is the fallen status of the Tahitian black pearl more than anything else, that is causing these problems. You just can't spin-market enough to hide the fact that every corner jeweller now has as pretty much as many Tahitians as akoyas.

http://www.pacificmagazine.net/news/...pearl-industry

"The European Union has earmarked some US$5.8 million as part of a plan to reform and boost French Polynesia's ailing black pearl industry, Maritime Resource Minister Keitapu Maamaatuaiahutapu announced late last week. The scheme is part of the EU's 9th EDF (European Development Fund), which initially covered the 2002-2007 period, Maamaatuaiahutapu told reporters. The project, which is scheduled to run over a three-year period from 2008 to 2010), involves on-site training by roving experts for black pearl farmers, with a particular focus on quality control and productivity. Another facet of the project concerns a survey on the state of the international market opportunities for French Polynesian black pearls. Once completed, the survey would give rise to recommendations on how the industry, which has been facing tough competition from neighboring Cook Islands and even Fiji, should rethink its international marketing strategy"

Slraep

[smetzler]

Originally Posted by Slraep

I didn't realize the Cooks were giving Tahiti that serious a run for their black pearl money. Fiji? Fiji?

Looks like they believe in ghosts in FP…and managed to scare an EU minister or two as well.

$5.8 million to FP should actually raise our concerns for the poor Cook Islands farmer, who additionally is hampered in his quest for outside investment by his own government's proscription against foreign ownership of real estate.

Going back to comments made earlier in this thread re marketing and origin of pearls. We have worked with a local scientist who previously developed a method to fingerprint gold. This was done to reduce the amount of theft and to pin point the origin of any gold parcel. His work assisted police in certain theft cases.

During the past few years or so, he turned his attention to pearls. Given that pearls are easily stolen, traded, etc, he theorised that by fingerprinting pearls, then producers, wholesalers, etc would be able to identify a source of a pearl and thus assess its credibility or honesty of supply.

Kind of a double edge sword though. If pearls could be fingerprinted, then potentially great for producers to ID their own products, strands, pieces, etc but perhaps not so good for some wholesalers who may need to mix pearls, parcels, etc to create something special - honestly or not.

I tend to agree however. Marketing for the sake of marketing not so good; marketing and promoting a unique selling feature and backing it up with the goods, then much better.

[smetzler]

Originally Posted by Pearling Technologies

Given that pearls are easily stolen, traded, etc, he theorised that by fingerprinting pearls, then producers, wholesalers, etc would be able to identify a source of a pearl and thus assess its credibility or honesty of supply.

Kind of a double edge sword though. If pearls could be fingerprinted, then potentially great for producers to ID their own products, strands, pieces, etc but perhaps not so good for some wholesalers who may need to mix pearls, parcels, etc to create something special - honestly or not.

I tend to agree however. Marketing for the sake of marketing not so good; marketing and promoting a unique selling feature and backing it up with the goods, then much better.

Thanks! Douglas McLaurin posted this fascinating electron microscope image of aragonite platelet sutures on the thread 'Iridescence' a while back (in case some newer readers are wondering about this fingerprint business…).

Regarding marketable identity, surely anything that cannot be appreciated by the naked eye would not be a factor. And quality would be important, as thicker nacre layers should be more apt to highlight whatever regional/local differences there may be.