Freshwater Pearl Downsizing

jshepherd

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
6,154
When does 8 mean 7.7, 7 mean 6.5, and will 9 ever really mean 8? Sound confusing? Welcome to the materials game in all 5 of the freshwater pearl producing provinces of China.

Cultured freshwater pearls are the only category of pearl completely controlled by a single producing market - China. Within China the market is controlled by a select group of companies that have the final say on nearly all aspects of production, pricing, and sizing. Controlling nearly all material (hama age pearl) in China are Grace, Ruan, Tian Di Run, Shanxiahu, and Sanshui, and Tear of Angel.

While prices are expected to fluctuate as demand and supply changes, there is one aspect that is very difficult for many of us to comprehend and begrudgingly accept. This is the constant change in material sizing.

Several years ago it was decided that in lieu of raising material costs it would be possible to simply drop material sizes by .1mm. This is similar to not getting a full gallon of gas - you are only paying for 9/10 of a gallon. So for a time, all pearls that were marked 7-8mm were actually 6.9-7.9mm in size. This was not a big difference although it padded producers pockets by an easy 10%.

Because of the ease of the .1mm transition the size was dropped again. Now 6.8-7.8 was considered 7-8mm. Finally it was decided that 6.7-7.7 was 7-8mm, and this is where it stayed for some time.

Although this was very difficult to work with as the only way to buy real size strands was to cooperate with a factory to separate material sizes to speciation, it was possible. But this also meant investing in a full line from smallest to largest, with the last mm ending at .7mm. This was facilitated by the fact that of the .7-.7 size range the materials were split 25/75. This means that if the lot was 7-8mm, 25% of the pearls were 6.7-7.2mm, and 75% of the pearls were 7.2-7.7mm. This of course offered another corner to cut, and last year this secondary sizing range was dropped to 50/50.

This year feels like a turning point truly for the worst. New materials are now separated by .5’s, a full .2mm drop. This means a strand of pearls that is 7-8mm, is really only 6.5-7.5mm is constructed to scale from new materials. If a strand is 8-9mm, it is really 7.5-8.5mm.

Now this aside one would assume it would still be simple to separate materials into true sized lots and create strands with the 50/50 split. But they actually took it even a step further… it is now 75/25. The most massive drop ever.

Why does this happen? Can it be anything more than greed or an inherent lack of business ethics? Is it to pay mortgage on the half dozen vanity buildings of Zhuji? When will 7-8mm actually be 6-7mm?

I apologize if this is a bit difficult to understand. But now you will all know why strands of freshwater pearls you order from China will seem a bit smaller and a bit lighter this year.
 
Thanks for the tidbit. This confused me as the sizes in the tag are always different from the figures in the caliper and I'm strict about following the caliper reading as I feel I'm being ripped off if it's declared anything off the actual size.

How about the length of the strand? The standard is 16", right? In Asia, it's 14". I've noticed some strands are actually shorter than other strands. I think this is also one way of getting more money.

Also, do they make the strands more graduated? I mean, if you place a couple of 7.5mm pearls in the middle and the rest are to be 6.5-6.8mm pearls, it will still be in the 7-8mm range.

Do you apply such sizing to your products, since this is the new standard in China?
 
The strands should still be the same length, 16-inches. This will vary typically, however. If the strand is heading to Hong Kong, it will typically be about a half inch longer. Length is not of much consequence unless one is buying by strand in lieu of weight.

With the new 75/25 split this will indeed change the way necklaces are graduated. Maybe 8-9mm will start to overtake the king of all sizes, 7-8mm.

I have not yet decided how to deal with this on our side. I am sure we will find a way around it, we do every year. It is just a bit of a pain...
 
For the South seas and Tahitians, I expect that actual diameter is being followed.

However, is this being applied to akoyas since a lot are from China or strictly to CFWPs at the moment?
 
It only applies to freshwater. China does not have unilateral control over the Akoya market (yet). Although you see some factories now trying to cut corners by graduating a full mm in Akoya instead of the standard .5mm (7-8mm Akoya, for example). This can shave as much as 30% off the cost of the strand. But I have only seen this done with uber low-end goods and only intended for the local market. No real seller would accept that, so it should never catch on.
 
Hi Jeremy and All,

I really appreciate such a thorough explanation about this measurement issue. Although this is the industry standard, it seems to me that full disclosure of the actual range of sizes on even the less expensive strand is a must for establishing trust and credibility. It's already tough for an online store to meet customers' expectations----

A B&M can deal with this more easily, because the buyer can look directly at the strand he is purchasing and and know they want a larger/smaller size.

When buying/selling Tahitians and SS the actual sizes of mm to .10mm are given, in terms of the largest and the smallest. I suppose that is done because often the strand is more expensive, has it's individual characteristics, separate listing and description. Thank goodness China isn't controlling this market.

So now when I purchase a freshwater round strand, it will always be smaller than the stated mm size, and even more so than last year!! And honestly, to anyone used to working with specific mm size beads, it is instantly noticable. As for the rest of us with our calipers, as Perlas sez, we feel "Ripped Off"!!!!:eek:

Just call me "Caliper Girl"

Pattye
so many pearls, so little time
 
I am so happy to see others posting about this. So nice to feel in such good company as the posters here. ;) I also think it shoud be disclosed. Will it continue downward, or will the trend ever reverse back to the actual stated size. Silly me, I think a 7-8mm strand should have pearls actually between 7-8mm. I think most people would prefer the raise in cost to get a strand that is as stated. I mean, even knowing ahead of time they will be smaller than stated, I would still feel ripped off. Too bad China so completely dominates this industry(CFWP). I hope others jump into the fray and impose standards of sizing.

Thanks Jeremy for the post, it was very interesting. And thanks for letting me know about the shell size in the other thread with the video.
Jen
 
All I can say is, glad I got in early. Hopefully the freshadamas aren't that affected. It's frustrating for both vendor and consumer, and any efforts at disclosing this are much appreciated. This is inflation all the same. I'd much rather pay more for a larger strand. But I'm sure PP's Akoyas will not fall short since Jeremy will be sure to impose stringent standards on his farm, as seen by the thick nacre on the baroque strand in the other thread. For the CFWP, I'm just going to get in early and opt for larger strands from now on. At least existing stock wouldn't be such a huge problem.
 
Ack - that is wrong, wrong, wrong! I can (sort of) understand calling pearls that range from 7.5 - 8.5 mm "8 mm pearls", but how can they call them 8 - 9 mm when there is no possibility that there will be a 9.0 mm pearl there? Plus, with a 75/25 split, the true average size would be closer to 7.8 (of course, I am generously rounding up, which it seems unlikely they will do, and that also assumes that the sizes are evenly distributed within the 75% and 25% fractions, and it seems like that is in no way certain, given all of the loose math going on) :mad:
 
Downsizing of freshwater pearls from 0.5 mm to 1 mm

Downsizing of freshwater pearls from 0.5 mm to 1 mm

I am really glad I bought most of my freshwater strands earlier on as I think it is simply a kind of fraudulent behavior from the producers of the pearls = Chinese that we customers have to satisfy us with strands that are not even close to the given mm. 1 mm is just too much in my mind! And it doesn?t matter that it is practiced everywhere -it?s just not right!

I like my strands to be as uniform (not graduated) in size as possible - that does mean I will not be satisfied with a strand of 7,9 mm when I have ordered one that is supposed to be 8 - 9 mm!:mad:

The only solution for me at the moment - I will not buy any freshwater pearls for a long time, if that is what it takes!
 
We can always ask the seller for the exact measurements of the items. That might not be realistic when purchasing "beading" quality pearls, but when buying individual strands, Oh Yes!!! Oh No!!! I'm not gonna stop buying!!!:p

Pattye
so many pearls, so little time
 
No, it is definitely not the end of the world for the freshwater industry. The standard has been below even for years now, it is something that sellers and buyers alike have learned to expect and live with. The only issue is when another change takes place, we must determine how to work with that change while not shorting the customer. Does this mean changing the standard from full numbers to half size increments, going to an Akoya measurement system of .5mm (consumer could win here), going 'large' on necklaces (every strand .5mm larger than listed), or strictly working with materials or a factory that is willing to separate in full increments loose material? There are so many options available...
 
I vote for going large for the benefit of the consumer!!:D :D


Just my greed setting in...don't mind me.
 
I really noticed the jump in this trend this year when I got some 12mm strands that were actually 10.5. That means we need to change the definition of klonks to 14mm and over because 10.5 is a klank not a klonk no matter what others call it :p
 
ACK...Caitlin, that is terrible. Were these finished peices, or wholesale pearls for your own designs? I bought some from jewelry making and what was supposed to be 8mm very closer to 6.5mm. But they were lovely, and I didn't pay a lt for them so no big deal. But I thought it was a fluke. Seems not though. but I really hope they weren't finished necklaces, that would just be sad.:(
 
Aha..my small ones were also dyed reds, from the same vendor I beleive Maybe it was just a problem with that color. The cranberry red is just gorgeous, but I do wish they had been larger. All the others seemed to be pretty on target with the size stated. At least to my untrained eye.
 
Back
Top