Pearlfection or Pearlfabrication

Odd how no one at head office gives a rat's behind that:

a) Lead is a heavy metal that is toxic to living things and is a suspected human carcinogen.

b) The earth's oceans are choking on toxic waste, hence so are we; therefore why put more lead out into the environment in a faux-luxury item?

Slraep
There is an Island twice the size of Texas between California and Hawaii that is all plastic waste products. It is breaking down and killing wildlife. There is a serious worry if you need. I am not promoting the product. I am just explaining it. Lead has been used to make things shiny for a long time. You are not supposed to eat it. My car has lead paint on it. I think I'll be OK.
Again I am not promoting the product. I am a purest when it comes to pearls. In fact I don't think pearls should be treated at all. I think when you open a shell you get the pearl you get. Case closed.
 
I put up an article about that garbage wasteland dominating the ocean just a couple of weeks ago. I think I titled it, "This is so Awful!" or something like that.

Wouldn't it be nice to have those pesky links just pop up of their own accord?
 
Yes Caitlin - let's hope the new PG we saw in Blaires PP visit post has an auto detect in it - any 5 words said in the same order as in a previous post could have an automatic link inserted...

The article you posted was amazing - I had completely no idea, and the photos just left me deeply saddened. Interesting that it comes up again.
 
Putting on my hat as a law teacher, it looks to me as if the descriptions given right at the top of this thread were very carefully worded to slide through the rules.
Pearl knowledgeable people may well say 'hang on a mo'...what on earth does that mean?' but many of those watching will accept the description and think they are getting real pearls.
As I mentioned in another thread - the problem arises with shell pearls and Majorcan pearls and even Swarovski pearls. I've had people come up to me and insist that their Swarovskis on a thick and stiff beading thread were the real thing and really high quality...
 
in the hands of our legal committee

in the hands of our legal committee

As a member of the Board of Cultured Pearl Association of America I have placed this issue in the hands of our legal committee and our retained consul. The intentional misrepresentations are about the worst I have seen. We will also pass it on to the JVC (jewelers vigilance committee) I included this video link which I think says it all http://www.shopnbc.com/product/launchProductVOD2.aspx?cm_sp=Video-_-Jewelry-_-j202298&videourl=http://akedge2.dayportmsp.com/storage/shopnbc/video/flash/j202298.flv&&familyname=Sterling+Silver%2fRhodium+or+18K+Plated+Simulated+Pearl+Set&familyid=J202298
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a member of the Board of Cultured Pearl Association of America I have placed this issue in the hands of our legal committee and our retained consul. The intentional misrepresentations are about the worst I have seen. We will also pass it on to the JVC (jewelers vigilance committee) I included this video link which I think says it all http://www.shopnbc.com/product/launchProductVOD2.aspx?cm_sp=Video-_-Jewelry-_-j202298&videourl=http://akedge2.dayportmsp.com/storage/shopnbc/video/flash/j202298.flv&&familyname=Sterling+Silver%2fRhodium+or+18K+Plated+Simulated+Pearl+Set&familyid=J202298

What a bunch of creeps. NBC should be forced to run a scroll that simply says "These are not pearls". Actually these folks should be sued. Saying that they lose 80%. And saying that they can only make so many because its a natural process is an attempt to sway people in to believing they are real pearls somehow. This is the sort of thing that makes this business difficult. There are so many creeps and thieves it hurts those of us who really appreciate the unique nature of pearls. The only thing this guy appreciates is money. He could give a crap about the minor miracle a gem quality pearl really is. And she would go gaga over a shiney piece of aluminum foil.
 
They're baaack!
I was channel surfing one evening recently, and noticed that Pearlfection is on JTV. The JTV website says "Pearlfection® is JTV's top-of-the-line pearl jewelry, featuring a luxury-for-less assortment you'll want to welcome to your own collection. Pearlfection's innovative manufacturing process expertly simulates Tahitian pearls, South Sea pearls and freshwater pearls ... " etc.
I did hear Mark Brown a few months ago say that JTV can't obtain quantities of genuine pearls and would be bringing in synthetics. Buyer beware.
 
I'm watching, right now, a Facebook video they uploaded recently to see what they have to say about them. so far they are very clear that the pearls are simulated.

Mark said they use mother of pearl beads (i.e. the beads that are used for a nucleus in cultured pearls) to make their imitation coating and he adds that they pass the "tooth test". I have yet to hear him say what they use for the actual bead-- glass, or perhaps also MOP bead maybe.
Will update this post if I learn more.

I have no issue at all with imitation pearls as long as they are described correctly and clearly.
I don't like making it harder for the average buyer to recognize imitations because they pass the tooth test.
 
Pricey, too. I see a 22", Pearlfection® 16mm "White South Sea Simulant Rhodium Over Sterling Silver Strand" that they were selling during that show for $419.99. The word "pearl" does not appear in the title, but Mark said it was "99.7% pure pearl".
The coating doesn't look real. But there are little flaws on it that are perhaps meant to make it look more real? :rolleyes:
 
I'm watching, right now, a Facebook video they uploaded recently to see what they have to say about them. so far they are very clear that the pearls are simulated.

Mark said they use mother of pearl beads (i.e. the beads that are used for a nucleus in cultured pearls) to make their imitation coating and he adds that they pass the "tooth test". I have yet to hear him say what they use for the actual bead-- glass, or perhaps also MOP bead maybe.
Will update this post if I learn more.

I have no issue at all with imitation pearls as long as they are described correctly and clearly.
I don't like making it harder for the average buyer to recognize imitations because they pass the tooth test.
These are shell pearls, as stated in their website (when clicking down a level). Dyed and polished, no coating. As for the 'tooth test', this is suggestable. Just as when a wine 'expert' tells a customer that a red wine smells of violets. The customer immediately agrees (or risks embarassment): "Yes I can smell them!!!"

Google pointed to THIS company at the top of my search. I suppose they would know about teeth tests.

Claim of coating the shaped shells with 'mother of pearl' (MOP) brings to mind an old pet peeve regarding mussel shell nuclei. While composed primarily of aragonite and thus approximating the thermodynamics of their intended nacreous coating, they are not themselves 'pearly.' I would rather that the term MOP be kept to the inner shell nacre layer, as applied through the centuries in inlay and other fine art.
 

Attachments

  • JTV.jpg
    JTV.jpg
    118.9 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
"Man made nacre" they say. Um, no.

Mark said: "...we developed our own nacre, to use that word loosely, and then it is applied by man in a laboratory setting, over months and months...."

Yeah, loosely-- very loosely! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
"Shell Pearl" is unregulated, for some unknown reason. So they've found a safe haven. The customers will get colorful and shiny balls, and they will be happy.
 
It's a safe haven. I hope we're raising a flag. Re price we discovered on another thread that the process is actually quite involved, maybe even as time-consuming as a couple of layers of nacre.
 
Back
Top