[Caitlin]

Tissue Nucleation
Pros:
1
Produces a solid nacre cultured pearl that is indistinguishable from the original, real, natural, wild, pearls
2
The resultant pearls can be judged by any of the original, authentic, pearl standards for natural pearls.
3
Tissue-nucleated pearls are far more likely to have the old fashioned excellent luster qualities of “like “orient” than bead nucleated pearls of any quality.
4
These are only cultured pearls that are acceptable to the old fashioned pearl experts. For instance anything but natural pearls is outlawed for sale in Bahrain
5
The only cultured pearl acceptable as a sacred gemstone to Hindus
6
There is a lower death rate of mollusks at nucleation, because tissue nucleation without the bead is a less stressful process to the scallop
7
The best quality pearls cultured this way need little to no artificial enhancements, unlike even the best quality bead nucleated akoyas.
8
Tissue nucleated cultured freshwater pearls have not yet been hyped; they are just a good buy for the knowledgeable.
9
The best of this type of pearl is poised to move up in value.
10
Freshwater pearls, like-for-like, hold their value far better than akoyas. ZE
11
CFWP are low tech and easier to raise, such as the circumstances of the average Chinese farmer


Cons:
1
These pearls take longer to culture and thus, are not as profitable as quickly as bead nucleated
2
There will be a higher rate of off-round pearls, unless human culturing techniques can intervene.
3
It is a process relatively new-to-mass-production, and the best round pearls are not well known compared to top-market branded akoyas.
4
The major CFWP from China have no Mystique and low quality CFWP are "common as dirt", both of which facts have become part of the PR machine of the Japanese and are accepted as fact –as are many other pearl myths
5
The lower quality pearls are subjected to same artificial enhancements as ALL bead nucleated pearls are. See below for more on that.



Bead Nucleation
Pros
1
A shell bead nucleus practically guarantees an almost round pearl, with proper culture.
2
Since the bead core is more than 95% of the pearl’s volume, there is a shorter growing period in the host than for than tissue culture.
3
Bead nuclei= bigger profits, sooner.
4
Bead nucleated pearls have Major Mystique; provided by the Mikimoto company. All other purveyors of Mystiqued marine pearls, esp. Paspaley, have been able to use MikiM’s marketing style for almost a century.
5
They are most peoples’ current idea of what a pearl is.
6
Bead nucleated marine pearls have snob appeal.
7
They satisfy the craving for a luxury item in a way that a less expensive pearl cannot
8
They have been the biggest selling pearls for 100 years- in fact they have been the only game in town for 100 years.
9
They will continue to be an important share of the market for the foreseeable future.


Cons
1
Built in obsolescence. Even the thickest layer of nacre will eventually wear down to the bead, if the pearls are worn long enough.
2
All cultured akoyas and most other cultured marine pearls that have visited Japan have artificially enhanced luster which is just on the surface -
3
The artificial luster will also begin to wear off quite soon, if the pearls are worn, even on the best of strands.
4
Since the bead core is more than 95% of the pearl’s volume, there is a shorter growing period in the host than for than tissue culture
5
This = bigger profits, sooner, which benefits the growers and merchants, but not the buyers.
6
The standards for thickness of nacre have decreased several times over the years. The nacre on akoyas is thinner than it used to be. It’s down to .4mm on the radius or .8 on the diameter. Out of 7-8mm, this is a very thin skin. On 10mm, it is even worse.
7
Bead nucleated pearls cannot be judged by ancient pearl grading standards because the luster is different on a thin layer of nacre. Real “orient” is almost impossible. Pinking” and suchlike enhancements are used to simulate overtones. Water refers to the depth of translucency, but can’t be judged in the less than 1mm thickness of nacre of the akoyas.


8
The Japanese PR machine invented a new Pearl grading standard which extols roundness and lack of surface blemishes above all other qualities. (roundness is the only criteria most solid-core pearls have trouble meeting, though some do).
9
Bead nucleating is traumatic to the scallop and there is a high death rate from it.
10
They are not the best value for the money, especially if one pays for brand names.


11
Bead nucleated pearls are not considered to be pearls at all by the natural pearl buffs, but synthetic pearls
12
None of the arguments for bead nucleation actually speak in favor of quality. ZE


please make suggestions, both to add to the list and to improve the wording.
Thanks!

[MABE BRAZIL]

Hi Caitlin,
I think that is a question of time to tissue nucletion attain the same pros augments of bead nucleated, like a round pearl and
faster growing period.

regards

Ricardo Cunha Lima

[Zeide Erskine]

Hi Caitlin,

What really makes me wonder so much about the common as dirt argument is that, for instance, diamonds are common as dirt. They are the most common of all gemstones. However, the mass consumers value them higher than other gemstones and believe them to be rare notwithstanding that a mere glimpse at any jelewry store should enlighten them to the contrary.

Zeide

[Caitlin]

Here is the ultimate article on diamonds: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/198202/diamond
Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Diamond?


An unruly market may undo the work of a giant cartel and of an inspired, decades-long ad campaign

by Edward Jay Epstein

Actually it was written 20 years ago and nothing has changed- and everything that is true of the DeBeers mystique is true of Big Mik

[Kevin Canning]

the phrase "A diamond is forever" is one of the most genius marketing slogans ever developed by the jewelry trade. They created the notion that diamonds and to a certain extent all jewelry should be kept as an heirloom and never sold. This helped to prevent an influx of "used" diamonds to the market which helped keep prices up.

That being said, Jewelry stores are flooded with diamonds not because they are soo over whelmingly more common then other gems, but because this is what the public wants.

On that note, why don't we start a debate about how Cubic zurconia is better then diamonds. They can be just as pretty as average diamonds, cost less and will last for a 100 years.

[Zeide Erskine]

Hi Kevin,

The funny thing about cubic zirconia is that they are actually inherently rarer than diamonds. Zirconium is a rare element to boot and it has plenty of industrial applications. Buying small-fry diamonds in the I range is about the greatest waste of money I can currently think of, short of short-cultured akoyas.

Zeide

[Caitlin]

If I weren't so doubled over in laughter, I would reply, "Zirconias have more rarity- and integrity- than diamonds do!" Diamonds truly are the most common gemstone and they now have even more mountains of them in Canada and Russia. More common than amethyst! Peridot!, Garnet! But they are like peanut seeds, controlled by a cartel. And they have the best promo in history, as Kevin points out. these are the grandaddies of Mystique!

Zirconias are more the equivalent of Swarovski glass pearlized beads-man made, not natural. (and boy, the Tahitian peacock colors in the Swarovski 12mm glass beads are spectacular! Now there is an imitation glass bead that looks more Tahitian than poor quality Tahitians do!)

However, to keep track of the point, CFWP really are PEARLS and the natural pearl buffs would argue whether the bead-nuked pearls are actually pearls at all!

[Zeide Erskine]

Hi Caitlin,

We wouldn't just argue it, we would flat out deny it! By the way natural cubic zirconia and strontium titanate have recently been found. These are extremely rare, so rare indeed, that they only sell in the collectors' market - and still cost only a fraction of diamonds. Given the prevalence of diamonds and their perceived value thanks to Mystique (only genuine with the capital M), why not Mystique-fy Chinese freshwater cultured pearls. At least they are, technically, pearls while bead-nucleated cultured "pearls" are not. Look at it that way: A lab ruby has to be a ruby with the same chemical, physical, and optical properties of the real thing. Why should there be a different standard for cultured pearls? Making a so-called ruby doublé with a clear cut stone and glued or fused-on ruby top is not allowed to be called lab ruby or cultured ruby. Why this double standard for pearls? Could there be a lobby behind this?

Zeide

[Kevin Canning]

ok well I guess you can add DeBeers to your list of giants you are going to bring to their knees.

[Caitlin]

why not Mystique-fy Chinese freshwater cultured pearls

The Chinese need a PR genius and a powerful cartel- lobby- to really finish the job on the Japanese and reform public opinion. (Think I would qualify? Hey China, over here! I love your pearls!)

[Zeide Erskine]

Hi Kevin,

Great idea! I was afraid I may be running out of targets. Kidding aside, wouldn't informed consumers be a good thing? O.k. it may seriously harm the holders of pipeline stock. But it would bring about a change in culturing techniques, make pearls in general, their origin (both regionally and species-wise), and colors worthy subjects of discussion the way they are in collectors' circles. There is more to know about pearls than most people have ever dreamed of and there are enormously more fascinating gemstones than diamonds.

Zeide

[Kevin Canning]

The Chinese need a PR genius and a powerful cartel- lobby-

The Chinese need to stop flooding the market with garbage and ruining the publics perception of Freshwater pearls. We all know they CAN be beautiful - but most are worse then costume jewelry.

[Caitlin]

Maybe I should add to the pros list of both kinds of pearls, that they are environmentally friendly to produce. Also pearls seem to be an economic source for various First Nations who have long traditonal associations with pearl diving, the Yaquis, the Badjao, the pearl divers of Bahrain, locals in Tahiti, etc. I think maybe pearls benefit rather than exploit these folks. ??

[Caitlin]

The Chinese need to stop flooding the market with garbage and ruining the publics perception of Freshwater pearls. We all know they CAN be beautiful - but most are worse then costume jewelry.

YUP. And they also need to quit producing the cheap akoyas. They are hurting themselves and the true market value of all their pearls. You'd think if they can control human reproduction the way they do, they could say,"Enough already, with lousy pearls of all stripes!"

On the other hand it looks like every Tom, Dick and Harry school kid is learning to tissue nucleate (where did I read that? Was it here?) and I heard farmers grow them in local ditches,ponds, in fact anywhere they will grow...... Now they need to make school kid science projects where they tissue nucleate a variety of mussels in far flung neigborhoods.....with local varieties.... and have competitons for the best pearls. A pearls olympics- or State Fair or something like that.

[Caitlin]

I just read in Strack (2006 p 446) that tissue nucleated pearls are easier to produce by low tech farmers. It is implied that they do not have the skill nor the sanitary conditions required for the added implantation of a nucleus and the higher death rates due to shock.