In the Matter of:

Jewelry Guides Regulatory

June 19, 2013

First Version

Condensed Transcript with Word Index

For The Record, Inc.

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555
1 (Pages 1 to 4)

1

1 

2 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

3

4

5

6 JEWELRY GUIDES ROUNDTABLE

7

8

9 JUNE 19, 2013

10

11

12

13 Federal Trade Commission

14 601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Conference Center

15 Washington, DC

16

17

18

19 Reported By: Stephanie Gilley

20

21

22

23

24

25

2

1 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

2 I N D E X

3

4 Session Page

5

6 Welcome, Reenah Kim 3

7

8 Panel 1 3

9

10 Panel 2 77

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

3

1 WELCOME

2 MS. REENAH KIM: Good morning everyone and

3 welcome. I think we might as well go ahead and get

4 started. Thank you all for coming to today's public

5 roundtable on the FTC's Jewelry Guides.

6 My name is Reenah Kim and this is Laura

7 Koss and Laura Kim with me. We are all attorneys

8 here at the FTC and we will be moderating this

9 morning's panels. We are looking forward to a

10 productive discussion with today's group.

11 First, I'm just going to go over a few

12 housekeeping items, starting with security. Anyone

13 who leaves the building without an FTC badge will be

14 required to go back through security screening

15 before reentering the conference center. 

16 In the event of a fire or evacuation, please

17 leave the building in an orderly fashion. Once you're

18 outside, proceed to the Georgetown Law Center, which

19 is across the street on New Jersey Avenue. People

20 from our building will be congregating on the

21 sidewalk that is out front and to the right. So

22 once you're there, please check in with the person

23 who is accounting for everyone in the conference

24 center to make sure you're accounted for.

25 In the event that it's safer to remain in

4

1 the building, you'll be directed where to go.

2 If you spot any suspicious activity,

3 please alert security.

4 And lastly, this event may be

5 photographed, videotaped, or otherwise recorded. By

6 participating in this event, you're agreeing that

7 your image and anything you say or submit may be

8 posted indefinitely at the FTC.gov website or on one

9 of the commission's publicly-available social media

10 sites.

11 Now some of you may have attended an FTC

12 roundtable in the past, so are probably familiar

13 with how this will go. As I mentioned, this

14 proceeding is being transcribed, so all of our

15 statements will be on the record and the transcript

16 will be made available on the FTC's website.

17 That said, this will be a relatively

18 informal discussion. We have panelists here at the

19 front and we also have a number of folks, I know,

20 who are interested in weighing in, sitting in our

21 audience right now. 

22 So we will -- the way this will proceed is that

23 we will sort of throw out questions and we'll have

24 panelists speak up. If you're a panelist and you wish to

25 speak, it's a small enough space, you can kind of just put
2 (Pages 5 to 8)

5

1 your hand up and we will invite you to join in. The

2 purpose of that being simply so we can have a clear

3 transcript and minimize any interruptions.

4 We will also be reserving time at the end

5 of each panel for Q&A from folks in the audience.

6 And so at that time, if you're someone in the

7 audience who would like to speak, you know, the same

8 thing. You can just put your hand up and we will

9 call on you to make sure you get a chance to be

10 heard.

11 Please keep in mind this roundtable is not

12 intended to be a protracted debate or oral argument.

13 Nothing is going to be decided today. And while

14 Laura and I will try to answer questions if they

15 arise, the purpose of the meeting is really not for

16 FTC staff to provide detailed responses. Nothing is

17 going to be decided today. What we say does not

18 necessarily reflect the views of the Commission or

19 any individual commissioner.

20 Our main objective is to guide the

21 discussion to identify issues and further develop

22 the record, as the FTC reviews and considers

23 possible revisions to the Jewelry Guides. As you

24 know, last summer the FTC sought comment on the

25 overall costs, benefits, necessity, and impact of

6

1 the Jewelry Guides, as well as any possible

2 modifications, as part of the Agency's systematic

3 review of its current rules and Guides.

4 To address some of the comments that we

5 received, we are conducting today's roundtable to

6 explore two particular issues. Our first panel will

7 discuss the marketing of alloy products containing

8 precious metals in amounts below the Guide's minimum

9 thresholds.

10 We'll take a short break and then for our

11 second panel, we will turn to the issue of jewelry

12 products with surface layer applications of precious

13 metals. We are planning to end today around 12:30,

14 if not sooner.

15 So with that, we'll turn to our first

16 panel focusing on marketing of certain types of

17 alloy jewelry products. Specifically, we want to

18 know what guidance would help sellers avoid consumer

19 deception when marketing alloy products that contain

20 precious metals in amounts below the minimum

21 thresholds set forth in the Guides.

22 As many of you are already aware, Section

23 23.4 of the Guides provides that it may be

24 misleading to use the word "gold" or any

25 abbreviation or quality mark implying gold content

7

1 to describe all or part of an industry product that

2 is composed throughout of an alloy of gold that is

3 less than 10 karats.

4 Similarly, Section 23.6 provides that it

5 is unfair or deceptive to mark, describe, or

6 otherwise represent that all or part of an industry

7 product is silver or to use a related abbreviation,

8 unless it is at least 925/1000 pure silver. Section

9 23.7 suggests a minimum of at least 500 parts per

10 thousand pure platinum for use of word "platinum" or

11 related abbreviation to mark or describe an industry

12 product.

13 Given these existing provisions, we want

14 to explore this morning how one should describe

15 products that contain precious metals, but in

16 amounts below those thresholds.

17 Before I begin with my first question, we

18 have a lot to cover, so I'm just going to do a very

19 quick introduction of our panelists for panel one.

20 To my left, we have Susan Kelly from QVC.

21 Seated next to her is Robert Herskovitz from MJJ

22 Brilliant Jewelers. We have Stuart Lee from

23 Sterling. Charles A. Wagner, III, from Jewelry

24 Television. Ewa Abrams from Tiffany and Company,

25 Lisa Brooks-Pike from Jewelers Ethics Association,

8

1 Ajit Menon from United Precious Metal Refining, Inc.

2 and Cecilia Gardner from the Jeweler's Vigilance

3 Committee, JVC. We really appreciate everyone being

4 here this morning.

5 So let's start, in particular, with an

6 issue that concerns whether there should be a

7 distinction made between marking something with a

8 quality stamp, for example 9 karat to indicate that

9 an alloy contains 9 karats of gold, as compared to

10 just using the word "gold" in descriptive marketing

11 materials like advertisements, tags, and labels.

12 In response to our recent notices, we

13 received a proposal from JVC that recommended

14 allowing sellers to indicate, in the descriptive

15 marketing materials, that a product contains a

16 precious metal, even when the amount falls below a

17 minimum threshold. But JVC's proposal did state

18 that sellers should not be allowed to stamp the name

19 of the precious metal on the product itself, such as

20 with a quality stamp or mark.

21 So the first question I present to our

22 panelists this morning is, what is the significance

23 of marking something with the quality stamp, such

24 that there should be a distinction made between a

25 quality stamp and information you provide in
3 (Pages 9 to 12)

9

1 descriptive marketing materials? Cecilia, do you

2 want to start off?

3 MS. GARDNER: Yes, thank you. First of

4 all, good morning everyone. Secondly, I'd like to

5 thank the FTC for the opportunity to appear here

6 today.

7 I want to remind everybody, as we have

8 said in our submissions, that the Federal Trade

9 Commission guidelines for the jewelry industry is a

10 very important document to the jewelry industry for

11 two reasons. It provides our marketers with very

12 clear guidance on what would be deceptive trade

13 practices, and we are interested in ensuring that we

14 do not engage in consumer deception in any way.

15 And secondly, the Guides are very

16 important as an indicator to manufacturers and

17 marketers as to what specifications they should meet

18 in connection with manufacturing and marketing our

19 products.

20 So we continue to emphasize that the

21 Guides themselves are an important document to our

22 industry and we are very glad that -- and we hope

23 that you're keeping them. We think they need good

24 revisions, but we really want them to stick around.

25 It's important to us.

10

1 I want to also clarify something. You've

2 been calling it the JVC response and we're fine with

3 that; however, I want you to be clear about the

4 process under which this particular -- these

5 submissions were provided to the FTC.

6 We basically had two work streams. One

7 was within our board, we solicited views of the many

8 sectors represented by the members of our Board of

9 Directors. But we also had a very open process

10 where we invited trade associations to participate

11 with us, and individual companies, and even

12 individuals, to join with us to provide inputs to

13 all of the questions that the Federal Trade

14 Commission submitted in connection with this

15 revision to the Guides.

16 So it's important for you to know that

17 what we've been calling the JVC really represents a

18 very broad-based and very inclusive process where we

19 took inputs from a wide variety and a wide array of

20 industry experts and stakeholders from every sector

21 of the industry. So I wanted to make that perfectly

22 clear.

23 Now your first question pertained to what

24 gets put into a piece of jewelry itself, either

25 stamping or embossing or engraving or lasering or

11

1 whatever new technology gets created on how to mark

2 a piece of jewelry. And our suggestion, again, from

3 this broad array of industry experts and

4 stakeholders, was that if we were to -- if the FTC

5 were to permit alloys with lower than minimum

6 standards of precious metals, you know, we're for

7 that. And we also think that common sense, reason,

8 and in the interest of consumer -- preventing

9 consumer deception, that the industry should be able

10 to freely describe what it is that they're producing

11 and what it is that a consumer is considering

12 purchasing.

13 But we think that the way that that has to

14 be identified should be distinct from the fine

15 jewelry products that meet the minimum standards of

16 10 karat. And by the way, this wide array of

17 industry associations and experts all committed --

18 are continually committed to the minimum for gold

19 being 10 karat to be able to call it fine jewelry,

20 10 karat gold.

21 But we do think that the way that these

22 are identified, marked, described out to be -- these

23 lower than minimum standard alloys should be

24 distinct, in order to distinguish them from fine

25 jewelry. So our suggestion was to disclose the

12

1 amount of precious metal in these alloys freely, you

2 know, go ahead and make them, market them, and go

3 ahead and freely describe what's in them, including

4 the amount of precious metal, but do it in a

5 percentage as opposed to parts per thousand or

6 karatage, because that is a distinct way to describe

7 these metals, number one.

8 Number two, it is understandable across

9 the array of the metals -- you know, silver is often

10 described in parts per thousand, platinum as well.

11 Gold is often not described in parts per thousand,

12 but rather karatage, so this percentage is a uniform

13 way to describe it.

14 And we think that the predominant metal

15 ought to come first. If you're going to -- you

16 know, you're free to describe all of the elements,

17 all of the components of the alloy. You don't have

18 to, we just think you must describe the percentage

19 of the precious metal in the item. But if you're

20 going to describe all the metals in the item, you

21 have to put the predominate one first, so that a

22 consumer understands what it's mostly made out of.

23 And then we also think it would be very

24 important not to stamp the item. And that

25 particular -- you know, what we felt was that based
4 (Pages 13 to 16)

13

1 on our research with consumer perception data, we

2 understood that consumers ascribe certain value or a

3 certain level of preciousness, if I may use that

4 word, to items of jewelry that have the stamp in

5 them, identifying the quality.

6 So that we felt -- we strongly felt, this

7 whole group felt that it was important not to permit

8 the quality content of the item to be stamped in the

9 jewelry. So for instance, if you're marketing a

10 metal like this with a lower than minimum amount of

11 precious metal in it, and you wish to stamp it with

12 a name like "Celebration" or something, that's fine.

13 But not the percentage of the precious metal in the

14 item.

15 So those were our suggestions in this

16 regard.

17 MS. REENAH KIM: And is there a -- I

18 understand that that's a component of the proposal

19 that JVC submitted on behalf of -- or as part of its

20 working group in its process, but what I'd like to

21 understand better is why there is such a

22 significance in making that distinction between

23 something that gets stamp on the article itself as

24 opposed to what's included in the materials that

25 accompany the product. Ajit?

14

1 MR. MENON: Cecilia, do you want to --

2 MS. GARDNER: The only thing I wanted to

3 say is that, you know, our views were based -- what

4 we submitted to you was based on the consumer

5 perception data, the studies that we did which we've

6 submitted to you, which indicated that consumers

7 widely believe that jewelry that is stamped has a

8 higher value than jewelry that isn't stamped.

9 So the distinction here is that, because

10 these are below minimum standard alloys, that if you

11 stamp it with the karat quality or the precious

12 metal quantity, purity in the item, that they will

13 ascribe a characteristic value to it that it doesn't

14 actually have.

15 And again, we are trying to distinguish

16 these alloys from fine jewelry and precious metal

17 alloys that are above the minimum standards and this

18 is one way to distinguish it.

19 MR. MENON: It's a nice way to distinguish

20 the karat of the fine jewelry to the lower karats,

21 but right now there are many companies who just use

22 585 for 14 karat or 5833 or 416 or 750, so there is

23 no distinction right now. So we have to enforce

24 that the K stamping is only for 10 and higher and

25 the lower ones have to be the parts per thousand.

15

1 MS. GARDNER: Well, our position is in

2 percentages.

3 MR. MENON: Yeah, so right now it's not

4 really clear. Because I see a lot of jewelry with

5 7500 and, you know, it's fine jewelry. So we first

6 need to make sure that that distinction is made and

7 everybody follows that before stepping into the

8 percentage numbers. Otherwise there's confusion all

9 over the place.

10 MS. REENAH KIM: Just to clarify, Ajit,

11 the articles that you were just describing, where

12 they are stamped with 585, and that's to indicate

13 gold content?

14 MR. MENON: 14K, yeah.

15 MS. REENAH KIM: So instead of 14 --

16 MR. MENON: They are going to have to be

17 stamping 14K, according to what Cecilia is saying,

18 to be classified as fine jewelry.

19 MS. GARDNER: No, no, no. I'm sorry. I

20 just want to make the distinction. I'm not saying

21 that they shouldn't be able to stamp 585. 585 tells

22 them what the karat quality is, parts per thousand.

23 14K tells them what the karat quality is, it's a

24 weight disclosure.

25 What we are saying is, for these lower

16

1 minimum standard -- and I don't have any problem

2 with that being reserved for fine jewelry. And when

3 I say "I" what I mean is my group, the submission.

4 And if we could just agree that when I say I, that's

5 what I mean?

6 MS. REENAH KIM: Sure.

7 MS. GARDNER: This is the way I talk. I'm

8 not saying that we shouldn't permit alternatives,

9 585 and 14K for precious metals above the minimum

10 standard. What I am -- what our group is suggesting

11 is that below the minimum standards, because

12 consumers understand percentage disclosures very

13 well, it's common parlance, and our consumer

14 perception data proves this, that they get it, they

15 understand it, that this disclosure be made in a

16 percentage in order to distinguish it from fine

17 jewelry, which is already described in parts per

18 thousand or karat. This lower than minimum standard

19 alloy would be identified by percentages only.

20 And that would describe this other, you

21 know -- we have been calling this cake mix alloys or

22 alternative metals, but this is the category of

23 allow that we feel that this requirement should

24 apply to and only that category.

25 MS. REENAH KIM: Thank you. Stuart?
5 (Pages 17 to 20)

17

1 MR. LEE: If I may, I think you're hearing

2 what we know and that is that there are two

3 different ways of accounting for precious metals,

4 especially in gold. So you're probably aware of

5 that. If you go overseas, 585 or -- 750 parts per

6 thousand is used to describe 18 karat, 585 is 14.

7 You have the metric system being used -- you know,

8 people are using that. You know, you have

9 Fahrenheit, you have Celsius, so it's kind of the

10 same thing. They are somewhat interchangeable and,

11 to Amit's (sic) point, there are people who stamp it

12 750 or 585, but in the U.S. it has been

13 predominately in the consumer’s mind, what they are

14 used to, is the karat. It's 10, 14, and 18 karat

15 that's being used. So you'll hear that back and

16 forth sometimes.

17 MS. REENAH KIM: And speaking to this sort

18 of translation between karats and percentage, one

19 question I have is to what extent would consumers

20 understand if, in a number of areas, they see gold

21 content being expressed as karats? To what extent

22 would they be able to comprehend that gold content

23 as expressed as a percentage? Would they

24 necessarily understand how that translates from

25 karats to percent? Susan?

18

1 MS. KELLY: Thank you. I think there's a

2 heritage and a volume of physical pieces that the

3 consumer is very familiar with, in terms of a K or

4 KT mark to mean gold. That's there.

5 But the parts per thousand that companies

6 that mark at times, or is used separately for

7 karatage of 583 and above for 14 karat and 750 for

8 18, is also very clear. There is no question in my

9 mind that the consumers understand that product.

10 When we lower the precious metal content

11 under what is already established in the FTC, we're

12 in a new world. And it's a world that we want to

13 embrace. I think for a distinction between the two,

14 the symbol and the word percentage is very clear.

15 In terms of written description, it would be very

16 clear. To add those types of symbols on the

17 physical product, I think might be very confusing.

18 However, to establish -- I would think we

19 are all thinking about establishing perhaps a brand

20 name that equates to certain percentages of alloys

21 of precious metals. And I'm thinking that it would

22 be great to have the option to define a brand, call

23 it, you know, "Happy Metal" with specific

24 percentages, descriptive information written about

25 the product and given to the customer prior to the

19

1 purchase, but have "Happy Metal" stamped on the

2 piece. I think there's a duty to our customer. I

3 think it's a benefit to the customer to have a mark,

4 but not necessarily a precious metal indication on

5 an item. For appraisers, for the future, for

6 inheritance, et cetera, to have some way of linking

7 a name to the content would be an advantage to the

8 customer.

9 MS. ABRAMS: Just to be clear, are you

10 proposing an industry-wide standard or brand for a

11 particular alloy?

12 MS. KELLY: Thank you for asking. No.

13 MS. ABRAMS: Okay.

14 MS. KELLY: It would be an individual

15 brand established by the manufacturer, retailer.

16 MR. LEE: So you're saying that if we had

17 "Happy Metal" for an example, I guess, that that

18 would be trademarked and somebody would be able to go

19 in 20 years from now, 30 years from now and be able

20 to see that that indeed had 33 percent gold, 25

21 percent silver, et cetera.

22 MS. KELLY: Perfect.

23 MS. REENAH KIM: But under that scenario,

24 does that mean that, given to dealing with some of

25 the sort of creativity of different manufacturers

20

1 and whatever alloy formulations they can come up

2 with, you could have a number of different

3 manufacturers tweaking their formulas, for lack of a

4 better word, and one would be called "Happy Metal."

5 You add 2 percent gold more and then it becomes --

6 MS. GARDNER: Really Happy Metal.

7 MS. REENAH KIM: -- Happier Metal. And

8 then for a consumer, if the only thing marked on the

9 actual, let's say, a bracelet itself is simply that

10 you look inside and it says "Happy Metal" you would

11 have to then go to some database to look up what the

12 formulation is. Because at that point, there's

13 nothing physically stamped on the product itself.

14 Whatever percentages were provided to the consumer

15 was given through whatever marketing materials were

16 provided at the time of sale. Is that how that

17 would go?

18 MS. KELLY: Mm-hmm.

19 MS. GARDNER: And we think this would, of

20 course, be accompanied by some education. Because

21 this is sort of, as Sue said, you know, a new world

22 for jewelry manufactures, in a sense. Because

23 although this product has always been out there and

24 available, you know, it's never really been

25 regulated, which is a problem. Because we do think
6 (Pages 21 to 24)

21

1 this is something that has to -- and I use regulated

2 in the loose sense of the word. And we think there

3 ought to be some way for the consumer to know what

4 it is they are buying.

5 And we would have to educate consumers to

6 know that if it's -- the only thing that you see on

7 there is, you know, Happy Metal or Happier Metal,

8 this means that it's underneath the -- or it's

9 probably, more likely, to be underneath the minimum

10 standard requirements for precious metal.

11 Now right now, manufacturers can simply

12 stamp even precious metal items with the brand name

13 They don't have to put the parts per thousand or the

14 karat quantity on the piece. If they do, then they

15 must also put their registered trademark on there,

16 but they could just put the registered trademark

17 with nothing else.

18 So this is going to -- there is a certain

19 amount of consumer education that's going to have to

20 be rolled out in connection with these new products.

21 MS. REENAH KIM: Ewa, actually I would

22 like to ask you, in particular, about the experience

23 that Tiffany had recently in marketing it's -- is it

24 Rubedo?

25 MS. ABRAMS: Rubedo, yes. Rubedo was a

22

1 mixed metal alloy that contains elements of gold and

2 silver but below the precious thresholds. So it was

3 quite a challenge in marketing this metal. We

4 didn't really have a challenge internally in

5 stamping the metal. We understood it was well below

6 the precious metal thresholds and we marked it -- we

7 simply stamped it as metal with our trademark on it.

8 But in terms of advertising, we found it

9 difficult to convey the value of this new alloy

10 without disclosing that gold and silver properties,

11 elements, not precious metals, but elements were

12 included in a fairly material quantities.

13 So we find that it is important to be able

14 to make these disclosures and I really agree with

15 Cecilia and JVC's proposition that that be allowed

16 in advertising materials and particularly perhaps to

17 describe the content through a percentage, but to

18 avoid stamping gold and silver and other precious

19 metals on the items themselves.

20 I think that it might be a little bit

21 confusing to mix issues. Trademark issues, stamping

22 issues, and patent issues related to the components

23 of the metals in this issue. And I think rather it

24 would be simpler to create sort of an industry

25 standard for these types of products to avoid

23

1 confusion among consumers and also among

2 manufacturers.

3 So perhaps there would be interest in

4 using a word such as alloy to describe, you know,

5 all mixed metal compositions. And then require, as

6 Cecilia suggested, that percentages be disclosed

7 voluntarily or be a requirement in advertising

8 materials. But then again, avoid any particular

9 stamping that could confuse consumers as to

10 precious metal content on the items themselves.

11 MS. REENAH KIM: Charles.

12 MR. WAGNER: I think we all have a general

13 recognition that, in the past ten years,

14 circumstances have changed dramatically as a result

15 of the escalation of the price of gold. So I

16 understand, and I think we all understand, that it's

17 a new world. And there is a need to be able to

18 describe, as gold product, something below 10 karat.

19 There seems to be a general recognition of that and

20 that doesn't need to be addressed further.

21 I think there is, in our opinion, the

22 threshold standard of 10 karat, as I hear people

23 talking today, there is certainly a general

24 consensus that that threshold should remain in place

25 and stamping should not be allowed below that.

24

1 We have suggested, right or wrong, that

2 the consumer is intelligent. That stamping, the

3 consumer understands the karat terminology. They

4 understand that 24 karat is pure gold and, as you go

5 down from that, there is a lesser amount of gold

6 included. We don't see any reason to adjust those

7 standards. We think the consumer understands that.

8 We've conducted no consumer research, but we deal

9 with our customers every day and we feel that they

10 understand that.

11 We prefer the karat standard and the karat

12 terminology. We do think that the consumer

13 understands karat. And if it's marked on the

14 product itself, there is no confusion because at

15 that point, they know what it is. Having said that,

16 we are less concerned with whether it is marked on

17 the product or on the marketing materials than we

18 are at being able to describe an alloy product

19 with less than 10 karat as gold, so long as we

20 identify what the content of the gold is.

21 Now again, we think the purpose of this is

22 consumer knowledge, make sure that there is no

23 confusion, and that's our feeling about it.

24 MS. REENAH KIM: A couple of points that I

25 do want to follow-up on and then I'll get to Lisa.
7 (Pages 25 to 28)

25

1 Jumping back to Ewa's point, you mentioned that

2 there might be, for example, just an understanding

3 in the industry, whether it's a standard or a

4 practice, that suggests that an alloy, or using the

5 term alloy, or just having that be almost a

6 substitute, I just want to make sure that I'm not

7 misunderstanding your position, for those products

8 that fall below the thresholds?

9 MS. ABRAMS: Using a term such as mixed

10 metal or alloy to avoid a situation where an

11 unscrupulous seller could be marketing a piece of

12 costume jewelry or a mixed metal piece, an alloy,

13 and simply highlighting that there's gold content in

14 it. In order to avoid, you know, basically the

15 premises of the Jewelry Guides themselves and trying

16 to pawn off their piece as a precious metal item.

17 So we want to avoid a situation where only

18 one element is highlighted, such as gold or silver,

19 instead of being able to, in an honest,

20 non-deceptive way, describing what an alloy is made

21 of.

22 MS. REENAH KIM: And just so I understand

23 sort of the science behind it, and Ajit you may be

24 able to help me with this, my understanding is that

25 even if it is a 10 karat gold, let's say, 10 karat

26

1 gold product that does meet the minimum thresholds,

2 what I understand technically that is an alloy,

3 because it's 10 parts gold --

4 MR. MENON: You're right.

5 MS. REENAH KIM: -- and the remaining

6 parts could be any other metal. So technically

7 anything that's above that threshold is also an

8 alloy, is that correct?

9 MR. MENON: Yes, you're right.

10 MS. LAURA KIM: Given that there seems to

11 be a lot of consensus that consumers understand gold

12 expressed in karats, if you move away from that and

13 for these mixed metal products you are relying on

14 percentage, is there any risk of consumer confusion

15 there because they are so used to the karat

16 description?

17 MS. GARDNER: Laura, can I just intervene

18 here for a moment and just say that, you know, we

19 studied this issue with consumers. We did a

20 consumer perception study on whether or not

21 consumers understand karat. And Charlie, with all

22 due respect, you have very sophisticated consumers

23 who go to JTV for jewelry. These are already

24 self-selected as jewelry enthusiasts, so maybe they

25 understand at a level that others don't.

27

1 But what our research shows is that a

2 large percentage of the consuming public is very

3 confused about the karat designation. And that's

4 just a fact. Now, does that mean that most people

5 do understand it? I mean, yeah. I think most

6 people do. A large percentage do not. And enough

7 to concern us.

8 MS. REENAH KIM: And following up on that

9 point, Cecilia, we did, you know, we are aware of

10 consumer data that we did see submitted with the

11 comments that does suggest many consumers do not

12 fully understand the definition of karat when it's

13 used to describe gold. You have a percentage

14 recognizing that karats is typically associated with

15 an indication of gold content, but there were a

16 significant percentage of respondents, for example,

17 with the Google insight research that we recently

18 got, and I think something like only 37.5 percent of

19 respondents were able to correctly identify the

20 purity of gold as being the correct definition of a

21 karat.

22 What I also found significant was that, in

23 that data, 28.1% thought that 14 karat referred to

24 14 percent gold and 16 percent of the respondent's

25 thought that 14 karat indicated 100 percent gold.

28

1 And that raises the question, if you're

2 just looking at the karat universe alone, and there

3 seems to be some consumer confusion about what the

4 karat means, if you're introducing now almost sort

5 of a parallel universe when you get above those

6 thresholds, where you are then switching over --

7 excuse me, below the thresholds, if you are

8 switching over to a percent, there are real concerns

9 that a consumer, when confronted with, you know, a

10 piece of information that says 20 percent gold and

11 something else that says 18 karat gold, I have

12 concerns and questions about whether a consumer

13 would really be able to understand the differences

14 and be able to really make an informed decision in

15 comparing what is better quality or which has more

16 value, 20 percent gold or something that says 18

17 karat gold. I'd like to hear from folks. Susan?

18 MS. KELLY: I wanted to just make mention,

19 or get to that point, I believe I understood a

20 comment earlier, for instance, that if we have 30

21 percent gold, 10 percent silver, and the remainder

22 as an alloy, that that also would not be incorrect.

23 So that in terms of disclosing to the customer that

24 you have precious metal, precious metal plus

25 additional metals or plus 60 percent alloy, would
8 (Pages 29 to 32)

29

1 also clearly let the customer know exactly what they

2 were purchasing if we used percentages and not a

3 mark for below FTC minimum standards, okay?

4 And in terms of customer understanding, I

5 think in all cases it is important to educate the

6 customer. And we have a vast number of customers

7 and products that are marked with karat stamps,

8 bridal in particular, you know, really washes across

9 the industry. I believe that the karat mark is

10 clear. And of course there's always the opportunity

11 to make it more clear.

12 I think the distinction between alloys

13 that are lower than the FTC requirements at this

14 time is the lack of a mark. You know, that's the

15 distinction. Marking the quality of the metal, the

16 purity of the metal for minimum standards going up,

17 and not marking going down, which then I would

18 surely assume that we would have the items sold and

19 delivered to the customer with a description. And

20 that might be one of the key elements in making sure

21 that the customers are clear about the content.

22 MS. REENAH KIM: Ewa?

23 MS. ABRAMS: I query whether percentage

24 content even is necessary in these thresholds below

25 the current Guides, where we can simply describe the

30

1 item as metal, a mixed metal alloy or something

2 similar. And just simply indicate, maybe as Cecilia

3 suggested, from the most predominant metal to the

4 least predominate metal, the elements that are

5 included in that alloy.

6 So that rather than including percentages,

7 to your point, that that could simply confuse the

8 situation.

9 MS. REENAH KIM: So to clarify Ewa, for

10 below standard alloys, it would simply -- it would

11 be described as, this is a mixed metal alloy

12 including, and let's say gold was 20 percent --

13 MS. ABRAMS: Yeah.

14 MS. REENAH KIM: -- including gold,

15 silver, and base metals, but you wouldn't specify

16 the amounts?

17 MS. ABRAMS: Yes.

18 MS. GARDNER: I think that's very

19 dangerous.

20 MR. LEE: I don't think that's --

21 MS. REENAH KIM: And I would -- okay, so

22 that is a suggestion. I think, you know, our

23 concern is that if you don't include an amount, is

24 there a risk that then consumers will assume or may

25 assume that there is more than there in fact is.

31

1 And one issue that became apparent to me,

2 at least, is that when you have, as the technology

3 becomes more sophisticated, you are seeing in the

4 market place alloy products that, by appearance, may

5 look every bit as shiny and gold-like as something

6 that is, perhaps, 14 karat gold. And if there is

7 not a disclosure of exactly how much is in there, if

8 a consumer looking at the appearance, and if they

9 really like the way it looks and they see the price

10 and it seems about right, and if they look at the

11 description and it says this is a mixed metal alloy

12 including gold, silver, and base metals, the point

13 that it is actually below the thresholds might

14 escape them. But I would like to hear from others

15 on that, Stuart?

16 MR. LEE: Yes, two things. One, on the

17 karatage and confusion, it is always important to

18 remember that a fine jewelry purchases is one that

19 is made on a much more seldom basis. Our best

20 customers buy every two years. Many customers, it's

21 a purchase they may make once-in-a-lifetime or once

22 every decade. So while they may have understood

23 what 14 karat was nine years ago, our job is, when

24 they come back in, is to always take them through

25 that complete disclosure. And it's a very simple

32

1 way of explaining 14 karat gold. I think most

2 people get it within 10 or 15 seconds or it will

3 come back to them and they go oh yeah, right. I've

4 got it.

5 Now, I think it's very dangerous when we

6 start to get below the thresholds that we don't have

7 complete disclosure to the consumer about what's in

8 that metal. And I'll give you an example, and it's

9 no one in this room, we were approached by a

10 manufacturer several years ago that said we've got a

11 proprietary metal, we'd like you to sell it in your

12 stores. And we said, well, tell us about it and

13 they said it's a wonderful mixture of platinum, of

14 palladium, of silver, and of gold. And I said,

15 well, that sounds wonderful. What's the secret

16 mixture? Well, we really don't want to -- it's a

17 secret mixture and that's why it's proprietary.

18 We did our due-diligence on it and we

19 found out that it had less than 2 percent platinum,

20 less than 2 percent gold, and in fact the vast

21 majority of the product was silver. And yet in the

22 marketing and the way that it is shown, you would

23 believe, as a consumer, when you see this beautiful

24 melding of four precious metals, and the name of it,

25 which I won't get into, led you to believe that it
9 (Pages 33 to 36)

33

1 might have been more one metal than another. But at

2 worst, I would think that maybe there's 25 percent

3 of all four of those precious metals, when at the

4 end of the day, what was happening was a little bit

5 of gold and a little bit of platinum were being used

6 so that they could use those big, cache names.

7 So I think that it's very important that

8 if we go below, that we have complete disclosure to

9 that consumer, whether a percentage or something

10 else that they understand, okay? Just as we do

11 today with juice, people can look on the back and

12 say, well, it's got 2 percent cherry juice in it, so

13 I'll make my decision based on that.

14 MS. REENAH KIM: Lisa?

15 MS. BROOKS-PIKE: I think if we leave out

16 the percentages, we do more harm than good. And I

17 think we need to know all of them.

18 Regarding the term fine jewelry that's

19 being used, fine jewelry is in the eye of your

20 wallet. A consumer's perception of fine jewelry, to

21 them, is what they can afford. It may be that they

22 perceive it to be a fine because of the stones that

23 are in it. Does it have diamonds or do they think

24 another stone is rarer.

25 As far as the value of that jewelry, what

34

1 you should pay for it, they associate that with

2 karat marks. The reason they associate that with

3 karat marks is because that's what we've taught

4 them.

5 The rest of the world, I don't know if

6 anybody else uses karat anymore besides us, they've

7 all converted to metric. Can Americans learn

8 metric? I think we can.

9 And I think that it wouldn't be -- when

10 we're talking about stamping something, I would say

11 that when we are talking about the new alloy that

12 you have presented with Tiffany, I think most people

13 consider that fine jewelry. What they don't know at

14 this point, because you haven't been allowed to say

15 it, is what's in it.

16 And I need to make a decision as to

17 whether I'm sensitive to something that's in it. I

18 think that all of it needs to be disclosed, not just

19 the precious. Those certainly do. If it's got

20 nickel in it and I'm sensitive to nickel, I need to

21 know so that I can make that decision and then make

22 a decision about how much I want to pay, which is

23 also important.

24 MS. REENAH KIM: And that is a question I

25 have, in terms of particularly when you get to this

35

1 universe of the below standard alloys. To what

2 extent --

3 MS. BROOKS-PIKE: They're all -- I'm

4 sorry. They're all alloys, except for 24.

5 MS. REENAH KIM: Thank you. The below

6 standard products, to what extent would adopting the

7 sort of, you know, the nutritional label approach,

8 in terms of listing all the components, to what

9 extent does that benefit consumers or conversely

10 lead to potentially more risk of consumer confusion?

11 So for example, if you have a product,

12 would there be any difference in a consumer’s

13 perception of value and quality if it is described

14 simply as, contains 33 percent gold or the

15 description says contains 33 percent gold and 67

16 percent brass and copper. Charles?

17 MR. WAGNER: Again, I feel like we are

18 somewhat disarmed in the fact that we have not

19 conducted consumer research, but we do have lots of

20 customers that we feel like understand these things.

21 When you think that 10 karat gold is less

22 than 50 percent gold and it's an alloy, and then you

23 go down to 8 karat or 5 karat or something like

24 Tiffany is marketing, which is below that 10 karat

25 threshold, and you have different standards for

36

1 describing them, I mean, just on its face, that

2 seems very confusing to me. A consumer is going to

3 be confused that if it's under 10 karat, that it is

4 being described one way and if it's over 10 karat,

5 it's being described a different way.

6 If the consumer doesn't understand a karat

7 measure, there needs to be a -- in our opinion,

8 there needs to be a uniform standard that applies

9 what the content of gold is.

10 MS. REENAH KIM: Regardless of whether

11 it's above 10 karat or below 10 karat?

12 MR. WAGNER: I think if it goes -- the

13 answer is yes. I think it if it goes above 10 karat

14 and someone describes it as 10 karat and then it

15 goes down to 5 karat, and it's done as a percentage,

16 what's the relationship between that and 10 karat?

17 The consumer doesn't know that. The consumer

18 doesn't understand that. Everyone in this room

19 understands it, but the basic consumer that is

20 coming into Sterling or coming to Jewelry

21 Television, in my opinion, doesn't understand that

22 distinction.

23 MS. REENAH KIM: To what extent might

24 additional disclosures or some form of consumer

25 education help in advancing a general consumer
10 (Pages 37 to 40)

37

1 understanding of karats versus percentage. And I

2 know we are particularly stuck on the gold products,

3 particularly because karats have been so long

4 traditionally associated with expressing gold

5 content.

6 I'd like to hear from a panel about your

7 ideas and to what extent any disclosures, and in

8 what form they might take, would be necessary to

9 help clarify for the consumer being able to

10 understand and make comparisons between -- if

11 something were to be or if we were to have a

12 universe where certain types of products were

13 described as having, you know, 33 percent gold and

14 other products were being described as 18 karat

15 gold. Cecilia?

16 MS. GARDNER: Thanks for asking that again

17 because I wanted to get back to that. And it's a

18 good question because, based on the premise that a

19 large part of the universe doesn't understand karat

20 disclosures, you know, how does it help to have two

21 views, two different methodologies?

22 And from the perspective of the responders

23 that participated with the JVC, it was very

24 important to maintain these two universes as

25 distinct from each other and you have to draw a line

38

1 as to where these two universes divide and that line

2 is 10 karat gold. So a product that is marketed as

3 10 karat gold, you're finished with your disclosure

4 and you can market it as a piece of 10 karat gold

5 jewelry.

6 If you go below that, and again the

7 assumption being that below that kind of karat

8 quality, the distinctive attributes of a piece of

9 jewelry change, I mean, that's a decision that was

10 made long ago, then we need a methodology to tell

11 consumers why these two things are different.

12 And I understand your concern about

13 percentage versus karats. Here's another thing

14 they're going to learn when they decide which one

15 they are going to buy. The 18 karat one costs a lot

16 more. And they're going to wonder why. And that's

17 a simple question to answer, across the counter.

18 Because there's a whole lot more precious metal in

19 this thing and a conversation ensues about what

20 karatage means, for those consumers that don't

21 understand it.

22 So the thing sort of speaks for itself,

23 because if you've got 30 percent gold in something,

24 that's going to cost a whole lot less than something

25 that's 18 karat gold.

39

1 The one thing I'm worried about, of

2 course, as you might be, is that you have this 30

3 percent attribute. What would stop this marketer

4 from deceiving consumers saying wow there's 30

5 percent gold in here, you know? You have to pay

6 the same as this 18 karat. There's -- you

7 know, we see the underbelly of the jewelry industry,

8 sadly, all the time at the JVC because we take

9 complaints and we do investigations and we monitor

10 the industry.

11 My feeling is that the consuming public

12 will correct that. Because the bad guys will be

13 found out, if they are going to deceive consumers in

14 this way, and they will be so -- it will be so

15 obvious to all that these 30 percent products are

16 just not performing the same way as the 18 karat

17 products are performing. And the price disparities,

18 if the prices are being charged in a manner that is

19 so deceitful that, you know, we are going to hear

20 about it. JVC is going to hear about it and you're

21 going to hear about, at the FTC.

22 So there has to be -- in my mind, the way

23 to protect consumers the best is to distinguish

24 these two universes, 10 karat and above, 10 karat

25 and below. You know, 9.97 and below -- sorry, parts

40

1 per thousand, and help that distinction to be rolled

2 out by using different disclosures for each, so

3 that the consumers are fully aware that this has

4 less gold in it than that.

5 MS. REENAH KIM: And just to circle back

6 to one point, and I think you're probably on the

7 same page on this, but I do have concern about

8 thinking that the price alone, not the price

9 alone --

10 MS. GARDNER: No.

11 MS. REENAH KIM: -- but that the price may

12 be an adequate or significant indicator of value.

13 Because I think what we often hear, and I'm sure a

14 lot of folks in this room hear the same thing, you

15 know, there will be marketers who charge a higher

16 price for something because at least for the 5, 10,

17 30 minutes that a consumer is in the story, they

18 are examining the piece, it looks just like

19 something that has more precious metal content. And

20 for many consumers, and I'd like to hear from

21 panelists on this, particularly in how they interact

22 with consumers, if consumers look at that and they

23 say, well, it looks like gold. There is some

24 description, whether it's 33 percent gold or

25 contains gold and other precious metal alloys or it
11 (Pages 41 to 44)

41

1 has a karatage stamped on it and if they look at the

2 price, they might make a connection that, because

3 the price is relatively high and comparable to

4 something that would go for an 18 karat piece, they

5 might think that they actually are getting, you

6 know, whatever that value is in the precious metal

7 content. And that's something that we do see with

8 other products, where if they are able to assemble a

9 product that resembles, at least to the

10 untrained eye, a higher quality product --

11 MS. GARDNER: And for the moment.

12 MS. REENAH KIM: -- and if they charge

13 those prices, they may be able to get away with a

14 consumer being confused. And of course on the back

15 end, it becomes -- it's a little messier to try to

16 clean up on the back-end than if we were able to try

17 to find a way to come up with disclosures in a, you

18 know, marking or description system that would help

19 clarify that confusion upfront.

20 I actually -- and Robert, I want to pose a

21 question to you in particular --

22 MR. HERSKOVITS: Sure.

23 MS. REENAH KIM: -- about to what extent

24 there may be disclosures or information provided,

25 whether in descriptive marketing materials or the

42

1 way you are rolling out a product, where you're able

2 to convey to consumers exactly what it is that they

3 are getting when you do have a product that is below

4 10 karat gold, for example. But in a lot of

5 respects, it looks -- you know, it's a great piece

6 of jewelry and for consumers who maybe aren't able

7 to afford the product, you know, products on the

8 higher end, maybe this is all they can afford and

9 they want to be able to get that type of jewelry.

10 I'd like to hear your thoughts on how that type of

11 information can be conveyed to the consumer.

12 MR. HERSKOVITS: Well, you know, MJJ

13 Brilliant has a mixture of three precious metals,

14 one being the higher content of gold, 25 percent, 21

15 percent silver, and 2 percent palladium, just mixed

16 into a naturally yellow color. And from MJJs

17 standpoint, the way we've taken our approach is that

18 we want to make sure that the consumer is informed

19 as much as possible.

20 So we sent, you know, all the metals to an

21 assay lab in Birmingham. We did all of our due

22 diligence, in terms of, you know, checking all of

23 the hardness versus 10 karat and really researching,

24 you know, the metal that we are using within the

25 marketplace and then conveying that back to the

43

1 retailer, because we understand that that is not the

2 only products that are being marketed in that

3 showcase. There is going to be other gold products,

4 so we need to, you know, really take an approach to

5 differentiate what that gold product is.

6 We also made an instructional video to

7 basically explain to the consumer what Yellora is,

8 the name of the product of that metal is Yellora,

9 and we wanted to, you know, be able to present what

10 the content, what the precious metal contents are,

11 so we wanted to disclose what the proprietary

12 contents are for full disclosure, so that the

13 consumer can make an educated decision whether or

14 not that's something that, you know, works for them.

15 We also created some marketing material

16 for the consumer -- for the sales associate on the

17 store level, in multiple languages, so that when the

18 consumer comes in, they can have like a little item

19 sheet so that they didn't misrepresent the product.

20 They can explain it very carefully in detail and

21 show the consumer what that product is and what the

22 precious metal content is.

23 We also put a hangtag on the merchandise

24 to kind of differentiate it from other products

25 within that showcase space. So the consumer may

44

1 come in and see something, for example, of the

2 yellow precious metal, which is Yellora, that's the

3 name of our precious metal, and then they would have

4 a 10 or 14 karat gold maybe sitting in the next

5 showcase so that they can have some sort of a

6 differentiation to be able to know that, okay,

7 that's precious metals, three precious metals, and

8 what the Yellora really is and then what the

9 differences between gold are and then they can make

10 that educated decision from there.

11 So we believe that as much marketing

12 material as you can, when you come out with a brand

13 to furnish to the consumer is key to the whole

14 program. Giving information, we have an information

15 website set up that any consumer can come and they

16 can be able to understand what Yellora is, with a

17 video. They can, you know, do that click down.

18 So it's full disclosure to the customer.

19 That's what we are really, you know, trying to

20 accomplish.

21 MS. REENAH KIM: Stuart?

22 MR. LEE: From a retailer perspective,

23 first, I agree with Robert. They obviously took the

24 high road. They are a manufacturer, however. It is

25 incumbent upon the retailer at that point to take
12 (Pages 45 to 48)

45

1 that information that he has provided and insure

2 that the consumer knows what it is.

3 So our take is a very simple one.

4 Complete disclosure has to be done in advertising,

5 marketing, and it even goes even further. It goes

6 across what we call the 18 inches across the

7 counter. Because they may not see the marketing.

8 They may not -- so it's very important that it is

9 required, when we are below these levels, that the

10 consumer has every opportunity. If it's in a

11 catalog, it should be stated that that's exactly

12 what it is. And that's exactly what they suggest.

13 But they can't control the retailer.

14 In fact, the example I gave earlier, that

15 was a manufacturer, okay? When I talked to him, he

16 said, well it's not our job to go out and see what

17 the retailer is doing. That's what they're calling

18 it in it's legal. And I said, well it's legal, but

19 is it -- and he goes, well, it's probably a little

20 deceiving, but it's still legal. So, I think you

21 have manufacturers trying to --

22 MS. LAURA KIM: We call that illegal.

23 MR. LEE: Yes, yes. Manufacturers trying

24 to do it the right way, but that the retailer will

25 have to make sure that that is enforced across every

46

1 possible way, whether that's on E-commerce, across

2 the counter marketing, or advertising.

3 MS. REENAH KIM: Ewa.

4 MS. ABRAMS: I totally agree with that

5 sentiment. I think that we are all sort of coming

6 from a place where we are looking for a better

7 disclosure for consumers and for ourselves, you

8 know, as an industry, to be in a better position.

9 But presently we are not in a position to

10 disclose without running afoul of the Guides.

11 MR. LEE: Well said.

12 MS. ABRAMS: And so that's where we are in

13 this, you know, strange place.

14 MS. GARDNER: That's the change that we

15 have to make.

16 MS. ABRAMS: We can't communicate this

17 distinction in value.

18 And just to get back to the issue of value

19 and cost, I think we have to be very careful about

20 assuming that cost will regulate this issue.

21 MS. GARDNER: Oh no, not alone. Certainly

22 not alone. I didn't mean to say that that alone

23 will do it.

24 MS. ABRAMS: No. We need to recognize

25 that design, R&D and brand --

47

1 MS. GARDNER: Yes, absolutely.

2 MS. ABRAMS: -- will go a long way into

3 determining what the final retail.

4 MS. GARDNER: Absolutely.

5 MR. LEE: And we have to say Tiffany did,

6 as far as I'm concerned, a very admirable job with

7 how they show their product and market it. But

8 you're exactly right, we're in a different world

9 here. And we share your angst a little, if I may be

10 transparent, about the 750, the 585 against the 14

11 karat. Believe me, there has been plenty of

12 discussions for any of us that have been in the

13 industry for any period of time. And yes, if you

14 waved your magic wand and went back 100 years, we

15 would all like it to be the same worldwide. So you

16 got very quickly to where we were. Karatage,

17 percentages, at best the customer will always be

18 somewhat confused because they just don't do it

19 often enough. And then it is our job, as the

20 retailer, to get that across to them in a very

21 simple manner.

22 MS. REENAH KIM: If we could get into the

23 weeds a little bit about exactly if we were to

24 formulate what type of disclosure would really be

25 both adequate and, you know, help the consumer to

48

1 understand what exactly it is that they're getting

2 and what they could reasonably expect from this

3 product, and also taking into account from the

4 manufacturer and the retailer's perspective what is

5 practical and able to be actually carried out, one

6 question I have is if you are looking at these below

7 threshold products, when you're providing -- let's

8 just say, if you were doing percentages, should

9 there be a full accounting of all components such

10 that a consumer looking at it can say, okay, they

11 can add up the percentages so that it actually does

12 equal 100%? Would that help in any way in clearing

13 up any confusion?

14 And sort of my second point of this, you

15 know, a number of these products would contain not

16 only -- it won't just be gold plus some other

17 metals. It might be gold plus silver plus some

18 other metals or it might even have gold, silver,

19 platinum, and other base metals. And the question

20 becomes, you know, each of those three precious

21 metals now are being expressed in different ways.

22 And if we convert all of them over to percentages,

23 there are concerns that the consumer, who is used to

24 seeing 925 for silver and parts per thousand for

25 platinum, karats for gold, will all of the sudden
13 (Pages 49 to 52)

49

1 see a product description that simply says 22

2 percent, 44 percent, and 2 percent and they won't be

3 able to translate.

4 So I'd really like to hear from folks on

5 what types of disclosures, what information really

6 would be effective in informing and educating the

7 consumer those points. Ajit?

8 MR. MENON: Practically, we've got to make

9 sure that, if you want to write a whole sentence on

10 jewelry, it is really not possible, okay? It is

11 literally not possible -- and five other metals and

12 how would you add it all to 100 and show a complete

13 disclosure? The customer is only interested in the

14 precious metals.

15 MR. HERSKOVITS: The intrinsic -- yeah, in

16 the intrinsic value.

17 MR. MENON: That said -- they don't know

18 iridium is or indium is or boron is or whatever else

19 it is. Practically, the three marking systems like

20 925, 10K, 14K, or 18K, all three numbers, that is

21 easy and can be done. But the moment you change

22 them into multiple numbers, even with the decimal

23 point, what's the difference between a 1 karat and a

24 10 karat? It's 4170 and 417. So how would you put

25 that? If you put 417, the consumer will get

50

1 confused. Is it 10 or is it 1?

2 So again, if you want to put a decimal

3 point for the lower karats, then it has to be

4 defined. It has to be a four digit number, 0417 or

5 4170 to make sure there's no confusion there. So

6 those have to be addressed, when you're putting the

7 decimal point.

8 MS. REENAH KIM: Cecilia.

9 MS. GARDNER: You know, it's interesting,

10 because in our task force and in our working groups,

11 we have long conversations about exactly this

12 subject. And you know, we landed at using the

13 percentage disclosure based on the very -- you know,

14 the difficulties that we were facing here. Because

15 we understood that there were many ways to disclose

16 this across the metals.

17 And what we came to, after long

18 discussions on this subject, was that we need to do

19 it by percentages because, number one, consumers

20 understand it very well. Ajit is completely right,

21 really what they only want to know is how much

22 precious metal is in this. How much gold, how much

23 silver, how much platinum, how much palladium. And

24 we think that's the information they must get.

25 Now if a particular marketer wants to go

51

1 the nine or ten yards and do the whole formula, we

2 think that's great. But we do want to make it

3 imperative that they at least describe the amount of

4 precious metal and do it in a manner that is

5 applicable across the board, just to address this

6 complicated methodology of using parts per thousand

7 for one precious metal and a K for another type of

8 precious metal.

9 So if we stick to the percentages and make

10 it required that they disclose the amount of

11 precious metal, which is what we understand

12 consumers really want to know, then I think we've

13 met our obligation to avoid consumer deception and

14 we've met consumer expectations as what they

15 actually want to know about the piece.

16 MS. REENAH KIM: One concern I have is

17 that if you -- and I can understand why both the

18 amount of precious metal is very relevant to

19 consumers, it's what they care about. My concern is

20 that if marketers, when you get to this

21 below-standard universe, if they are advised to

22 disclose the amount of precious metal content as a

23 percentage, but they are not necessarily required to

24 include all of the other components, particularly

25 because this is a very new system, a new way of

52

1 expressing and conveying what that precious metal

2 content is, a consumer might see alloy contains 33

3 percent gold and just not realize that that means

4 all the rest is something very different, different

5 metals. To Lisa's point, if it contains nickel or

6 some other metal that they may either have an

7 allergy to just that they simply -- it changes their

8 perception. Again, to my example, what's the

9 difference between seeing a description that says 33

10 percent --

11 MR. MENON: But that's true with the --

12 MR. HERSKOVITS: Right. 14 karat is --

13 MS. REENAH KIM: -- gold or 33 plus the

14 others --

15 MR. HERSKOVITS: What's the --

16 MR. LEE: It's the world we're in. And I

17 think I was fortunate enough to work in the stores

18 for many years, as well as we talked to the store19 level people, and in all the years I sold, I can

20 count on one hand the number of people that were

21 interested in what was the rest of the metal. If

22 it's 14, if it's 585, then what's the rest.

23 To Lisa's point earlier, nickel was an

24 issue -- you know, many of us today, all of our

25 manufactures that we work with, are nickel-free. So
14 (Pages 53 to 56)

53

1 we can make that statement, and we do, to our

2 consumers. But when you start trying to get in --

3 and you've made a perfect point. When you start

4 trying to get into, this has 18 percent boron, it's

5 got this, that's when you really lose the consumer.

6 And frankly, they don't seem to care at that point.

7 Tell me how much precious metal is in it, I'm smart

8 enough that I can figure that out, and figure the

9 value equation.

10 MS. REENAH KIM: And just to -- you know,

11 there are provisions in the Guides, as they are

12 written now, relating to certain types of platinum

13 alloys where, if you fall below certain thresholds

14 and have a particular formulation of different

15 platinum group metals, different pure platinum, the

16 disclosures that you make differ than when you are

17 above certain levels. I don't want to get into all

18 the numbers here, because we all know it's pretty

19 detailed. But the general principal being, when you

20 fall below certain thresholds, you provide a listing

21 of all the different, essentially all of the

22 different metals. And in addition, you provide

23 disclosure, essentially indicating that this product

24 may not, for lack of a better word, perform in the

25 same way you would expect a product that is higher

54

1 platinum content.

2 MR. LEE: That's an excellent point.

3 MS. REENAH KIM: And my question is, you

4 know, those provisions have been out for a few years

5 now. I'm curious to hear, particularly from people

6 on the retail side, how effective has that form of

7 disclosure been, where you're essentially giving the

8 full listing, a listing up to 100 percent, telling

9 people the full nutritional label, so to speak, and

10 then also saying, performance may be different in x,

11 y, and z respects. I'm curious to hear how that's

12 been working and whether that would really work in

13 this arena.

14 MS. GARDNER: But isn't that when it's

15 only combined with non-platinum group metals?

16 MS. REENAH KIM: Correct.

17 MR. LEE: Yes, that's correct. Cobalt,

18 things like that.

19 MS. REENAH KIM: Susan.

20 MS. KELLY: I think there's an opportunity

21 to do great good and some harm. We need to, I

22 think, be specific to always separate the precious

23 metals and to not add silver, gold, whatever,

24 together for one percentage or number. I think it's

25 very important for the customer to understand if

55

1 they're getting 1 percent gold, 50 percent silver,

2 plus other alloys. And I do think that ending plus

3 other alloys, plus other metals, plus other

4 whatever, that that is a piece of the information

5 that will help the customer fully understand. And

6 by having one percent gold or whatever, that is also

7 clear. Because coming from retail, often, you know,

8 what is 18 karat? It's 75 percent gold. That is

9 the natural response and that's generally how we

10 talk to karats.

11 So the platinum piece, I'm sorry, I cannot

12 speak to that.

13 MS. REENAH KIM: Okay. Ewa.

14 MS. ABRAMS: I can't speak to the platinum

15 piece because we don't sell pieces like that, but I

16 do have a question as to whether or not we are

17 interested in developing a standard for disclosure

18 where an allow contains only one precious element,

19 like gold. So to say, this product contains 33

20 percent gold and other base metals, or whether we

21 are interested in finding a standard for an alloy

22 that contains more than one precious metal. Because

23 I think we develop a more kind of confusing

24 situation and standard where we are allowing for

25 this type of disclosure, this percentage disclosure,

56

1 when there is only one precious metal. Then it is

2 sort of fighting, let's say for example, gold. This

3 item contains 20 percent gold and other base metals.

4 That sort of --

5 MS. GARDNER: Yeah.

6 MS. ABRAMS: -- potentially fighting with

7 --

8 MS. GARDNER: I want to just clarify, our

9 suggestion is, whenever there is a precious metal,

10 the percentage of the total should be disclosed. So

11 if it is gold and silver, you have to disclose the

12 percentage of gold and the percentage of silver.

13 And I can speak to the platinum issue,

14 because we were very involved with it some years

15 ago.

16 MS. ABRAMS: But what if the product

17 contains only gold, that's the only precious metal

18 that it contains?

19 MS. GARDNER: Then it would be 30 percent

20 gold.

21 MS. ABRAMS: Then you're still --

22 MS. GARDNER: Then you're done.

23 MS. ABRAMS: You're still recommending

24 that the percentage be disclosed, rather than --

25 MS. GARDNER: Right.
15 (Pages 57 to 60)

57

1 MR. LEE: Absolutely.

2 MS. ABRAMS: -- how it --

3 MS. GARDNER: Exactly.

4 MR. MENON: You have a 10 karat white gold

5 with three precious metals, palladium -- it will

6 have palladium in it, it will have silver in it, and

7 it will have gold in it. You are still stamping it

8 only 10K.

9 MS. GARDNER: 10K, right.

10 MR. MENON: So why is it different --

11 MS. GARDNER: Because it's below minimum

12 thresholds. That's really why.

13 MR. LEE: And it's being marketed using

14 those precious metals.

15 MS. GARDNER: Right.

16 MS. REENAH KIM: Okay, just for the

17 record, I know this is -- I'm glad we are having

18 this discussion. I'm glad that everyone is -- I

19 just want to make sure that the court reporter can

20 keep up with us, so I want to make sure that we at

21 least don't speak over each other.

22 MS. GARDNER: Can I speak to your question

23 about platinum, if that's still a question in your

24 mind?

25 MS. REENAH KIM: Sure.

58

1 MS. GARDNER: If it's not, we can move on.

2 MS. REENAH KIM: Go ahead. No, I would

3 like to hear it.

4 MS. GARDNER: Platinum is different.

5 Platinum is special. And the history, you know, of

6 how platinum has been addressed by the Federal Trade

7 Commission and back when we were, you know, dealing

8 with voluntary standard, voluntary product

9 standards. You know, the whole history of how

10 platinum has been described into the consumer public

11 is just, frankly, different.

12 And what we were confronting at the time a

13 few years ago when we amended the Guides, is we were

14 being confronted with alloys that combined platinum

15 with non-platinum group metals. So now we were

16 having a new world, like we have today with these

17 below minimal threshold precious metal alloys. You

18 know, we needed to find a way to address that that

19 made sure consumers understood what they were

20 buying, that was usable to the manufacturing

21 community, and that could be explained -- could be

22 easily, or not easily or at least could be handled

23 by retail sales. So the suggestions we made in what

24 we gave to the Federal Trade Commission, in terms of

25 solutions, we felt met all of these concerns.

59

1 And it is our view, or my group's view,

2 that this particular suggestion about using

3 percentages for below minimal threshold alloys and

4 calling out all the precious metals in percentages,

5 and then leaving it optional as to whether you do

6 the whole cake mix percentages, you know, this meets

7 those three concerns in the best possible way. It's

8 not perfect, nothing is perfect, but at least it

9 addresses those concerns.

10 MS. REENAH KIM: In your experience, and

11 again, it is particularly helpful to hear from the

12 retailers, have the disclosures been beneficial for

13 alleviating any confusion by consumers or enhancing

14 a consumer's understanding of what it is they are

15 buying when they're dealing with these particular

16 types of platinum products?

17 MR. LEE: I can speak to it because we

18 have carried them. It's helpful and, in fact, with

19 the stamping, if memory serves, it was 585/CO/CU, I

20 believe, which was cobalt and copper, if my memory

21 serves. We put that out, and we stamped it, and we

22 even went as far as to put information out in the

23 store right with the product that explained it to

24 them.

25 Again, what we found is the important part

60

1 that they were concerned with, the consumer was, was

2 how much platinum was in it. They really didn't

3 care about the cobalt or the copper or anything

4 else. It was, okay, explain to me why this is less

5 than 900 or 950.

6 So I know the guidelines went there, but

7 what we found with the consumers is, thank you, but

8 it's really fine. I get it. It's got less platinum

9 in it than the regular, traditional platinum.

10 MS. REENAH KIM: So sort of a two-part

11 question here. If there is a difference in the

12 quality of the product that contains less than 10

13 karat gold, for example, whether that's with respect

14 to attributes like tarnishability, corrosion, you

15 know, other things that are important to consumers

16 and whether, if you have below 10 karat gold, that

17 makes a difference in how that product will appear

18 and continue to appear over time.

19 And two, whether the fact that it is below

20 10 karats changes that product's ability to deliver

21 those qualities that are important to consumers.

22 What types of disclosures or what sort of

23 disclaimers could and should be provided to

24 consumers to signal to them and flag to them, you

25 know, besides the fact that this is 9 karat gold, it
16 (Pages 61 to 64)

61

1 may not look the same and it may not perform in the

2 same way as a 10 or 14 karat gold ring two, three,

3 four years down the line. Lisa.

4 MS. BROOKS-PIKE: I actually will speak to

5 that, only because I had the opportunity to see the

6 Birmingham assay on the Yellora. And I think the

7 assumption is being made here that if it's not 10

8 karat or better, that the performance will be less.

9 Huge mistake. Because in the case of the Yellora,

10 it performed better than 14.

11 MS. REENAH KIM: And in what respects?

12 MS. BROOKS-PIKE: You had a tarnish and a

13 corrosion.

14 MR. HERSKOVITS: Well, we did a tarnish

15 test against 10 karat and 14 karat. We did a

16 hardness test. We did multiple sweat tests. We did

17 a durability test, in terms of, you know, 10 karat

18 has, for example, 120 on the Vickers scale and

19 Yellora was 128.

20 So we did all the testing to understand

21 what the metal is. We wanted to make sure that it

22 is a nickel-free alloy and we provided -- we have

23 all of those reports ready to provide to the

24 retailer so that they have that for documentation,

25 backed up with all of the marketing material that

62

1 kind of speaks to all of that material that it is

2 cadmium-free and lead-free, et cetera, et cetera.

3 MS. REENAH KIM: What is a sweat test? I

4 think I heard you --

5 MR. HERSKOVITS: A sweat test is if you go

6 into a chlorinated -- if you go into a swimming

7 pool, will it, you know, will it turn or what would

8 happen to it. Or in the event that you were to take

9 it in the shower or swim, all the things that

10 consumers want to know. You know, how do I take

11 care of this? So we also provided care instructions

12 on how to take care of the jewelry to the retailer.

13 And you know, to Stuart's point, that would be the

14 retailer's position to be able to now educate the

15 consumer on that level.

16 MS. REENAH KIM: Ewa.

17 MS. ABRAMS: I would echo the same exact

18 sentiments. Because it is my understanding, based

19 on reviewing the components of our alloy, that it is

20 not just the precious metal content that goes into

21 anti-tarnishment properties, but some of the other

22 base metals are, in fact, even more important. And

23 tweaking those --

24 MR. HERSKOVITS: Right.

25 MR. ABRAMS: -- one way or the other

63

1 really affect those properties. So I don't think

2 that that is a, you know, serious issue, given that

3 all of the properties of the alloy should be taken

4 into consideration.

5 MS. KELLY: In terms of -- oh, sorry.

6 MS. REENAH KIM: Susan.

7 MS. KELLY: In terms of full disclosure, I

8 do believe strongly that not only the content, but

9 the care instructions are important.

10 MR. HERSKOVITS: Absolutely.

11 MS. KELLY: Yeah. And it is the case that

12 certainly the lower precious metal content alloys

13 are extraordinary. And I think we are going to

14 really see a great area of growth, I hope, there.

15 But again, there is the distinction of

16 what is considered the heritage and the legacy of

17 the jewelry industry with marks within a metal

18 object and non-precious content marks. So to me,

19 that's a great distinction when a customer is either

20 electronically purchasing or over-the-counter.

21 The lack of a karat mark or parts per

22 thousand mark or percentage mark will prompt a

23 question. And I know that many retailers actually

24 create an image of the mark. So marks represent

25 over the minimum thresholds, okay?

64

1 MS. REENAH KIM: Cecilia.

2 MS. GARDNER: I'm going to echo what Sue

3 said. When this was under discussion in our various

4 working groups, as to whether or not we wanted to

5 take the position to maintain the 10 karat minimum

6 standard for fine gold, you know, we were all aware

7 of the fine performance of these below-threshold,

8 below minimal threshold alloys. And that the

9 concerns that may have pertained back in 1996, when

10 this was maintained then, may not exist now.

11 Because back in 1996, I think they were considered,

12 considering the potential degradation of the alloy

13 below 10K. Now it is clear to us that there aren't

14 those issues.

15 Instead, there are issues of longtime

16 tradition and consumer perceptions as to what fine

17 jewelry is. Now I would agree with Lisa that sort

18 of depends on the pocketbook, but our industry is

19 very concerned with image and with expectations,

20 consumer expectations for the product. And it was

21 the consensus of the group, based on today's

22 expectations and based on the history and the

23 heritage of the industry, to maintain that 10 karat

24 minimum standard for disclosures of gold. And there

25 was a uniform, you know, consensus on that issue.
17 (Pages 65 to 68)

65

1 MS. REENAH KIM: We are closing in on the

2 15 minute mark and I would like to give folks in the

3 audience an opportunity to chime in. So we have a

4 gentleman in the back row.

5 MR. AKKAOUI: Michael Akkaoui from Tannery

6 Industries. Just a few comments about what I've

7 heard this morning.

8 First, when you use the word alloy, there

9 is an immediate connection between the word alloy

10 and precious metal. When you get into the base

11 metal world, there is a lot less talk about alloy

12 than it is composition. So the lower you go below

13 that 10 karat benchmark and the closer you get to

14 "costume jewelry" the less conversation there is

15 about the term alloy. And I just want to caution

16 about that.

17 Secondly, the lack of disclosure when it

18 comes to multiple metals in a composition, the

19 further down you go below that 10 karat benchmark,

20 the closer you get to costume jewelry. And just

21 like the CPSC was battling cadmium and trying to

22 remove that -- when you start getting foreign

23 imports into the subject matter, and you will --

24 MS. GARDNER: We already do.

25 MR. AKKAOUI: -- you already do. And the

66

1 manufacturers in this room are very, very careful to

2 test their product --

3 MR. HERSKOVITS: Absolutely.

4 MR. AKKAOUI: -- to make sure that it

5 wears properly and there's corrosion protection, so

6 on and so forth. Again, the further you go down

7 below that 10 karat, the closer you get to costume

8 jewelry, the more that composition is going to

9 become important. And I would argue that perhaps it

10 is even a consumer safety issue at a certain point

11 in time. So I just wanted to throw that out there.

12 MS. REENAH KIM: Ewa.

13 MS. ABRAMS: That's why I think it is

14 important to potentially explore that these

15 standards that we are creating are developed for

16 alloys that contain more than one precious metal,

17 gold and silver.

18 So you know initially, I asked the

19 question of whether or not this would apply to an

20 alloy that contained, say 20 percent or to the

21 gentleman's point, 3 percent gold but the rest all,

22 you know, base metals and no other precious metals.

23 Should the standard apply to a piece like that,

24 that's more akin to costume jewelry that might have

25 these, you know, properties that perform poorly or

67

1 may be dangerous, for example. So maybe we should

2 apply this standard to alloys that contain more than

3 one precious element.

4 MS. REENAH KIM: Is there evidence that

5 when you have more than one precious metal in one of

6 these alloy products, it performs differently than

7 if it simply has one? So for example, is there a

8 difference between something that contains 3 percent

9 gold and 97 percent base metals versus 2 percent

10 gold, 1 percent silver, 97 percent base metals?

11 MS. ABRAMS: I think, and I'm not a

12 metallurgist, but I definitely think that in that

13 scenario, there might not be a difference. I think

14 it's the percentage of -- so maybe there's a

15 material threshold, a percentage, that might be

16 important to look at. But again I'm no expert, I'm

17 not a metallurgist.

18 MS. REENAH KIM: We've got a gentleman in

19 the middle row here.

20 MR. HERSKOVITS: Yes. I'm here for a

21 reason, I'm not going to bore everyone, but I'm an

22 unsophisticated industry. I don't know this

23 industry, so just listening to the various comments

24 I can tell you that, if you want to confuse me, set

25 up two standards. One for 10 karat and above and an

68

1 entirely different standard for below 10 karats. If

2 you don't want me to be confused, tell me the

3 standard product is 10 karats, it's 1 karat, it's

4 0.5 karats, I will know the content of the precious

5 metal and make my decision.

6 As far as the non-precious metal

7 components, that's where the -- the brand name,

8 perhaps. If you use different brand names, and they

9 gain a certain recognition, that's how the consumer

10 will decide whether to buy that product or not.

11 Just using a brand name for anything below 10

12 karats, that won't really communicate anything to

13 me.

14 And Ms. Brooks-Pike mentioned earlier

15 about the metric system. It's been tried back in

16 the Carter administration, across many other fields

17 and, for whatever reason, the American public will

18 not accept it. And so I don't -- as rational as it

19 sounds, I don't think it will work.

20 MS. REENAH KIM: Thank you, sir. And just

21 for the record, could you please state your name?

22 MR. HERSKOVITS: Yes, I'm Abe Herskovits.

23 I am related to Robert.

24 MS. REENAH KIM: Thank you. We have a

25 woman in the front row with a comment.
18 (Pages 69 to 72)

69

1 MS. POTEET: Veronica Poteet and I'm a

2 geologist and I'm associated with the Jeweler's

3 Ethics Association.

4 I'm going to sit back down, but I think

5 the precious metals, whether it is silver, gold,

6 platinum, you have a percentage of how much precious

7 metal is in that item. And to me, putting on a

8 consumer hat, if there's less than 50 percent

9 precious metal in the whole alloy, you know, it's

10 not really -- I know that we are already below that

11 threshold.

12 MS. GARDNER: You can't unwind 10K.

13 MS. POTEET: Yeah, I know you can't unwind

14 it, but it's just -- to sort of move on, gold is

15 known by karats. And a lot of consumers, if they

16 have someone to tell them the difference, they get

17 the difference. But they don't get the difference.

18 So they know 10 karat, and they see fine

19 jewelry, I just think that to do percentages, to put

20 the percentage mark in is really confusing. To do

21 decimals is great and I've been a big fan of the

22 metric system my whole life as a scientist, so.

23 But we're not getting there in this

24 country. We are not going to get there, but we do

25 with platinum, so that's a step, but all of this is

70

1 in karats, so --

2 MS. BROOKS-PIKE: So we can learn.

3 MS. POTEET: We can learn, but karats goes

4 way back and I just think that, you know, I don't

5 see a problem with saying 6 karats. I really don't.

6 MS. GARDNER: Well, we have to disagree.

7 MS. POTEET: It has to be enough to make

8 it a fine piece of jewelry. Because if it's just

9 like 1 karat of gold and then the rest is base

10 metals, that's costume.

11 MS. REENAH KIM: We have a gentleman in

12 the middle row who has been waiting.

13 MR. LUSTIGMAN: Hi. Sheldon Lustigman, I

14 represent New Annex Plating.

15 I think the percentage that you are

16 raising is good, to a point, but I don't think it's

17 enough. I think the consumer needs to understand

18 how much is in it so that you want to disclose not

19 only the percentage, however you do it, by decimals

20 or whatever, but also the weight.

21 So if you are comparing, for example, two

22 ingots, one made of 10 karat gold and another one of

23 18 karat gold, if you are comparing 4 ounces of the

24 10 karat gold versus 2 ounces of 18 karat, for the

25 consumer to understand which is worth more, he needs

71

1 to calculate, you know, how much gold is in it,

2 which they can easily do by times 0.16 and --

3 MS. GARDNER: You already lost me.

4 MR. LEE: Yeah, I --

5 MR. LUSTIGMAN: You can easily -- you can

6 calculate how much gold is there if you know the

7 weight. Not only the percentage, but the weight.

8 That's the way --

9 MR. MENON: That's the way the price for

10 each -- by weight, on the karats. So it’s already

11 calculated in and that's --

12 MR. LUSTIGMAN: No, it's not because I can

13 -- I or anyone can pick any number they want for a

14 price. It doesn't mean it's that much more gold in

15 it than there is in something else.

16 So if you disclose two ounces, four grams,

17 whatever of the precious metal, and that is what it

18 is, that will allow consumers to make a value

19 comparison, an easy comparison as to which one to

20 purchase.

21 MR. REENAH KIM: Thank you. I do want to

22 -- we have about five minutes left and there are a

23 couple of people who have been waiting patiently and

24 I want to make sure that I get to them. Mr. Hanna

25 and then --

72

1 MR. HANNA: I'm Mark Hanna from Richline.

2 I'm sitting back down, too. Just one point and one

3 question.

4 We have now, within the Guides, something

5 called indistinguishable. It's quite a well-used

6 phrase, particularly when we are talking about it

7 being gold and silver -- I'd like to see this

8 harmonized with what we are talking about now. I

9 think that it's dealing with basically the same

10 issue. We are not allowed to say sterling silver

11 plus 14 karat gold if, in fact, that's what the

12 product is made of.

13 MS. GARDNER: That's the next panel.

14 MR. HANNA: No, it's not.

15 MS. BROOKS-PIKE: Full disclosure is

16 always best and that's the intent of the Guides. If

17 we have any opportunity -- and I'll be really quick.

18 I think that both the Yellora and -- is it

19 Rubido or Rubado, Rubado, were harmed by the current

20 Guides. And I think that additionally, it caused

21 you to use a term of a new metal, which it isn't.

22 It is a new alloy. There was nothing new on the

23 periodic table.

24 So actually, it almost put you in a

25 position of doing something that could be
19 (Pages 73 to 76)

73

1 misleading. You know what I mean? Right, yeah.

2 It's a new alloy.

3 So they need to be able to say, they've

4 got a great product. They've got a great product,

5 we need to know what's in it so we can make our

6 decision as buyers to choose what we want to spend.

7 MR. HANNA: And my question was that,

8 using this percentage basis, so what 4 percent gold,

9 that's also 10 percent 10 karat gold, are we

10 excluding the ability to talk about the percentage

11 of the karats entirely by this?

12 MS. GARDNER: No.

13 MR. HANNA: Or are we allowing that as

14 part of the description, as long as we're disclosing

15 the percentage of fine gold?

16 MS. GARDNER: The suggestion that we're

17 making is that, as a minimum requirement, you can

18 always do more, that you have to say the percentage

19 of the precious metal, whether it is silver --

20 MR. HANNA: As a parentage --

21 MS. GARDNER: -- alone, whether it's gold,

22 as a percentage.

23 MR. HANNA: Of fine gold, okay.

24 MS. GARDNER: Mm-hmm. But one other point

25 I want to make also. You know, it is standard

74

1 operating concepts, in drafting statutory

2 requirements, that you don't draft to the bad guy.

3 You know, you don't draft to the deceivers. What

4 you do is, you create standards and then enforce

5 them. So in other words, you shouldn't draft

6 statutes, regulations, Guides, based on a

7 methodology to address noncompliance. What you do

8 is, you set standards and then you enforce those

9 standards by ensuring that, when they are violated,

10 you correct the violations or you enforce against

11 them.

12 So what we are seeking here is a standard

13 for the industry as a whole to understand and

14 implement. And then it will be your task, our task

15 as the JVC, to look and monitor industry conduct,

16 educate people, and help them into compliance with

17 the standards that the FTC sets.

18 And I'm anxious for you to understand, as

19 you probably already do, how important these Guides

20 are to our industry. You see how they are used on a

21 daily basis. And it's really important to us that

22 they set standards that we can understand, that we

23 can implement, both as manufacturers and as

24 retailers, as marketers, and that we can enforce and

25 educate people about to come into a general sense of

75

1 compliance in order to maintain the integrity of the

2 industry and to ensure that its reputation is

3 maintained over time.

4 MS. REENAH KIM: Thank you. We do have

5 one more comment. Ms. Merino.

6 MS. MERINO: Dee Merino, with TSI

7 Accessory Group. I have two comments. One is

8 related to the marks itself. I don't believe the

9 consumer understands the percentage of 14 karat. We

10 deal in sterling silver. Our consumers -- we're

11 dealing with manufacturers and retailers. Our

12 consumers understand that it is stamped 925. Most

13 of them, and even our own employees who work in

14 sterling in the company, didn't understand that that

15 means it is 92.5 percent silver. They know to look,

16 is it marked and it has a 925 stamp on it? That

17 means something, but they did not understand the

18 concept of what it was, the content of that metal.

19 So I feel like just the education of the

20 stamp is the fact that there is a stamp is what is

21 important, in the delineation between keeping a

22 stamp and non-stamping. It is important for the

23 consumer.

24 And the other thing is in regard to your

25 nutritional list. I kind of am thinking of more the

76

1 practical nature of how is that going to be actually

2 implemented. Because the majority of our

3 manufacturers will not share the composition of

4 their alloys.

5 MS. GARDNER: Right.

6 MS. MERINO: I mean, whether it's trade

7 secrets or whatever, they're not going to want to

8 disclose to me, as a wholesaler, as to what is in

9 that other 7.5 percent. So to be able to say that I

10 am now going to provide that to a retailer and disclose

11 it on paper or marketing material is going to be

12 almost impossible.

13 MS. REENAH KIM: Thank you. I appreciate

14 everyone's time. We had a lot of good ideas here.

15 We really appreciate everyone's input.

16 We do want to break a bit for about 15

17 minutes and then reconvene for the second panel

18 around 10:45. Thank you.

19 (Whereupon, a brief recess was

20 taken.)

21

22

23

24

25
20 (Pages 77 to 80)

77

1 PANEL TWO

2 - - - -

3 MS. KOSS: I think we'll get started. I'm

4 assuming that the panel name tents are the ones that

5 we have sitting here and we haven't left the other

6 ones.

7 Again, my name is Laura Koss with the

8 Federal Trade Commission. Thanks for sticking with

9 us today. Now, we are moving on to panel number two

10 which focuses on issues concerning the surface layer

11 application of precious metals on products. As I'm

12 sure you know, the current Guides discuss certain

13 aspects of certain surface applications for gold,

14 for vermeil and, to a more limited extent, for

15 silver. And they advise that surface platings be of

16 such thickness and extent of surface coverage that

17 reasonable durability is assured or that all

18 significant surfaces of the product or part contain

19 a plating or a coating that is of substantial

20 thickness.

21 In addition, 23.4© of the Guides contain

22 numerous examples that reflect very specific minimum

23 thicknesses and weights for certain terms that are

24 used to describe surface plated products. They

25 mostly -- as we know, they center on gold or gold

78

1 alloy.

2 So when the Commission issued these

3 provisions in the Guides, it stated specifically

4 that consumers are, in fact, unlikely to distinguish

5 between products on the basis of a method of

6 plating, that they are not concerned specifically on

7 whether it is an electrolytic application or a

8 mechanical application, but that they are, in fact,

9 concerned with durability.

10 And we learned from JVCs group, their task

11 force's recent comment, that consumers don't

12 understand many of these traditional industry terms.

13 They likely don't understand the difference between

14 rolled gold plate or clad or filled.

15 So I'm going to start with this basic

16 point, because I want to remind people that the

17 Guides are based on preventing consumer deception,

18 unfairness or deception. They are not meant to set

19 uniform high standards for the industry. Instead,

20 they are meant to prevent consumer deception.

21 But if these very specific industry terms

22 are not well understood by consumers, then my

23 question is, why should we continue to focus on

24 these terms like rolled gold plate and heavy

25 electroplate, et cetera?

79

1 And more to the point, when we talk about

2 specifying minimum thickness amounts for use of

3 certain terms to signify certain surface

4 applications, how does that serve consumer interests

5 if they don't understand these terms and if they

6 don't have specific expectations regarding the

7 performance and the quality of products described

8 with these specific terms?

9 So I think I'm going to start today with

10 Suzan, who is here representing JVC. So if maybe

11 you could talk to me specifically about consumers'

12 expectations regarding these specific terms?

13 MS. FLAMM: Certainly. And thank you,

14 again, for allowing us an opportunity to address

15 this issue.

16 In the work groups that Cecilia described

17 earlier, I will note that this issue of surface

18 platings emerged very early on as a premier issue

19 that was of concern in the industry. Not only

20 because of industries anxious to have a level

21 playing field so that they can be manufactured to

22 similar standards, but very importantly because the

23 opportunity for consumer deception everyone saw as

24 out there, given the increase in precious metal

25 prices that we've heard about and the greater

80

1 numbers of plated or products of surface layer

2 applications of precious metals. So we are very

3 happy that this is an issue that the FTC wants to

4 talk about more.

5 And we understand that your point is

6 well-taken, that consumers are confused by many of

7 the terms that have traditionally been used to both

8 to describe products with electrolytic applications

9 and products with mechanical applications. That

10 being said, the consumer research shows that there

11 is a baseline. There is something to work with,

12 given that there is some familiarity with the terms.

13 Consumers have said -- there are some number of

14 consumers that have said, and depending on the word,

15 and there is some variety there, but it is -- there

16 is some help in hearing those terms. And these are

17 terms such as electroplate or plate or vermeil,

18 let's say, or bonded. So these are words where

19 there is some baseline to work with.

20 Also, our research in the industry

21 indicates that these are words that are well-known

22 within the industry and have meaning, for the most

23 part, within the industry. So it would be a place

24 to start. Where the industry can understand these

25 words, the industry is looking for guidance as to
21 (Pages 81 to 84)

81

1 how to create products that meet standards for these

2 words. We have consumers who have some knowledge

3 about them, in the very complex context. And I say

4 that because we are talking about two different

5 processes of creating an application of precious

6 metal. And I understand your point, and it is

7 well-taken, consumers aren't so interested in the

8 fact that there are two processes, but there are.

9 They perform, you know, different -- experiences in

10 how they perform, how much metal is required, given

11 the process.

12 And also, now that we are living in a

13 world where it is not just gold that is the primary

14 precious metal used to create a surface layer

15 application, but we are in a world now where many

16 other precious metals are used, including silver and

17 the platinum group metals.

18 So we have sort of this complex

19 environment. We have two processes, we have several

20 precious metals that perform differently. Wear

21 tests show that they should be -- different amounts

22 are required to create a durable product to meet

23 consumer expectations. I mean, what consumers do

24 expect, and research has shown, I think, as Reenah

25 pointed out, they do expect certain product

82

1 attributes, once you identify products as having a

2 precious metal. They expect durability to some

3 extent, to a large extent, and they expect tarnish

4 resistance. So they do expect that.

5 We have these variety of precious metals,

6 we have two ways of applying those precious metals,

7 we have a baseline of consumer understanding, some

8 understanding, we have efforts in the industry to

9 enlarge that understanding while educating on the

10 differences between processes and what different

11 terms mean. So to us, as you know from our

12 submission, we recommended keeping eleven of the

13 terms, creating standards for them, allowing the

14 industry to use those terms, create that level

15 playing field in the industry, and then the big

16 piece, of course, is consumer education. It seemed

17 a very good place to start and a good way to address

18 what's a complex environment.

19 MS. KOSS: So just one point of

20 clarification. You said that the consumer

21 perception indicates that consumers have a baseline

22 understanding of these terms, but does that mean

23 that they can distinguish between the terms? You

24 were saying they know a plate, an electroplate, or a

25 rolled gold plate is different than a product that

83

1 is not surface-plated.

2 MS. FLAMM: Well, those -- the questions

3 weren't asked or phrased exactly that way. They

4 said they have familiarity, I think, was the way the

5 question was phrased. They had some familiarity

6 with the term, and they were also asked were these

7 terms useful. Those were the questions that were

8 asked. Exactly, you know, if we were to ask

9 follow-up questions or dig down, what we would find

10 out, I couldn't really tell you. But it does

11 indicate to us that we are starting somewhere with

12 keeping those terms.

13 MS. KOSS: Okay. And I'd like to hear a

14 retailer's perspective, so I'm going to start with

15 you, Susan. If you could tell me a little bit about

16 whether QVC has any insights, in terms of marketing

17 these products to consumers, and how you emphasize

18 or whether you emphasize a difference between the

19 electrolytic applications or the mechanical

20 applications or whether consumers even ask or care

21 about the minimum thresholds, et cetera.

22 MS. KELLY: That's great. Thank you for

23 asking. We, right now in our product mix, have

24 plated, electroplated products, using the

25 electrolytic method.

84

1 We had very little mechanical joined

2 precious metals. Occasionally we will have the

3 1/20th, 14 karat gold-filled chain. That's a very,

4 very small mix in our product.

5 We have, in our descriptions, felt it very

6 important to explain that we are plating, meaning

7 the process, 18 karat gold onto a sterling product.

8 We have brand names that use the word “clad.” And we

9 came up with our own rather heavy duty thicknesses

10 that we require our vendors to supply in order to

11 use that term. And I see it on a list of proposals

12 and I'd like to get back to that.

13 But in terms of our customers questioning

14 thicknesses or anything very specific about a

15 product, that's not something that's happened. I

16 think if the -- my conclusion is that our product

17 has been monitored by our company. The types of

18 applications we have used are thick enough to

19 provide the durability that our customers are

20 expecting, as reflected in our repeated business for

21 brands that are very strong, the plated brands, the

22 Epiphany platinum clad and 18 karat gold clad

23 Veronese.

24 So I think we've landed in a sweet spot in

25 terms of plating. And the FTC guidelines, as they
22 (Pages 85 to 88)

85

1 are, provided guidance for us and our manufacturers,

2 but in addition to that, we worked with the term

3 "plated" and upped the ante a good amount in terms

4 of thickness in order to use our brand name,

5 platinum clad or 18 karat clad. And we published

6 this in our guidelines to our vendors and it is

7 easily compared to the FTC requirements. So we are

8 running a good amount thicker for the platinum clad

9 and epiphany clad and it is performing well.

10 MS. KOSS: And Pam, what about you and

11 your experience with JCPenney?

12 MS. MORTENSEN: I agree with Sue that the

13 customer really does not understand plating.

14 They're not asking that. What they do understand is

15 the durability when it doesn't perform.

16 So what happens is, if you don't have the

17 proper amount of plating on a product, you'll get it

18 back. So I mean, that's one of the things that, as

19 a retailer, for the consumer you want to offer them

20 the best product that you can.

21 But I do feel that there's like an uneven

22 playing field. Because plated goods have, as you

23 know, can have a variety of coatings, the level of

24 plating. So what they might see as plated at

25 another retailer versus QVC, which has higher

86

1 standards, there's really no standard to the

2 customer to allow them to know what they're getting.

3 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

4 MS. FLAMM: I wonder if I might add just

5 one thing, it reminds me of a point I should have

6 made earlier, if that's okay.

7 MS. KOSS: Sure.

8 MS. FLAMM: We just heard two retailers

9 use two of those terms, clad and plated, which

10 speaks to the point that those words are out there,

11 consumers are hearing them, the industry uses them.

12 And yet I don't know if they mean the same thing

13 when they say those words. I don't know if anyone

14 at this table means the same thing when they say

15 those words.

16 Someone could say, for instance, platinum

17 clad and could mean a product with a certain amount

18 of platinum on it that has been mechanically

19 applied. Someone else at this table can use that

20 same word to mean a certain amount of platinum that

21 has been electrolytically applied and they could be

22 talking about a difference in the amount of metal,

23 precious metal, that could be three times as much as

24 the other or more.

25 So it's just a point that I should have

87

1 made initially that those terms are out there.

2 Retailers use them, we heard them, and the FTC could

3 just do a huge service to consumers and the industry

4 by saying, okay, this is what these terms mean.

5 MS. KOSS: Okay. And quick question for

6 you, Suzan. You mentioned clad as a term that

7 you're not sure how people are using it. But JVC,

8 in particular, refers to it as a mechanical

9 application, is that correct?

10 MS. FLAMM: Yes. Our understanding is

11 that that is the majority used, but it has come to

12 my attention that that is not the exclusive use of

13 the term.

14 MS. KOSS: And is that, the fact that you

15 have tied it to mechanical, what does that -- are

16 you basing that on the fact that that is industry

17 standard or that's how consumers understand that to

18 be mechanical application?

19 MS. FLAMM: We believe that is -- the

20 predominant use of the word in the industry reflects

21 mechanical. And we believe, from the consumer

22 research that we did and which you have, that

23 consumers say that they are familiar with it, to

24 some extent are familiar with the term. Not an

25 overwhelming extent, but to some extent are familiar

88

1 with the term and to some extent find it to be

2 useful. So those are the three points.

3 MS. KOSS: And not to pick on you --

4 MS. FLAMM: That's okay.

5 MS. KOSS: -- but one more follow-up

6 point. So in the JVC comment or the JVC task group

7 comment, you specifically indicated that for terms

8 like clad and filled, that have mechanical

9 applications, that you would confine those terms to

10 precious metal applications that are at least 1/20th

11 of the term.

12 I know that you did durability testing and

13 you also have the 4.32 micron test, and I know I'm

14 getting exceedingly technical here, but I have a

15 point. My question is, the JVC comment notes that

16 the 1/20th threshold is based not on durability, but

17 on industry use of the term. So I just wanted to

18 explore that again, given that the Guides are based

19 on preventing consumer deception and unfairness and

20 not aligning with industry use, I wanted to hear why

21 the Guides should be revised to reflect that or why

22 they should continue to mirror current industry

23 terms, as opposed to purporting with how consumers

24 understand the specific term.

25 MS. FLAMM: Well, the thought is that
23 (Pages 89 to 92)

89

1 consumers will catch up with the way the industry is

2 using it and because these products are becoming

3 marketed. So in other words, the products that are

4 marketed as 1/20th, which is, you know, a lot of

5 precious metal, that's a lot of precious metal in

6 the world of these surface layer application

7 products. 1/20th is a lot.

8 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

9 MS. FLAMM: They will come to understand

10 it. Retailers will tell them exactly what that

11 means. And for that reason, we think it is also a

12 consumer issue that they should rightfully expect

13 that a product described as 1/20th would perform

14 better and longer than a product described as

15 1/40th, which we also -- which has a different term

16 associated with it.

17 MS. KOSS: Okay. Michael, I know you

18 wanted to speak before.

19 MR. AKKAOUI: Yeah. I think the fact

20 remains is that the processes, as the Guides

21 currently describe them, are in fact different

22 manufacturing processes. They have -- each of them

23 have their own separate value and application to the

24 industry.

25 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

90

1 MR. AKKAOUI: Trying to overlap them in

2 some way would cloud how manufacturers, I think,

3 market their products to retailers and then

4 therefore provide more confusion to the overall

5 marketplace.

6 So I would be concerned about trying to

7 overlap them. I think the fact that they are kept

8 separate here and defined separately is appropriate.

9 Certain products that you can make using a

10 gold-filled, clad methodology --

11 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

12 MR. AKKAOUI: -- you can electroplate

13 those products, but not vice versa. So I think

14 there's a value to that definition within the

15 industry. And therefore, if it is clear within the

16 industry or remains clear in the industry, I don't

17 think that providing some overlap into the

18 marketplace is going to be helpful.

19 MS. KOSS: Okay. I just have a question

20 for Mark, I guess, or it could be for Valerie or it

21 could be, again, for Susan. I noticed that, in the

22 recommendation where you are providing a unified

23 approach and you have the groups, you are terming

24 groups together, like electroplate and plate, that

25 you are grouping those groups together to signify

91

1 some kind of an electrolytic process. But when the

2 Commission drafted the Guides, they created what we

3 called a -- well, it's really basically a safe

4 harbor that essentially says that, no matter what

5 the application is, you can call it gold plate.

6 And so I noticed that the word plate is

7 grouped with electroplated, I was wondering if there

8 was a specific basis for that or why the term plate

9 was grouped with electroplated, given the fact that,

10 in the history of the Guides, we've used that to

11 signify other applications, not just electroplated.

12 MR. HANNA: My opinion is that the biggest

13 confusion created by the Guides as originally

14 drafted is the word plate or plated.

15 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

16 MR. HANNA: Because it did exactly as

17 Michael discussed, it tended to create one

18 homogenous group of product that had some surface

19 layer application applied, no matter how it

20 happened.

21 And yes you are right about now saying

22 that plate or plated is the electrolytic process.

23 It needs to be separated one way or the other. It

24 should not stand for both and it is a foundation of

25 a lot of the confusion, at least in the application

92

1 in the Guides. I'm not talking about the consumer

2 at this point in time, but --

3 MS. KOSS: Okay. So it's --

4 MR. HANNA: -- the application of the

5 Guides, it's clearly confusing the way it is written

6 now.

7 MS. KOSS: Okay, so I just want to

8 clarify. The fact that there is a separate

9 provision that talks about coding or deposition of a

10 coding by any process can be called gold plate or

11 gold plated, you think that's confusing even though

12 the Guides have a second part that specifically

13 distinguishes electroplated products with

14 gold-filled, gold overlay, gold plated.

15 MR. HANNA: Different processes, different

16 manufacturing processes, different application of

17 the gold. Clearly different.

18 And further confusion is that goods that

19 are filled or clad or bonded, we refer to 1/20th.

20 What does that mean? That's 1/20th of weight. When

21 we refer to thickness in electrolytic plating, we

22 are talking about 7 mm or 1 micron. That's

23 thickness.

24 So even to try to lump these two together

25 with two different measures is far more defeating of
24 (Pages 93 to 96)

93

1 the clarity intention than separating them would be.

2 MS. KOSS: When you talk about confusion,

3 are you referring to consumer confusion or are you

4 talking about confusion in the industry?

5 MR. HANNA: Overall confusion. If you are

6 talking 1/20th by weight when you are talking about

7 a gold-filled product and you are talking about 0.5

8 micro when you are talking about electrolytic, how

9 does those relate to each other? Does anyone really

10 understand that?

11 MS. KOSS: Right. And yet in the comment,

12 and I think it was the JVC Sterling Richline

13 comment, you are now -- or the latest comment from

14 JVC talks about instead of having the weight

15 disclosure, you are now saying that based on

16 durability testing, you would use a 4.32 micron

17 standard. And yet you are still retaining the

18 1/20th, the standard based on industry use.

19 There's a little bit of confusion there on

20 our part, because you are saying that this is a new

21 standard that marketers should use based on

22 durability testing, and yet industry, the industry

23 standard for many years has been the 1/20th weight.

24 MR. HANNA: I think it would be some

25 combination of the karat and the thickness in the

94

1 end. That's why -- our metallurgist could probably

2 give you the tremendous detail, in terms of why the

3 mechanical process should be managed by weight as

4 opposed to thickness as the guide. It's what we can

5 measure. It's got to do with total mass, it's got

6 to do with densities. I don't know that it is

7 necessary to get into that level of scientific

8 detail.

9 MS. KOSS: Right.

10 MR. HANNA: But in conclusion, what this

11 is most about is instilling confidence in the

12 consumer that they know what they're getting. And

13 we think that separating them and being very clear

14 in how we define what we're talking about, in as few

15 terms as we possibly can, and establishing minimums

16 for each of those so they know at least what they

17 are getting from that definition, can do a

18 tremendous job for this industry and instilling

19 confidence.

20 And with the internet-researching consumer

21 base today, where if they want to find something

22 out, they can find it out, and it can be defined in

23 a way that they can understand it. So we actually

24 believe separating these two processes is very

25 important.

95

1 MS. KOSS: Yes, Suzan with a Z and then

2 Susan with an S.

3 MS. FLAMM: I want to speak a little bit

4 to your point about, okay, is this for the industry

5 or is this going to help consumers. I get it and

6 the truth is, there's not such a bright line.

7 If the industry is confused and if they

8 don't use terms in a way that is consistent across

9 the industry, even if they may seem technical and at

10 a level that a consumer might not read these Guides

11 before they go shopping, nonetheless, to the extent

12 that it allows the industry to comply with standards

13 and create products that have meaning when words are

14 used, you know, from the manufacturer to the

15 retailer, that is to the consumer's benefit and

16 prevents deception.

17 So I think it may not be such a bright

18 line between the two. And of course what we do have

19 though is what you've just flagged, that at some

20 level, below a certain thickness, warning, you know,

21 disclosure, consumer durability may not be assured.

22 So it sort of all fits together, we think.

23 And I get your point, but if we could help the

24 industry comply with standards and understand words,

25 we're going to help the consumer.

96

1 MR. HANNA: You think it would help the

2 consumer if they understood that 1/20th, 14 karat

3 gold-filled, gold washed, gold flashed at the

4 maximum of 6.9 mm. The 1/20th is 100 times more,

5 you know, give or take a couple of decimal points.

6 But it's 100 times more. I mean, that's an

7 important distinction, I think, for the consumer to

8 understand that, you know, that's a product of far

9 greater durability and long-lasting value, which is

10 what they really care about.

11 MS. LAURA KIM: Thank you. Susan.

12 MS. KELLY: Thank you. I want to just add

13 a few comments to what has already been said.

14 Definitely it would help the Guides be

15 more clear for the industry and whoever else may,

16 you know, avail themselves of the Guides to clean up

17 the terminology. Electrolytic joining of metals and

18 mechanical joining of metals needs to be very

19 separate in the verbiage for clarity.

20 In my opinion, I know there's a proposal

21 to redefine, or to actually define for the first

22 time, the word bonded in terms of a mechanical

23 application, to maintain filled, the gold-filled

24 with the fraction, rolled, gold-plate with adding a

25 fraction, and then setting minimum standards.
25 (Pages 97 to 100)

97

1 In terms of the plating, we have the

2 electroplate, the plated, the heavy gold

3 electroplate and that is where QVC has placed the

4 word clad. And the clad objects were very carefully

5 looked at in terms of, yes, the material and the

6 thickness for the performance. But in addition to

7 that, it was the type of item.

8 So our tests and research showed that for

9 any item, other than a ring or a watch, we have a 1

10 micron tolerance for 18 karat, which is quite a bit

11 of plated tolerance. And for the rings and watches,

12 a 2 micron because of the variation in the amount of

13 wear, depending upon the type of the product.

14 So that is a factor that I think was

15 well-established and well-embraced by our customer

16 and that's why that brand is so successful.

17 There's quite a bit of product out there

18 with brand names that include "clad" that are

19 described as plated. I don't -- I wanted to make

20 note that I don't believe there is a good amount of

21 research determining that clad automatically is to

22 be defined as mechanically joined.

23 MS. KOSS: Okay. So when you talk about

24 plating, you are talking about electroplating as

25 well. Okay.

98

1 MS. KELLY: Mm-hmm, the electrolytic

2 plating.

3 And then one final note is something that

4 we haven't touched upon, and perhaps someone here

5 could speak to it, is the vapor deposition or plasma

6 vapor deposition, which is entering into our market

7 now and, I think, within the next five to ten years

8 we will be addressing the durability and thickness

9 of new processes as well, so.

10 MS. KOSS: Okay. Michael.

11 MR. AKKAOUI: Our company does PVD

12 coating, physical vapor deposition, and it is not

13 addressed in the current standard. The materials

14 that are used are quite foreign, quite frankly, to

15 the jewelry industry. You can use real gold in the

16 application, but most of the durability doesn't come

17 from the gold itself, it comes from the base that is

18 applied through physical vapor deposition. Usually

19 it is a conium nitride base that is applied.

20 It's dying to get some foothold in the

21 jewelry industry. It can only be applied, at this

22 point, to a limited number of products that are

23 completely unassembled and so it's at its infancy.

24 It may have it's place in the standards, in the

25 Guides, at some point in time.

99

1 MS. KOSS: I think both Susan and Michael,

2 I think you've provided a really good segue to

3 another area that we are interested in and that's

4 the factors affecting durability that go beyond

5 minimum thickness.

6 So Susan, you mentioned that there's other

7 aspects, you might have a different threshold for a

8 ring or a watch that you wear every day, you're

9 washing your hands, as opposed to a pin that you

10 wear on your lapel and it doesn't get the constant

11 use.

12 MS. KELLY: Mm-hmm.

13 MS. KOSS: And then you mentioned,

14 Michael, other factors. There could be a protective

15 coating and other factors that would affect

16 durability that would include the actual metal, the

17 precious metal you are applying, or the substrate

18 metal.

19 MR. AKKAOUI: That's right.

20 MS. KOSS: You know, one commenter said

21 that, given that there's other factors that affect

22 durability beyond minimums in thicknesses, that the

23 suggested thickness minimums might actually increase

24 consumer confusion.

25 So I wanted to throw that out there. What

100

1 impact does that have, the fact that there are

2 different factors, on whether we should include and

3 continue to include minimum thickness amounts in the

4 Guides to allow for specified terms like

5 electroplated or bonded or etc.

6 MS. FLAMM: Certainly, yes it is a complex

7 formula, but the premier item in the research we

8 conducted with experts in the field who have a

9 combined, you know, 100 years of experience plating,

10 electroplating and mechanical applications, was that

11 the go-to element was thickness. And that's why we

12 -- and it makes common sense that the more metal you

13 have on the product, the longer it will take to wear

14 out. The wear tests at Taber Industries, which is

15 an independent tester, conducted showed, in fact,

16 that with twice as much metal on it, it would wear

17 twice -- it would take twice as long for it to wear

18 off.

19 Tanury conducted testing, vibratory

20 testing, as well. LeachGarner conducted --

21 MR. AKKAOUI -- Taber testing as well.

22 MS. FLAMM: -- wear testing and those were

23 the critical factors for them, was how long does it

24 take this amount of metal to come off. And of

25 course you can't simulate every possible thinning,
26 (Pages 101 to 104)

101

1 but what they do do is try to equate, okay, this

2 many hours in a wear test equates to this many

3 months of use, given common consumer use of a

4 product. That is, you have it on your finger,

5 you're washing dishes, you're gardening, that's the

6 equation that's used. And it did seem to make a lot

7 of common sense and it seemed like a good place to

8 try to come up with a baseline.

9 Because it does seem that it's very

10 important that there be some standard below which

11 consumers are told, hey, you know, durability here

12 is just not great.

13 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

14 MS. FLAMM: And it seemed that that seems

15 to be the best place to pen that standard to it, was

16 the thickness.

17 MS. KOSS: Dee.

18 MS. MERINO: I guess I'm a bit confused

19 and need some clarification as what you guys are

20 defining as durability. Is it, is it going to

21 tarnish? Because sterling silver is going to

22 tarnish no matter -- I mean, if it's pure silver it

23 is going to tarnish instantly. So if tarnishing is

24 your definition of durability, you can use defining

25 the millimeters of plating to say that that is going

102

1 to improve it or not.

2 And the other thing is, the consumer's

3 expectation as to how long is it going to take

4 before that item does -- what's the wearability. Is

5 it going to take six months for it to wear through

6 the plating? Is it going to take a year? Is it

7 supposed to last five years? And unfortunately, I

8 think that relates to -- and I think maybe it was

9 Lisa that commented, that relates to the value of

10 the item and how much the consumer paid for that

11 item.

12 And I know we don't want to talk about

13 cost and price, but a lot of these goods that we are

14 talking about today, that are plated with sterling

15 silver or plated with gold over a base metal, it's

16 priced at price points that are eight dollars or ten

17 dollars or twelve dollars or fifteen dollars. I

18 don't know that the consumer expects that item to

19 last for three years before the plating wears off.

20 And I don't know that we can set the Guides that it

21 is only saying that durability has to compete with

22 the level of fine jewelry durability.

23 MR. CLAPPROOD: If I could speak to that

24 if I could? The testing that we did was based on

25 comparing electrolytic plating to mechanical bonding

103

1 for two reasons.

2 For one, to ensure that the consumer had a

3 clear protection in terms of intrinsic value of the

4 metal. Meaning that if the mechanically bonded

5 material wore off quicker than electrolytically-plated

6 material, they would lose intrinsic value. And that's

7 something that we believe is important to the customer. 

8 It is very similar to the last discussion about mixed

9 metals and the consumer knowing, what is this actually

10 worth in terms of metal value.

11 Secondly, we wanted to see if there was a

12 delineation between how quickly this material wore

13 off and when would it get to the point where the

14 consumer had something that wasn't necessarily

15 viable. Now viable is sort of ambiguous. What you

16 might think still looks good might not look good to

17 someone else, so we had to try to build some

18 correlations between relative wear between

19 electrolytically-plated and mechanically bonded.

20 What we didn't do is we didn't make a

21 correlation between rate of wear and time of use.

22 So would the consumer have this piece of jewelry for

23 five years, based on the rate of wear, or ten years?

24 I think what Michael did, and he did it very well,

25 was he tried to build a correlation between the two

104

1 and said, I believe, based on my professional

2 experience and all the analysis that we did, that

3 this rate of wear equates to one year of use in the

4 field.

5 MR. AKKAOUI: If I could comment on that?

6 MS. KOSS: Sure.

7 MR. AKKAOUI: If you jump back first to

8 your earlier question about clear coats and other

9 factors of wear.

10 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

11 MR. AKKAOUI: There are plenty of factors

12 of wear, they'll make your head spin. But in

13 particular, if you put a clear coat on an item that

14 has less than the recommended benchmark for gold,

15 let's say 3 micro inches of gold versus 7, similar

16 to what the Europeans did when they were determining

17 testing for nickel-free products, the mandate was

18 you needed to test that product without the

19 clear-coat. Because you can encapsulate a product

20 and have it pass the nickel-free test.

21 So the mandate there was, you have to take

22 the clear-coat off and then test it. And if it

23 passes without the clear-coat, then you've got a

24 good product.

25 It's a similar thing. Clear-coats are not
27 (Pages 105 to 108)

105

1 very good. They wear off, depending on how they are

2 applied, they are adding just marginal protection to

3 the product. So the guidelines, I believe, provide

4 a baseline of a guaranteed performance when you set

5 a benchmark at 7 micro inches or higher, for gold in

6 particular, these benchmarks are, I think, highly

7 critical. Because you can't assure yourself that

8 the clear-coat that is used across the world is

9 going to be of any certain quality. So I think that

10 distinction is very, very important.

11 The wear testing that we did, to answer

12 Dee's question, was not for tarnishing. The world

13 of silver and silver-plating is constantly battling

14 with the idea of why does silver tarnish and how can

15 we prevent it from tarnishing? How do we get it

16 from the shelf and then to the consumer without

17 tarnishing? It's an old debate and that's not what

18 we did. We did our testing based on, at what point

19 does it get to a metal that the consumer doesn't

20 want to see?

21 So if it's over nickel, how long does it

22 take to get to that nickel, and/or if it is over

23 something else, copper for instance or palladium.

24 So our testing was really trying to

25 determine a baseline Taber testing, which is used

106

1 across a multitude of industries. Taber testing is

2 like the test for wearability in almost any industry

3 that you go into. So we worked with Taber to

4 determine what's the weight of a touch. Basically,

5 if we can define what the weight of a touch is,

6 okay, then we can calibrate the Taber test to mimic

7 normal wear. Not abusive wear, but normal wear.

8 And so we did that. We did some research.

9 Taber Industries, world-famous, helped us

10 define what that weight would be. And then once we

11 got that data on the exact same weight and thickness

12 of coupons, we then did the standard jewelry test,

13 which is the vibratory test. Which, you know, Greg

14 and Brian did on materials that we prepared,

15 comparing gold-filled to plated. We just took and

16 said, can we correlate Taber to vibe, which has

17 never been done, and we did that.

18 The reason that that is important is

19 because you want to be able to take that information

20 and then say, now let's try to project how long that

21 is going to wear in the field. So the Taber test,

22 which is a great platform test for many industries,

23 was now correlated to the standard jewelry vibe

24 test, which we have some data that says here is how

25 it is going to last in the industry and we provided

107

1 that information to the Commission.

2 MS. KOSS: Okay.

3 MR. AKKAOUI: Okay.

4 MS. KOSS: So now again, I want to focus,

5 and this has to do with testing as well, but the

6 electroplating with gold alloy, as you know, I'm

7 sure, the current Guides state that it is consistent

8 with the guidance for products to be electroplated

9 with gold or gold alloy of not less than 10 karat

10 fineness.

11 The comments, however -- many comments

12 recommended the Commission specify that

13 manufacturers should not use low karat plating

14 because of the risk of, you know, according to

15 testing that there is tarnishing.

16 But Valerie, this is a question for you.

17 Sterling Richline comment mentioned that, when you

18 have electrolytic plating with gold, there should be

19 a 23.5 karat minimum. And the comment said, focused

20 on that, if you've got this kind of -- if you've got

21 10 karat gold as an electroplated plating, you're

22 only going to have 41 percent of the value compared

23 to a thicker plating. And the statement was

24 actually, there needs to be a single measure

25 indicative of this value perception.

108

1 And it could be Valerie, it might be Mark,

2 but I just want to hear a little bit more about what

3 you meant by value perception. You know, indicative

4 of a value perception and whether that was primarily

5 based on durability testing as well, and what you

6 mean by value perception?

7 MR. HANNA: Can I say something first?

8 Subsequent to our submission, we spent quite a bit

9 of time investigating the 23 and worked together

10 with Michael and his lab people and our lab people

11 and we would now revise that to say 22, primarily

12 because of the ability to apply and the ability to

13 measure versus the 23.5 in the real world. So we

14 would now say that that number is 22.

15 And to your question, the combination of

16 the karatage and the thickness, we feel, is really

17 the value proposition. And that, you know, at the

18 higher karatage, at a higher thickness, you have a

19 higher value. And we'd like to see the definitions

20 reflect that.

21 MS. KOSS: Okay, but when you've revised

22 it to 22. I'm sorry, when you revised it to 22,

23 that was based on the durability testing that

24 Michael provided or --

25 MR. HANNA: It was based on a combination
28 (Pages 109 to 112)

109

1 of the -- go ahead, Michael.

2 MR. AKKAOUI: The problem is is that if

3 you set it at 23.5, the chemistries that are out

4 there in the plating world, depending on how they

5 are alloyed or the brightness systems that are used,

6 such as cobalt, nickel, silver to promote hardness

7 in the deposit, can't be assured that you can

8 maintain it at 23.5. There is a high level of data

9 that says that you can easily maintain it at 22

10 plus. But when you look at all of the varieties,

11 and just trying to be clear to everyone in

12 manufacturing, when you look at all of the varieties

13 of chemistries out there, the concern is that you

14 might not be able to maintain 23.5 purity all the

15 time.

16 MS. KOSS: But for when I'm asking the

17 question about value perception, I'm just trying to

18 figure out, does that tie to durability? Or what's

19 the connection there? Again, I'm focusing on --

20 MS. FALEN: I think it's two different

21 issues. At first, we feel that there needs to be a

22 minimum standard for the thickness that provides

23 that reasonable durability to the consumer.

24 Secondly, the coating or the plating that

25 we are using needs to be measured in a stringent

110

1 value that is equal across all playing fields. If

2 I'm only using 10 karat gold to plate something, it

3 has much less value than if I'm using a 22 or 23.5

4 percent gold or karat gold.

5 So what we're asking for is, when plating,

6 everybody plates with the fine gold or the 22. So

7 everyone is on that equal playing field and the

8 value perception is the same to the customer, no

9 matter where they are purchasing their goods from.

10 So there's no confusion. We can build some customer

11 confidence and educate the customer, which I think

12 is the main goal here.

13 MS. KOSS: Right. And the reason that I'm

14 focusing on that specific point is that the Guides,

15 the purpose of the Guides, as the Commission has

16 said, is not to maintain high or uniform high

17 product standards, but instead to insure that

18 consumers aren't being deceived, just so you

19 understand the basis of my question. Dee?

20 MS. MERINO: Even when we are doing

21 plating, aren't we required to put if it is 10 karat

22 plated gold or 22 karat? I mean, doesn't the

23 definition of the karat have to be in front of the

24 plated term anyway, in the Guides? So wouldn't that

25 level the -- I mean, you can't just --

111

1 MR. AKKAOUI: Once you hit the minimum --

2 MS. KOSS: Once you hit the minimum of 10

3 karats --

4 MR. AKKAOUI: -- it doesn't matter.

5 MS. KOSS: -- you don't need to disclose.

6 You have to decide that based on karats.

7 But what, again, I'm trying to get at and

8 I don't mean to put you, Valerie, on the spot, it

9 could be anyone. But what we are trying to

10 determine is, is there a risk of consumer deception

11 at 10 karats? Is it based on -- I think, Michael,

12 you are going to talk about durability and what you

13 learned, but what is the value perception in

14 maintaining those high uniform product standards?

15 How does that tie to whether consumers are actually

16 being deceived by an electrolytic plating at 10

17 karats and above.

18 MS. FLAMM: I would just throw in that my

19 understanding is that yes, in fact, with the lower

20 karat quality there is -- those products don't

21 perform well and consumers are disappointed at the

22 very low karat quality, which is why we made the

23 recommendation that it be at least 22 karats. It's

24 our understanding from the conversations with the

25 experts that that is where there is more uniform and

112

1 more consistent and more predictable performance.

2 If you are at a 10 or 12 karat, then there's going

3 to be problems with that product.

4 MR. AKKAOUI: There are several key

5 factors that you have to consider. The lower karat

6 chemistries are alloyed, in most cases, with silver.

7 And what happens is is that, at almost any

8 thickness, you get this phenomenon called bleed-out,

9 which is a form of tarnish. Even if you build a

10 layer over that 23 karat gold, you have to have a

11 minimum thickness of that 23 karat gold in order to

12 stop that or prevent that from occurring in the

13 field.

14 The second factor that is really critical

15 to your point is that there is a real value issue

16 here. Seven millionths of an inch of 10 karat gold

17 is a lot less valuable than seven millionths of an

18 inch of 22-plus karat gold.

19 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

20 MR. AKKAOUI: The third factor that comes

21 into play is the inability, the significant

22 inability for the world to measure that.

23 MR. HANNA: That's what I was going to

24 say.

25 MR. AKKAOUI: Because in order to
29 (Pages 113 to 116)

113

1 calibrate an x-ray fluorescence machine properly, to

2 read the difference between 10 karat and 23 karat,

3 first you have to know it. And if it's coming in

4 from overseas, who knows? I don't know. I'm given

5 product every day to read, I have no idea if it is

6 10 karat or 23 karat.

7 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm, right. Now Susan, I

8 want to hear first from Susan and then Pam, you

9 next. I want to hear that, in terms of marketing

10 and whether -- how you are communicating to

11 consumers, what is your approach when you do have an

12 alloy that is, you know, less than 10 karats or less

13 than 22 karats? Have you made any disclosures? Has

14 there been a consumer problem? Have you received

15 consumer complaints when the alloy -- you know,

16 because of tarnishing? I'm just curious about your

17 experience as retailers.

18 But I'm going to start with Susan, since

19 you had your hand up.

20 MS. KELLY: I want to first mention that

21 our product, at this time, does not include anything

22 lower than 14 karat, so I'm not familiar with the

23 bleeding.

24 But I can say that we apply a thickness --

25 if we were applying a thickness of a 24 or 23.5

114

1 karat plate, our understanding is that to name the

2 product as plated gold, it would need to be 0.5

3 micron. But if we cut the karatage of the gold in

4 half to 12 karat, we would need to plate one full

5 micron thickness in order to meet the FTC

6 requirements. That's a footnote that refers to the

7 fine gold equivalency, so --

8 MS. KOSS: Yeah, I'm going to get to that.

9 MS. KELLY: Okay.

10 MS. KOSS: I'm going to get to that in a

11 minute.

12 MS. KELLY: So we do that. But in terms

13 of marketing the value we, in our descriptions,

14 always precede the word "plated" with the karatage

15 that is proven through an SRF analysis.

16 MS. KOSS: But do consumers understand,

17 when you provide that number, what that means?

18 MS. KELLY: I can't -- you know, no

19 absolutes, but I believe that the customers

20 understand the difference between 14 karat gold

21 plate and 18 karat gold plate. And by the longevity

22 of the product and its performance, they understand

23 that it is meeting their needs. But finer

24 definitions or finer data to the customer, we

25 haven't shared it.

115

1 And I haven't seen any negative trends for

2 plating. Again, possibly because of the 14 karat

3 and up.

4 MS. KOSS: And Pam?

5 MS. MORTENSEN: We do the same thing. We

6 always distinguish the karatage, 14 karat or 18

7 karat, before the plating.

8 And I do not think the -- I think the

9 consumer thinks that 18 karat is better than 14

10 karat. I think that they understand that.

11 But what Dee talked about, I mean there is

12 product, we sell, open sell, product on the floor

13 that is opening price point. I mean, we sell

14 product that is under glass that is a higher price

15 point. They have different plating microns, might

16 it be 0.5 micron for the open sell, because it is,

17 you know, the expectation of the customer is that it

18 does not have the longevity of what they are going

19 to find in the fine jewelry department.

20 So there is a difference in the thickness

21 of plating that we put on, depending on, I think,

22 what the customer is expecting.

23 MS. KOSS: Okay. So I want to touch on,

24 you mentioned, Susan, the equivalency issue. So for

25 gold electrolytic plating applications, is there an

116

1 impact on performance and quality of the product, if

2 a manufacturer uses a thicker amount of lower

3 fineness gold on a product rather than a thinner

4 product of higher fineness gold? Because the Guide

5 refers to achieving an equivalent amount of, what is

6 it, 0.175 microns. So is that an issue? And I

7 think, Michael, you want to -- it seems like you

8 want to speak to that.

9 MR. AKKAOUI: Well, I don't think that the

10 Guides explain that very well, to be quite honest

11 with you. And I don't think that, in general, people

12 understand that if you change the karat -- and let's

13 face it, the reason why the karat issue has come up

14 is because the price of gold has sky-rocketed.

15 Prior to that, there was a very even playing field.

16 There was one method of measurement. There was one

17 standard, to a large degree. The only folks using

18 low karat was the watch industry. They would use

19 200 millionths of an inch of low karat and 200

20 millionths of an inch of high karat, because they

21 understood the bleed-out issue.

22 So you know, that's where this issue has

23 come. It has come because of the market price of

24 gold. But if you read into the particular language

25 about the equivalency, I'm not sure that that's well
30 (Pages 117 to 120)

117

1 understood, to be quite honest with you. There are

2 some folks who have studied it, tried to implement

3 it, but in general, I would say that 90 percent

4 don't understand what that means the way that Susan

5 understands it.

6 MS. KOSS: But why do you think that's the

7 case? I mean, can you --

8 MR. AKKAOUI: Well, it doesn't describe,

9 it doesn't given an example. It doesn't describe,

10 you know, some methodologies for compliance with

11 that clause. It's rather vague.

12 MS. KOSS: Okay.

13 MS. KELLY: Other than the foot note. You

14 need to refer to a footnote.

15 MR. AKKAOUI: Yes. We had to go to the

16 footnotes of the original drafters of the standard

17 to understand that.

18 MS. KOSS: Okay. So I'm going to move --

19 just in the interest of time, I'm going to move to

20 thresholds for silver, because this is something

21 that, Dee, I know is important to you.

22 So TSIs comment, as you know, suggested

23 that for silver, we should refer to the standard for

24 gold in that safe harbor, which is 0.5 or one-half

25 microns, 0.5 microns. And basically, correct me if

118

1 I'm wrong, but TSI is saying that that should be the

2 standard, regardless of the application. And that

3 that is based on -- that is consistent with

4 historical plating standards and, because of that,

5 that would meet consumer expectations.

6 And I'm focusing on this because this,

7 your recommendation, focuses on the standard that is

8 considerably less than the other recommended

9 thresholds. And I wanted to hear a little bit more

10 about what the basis was when you talked about

11 consumer expectation. So if you could speak a

12 little bit more about your justification for the

13 recommendation?

14 MS. MERINO: Sure. And actually, I think,

15 since then, just like I think Mark and everyone

16 else, that we've made changes to our position since

17 last September.

18 But we are definitely fine with allowing

19 the mechanical application to go through the same

20 percentage as what JVC and everyone else has

21 recommended. We were okay with that delineation

22 versus the electroplating aspect.

23 And when we had done our research --

24 because we were -- when obviously sterling silver

25 has taken the increase that it did several years

119

1 ago, we started going into plated product versus

2 pure sterling silver, or 92.5 percent sterling

3 silver. And we looked to our attorneys and we

4 looked to going to the FTC to try to understand what

5 is the minimum thickness we need on there to be able

6 to call it silver plated. And there wasn't a whole

7 lot of guidance because it just says that it had to

8 be a substantial thickness.

9 So we looked to just the understanding

10 that gold has been out there at 20 mills, at the

11 time, to be able to call something gold-plated, it

12 needed 20 mills of thickness to be able to use that

13 term.

14 So we use that as our basis to say, as

15 long as we have a minimum of 20 mills of silver,

16 then we would also be able to call it silver-plated

17 in the marketing of the product.

18 Since then, we have actually increased our

19 level of plating to 40 mills instead of 20 mills,

20 only to be able to offer something that we feel may

21 be above what the competition was doing, not from a

22 durability or a study from consumer groups. But

23 what we have done is, looking at our production of

24 our sterling silver line, our plating there is --

25 obviously it's 92.5 percent silver, so there's other

120

1 alloys in there, but the way we plate is including a

2 40, at least 40 mills of 0.999 silver as the final

3 coat to the consumer.

4 So to us, the expectation of the consumer

5 is, you're buying a silver-plated item would be it

6 should last or be similar to if I'm buying a

7 sterling item. I know it's not going to be as

8 durable, because I'm not paying the price that I

9 would pay for sterling silver, but it should wear

10 the same.

11 But we have changed ours to 40 mills,

12 which has been in our manufacturing base, in our

13 experience in 40 years of doing sterling silver, we

14 use 40 mills of pure silver on top of the 925.

15 MS. KOSS: So how much is 7 microns? I

16 think that it's easier to --

17 MS. MERINO: 40 mills is 1 micron.

18 MS. KOSS: Okay, okay. But then again,

19 you're saying that is based on your experience in

20 manufacturing the product. Did you do some

21 additional durability testing as well?

22 MS. MERINO: We have not done any formal,

23 you know -- we don't have metallurgists in our

24 company so we are not doing any formal studies on

25 that. That is just based on -- we can ask Mike,
31 (Pages 121 to 124)

121

1 because we use him sometimes.

2 MS. KOSS: Yes, Michael.

3 MR. AKKAOUI: Our study incorporated

4 silver as well. And to our surprise, and I'll say

5 this admittedly, that we found that 40 micro inches

6 of silver plate actually wore better than

7 anticipated.

8 If you look in our exhibit, you'll find a

9 chart that includes this information. We compared

10 one hundred millionths, or 2.5 microns of silver

11 plate, to one micron or 40 millionths of silver

12 plate and found, in comparison, to look at the other

13 metals that we were defining benchmarks for, that

14 the silver, pure silver plate, this is 39 silver

15 deposit, went 6,000 cycles on the linear Taber test,

16 which we were quite impressed with.

17 So you know, from my just personal

18 perspective, I wouldn't have a problem lowering our

19 benchmark that has been recommended to the 40, as it

20 did perform, again, relative to the other metals

21 that we tested, relatively well at that benchmark.

22 MS. KOSS: Okay. Just so I understand

23 what you're saying, based on further testing -- in

24 other words, that recommendation isn't incorporated

25 in the declaration that you submitted with the --

122

1 MR. AKKAOUI: We recommended one hundred

2 millionths of an inch or 2.5 microns.

3 MS. KOSS: Uh-huh.

4 MR. AKKAOUI: But this test data is being

5 done at basically the same time that the

6 recommendations were being formulated. And I was

7 obviously very comfortable in keeping with the 100

8 micro inch recommendation. The value on a pot of

9 that much more silver, at least for me, was not that

10 much more significant so we kind of left it at 100.

11 But the test data at 40 was actually pretty good.

12 MS. KOSS: Do you plan to submit that

13 additional testing on the public record?

14 MR. AKKAOUI: Well, it is currently on the

15 --

16 MS. KOSS: Okay, all right.

17 MR. AKKAOUI: -- in what you have, yes.

18 MS. KOSS: So now I want to move on to a

19 discussion that is more specifically focused on

20 disclosures about lack of durability. And I know

21 that the JVC task force comment talked about using

22 the eleven terms, if you meet a threshold. And if

23 it's below the threshold, there could be a

24 disclosure about durability is not assured.

25 So I'm wondering about -- and I think I

123

1 want to start again with Pam and Susan. Are there

2 currently disclosures that are common in the

3 marketplace that talk about a lack of durability for

4 products that are below the thresholds, that either

5 are suggested in the Guides currently or in the

6 numbers that JVCs task force has recommended? Does

7 anything exist at this point in the marketplace?

8 MS. KELLY: It does in mine.

9 MS. KOSS: Because I'm assuming that

10 products exist in the marketplace now that are below

11 the threshold.

12 MS. MORTENSEN: Absolutely. And there are

13 no disclosures that I --

14 MS. FLAMM: Well, I'll just add this as

15 far as development in the industry, which is a vast

16 number of products now with these very, very thin

17 coatings, which is not brand new but has certainly

18 increased over the last year or so. And when the

19 Guides were last written, we weren't dealing with

20 those kinds of products. So the fact that retailers

21 have not yet devised on their own some disclosure

22 makes sense. They are sort of waiting for guidance

23 from JVC, from the FTC, as to how to handle that,

24 which is a relatively new phenomenon.

25 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

124

1 MS. KELLY: I would say that we turned it

2 around to a positive spin, in that rather than

3 "Beware, this clad product will wear out faster than

4 a solid, an entirely 14 karat yellow gold plate

5 piece" we will advocate special care for any plated

6 item. So although we didn't address -- we address

7 any metal surface that is a precious metal over

8 another.

9 MS. KOSS: Dee.

10 MS. MERINO: Can I just get a

11 clarification? Are we -- is the JVCs position that

12 there should be a disclosure or warning if they are

13 below the mills of thickness? So that would be

14 every product, other than what meets these minimums,

15 would have that warning on it?

16 MS. FLAMM: If the seller references a

17 precious metal surface layer application, if they

18 said, here, buy this pretty gold-plated item --

19 MS. MERINO: But they can't call it gold

20 plated unless it --

21 MS. FLAMM: That's true. So, buy this

22 pretty item that has gold on it.

23 MR. AKKAOUI: Gold tone.

24 MS. FLAMM: Gold tone, gold washed, gold

25 flash. Then we would say yes, you reference that
32 (Pages 125 to 128)

125

1 precious metal and you've now triggered expectations

2 in a consumer's mind about durability. You are

3 going to have to tell them that durability is not

4 assured.

5 If they choose not to reference the

6 precious metal, then they certainly don't say

7 anything. And certainly nothing we are recommending

8 would prevent any manufacturer or seller from

9 selling these products. It's just about letting

10 consumers know -- you hear the word gold and you're

11 thinking certain things, while it may not perform

12 within your expectations.

13 MS. KOSS: So Susan, you mentioned

14 disclosing special care requirements.

15 MS. KELLY: Mm-hmm.

16 MS. KOSS: And I'm just wondering if you

17 can elaborate on how, whether you believe there are

18 sufficient to cure any consumer deception. Are the

19 care requirements or that kind of information

20 enough?

21 MS. KELLY: My feeling is that it is

22 giving a level playing field. If we feel that any

23 plated product should be treated -- you know, do not

24 have the ring sized. You know, certain things that

25 the customer needs to know, we will share that

126

1 information.

2 I don't know that that answered your

3 question to the degree that it could. I would say

4 though that the word "gold" in terms of -- this is

5 something that maybe guidance could be given as

6 well. Saying the word "gold" G-O-L-D alone,

7 standing alone, in referring to an item of having

8 gold or gold on the surface or anything else, that

9 is so low, below these standards, with an admission

10 that it is below the standards, then it would

11 accompany a disclosure that it may not wear well.

12 We are assuming that our standards and higher will

13 wear well enough to not require a disclosure. But

14 there are some instances where plated products will

15 not perform as well, such as in sizing rings.

16 And also, in my opinion, combining the

17 word "gold" and "tone" into one word of "goldtone"

18 changes it. And I think it becomes a color, like

19 silvertone and goldtone.

20 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

21 MS. KELLY: So maybe there's some clarity

22 there that we could identify.

23 MS. KOSS: So you mentioned ring sizing,

24 do you think -- and we've been focused, as the

25 Guides focus, on durability as the issue here. But

127

1 do you think there is other issues beyond durability

2 that need to be disclosed?

3 MS. KELLY: It's a good question. I think

4 --

5 MS. KOSS: Or that are disclosed

6 currently.

7 MS. KELLY: Yeah. I think the retailers

8 do guide their customers appropriately. We are

9 driven to do that to keep our return rates low and

10 to keep our customer satisfaction high.

11 I'm not sure if guidance in the FTC

12 guidelines would help clarify or not, in terms of

13 performance and care.

14 MS. KOSS: Relatedly about disclosures,

15 the Guides do currently state that when you have a

16 mechanical surface layer application, if you are not

17 meeting the 1/20th weight, then you should disclose

18 the precise weight, and the portion of the weight of

19 the metal and the entire article.

20 So they give an example of 1/40th. And I

21 know that JVCs comment states that consumers don't

22 understand, for example, rolled gold plate so

23 they're not going to understand rolled gold plate,

24 1/40th.

25 SO I just -- why would be -- since the

128

1 Guides have traditionally told marketers to disclose

2 if you are not meeting that 1/20th and if 1/20th is

3 the industry standard, then why would consumers be

4 confused by that additional information, with the

5 precise weight?

6 MS. FLAMM: It didn't seem to us that it

7 was a helpful descriptor. And since part of our

8 effort was to simplify, we made the choice that it

9 would be better to just define terms such as bonded,

10 plate, filled, as either 1/40th or 1/20th, so that

11 those terms would only be used for that weight

12 ratio. And then just get rid of the necessity to

13 add a fraction in front of it, and then the lift

14 required to educate consumers about those terms and

15 start creating understanding would be that much

16 easier. Yeah, including the fact of just details

17 like why, that just won't help in this effort. So

18 that's why we came up with the scheme that we came

19 up with.

20 MS. KOSS: Okay. Now Susan, going back to

21 you mentioned goldtone and silvertone and I know

22 that -- and you seemed to refer to those as costume

23 jewelry, right? I just -- are those terms current?

24 Is that something that's prevalent, the use of

25 goldtone and silvertone, and how do consumers
33 (Pages 129 to 132)

129

1 understand those terms?

2 MS. KELLY: I believe it is very clearly

3 understood. We apply those terms only to costume

4 jewelry brands that are well-defined and they are

5 not mixed in with fine gold or precious metal items.

6 MS. MORTENSEN: I would agree with Sue on

7 that because we also carry costume jewelry that is

8 goldtone or silvertone and I think that we try to

9 distinguish between the two. Whenever we talk about

10 gold, it is really gold. We put a karat in the

11 front of it.

12 MS. KOSS: So that, I think, is another

13 good transition to what I want to focus on, and

14 that's all of the other terms that we've left out.

15 You know, we've talked specifically about rolled

16 gold plate, about the fill, to a certain degree, but

17 there's a lot of other terms like flashed and washed

18 and overlay and duragold and durigold with an "I".

19 And some of the comments noted that they are not --

20 a lot of those terms, specifically duragold and

21 durigold, are not being used by the industry and

22 they are confusing the consumers because they don't

23 have a plain English term and they don't convey

24 anything specific.

25 But you know, at the outset, I just want

130

1 to hear a little bit about how that is really

2 different from terms like clad and filled? Because

3 consumers similarly are unfamiliar with them and yet

4 we, you know, are contemplating including those in

5 the Guides and people have given us thresholds for

6 those.

7 MS. KELLY: May I?

8 MS. KOSS: Go ahead.

9 MS. KELLY: Thank you. I think there may

10 be a place for flashed and washed, only in that it

11 would require disclosure for being not that durable

12 or as durable as a mechanically-applied or

13 electrolytically-applied process.

14 But I think we have a great opportunity

15 here. We have some terms that we have used, and

16 used maybe loosely, some very well-defined and some

17 not so defined. And I would think that we have an

18 opportunity to define levels of thickness specific

19 to a term. And perhaps, you know, you can give me

20 some clarity. I'm hearing that we are going to use

21 the word bonded with a minimum of maybe 1/40th and

22 filled with 1/20th and then rolled with 1/40th. And

23 maybe there's an opportunity to say, okay, rolled is

24 1/40th, filled is 1/20th, and then go up. I think

25 there's an opportunity here to go to, you know, that

131

1 sweet spot that is just a little more durable, maybe

2 a bit higher in price, but it would give our jewelry

3 industry, perhaps, more clarity and more flexibility

4 in the types of products that we could acquire. So

5 that's a thought.

6 But in terms of customer perception and

7 not deception, I think very clear, defined terms

8 with minimums would be essential.

9 MS. KOSS: You mentioned gold wash as

10 something to describe mechanical and electroplated,

11 but currently the Guides refer to the terms gold

12 flashed and gold washed, both of them, to describe

13 products that have an electrolytic application but

14 are less than the 1.75 equivalency, the microns of

15 gold.

16 MS. KELLY: Mm-hmm.

17 MS. KOSS: So I'm curious, are the terms

18 gold washed and gold flashed still being used in the

19 marketplace and do consumers understand that to be

20 an electrolytic application?

21 MS. KELLY: May I just say that we do not

22 use those terms and we do not go that thin, but I

23 think there's more than just electrolytic. I

24 believe, and others would speak perhaps to clarify

25 this, that whether or not a current is actually

132

1 applied through the bath, so that there's one type

2 of mechanical bonding, electrolytic bonding onto

3 the metal, it's kind of a hot bath or a cold bath,

4 whether there's -- can you elaborate?

5 MR. AKKAOUI: Yeah. There's actually --

6 MS. KELLY: So you can get really, really

7 low and very temporary as well.

8 MR. AKKAOUI: Electrolytically, in

9 electroplating chemistry, you can go as low as one

10 millionth of an inch. There are immersion

11 chemistries that can apply that much and lower

12 without using a current, but it is still a

13 chemistry. And I think that you have to separate

14 the chemistry applications, whether they are

15 electrolytic or not, from the bonding or mechanical

16 applications. Correct me, if I'm wrong, for those

17 that know about cladding or bonding, you can't go

18 that low in a clad or bonding. It's probably not

19 even economically efficient to go that low in that

20 process.

21 So I think that goldtone and gold wash

22 kind of live and breathe within the chemical

23 deposition world, most of them being electrolytic.

24 But there are some cases of immersion, non-electrolytic

25 applications as well.
34 (Pages 133 to 136)

133

1 MS. KOSS: Suzan.

2 MS. FLAMM: To return to your question

3 about certain terms, duragold, durigold, washed and

4 referencing some of the terms that we are suggesting

5 no longer need to be addressed specifically by the

6 Guides, it really goes back to our effort to, not

7 only unify the sections in the Guides that address

8 precious metal applications, that is to make them

9 global so that they address all of the precious

10 metals, but also to the extent possible, given the

11 complexity of these products, to simplify.

12 And so that was a process of determining

13 which terms really were essential, which terms were

14 consumers being educated on, which terms should they

15 be educated on, and which terms were really no

16 longer being used or necessary to define. So that's

17 the duragold/durigold. I'm in the industry over

18 five years and I didn't know what those meant.

19 Moreover, no one in my office knew what they meant.

20 And it seemed like we really don't need those. We

21 don't need to burn into the Guides, and in consumers

22 -- no one is out there trying to educate consumers

23 about what those words mean.

24 MS. KOSS: Right.

25 MS. FLAMM: Those can go. In terms of

134

1 gold flash and gold wash, any manufacturer or seller

2 is welcome to use those terms, but since the way --

3 what those products are today are generally,

4 products described with those terms are going to be

5 below those minimums that we recommend, they are

6 going to need a -- or we suggest that there be a

7 disclosure made about durability. It seemed that

8 those were not necessary to define in the Guides

9 specifically, but they are not words that -- since

10 they would be accompanied by the disclosure, as they

11 are currently used.

12 So that was all part of our effort to --

13 which words do we currently need here? How can we

14 really make an effort to -- these products are big in

15 the marketplace, consumers want them, sellers are

16 able to reach price points they want to reach by

17 selling them, it's all a good thing. But how can we

18 protect consumers and how can we make this a little

19 simpler for everybody, especially for consumers, and

20 then start educating them as to what this stuff is.

21 MS. KOSS: Okay. I want to make sure I

22 heard you correctly, because currently the Guides

23 state that you can state gold flashed or gold

24 washed, even if you are below the threshold.

25 MS. FLAMM: Yes.

135

1 MS. KOSS: Even without any kind of a

2 disclosure.

3 MS. FLAMM: Yes.

4 MS. KOSS: But your recommendation would

5 be, you could use those terms, but you would have to

6 also additionally include a disclosure that

7 reasonable durability is --

8 MS. FLAMM: Yes, if they are below those

9 minimums, we would recommend --

10 MS. KOSS: Okay. And I'm -- Dee, did you

11 have your hand up?

12 MS. MERINO: I did, but I guess I was just

13 trying to get to where is this --

14 MR. AKKAOUI: Just to --

15 MS. MERINO: -- recommendation for a

16 warning? I mean, would that be something that the

17 FTC would be monitoring or managing? Is it up to

18 the discretion of the retailer to determine where

19 that warning goes?

20 I guess, I just envision there are so many

21 warnings and products in jewelry are such a small

22 thing. There are so many warnings now that if you

23 have an image in marketing that you're putting out

24 in marketing -- you know, gold is the big thing on

25 the front of the card and then on the back of the

136

1 card, it's this one little sentence that is, you

2 know, so small.

3 I guess, would there be information in the

4 Guides that would specify exactly how that warning

5 would need to be executed?

6 MS. KOSS: That's actually -- I think

7 that's a question more for Suzan because it's what

8 your proposal is. I mean, we're not going to be

9 speaking to -- you know, we are still in the middle

10 of the review, so we are not going to be speaking to

11 the commenter's proposals.

12 But Suzan, you might want -- do you have

13 any thoughts as to where that durability, or lack of

14 durability, disclosure would go?

15 MS. FLAMM: Yes, we have thought about

16 that. And the way generally the Guides address this

17 would be they advise, they cannot -- they don't

18 direct or require, but they advise sellers if a

19 disclosure is necessary, if it has been triggered by

20 particular representation, they advise sellers to

21 make whatever the disclosure is.

22 In this case, it is durability is not

23 assured. And there is a lot of guidance on how the

24 disclosure should be made. They should be

25 prominent? What is the word?
35 (Pages 137 to 140)

137

1 MS. LAURA KIM: Clear and prominent, clear

2 and conspicuous.

3 MS. FLAMM: Clear and conspicuous, thank

4 you. That just escaped my head, clear and

5 conspicuous. But generally, the FTC will not say

6 exactly what that means. That generally comes --

7 MS. KOSS: Right. It has to be very

8 case-by-case, which is why I was wondering whether

9 you had a specific proposal beyond, you know -- the

10 Commission would, of course, want to ensure that

11 consumers see and understand the disclosure that is

12 being made at the point of purchase. And so it has

13 to be clear, it has to be prominent, it has to be in

14 close proximity to the claim.

15 But again, we can't -- because it depends

16 on the specific context, we can't just tell you

17 exactly it has to be this font, it has to be --

18 MS. FLAMM: Right.

19 MS. KOSS: -- this many inches away from

20 the claim itself.

21 MS. FLAMM: Well, we do have some

22 experience advising the industry. Actually, a lot

23 of experience advising the industry about

24 disclosures because, you know, treatments to gem

25 stones have to be disclosed, karat weight ranges

138

1 have to be disclosed. So we've worked closely with

2 people in the industry as to how to do those hangtag

3 marketing materials.

4 The FTC recently issued a lot of very

5 helpful guidance on having disclosures online. We

6 try to interpret that throughout the industry,

7 that's what we're here for.

8 MS. KOSS: So that's a good point about

9 disclosures and comparing the disclosures to

10 treatment disclosures.

11 So a question that I have, and I think

12 this is for Mark or Valerie, is you talked -- your

13 comment talked about the practice of rhodium plating

14 over white gold or other metals. And you talked

15 about how, in many cases, the rhodium might wear

16 away and so there might need to be replating in

17 order to ensure that the product continues to

18 maintain the appearance that consumers expect.

19 So could that -- I mean, do you consider

20 that to be a kind of treatment, similar to the

21 disclosure -- we have a whole separate section on

22 disclosure of treatments, at 23.22, to gemstones

23 where you have to make a disclosure if the treatment

24 is not permanent, if it creates special care

25 requirements.

139

1 So how do you feel about that, in terms of

2 the --

3 MR. AKKAOUI: Go ahead.

4 MS. FALEN: Because we are the largest

5 jewelry retailer in the U.S., we feel it is

6 incumbent upon us to lead by example in one of

7 transparency to our consumers. The proper

8 disclosure and product education in the industry

9 needs to have consistent standards and they need to

10 follow proper -- we need to have some enforcement of

11 those standards for the violators as well.

12 One of our most common complaints we

13 frequently received from our consumers was related

14 to the dissatisfaction of the white gold jewelry.

15 Customers were unaware that products were

16 rhodium-ed, that rhodium was used to plate the white

17 gold in order to provide a bright white finish.

18 However, over time, it rubs off. We all know that.

19 Normal wear will rub off your rhodium.

20 The complaints that we received were that

21 the white gold jewelry was defective, it was

22 tarnished, because that alloy, the white gold alloy

23 began to come through as the rhodium wore off.

24 So upon seeing a number of these customer

25 complaints, we've been up front with our customers

140

1 in our sales presentations. We have over 18,000

2 employees over 1,400 stores and we have

3 operationally trained our sales associates to

4 disclose this fact up front to our consumers, that

5 your product does have rhodium over the white gold.

6 If they are selling them a white gold piece of

7 jewelry, we let them know that, under normal wear

8 and conditions, that rhodium will begin to wear off

9 and that they will have to come back to have it

10 reapplied.

11 MS. KOSS: And since we only have about

12 another five minutes before we open up for

13 questions, I wanted to come back to some of the

14 terms that commenters recommended that we not

15 provide guidance on.

16 You mentioned, Suzan, that durigold and

17 duragold, D-U-R-A-gold and D-U-R-I-gold people are

18 not -- people don't know what they mean, your staff

19 does not know what they mean, and they don't have a

20 plain English meaning. But what about terms like

21 over and overlay? And I'm raising those because

22 they do have a plain English meaning and because

23 there was a difference in the commenter's opinions

24 on whether those terms, guidance should be retained

25 on those terms.
36 (Pages 141 to 144)

141

1 So for example, Dee, you specifically --

2 the TSI did suggest that the Guides retain guidance

3 for overlay. And you know, there's a difference of

4 opinion there, so I just wanted to open up, for the

5 last five minutes, if we could talk about terms like

6 over and overlay, given the fact that they mean what

7 they mean. You have a precious metal over a base

8 metal.

9 MS. FLAMM: If I could address the over,

10 typically the way that's used, or the way we hear

11 it, is gold over silver or platinum over silver. We

12 are very concerned with the use of that term because

13 it -- consumers expect, from our research and what

14 our common sense told us, is that they would expect

15 that that first precious metal that they hear in a

16 description would be the predominant metal.

17 So we've long cautioned the industry that

18 describing something as gold over is not an

19 appropriate way to describe a product. And we try

20 to make that clear in our suggestions by

21 specifically saying that the dominant metal should

22 be listed first.

23 MS. KOSS: And how is it different than

24 gold electroplated or gold, rolled gold plate?

25 Where again, you are mentioning the -- Mark really

142

1 wants to talk.

2 MR. HANNA: No, I think the real question

3 is, what is it? What is over? It's a phrase that

4 didn't exist commercially when the Guides were done.

5 So whether it -- it either shouldn't exist or it

6 should be defined.

7 MS. KOSS: Well, the question is, how do

8 consumers understand it.

9 MR. HANNA: They understand it as -- you

10 know, we spent a lot of time in the early committee

11 talking about the importance of 6 karat versus 4

12 karat versus 3 karat. I think we are allowing the

13 word gold to be used absolutely totally undefined as

14 the first word in a consumer product and it needs

15 definition.

16 I know I'm a broken record, but define the

17 terms and set the minimums. And this is an

18 undefined word, so it's uncharted territory, so it

19 means anything.

20 MS. KOSS: You think it's undefined, but

21 is it unused? Do you see it as --

22 MR. HANNA: No, that's the problem. It's

23 very well used, but it's undefined.

24 MS. KOSS: And has anyone seen consumer

25 perception of it and whether consumers understand?

143

1 First of all, is there a difference between over and

2 overlay? Because you specifically focused on over.

3 MS. FLAMM: Right. We did not test gold

4 over. It's -- but for the reasons I mentioned, we

5 have a lot of concern with gold over silver. It's

6 not defined and it runs into our concern that

7 consumers hear gold over and think that there's more

8 gold in it.

9 Often that term, as it happens, often that

10 term is used for products with just a tiny, tiny,

11 tiny, very thin amount of gold on it, because they

12 are not using terms like electroplating. They are

13 not using the defined terms. But consumers hear

14 gold over and may well think that it's the

15 equivalent of a gold electroplated product, when in

16 fact it's far less. And they might even think that

17 it's better than that.

18 And overlay, I already spoke about that.

19 That's just one of the terms that we thought, since

20 the way that -- what that term is applied to is

21 generally the very thin applications, the disclosure

22 wouldn't be required. We were trying to simplify

23 and we just thought that was one we could live

24 without.

25 MS. KOSS: Okay. Michael, one last --

144

1 you're going to have the floor last and then we're

2 going to up it for Qs and As.

3 MR. AKKAOUI: I think if you are going to

4 define those terms, they should be defined by the

5 methodology that is used to create them. And they

6 should refer back to, in the Guides, whatever is

7 being recommended, the thicknesses for whatever that

8 application is. That's just my opinion.

9 MS. KOSS: All right. So now we have ten

10 more minutes, so if anybody in the audience has any

11 questions for any of the panelists? No?

12 MS. KELLY: I have a question about Mike's

13 answer.

14 MS. KOSS: Okay. Go ahead, Susan, and

15 then Valerie.

16 MS. KELLY: Thanks so much. So I think

17 I'm hearing that you're saying well, okay, if you're

18 saying 18 karat gold-plated on or over sterling,

19 that that is clear?

20 MR. AKKAOUI: Well, I'm saying that if the

21 term "over" or "overlay" is used without much

22 definition, which I'm hearing is usually the case,

23 that the methodology of application -- because you

24 can have a clad and call it an overlay, right? Or a

25 mechanical bond and call it an overlay.
37 (Pages 145 to 148)

145

1 So the definition around that word should

2 be guided by the factoring methodology that's used

3 and therefore should be defined in that fashion.

4 MS. KELLY: And did I hear anyone

5 substantiate why maintaining the word overlay was a

6 good idea?

7 MR. AKKAOUI: I'm just saying if it were.

8 MS. KELLY: If it were. Well, then I

9 don't know that it is a good idea to maintain

10 overlay.

11 MS. KOSS: Valerie.

12 MS. POTEET: It's Veronica.

13 MS. KOSS: Veronica, I'm sorry.

14 MS. POTEET: My sister is Valerie.

15 MS. KOSS: Really?

16 MS. POTEET: This is a great discussion.

17 And I think that, for me personally, the white gold

18 issue, and the disclosure, should be -- is big. But

19 I think all the plates and the washing and cladding

20 and all those kind of terms, I think we discussed it

21 a little -- I hate to see it getting too semantical,

22 so. And I know they are different products, but I

23 don't know --

24 MS. LAURA KIM: I think it was Valerie who

25 was mentioning that it was your company's practice

146

1 to make a disclosure about the special care that

2 might be required for these white gold products.

3 So my follow-up question is, is that

4 something that you've chosen to do, do other people

5 think that this is an issue that should be addressed

6 in the Guides to prevent consumer deception across

7 the board? Yeah, Brian.

8 MR. CLAPPROOD: I think it has been and we

9 are recommending that there be a minimum threshold,

10 a minimum tolerance for manufacturers. And it still

11 is a good practice to educate consumers and

12 hopefully there are few returns.

13 And you can choose to educate the

14 consumer, but by putting minimum thresholds, the

15 durability will be enhanced and we will have few

16 problems. I think the issue right now is there is

17 no regulation, there's no specification, and people

18 could be putting 1 mill, 2 mills or 3 mills.

19 MS. LAURA KIM: Valerie, do you want to

20 follow up?

21 MS. FALEN: I agree with what Brian is

22 saying. There is no current minimum standard for

23 the rhodium plating, but no matter what the plating

24 thickness is, it will wear off in time.

25 MR. CLAPPROOD: Right.

147

1 MS. FALEN: So we are recommending that

2 they have complete disclosure, whether that be

3 written materials or, you know, across that 18

4 inches of the counter like my colleague said

5 earlier. We have to let the customers know what

6 they are getting and let them know that this will

7 happen, it is normal. And that it can be reapplied

8 so their piece will look bright and white again.

9 MS. LAURA KIM: So is it your view then

10 that, even with a certain minimum thickness, it will

11 always require reapplication to maintain the product

12 and that that is something that should be disclosed?

13 MS. FALEN: Mm-hmm. And over time --

14 MS. MORTENSEN: If it's in a box, it will

15 stay pretty forever.

16 MS. LAURA KIM: And that's unique to

17 rhodium plating, as opposed to other platings?

18 MR. AKKAOUI: Well, it's unique to the

19 application over white gold.

20 MS. MORTENSEN: I think that's the issue.

21 We have the same issue with our bridal, because

22 bridal is prominently sold in white. And so, I

23 mean, it's like 70 to 80 percent of the sales are

24 white gold. And so the customer -- they are shocked

25 when you tell them that there's rhodium plating.

148

1 They don't understand what rhodium plating is. We

2 also teach and train to that, to let the customer

3 know that it will be an issue and to expect it.

4 Because they don't really understand that white gold

5 is not a white metal. So I do think it's important.

6 MS. KOSS: Suzan.

7 MS. FLAMM: I would add that, yes, it's --

8 first, we absolutely believe that the disclosure

9 should be made that it's rhodium-plated. And

10 remembering that the purpose of the rhodium-plating

11 is -- rhodium is this great white metal that will

12 create a really white product and that the special

13 care requirement is a good idea.

14 It turns out that replating is not a huge

15 investment of money. It can be easily done, a lot

16 of people do it and it doesn't cost a fortune. And

17 that's how people maintain their product over a

18 lifetime, is simply by knowing that this plating may

19 come off and that you just go back and get it

20 replated.

21 MS. KOSS: But are there are platings,

22 besides rhodium plating, that are used typically in

23 the industry? I mean, I know that in the bridal

24 market, I understand the concept that you want

25 something to be white, but are there are platings
38 (Pages 149 to 152)

149

1 that need to be disclosed?

2 MS. FLAMM: We don't take the position

3 that -- you know, our position starts like this. If

4 you reference precious metal plating then all of

5 this stuff has to happen. You have to use different

6 words, you should use certain defined terms then,

7 and you have to give a warning that durability is

8 not assured.

9 If you choose not to reference the

10 precious metal plating generally, then there's no

11 requirements. The exception is rhodium plating,

12 because that's -- it's just its own animal. I mean,

13 it's not referenced, and yet it is one that really

14 should be because it is very prevalent in the

15 industry. If that -- when that plating comes off,

16 the consumer is going to see a yellow or a substrate

17 underneath and we know that they will be

18 disappointed, because we hear from the retailers

19 that they are upset by that.

20 MS. MORTENSEN: I think that the

21 difference is that we are disclosing that it is

22 plated by saying sterling silver, 14 karat plate or

23 14 karat wash. Bridal product, we are not

24 disclosing that there is a rhodium plating. It's

25 just -- we tag it, it's white gold.

150

1 MS. KOSS: Right. But Suzan, your

2 position would be, or JVCs position would be that,

3 for rhodium plating, in addition -- if you are

4 saying rhodium plating, if it is below the threshold

5 that JVC has suggested, then not only do you need to

6 have the disclosure about the reasonable durability

7 isn't insured, or whatever the wording was, you also

8 would additionally have to disclose the fact that it

9 needs to be replated or retreated?

10 MS. FLAMM: Well, I think --

11 MS. KOSS: Because that's not the way I

12 understood --

13 MS. FLAMM: -- that that's up to the

14 panel. The sense of the panel is that additional

15 disclosure. And that was not in our recommendation.

16 MS. KOSS: Okay, I just wanted to clarify.

17 MS. FLAMM: I'm getting the sense of the

18 panel of that and it's striking me as -- I mean, the

19 way we left was that would cause the beginning of

20 the conversation about what this plating is and

21 what's required and how you keep this product with us,

22 but an affirmative obligation to say hey, that this

23 is the special care that's needed is striking me as

24 something worth consideration.

25 MS. KOSS: Michael, I just --

151

1 MR. AKKAOUI: I think the clarification is

2 that the discussion that we just had is very

3 specific to white gold.

4 MS. KOSS: Mm-hmm.

5 MR. AKKAOUI: It's not about rhodium, it's

6 about white gold.

7 MS. MORTENSEN: Yeah.

8 MS. KOSS: Right.

9 MR. AKKAOUI: It's not about -- it's about

10 white gold and the fact that the common practice is

11 to put rhodium over white gold and that once that

12 wears through, you have exposure and you have

13 tarnish and so on and so forth.

14 MS. FLAMM: Right. You are representing

15 that you are selling white gold -- or rhodium

16 plating, and I think rhodium is on platinum as well,

17 to create a whiter product?

18 MS. AKKAOUI: Over just about anything you

19 want.

20 MS. KOSS: So is the --

21 MS. MORTENSEN: And when it wears off, it

22 is not what you bought. It does not look --

23 MS. LAURA KIM: I understand. So just to

24 clarify, the issue is that the rhodium plating is

25 something that does wear off, it can be rather

152

1 inexpensively replated, and that it is not disclosed

2 that the product is plated with rhodium. And that

3 is certainly true with white gold products.

4 MR. AKKAOUI: Right.

5 MS. LAURA KIM: Is that also true for

6 other types of products that are plated with

7 rhodium? So in other words, is there a sense that

8 there should be a disclosure of the rhodium plating

9 for white gold products, is that something that is

10 necessary to prevent consumer deception in other --

11 for other types of products that are typically

12 plated with rhodium?

13 MR. AKKAOUI: Only when it is marketed as

14 something other than a rhodium-plated product.

15 MS. FLAMM: The way we -- our suggested

16 language said rhodium-plating over a precious metal.

17 Because it is used over platinum as well, for the

18 same exact purpose, to create a whiter --

19 MS. LAURA KIM: I just wanted to clarify

20 --

21 MR. AKKAOUI: But when it is --

22 MS. FLAMM: It's over --

23 MS. LAURA KIM: Hold on, just one moment.

24 Just one person at a time. I just wanted to

25 clarify, because Michael said the issue was it
39 (Pages 153 to 155)

153

1 pertains just to white gold, but what I'm hearing is

2 that it actually could pertain to other

3 rhodium-plated products.

4 MR. AKKAOUI: I don't see that, frankly.

5 You can put rhodium over silver, you know, you are

6 marketing it as a white metal, it is silver. People

7 have an expectation that silver is going to tarnish.

8 It could be marketed as a rhodium-plated item. But

9 in this particular case, because of the value of

10 white gold and the fact that it is being marketed

11 and sold as a white gold item, the consumer is

12 unaware that there is rhodium there to begin with.

13 And I think that's really the point.

14 All plating will wear. All plating will

15 wear on anything, right? But in this particular

16 case, it is because it is white gold, there's a

17 perception that it is going to last, in and of

18 itself, as white gold alone.

19 MS. KOSS: Right. I guess what makes it

20 different is that it is a precious metal over a

21 precious metal, but people don't understand that the

22 first precious metal is there and that it is going

23 to wear off.

24 MR. AKKAOUI: Yes.

25 MS. KOSS: So, we're out of time but I

154

1 wanted to once again thank all of our very

2 distinguished panelists and our guests for coming.

3 And I also wanted to urge you to continue to provide

4 us your very valuable input as we continue with our

5 Jewelry Guide review.

6 Thank you very much, safe travels, and

7 have a great day. We really appreciate your being

8 here.

9 (Whereupon, the conference

10 concluded at 12:25 p.m.)

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

155

1 C E R T I F I C A T I O N O F R E P O R T E R

2 DOCKET/FILE NUMBER: G711001

3 CASE TITLE: JEWELRY GUIDES ROUNDTABLE

4 DATE: JUNE 19, 2013

5

6 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the transcript contained

7 herein is a full and accurate transcript of the notes

8 taken by me at the hearing on the above cause before the

9 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION to the best of my knowledge and

10 belief.

11

12 DATED: 6/25/2013

13

14

15 STEPHANIE M. GILLEY

16

17 C E R T I F I C A T I O N O F P R O O F R E A D E R

18

19 I HEREBY CERTIFY that I proofread the transcript

20 for accuracy in spelling, hyphenation, punctuation and

21 format.

22

23

24 DIANE QUADE
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[156]

A

abbreviation 6:25

7:7,11

Abe 68:22

ability 60:20 73:10

108:12,12

able 11:9,19 15:21

17:22 19:18,19

22:13 23:17 24:18

25:19,24 27:19

28:13,14 37:9 41:8

41:13,16 42:1,6,9

43:9 44:6,16 48:5

49:3 62:14 73:3

76:9 106:19

109:14 119:5,11

119:12,16,20

134:16

Abrams 7:24 19:9

19:13 21:25 25:9

29:23 30:13,17

46:4,12,16,24 47:2

55:14 56:6,16,21

56:23 57:2 62:17

62:25 66:13 67:11

absolutely 47:1,4

57:1 63:10 66:3

123:12 142:13

148:8

absolutes 114:19

abusive 106:7

accept 68:18

Accessory 75:7

accompanied 20:20

134:10

accompany 13:25

126:11

accomplish 44:20

account 48:3

accounted 3:24

accounting 3:23

17:3 48:9

accuracy 155:20

accurate 155:7

achieving 116:5

acquire 131:4

activity 4:2

actual 20:9 99:16

add 18:16 20:5

48:11 49:12 54:23

86:4 96:12 123:14

128:13 148:7

adding 96:24 105:2

addition 53:22

77:21 85:2 97:6

150:3

additional 28:25

36:24 120:21

122:13 128:4

150:14

additionally 72:20

135:6 150:8

address 6:4 51:5

58:18 74:7 79:14

82:17 124:6,6

133:7,9 136:16

141:9

addressed 23:20

50:6 58:6 98:13

133:5 146:5

addresses 59:9

addressing 98:8

adequate 40:12

47:25

adjust 24:6

administration

68:16

admirable 47:6

admission 126:9

admittedly 121:5

adopting 35:6

advancing 36:25

advantage 19:7

advertisements 8:11

advertising 22:8,16

23:7 45:4 46:2

advise 77:15 136:17

136:18,20

advised 51:21

advising 137:22,23

advocate 124:5

affect 63:1 99:15,21

affirmative 150:22

afford 33:21 42:7,8

afoul 46:10

Agency's 6:2

ago 31:23 32:10

38:10 56:15 58:13

119:1

agree 16:4 22:14

44:23 46:4 64:17

85:12 129:6

146:21

agreeing 4:6

ahead 3:3 12:2,3

58:2 109:1 130:8

139:3 144:14

Ajit 8:1 13:25 15:10

25:23 49:7 50:20

akin 66:24

Akkaoui 65:5,5,25

66:4 89:19 90:1,12

98:11 99:19

100:21 104:5,7,11

107:3 109:2 111:1

111:4 112:4,20,25

116:9 117:8,15

121:3 122:1,4,14

122:17 124:23

132:5,8 135:14

139:3 144:3,20

145:7 147:18

151:1,5,9,18 152:4

152:13,21 153:4

153:24

alert 4:3

aligning 88:20

allergy 52:7

alleviating 59:13

allow 16:23 55:18

71:18 86:2 100:4

allowed 8:18 22:15

23:25 34:14 72:10

allowing 8:14 55:24

73:13 79:14 82:13

118:18 142:12

allows 95:12

alloy 6:7,17,19 7:2

8:9 12:17 16:19

19:11 20:1 22:1,9

23:4 24:18 25:4,5

25:10,12,20 26:2,8

28:22,25 30:1,5,11

31:4,11 34:11

35:22 52:2 55:21

61:22 62:19 63:3

64:12 65:8,9,11,15

66:20 67:6 69:9

72:22 73:2 78:1

107:6,9 113:12,15

139:22,22

alloyed 109:5 112:6

alloys 11:5,23 12:1

14:10,16,17 16:21

18:20 29:12 30:10

35:1,4 40:25 53:13

55:2,3 58:14,17

59:3 63:12 64:8

66:16 67:2 76:4

120:1

alternative 16:22

alternatives 16:8

ambiguous 103:15

amended 58:13

American 68:17

Americans 34:7

Amit's 17:11

amount 8:16 12:1,4

13:10 21:19 24:5

30:23 51:3,10,18

51:22 85:3,8,17

86:17,20,22 97:12

97:20 100:24

116:2,5 143:11

amounts 6:8,20 7:16

30:16 79:2 81:21

100:3

analysis 104:2

114:15

and/or 105:22

angst 47:9

animal 149:12

Annex 70:14

answer 5:14 36:13

38:17 105:11

144:13

answered 126:2

ante 85:3

anticipated 121:7

anti-tarnishment

62:21

anxious 74:18 79:20

anybody 34:6

144:10

anymore 34:6

anyway 110:24

apparent 31:1

appear 9:5 60:17,18

appearance 31:4,8

138:18

applicable 51:5

application 77:11

78:7,8 81:5,15

87:9,18 89:6,23

91:5,19,25 92:4,16

96:23 98:16 118:2

118:19 124:17

127:16 131:13,20

144:8,23 147:19

applications 6:12

77:13 79:4 80:2,8

80:9 83:19,20

84:18 88:9,10

91:11 100:10

115:25 132:14,16

132:25 133:8

143:21

applied 86:19,21

91:19 98:18,19,21

105:2 132:1

143:20

applies 36:8

apply 16:24 66:19

66:23 67:2 108:12

113:24 129:3

132:11

applying 82:6 99:17

113:25

appraisers 19:5

appreciate 8:3

76:13,15 154:7

approach 35:7

42:17 43:4 90:23

113:11

approached 32:9
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[157]

appropriate 90:8

141:19

appropriately 127:8

area 63:14 99:3

areas 17:20

arena 54:13

argue 66:9

argument 5:12

array 10:19 11:3,16

12:9

article 13:23 127:19

articles 15:11

ascribe 13:2 14:13

asked 66:18 83:3,6,8

asking 19:12 37:16

83:23 85:14

109:16 110:5

aspect 118:22

aspects 77:13 99:7

assay 42:21 61:6

assemble 41:8

associate 34:1,2

43:16

associated 27:14

37:4 69:2 89:16

associates 140:3

Association 7:25

69:3

associations 10:10

11:17

assume 29:18 30:24

30:25

assuming 46:20

77:4 123:9 126:12

assumption 38:7

61:7

assure 105:7

assured 77:17 95:21

109:7 122:24

125:4 136:23

149:8

attended 4:11

attention 87:12

attorneys 3:7 119:3

attribute 39:3

attributes 38:8

60:14 82:1

audience 4:21 5:5,7

65:3 144:10

automatically 97:21

avail 96:16

available 4:16 20:24

Avenue 1:14 3:19

avoid 6:18 22:18,25

23:8 25:10,14,17

51:13

aware 6:22 17:4

27:9 40:3 64:6

B

back 3:14 17:15

25:1 31:24 32:3

33:11 37:17 40:5

41:14 42:25 46:18

47:14 58:7 64:9,11

65:4 68:15 69:4

70:4 72:2 84:12

85:18 104:7

128:20 133:6

135:25 140:9,13

144:6 148:19

backed 61:25

back-end 41:16

bad 39:12 74:2

badge 3:13

base 30:15 31:12

48:19 55:20 56:3

62:22 65:10 66:22

67:9,10 70:9 94:21

98:17,19 102:15

120:12 141:7

based 12:25 14:3,4

33:13 37:18 50:13

62:18 64:21,22

74:6 78:17 88:16

88:18 93:15,18,21

102:24 103:23

104:1 105:18

108:5,23,25 111:6

111:11 118:3

120:19,25 121:23

baseline 80:11,19

82:7,21 101:8

105:4,25

basic 36:19 78:15

basically 10:6 25:14

43:7 72:9 91:3

106:4 117:25

122:5

basing 87:16

basis 31:19 73:8

74:21 78:5 91:8

110:19 118:10

119:14

bath 132:1,3,3

battling 65:21

105:13

beautiful 32:23

becoming 89:2

began 139:23

beginning 150:19

behalf 13:19

belief 155:10

believe 14:7 28:19

29:9 32:23,25

44:11 47:11 59:20

63:8 75:8 87:19,21

94:24 97:20 103:7

104:1 105:3

114:19 125:17

129:2 131:24

148:8

below-standard

51:21

below-threshold

64:7

benchmark 65:13

65:19 104:14

105:5 121:19,21

benchmarks 105:6

121:13

beneficial 59:12

benefit 19:3 35:9

95:15

benefits 5:25

best 31:19 39:23

47:17 59:7 72:16

85:20 101:15

155:9

better 13:21 20:4

28:15 46:6,8 53:24

61:8,10 89:14

115:9 121:6 128:9

143:17

Beware 124:3

beyond 99:4,22

127:1 137:9

big 33:6 69:21 82:15

134:14 135:24

145:18

biggest 91:12

Birmingham 42:21

61:6

bit 22:20 31:5 33:4,5

47:23 76:16 83:15

93:19 95:3 97:10

97:17 101:18

108:2,8 118:9,12

130:1 131:2

bleeding 113:23

bleed-out 112:8

116:21

board 10:7,8 51:5

146:7

bond 144:25

bonded 80:18 92:19

96:22 100:5 103:4

103:19 128:9

130:21

bonding 102:25

132:2,2,15,17,18

bore 67:21

boron 49:18 53:4

bought 151:22

box 147:14

bracelet 20:9

brand 18:19,22

19:10,15 21:12

44:12 46:25 68:7,8

68:11 84:8 85:4

97:16,18 123:17

brands 84:21,21

129:4

brass 35:16

break 6:10 76:16

breathe 132:22

Brian 106:14 146:7

146:21

bridal 29:8 147:21

147:22 148:23

149:23

brief 76:19

bright 95:6,17

139:17 147:8

brightness 109:5

Brilliant 7:22 42:13

broad 11:3

broad-based 10:18

broken 142:16

Brooks-Pike 7:25

33:15 35:3 61:4,12

68:14 70:2 72:15

build 103:17,25

110:10 112:9

building 3:13,17,20

4:1

burn 133:21

business 84:20

buy 31:20 38:15

68:10 124:18,21

buyers 73:6

buying 21:4 58:20

59:15 120:5,6

C

C 155:1,1,17,17

cache 33:6

cadmium 65:21

cadmium-free 62:2

cake 16:21 59:6

calculate 71:1,6

calculated 71:11

calibrate 106:6

113:1

call 5:9 11:19 18:22

45:6,22 91:5 119:6

119:11,16 124:19

144:24,25

called 20:4 72:5

91:3 92:10 112:8

calling 10:2,17

16:21 45:17 59:4

card 135:25 136:1

care 51:19 53:6 60:3

62:11,11,12 63:9
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[158]

83:20 96:10 124:5

125:14,19 127:13

138:24 146:1

148:13 150:23

careful 46:19 66:1

carefully 43:20 97:4

carried 48:5 59:18

carry 129:7

Carter 68:16

case 61:9 63:11

117:7 136:22

144:22 153:9,16

155:3

cases 29:5 112:6

132:24 138:15

case-by-case 137:8

catalog 45:11

catch 89:1

category 16:22,24

cause 150:19 155:8

caused 72:20

caution 65:15

cautioned 141:17

Cecilia 8:2 9:1 14:1

15:17 22:15 23:6

27:9 30:2 37:15

50:8 64:1 79:16

Celebration 13:12

Celsius 17:9

center 1:14 3:15,18

3:24 77:25

certain 6:16 13:2,3

18:20 21:18 37:12

53:12,13,17,20

66:10 68:9 77:12

77:13,23 79:3,3

81:25 86:17,20

90:9 95:20 105:9

125:11,24 129:16

133:3 147:10

149:6

certainly 23:23

34:19 46:21 63:12

79:13 100:6

123:17 125:6,7

152:3

CERTIFY 155:6,19

cetera 19:6,21 62:2

62:2 78:25 83:21

chain 84:3

challenge 22:3,4

chance 5:9

change 38:9 46:14

49:21 116:12

changed 23:14

120:11

changes 52:7 60:20

118:16 126:18

characteristic 14:13

charge 40:15 41:12

charged 39:18

Charles 7:23 23:11

35:16

Charlie 26:21

chart 121:9

check 3:22

checking 42:22

chemical 132:22

chemistries 109:3

109:13 112:6

132:11

chemistry 132:9,13

132:14

cherry 33:12

chime 65:3

chlorinated 62:6

choice 128:8

choose 73:6 125:5

146:13 149:9

chosen 146:4

circle 40:5

circumstances

23:14

clad 78:14 84:8,22

84:22 85:5,5,8,9

86:9,17 87:6 88:8

90:10 92:19 97:4,4

97:18,21 124:3

130:2 132:18

144:24

cladding 132:17

145:19

claim 137:14,20

CLAPPROOD

102:23 146:8,25

clarification 82:20

101:19 124:11

151:1

clarify 10:1 15:10

30:9 37:9 41:19

56:8 92:8 127:12

131:24 150:16

151:24 152:19,25

clarity 93:1 96:19

126:21 130:20

131:3

classified 15:18

clause 117:11

clean 41:16 96:16

clear 5:2 9:12 10:3

10:22 15:4 18:8,14

18:16 19:9 29:10

29:11,21 55:7

64:13 90:15,16

94:13 96:15 103:3

104:8,13 109:11

131:7 137:1,1,3,4

137:13 141:20

144:19

clearing 48:12

clearly 29:1 92:5,17

129:2

clear-coat 104:19,22

104:23 105:8

Clear-coats 104:25

click 44:17

close 137:14

closely 138:1

closer 65:13,20 66:7

closing 65:1

cloud 90:2

coat 104:13 120:3

coating 77:19 98:12

99:15 109:24

coatings 85:23

123:17

coats 104:8

cobalt 54:17 59:20

60:3 109:6

coding 92:9,10

cold 132:3

colleague 147:4

color 42:16 126:18

combination 93:25

108:15,25

combined 54:15

58:14 100:9

combining 126:16

come 12:15 20:1

31:24 32:3 41:17

44:1,12,15 74:25

87:11 89:9 98:16

100:24 101:8

116:13,23,23

139:23 140:9,13

148:19

comes 43:18 65:18

98:17 112:20

137:6 149:15

comfortable 122:7

coming 3:4 36:20,20

46:5 55:7 113:3

154:2

comment 5:24 28:20

68:25 75:5 78:11

88:6,7,15 93:11,13

93:13 104:5

107:17,19 117:22

122:21 127:21

138:13

commented 102:9

commenter 99:20

commenters 140:14

commenter's 136:11

140:23

comments 6:4 27:11

65:6 67:23 75:7

96:13 107:11,11

129:19

commercially 142:4

Commission 1:2,13

2:1 5:18 9:9 10:14

58:7,24 77:8 78:2

91:2 107:1,12

110:15 137:10

155:9

commissioner 5:19

commission's 4:9

committed 11:17,18

committee 8:3

142:10

common 11:7 16:13

100:12 101:3,7

123:2 139:12

141:14 151:10

communicate 46:16

68:12

communicating

113:10

community 58:21

companies 10:11

14:21 18:5

company 7:24 75:14

84:17 98:11

120:24

company's 145:25

comparable 41:3

compared 8:9 85:7

107:22 121:9

comparing 28:15

70:21,23 102:25

106:15 138:9

comparison 71:19

71:19 121:12

comparisons 37:10

compete 102:21

competition 119:21

complaints 39:9

113:15 139:12,20

139:25

complete 31:25 32:7

33:8 45:4 49:12

147:2

completely 50:20

98:23

complex 81:3,18

82:18 100:6

complexity 133:11

compliance 74:16

75:1 117:10

complicated 51:6

comply 95:12,24

component 13:18

components 12:17

22:22 35:8 48:9
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[159]

51:24 62:19 68:7

composed 7:2

composition 65:12

65:18 66:8 76:3

compositions 23:5

comprehend 17:22

concept 75:18

148:24

concepts 74:1

concern 27:7 30:23

38:12 40:7 51:16

51:19 79:19

109:13 143:5,6

concerned 24:16

47:6 60:1 64:19

78:6,9 90:6 141:12

concerning 77:10

concerns 8:6 28:8

28:12 48:23 58:25

59:7,9 64:9

concluded 154:10

conclusion 84:16

94:10

conditions 140:8

conduct 74:15

conducted 24:8

35:19 100:8,15,19

100:20

conducting 6:5

conference 1:14

3:15,23 154:9

confidence 94:11,19

110:11

confine 88:9

confronted 28:9

58:14

confronting 58:12

confuse 23:9 30:7

67:24

confused 27:3 36:3

41:14 47:18 50:1

68:2 80:6 95:7

101:18 128:4

confusing 18:17

22:21 36:2 55:23

69:20 92:5,11

129:22

confusion 15:8 23:1

24:14,23 26:14

28:3 31:17 35:10

41:19 48:13 50:5

59:13 90:4 91:13

91:25 92:18 93:2,3

93:4,5,19 99:24

110:10

congregating 3:20

conium 98:19

connection 9:18

10:14 21:20 41:2

65:9 109:19

consensus 23:24

26:11 64:21,25

consider 34:13

112:5 138:19

considerably 118:8

consideration 63:4

150:24

considered 63:16

64:11

considering 11:11

64:12

considers 5:22

consistent 95:8

107:7 112:1 118:3

139:9

conspicuous 137:2,3

137:5

constant 99:10

constantly 105:13

consumer 6:18 9:14

11:8,9,11 12:22

13:1 14:4 16:13

18:3 20:8,14 21:3

21:19 24:2,3,7,8

24:12,22 26:14,20

27:10 28:3,9,12

31:8 32:7,23 33:9

35:10,19 36:2,6,17

36:17,19,24,25

37:9 40:17 41:14

42:11,18 43:7,13

43:16,18,21,25

44:13,15 45:2,10

47:25 48:10,23

49:7,25 51:13,14

52:2 53:5 58:10

60:1 62:15 64:16

64:20 66:10 68:9

69:8 70:17,25 75:9

75:23 78:17,20

79:4,23 80:10

81:23 82:7,16,20

85:19 87:21 88:19

89:12 92:1 93:3

94:12,20 95:10,21

95:25 96:2,7 99:24

101:3 102:10,18

103:2,9,14,22

105:16,19 109:23

111:10 113:14,15

115:9 118:5,11

119:22 120:3,4

125:18 142:14,24

146:6,14 149:16

152:10 153:11

consumers 13:2

14:6 16:12 17:19

18:9 21:5 23:1,9

26:11,19,21,22

27:11 30:24 35:9

38:11,20 39:4,13

39:23 40:3,20,22

40:22 42:2,6 46:7

50:19 51:12,19

53:2 58:19 59:13

60:7,15,21,24

62:10 69:15 71:18

75:10,12 78:4,11

78:22 79:11 80:6

80:13,14 81:2,7,23

82:21 83:17,20

86:11 87:3,17,23

88:23 89:1 95:5

101:11 110:18

111:15,21 113:11

114:16 125:10

127:21 128:3,14

128:25 129:22

130:3 131:19

133:14,21,22

134:15,18,19

137:11 138:18

139:7,13 140:4

141:13 142:8,25

143:7,13 146:11

consumer’s 17:13

35:12

consumer's 33:20

59:14 95:15 102:2

125:2

consuming 27:2

39:11

contain 6:19 7:15

48:15 66:16 67:2

77:18,21

contained 66:20

155:6

containing 6:7

contains 8:9,15 22:1

35:14,15 40:25

52:2,5 55:18,19,22

56:3,17,18 60:12

67:8

contemplating

130:4

content 6:25 13:8

15:13 17:21,22

18:10 19:7 22:17

23:10 24:20 25:13

27:15 29:21,24

36:9 37:5 40:19

41:7 42:14 43:10

43:22 51:22 52:2

54:1 62:20 63:8,12

63:18 68:4 75:18

contents 43:10,12

context 81:3 137:16

continually 11:18

continue 9:20 60:18

78:23 88:22 100:3

154:3,4

continues 138:17

control 45:13

conversation 38:19

65:14 150:20

conversations 50:11

111:24

conversely 35:9

convert 48:22

converted 34:7

convey 22:9 42:2

129:23

conveyed 42:11

conveying 42:25

52:1

copper 35:16 59:20

60:3 105:23

correct 26:8 27:20

39:12 54:16,17

74:10 87:9 117:25

132:16

correctly 27:19

134:22

correlate 106:16

correlated 106:23

correlation 103:21

103:25

correlations 103:18

corrosion 60:14

61:13 66:5

cost 38:24 46:19,20

102:13 148:16

costs 5:25 38:15

costume 25:12

65:14,20 66:7,24

70:10 128:22

129:3,7

count 52:20

counter 38:17 45:7

46:2 147:4

country 69:24

couple 24:24 71:23

96:5

coupons 106:12

course 20:20 29:10

39:2 41:14 82:16

95:18 100:25

137:10

court 57:19

cover 7:18

coverage 77:16

CPSC 65:21

create 22:24 63:24

74:4 81:1,14,22

82:14 91:17 95:13
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[160]

144:5 148:12

151:17 152:18

created 11:1 43:15

91:2,13

creates 138:24

creating 66:15 81:5

82:13 128:15

creativity 19:25

critical 100:23

105:7 112:14

cure 125:18

curious 54:5,11

113:16 131:17

current 6:3 29:25

72:19 77:12 88:22

98:13 107:7

128:23 131:25

132:12 146:22

currently 89:21

122:14 123:2,5

127:6,15 131:11

134:11,13,22

customer 18:25 19:2

19:3,8 28:23 29:1

29:4,6,19 44:18

47:17 49:13 54:25

55:5 63:19 85:13

86:2 97:15 103:7

110:8,10,11

114:24 115:17,22

125:25 127:10

131:6 139:24

147:24 148:2

customers 24:9 29:6

29:21 31:20,20

35:20 84:13,19

114:19 127:8

139:15,25 147:5

cut 114:3

cycles 121:15

D

D 2:2 155:17

daily 74:21

dangerous 30:19

32:5 67:1

data 13:1 14:5 16:14

27:10,23 106:11

106:24 109:8

114:24 122:4,11

database 20:11

DATE 155:4

DATED 155:12

day 24:9 33:4 99:8

113:5 154:7

DC 1:15

deal 24:8 75:10

dealing 19:24 58:7

59:15 72:9 75:11

123:19

debate 5:12 105:17

decade 31:22

deceitful 39:19

deceive 39:13

deceived 110:18

111:16

deceivers 74:3

deceiving 39:4

45:20

deception 6:19 9:14

11:9 51:13 78:17

78:18,20 79:23

88:19 95:16

111:10 125:18

131:7 146:6

152:10

deceptive 7:5 9:12

decide 38:14 68:10

111:6

decided 5:13,17

decimal 49:22 50:2

50:7 96:5

decimals 69:21

70:19

decision 28:14 33:13

34:16,21,22 38:9

43:13 44:10 68:5

73:6

declaration 121:25

Dee 75:6 101:17

110:19 115:11

117:21 124:9

135:10 141:1

Dee's 105:12

defeating 92:25

defective 139:21

define 18:22 94:14

96:21 106:5,10

128:9 130:18

133:16 134:8

142:16 144:4

defined 50:4 90:8

94:22 97:22

130:17 131:7

142:6 143:6,13

144:4 145:3 149:6

defining 101:20,24

121:13

definitely 67:12

96:14 118:18

definition 27:12,20

90:14 94:17

101:24 110:23

142:15 144:22

145:1

definitions 108:19

114:24

degradation 64:12

degree 116:17 126:3

129:16

delineation 75:21

103:12 118:21

deliver 60:20

delivered 29:19

densities 94:6

department 115:19

depending 80:14

97:13 105:1 109:4

115:21

depends 64:18

137:15

deposit 109:7

121:15

deposition 92:9 98:5

98:6,12,18 132:23

describe 7:1,5,11,14

11:10 12:3,6,13,16

12:18,20 16:20

17:6 22:17 23:4,18

24:18 27:13 29:25

51:3 77:24 80:8

89:21 117:8,9

131:10,12 141:19

described 11:22

12:10,11 16:17

30:11 35:13 36:4,5

37:13,14 58:10

79:7,16 89:13,14

97:19 134:4

describes 36:14

describing 15:11

25:20 36:1 141:18

description 18:15

26:16 29:19 31:11

35:15 40:24 41:18

49:1 52:9 73:14

141:16

descriptions 84:5

114:13

descriptive 8:10,14

9:1 18:24 41:25

descriptor 128:7

design 46:25

designation 27:3

detail 43:20 94:2,8

detailed 5:16 53:19

details 128:16

determine 105:25

106:4 111:10

135:18

determining 47:3

97:21 104:16

133:12

develop 5:21 55:23

developed 66:15

developing 55:17

development 123:15

devised 123:21

diamonds 33:23

DIANE 155:24

differ 53:16

difference 35:12

49:23 52:9 60:11

60:17 67:8,13

69:16,17,17 78:13

83:18 86:22 113:2

114:20 115:20

140:23 141:3

143:1 149:21

differences 28:13

44:9 82:10

different 17:3 19:25

20:2 35:25 36:5

37:21 38:11 40:2

47:8 48:21 52:4,4

53:14,15,21,22

54:10 57:10 58:4

58:11 68:1,8 81:4

81:9,21 82:10,25

89:15,21 92:15,15

92:16,17,25 99:7

100:2 109:20

115:15 130:2

141:23 145:22

149:5 153:20

differentiate 43:5

43:24

differentiation 44:6

differently 67:6

81:20

difficult 22:9

difficulties 50:14

dig 83:9

digit 50:4

diligence 42:22

direct 136:18

directed 4:1

Directors 10:9

disagree 70:6

disappointed 111:21

149:18

disarmed 35:18

disclaimers 60:23

disclose 11:25 43:11

46:10 50:15 51:10

51:22 56:11 70:18

71:16 76:8,10

111:5 127:17

128:1 140:4 150:8

disclosed 23:6 34:18

56:10,24 127:2,5

137:25 138:1

147:12 149:1

152:1

disclosing 22:10
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[161]

28:23 73:14

125:14 149:21,24

disclosure 15:24

16:15 31:7,25 32:7

33:8 38:3 43:12

44:18 45:4 46:7

47:24 49:13 50:13

53:23 54:7 55:17

55:25,25 63:7

65:17 72:15 93:15

95:21 122:24

123:21 124:12

126:11,13 130:11

134:7,10 135:2,6

136:14,19,21,24

137:11 138:21,22

138:23 139:8

143:21 145:18

146:1 147:2 148:8

150:6,15 152:8

disclosures 16:12

22:14 36:24 37:7

37:20 40:2 41:17

41:24 49:5 53:16

59:12 60:22 64:24

113:13 122:20

123:2,13 127:14

137:24 138:5,9,9

138:10

discretion 135:18

discuss 6:7 77:12

discussed 91:17

145:20

discussion 3:10 4:18

5:21 57:18 64:3

103:8 122:19

145:16 151:2

discussions 47:12

50:18

dishes 101:5

disparities 39:17

dissatisfaction

139:14

distinct 11:14,24

12:6 37:25

distinction 8:7,24

13:22 14:9,23 15:6

15:20 18:13 29:12

29:15 36:22 40:1

46:17 63:15,19

96:7 105:10

distinctive 38:8

distinguish 11:24

14:15,18,19 16:16

39:23 78:4 82:23

115:6 129:9

distinguished 154:2

distinguishes 92:13

divide 38:1

DOCKET/FILE

155:2

document 9:10,21

documentation

61:24

doing 45:17 48:8

72:25 110:20

119:21 120:13,24

dollars 102:16,17,17

102:17

dominant 141:21

draft 74:2,3,5

drafted 91:2,14

drafters 117:16

drafting 74:1

dramatically 23:14

draw 37:25

driven 127:9

due 26:22 42:21

due-diligence 32:18

durability 61:17

77:17 78:9 82:2

84:19 85:15 88:12

88:16 93:16,22

95:21 96:9 98:8,16

99:4,16,22 101:11

101:20,24 102:21

102:22 108:5,23

109:18,23 111:12

119:22 120:21

122:20,24 123:3

125:2,3 126:25

127:1 134:7 135:7

136:13,14,22

146:15 149:7

150:6

durable 81:22 120:8

130:11,12 131:1

duragold 129:18,20

133:3 140:17

duragold/durigold

133:17

durigold 129:18,21

133:3 140:16

duty 19:2 84:9

dying 98:20

D-U-R-A-gold

140:17

D-U-R-I-gold

140:17

E

E 2:2 155:1,1,1,17

155:17,17

earlier 28:20 45:14

52:23 68:14 79:17

86:6 104:8 147:5

early 79:18 142:10

easier 120:16

128:16

easily 58:22,22 71:2

71:5 85:7 109:9

148:15

easy 49:21 71:19

echo 62:17 64:2

economically

132:19

educate 21:5 29:5

62:14 74:16,25

110:11 128:14

133:22 146:11,13

educated 43:13

44:10 133:14,15

educating 49:6 82:9

134:20

education 20:20

21:19 36:25 75:19

82:16 139:8

effective 49:6 54:6

efficient 132:19

effort 128:8,17

133:6 134:12,14

efforts 82:8

eight 102:16

either 10:24 52:6

63:19 123:4

128:10 142:5

elaborate 125:17

132:4

electrolytic 78:7

80:8 83:19,25 91:1

91:22 92:21 93:8

96:17 98:1 102:25

107:18 111:16

115:25 131:13,20

131:23 132:2,15

132:23

electrolytically

86:21 132:8

electrolytically-ap...

130:13

electrolytically-pl...

103:5,19

electronically 63:20

electroplate 78:25

80:17 82:24 90:12

90:24 97:2,3

electroplated 83:24

91:7,9,11 92:13

100:5 107:8,21

131:10 141:24

143:15

electroplating 97:24

100:10 107:6

118:22 132:9

143:12

element 25:18 55:18

67:3 100:11

elements 12:16 22:1

22:11,11 29:20

30:4

eleven 82:12 122:22

embossing 10:25

embrace 18:13

emerged 79:18

emphasize 9:20

83:17,18

employees 75:13

140:2

encapsulate 104:19

enforce 14:23 74:4,8

74:10,24

enforced 45:25

enforcement 139:10

engage 9:14

English 129:23

140:20,22

engraving 10:25

enhanced 146:15

enhancing 59:13

enlarge 82:9

ensues 38:19

ensure 75:2 103:2

137:10 138:17

ensuring 9:13 74:9

entering 98:6

enthusiasts 26:24

entire 127:19

entirely 68:1 73:11

124:4

environment 81:19

82:18

envision 135:20

epiphany 84:22 85:9

equal 48:12 110:1,7

equate 101:1

equates 18:20 101:2

104:3

equation 53:9 101:6

equivalency 114:7

115:24 116:25

131:14

equivalent 116:5

143:15

escalation 23:15

escape 31:14

escaped 137:4

especially 17:4

134:19

essential 131:8

133:13

essentially 53:21,23

54:7 91:4

establish 18:18

established 18:11

19:15
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[162]

establishing 18:19

94:15

et 19:6,21 62:2,2

78:25 83:21

Ethics 7:25 69:3

Europeans 104:16

evacuation 3:16

event 3:16,25 4:4,6

62:8

everybody 9:7 15:7

110:6 134:19

everyone's 76:14,15

evidence 67:4

Ewa 7:24 21:21

29:22 30:9 46:3

55:13 62:16 66:12

Ewa's 25:1

exact 62:17 106:11

152:18

exactly 29:1 31:7

42:2 45:11,12 47:8

47:23 48:1 50:11

57:3 83:3,8 89:10

91:16 136:4 137:6

137:17

examining 40:18

example 8:8 19:17

25:2 27:16 32:8

35:11 42:4 44:1

45:14 52:8 56:2

60:13 61:18 67:1,7

70:21 117:9

127:20,22 139:6

141:1

examples 77:22

exceedingly 88:14

excellent 54:2

exception 149:11

excluding 73:10

exclusive 87:12

excuse 28:7

executed 136:5

exhibit 121:8

exist 64:10 123:7,10

142:4,5

existing 7:13

expect 48:2 53:25

81:24,25 82:2,3,4

89:12 138:18

141:13,14 148:3

expectation 102:3

115:17 118:11

120:4 153:7

expectations 51:14

64:19,20,22 79:6

79:12 81:23 118:5

125:1,12

expecting 84:20

115:22

expects 102:18

experience 21:22

59:10 85:11 100:9

104:2 113:17

120:13,19 137:22

137:23

experiences 81:9

expert 67:16

experts 10:20 11:3

11:17 100:8

111:25

explain 43:7,20 60:4

84:6 116:10

explained 58:21

59:23

explaining 32:1

explore 6:6 7:14

66:14 88:18

exposure 151:12

expressed 17:21,23

26:12 48:21

expressing 37:4

52:1

extent 17:19,21 35:2

35:6,9 36:23 37:7

41:23 77:14,16

82:3,3 87:24,25,25

88:1 95:11 133:10

extraordinary 63:13

eye 33:19 41:10

E-commerce 46:1

F

F 155:1,1,17,17,17

face 36:1 116:13

facing 50:14

fact 27:4 30:25

32:20 35:18 45:14

59:18 60:19,25

62:22 72:11 75:20

78:4,8 81:8 87:14

87:16 89:19,21

90:7 91:9 92:8

100:1,15 111:19

123:20 128:16

140:4 141:6

143:16 150:8

151:10 153:10

factor 97:14 112:14

112:20

factoring 145:2

factors 99:4,14,15

99:21 100:2,23

104:9,11 112:5

Fahrenheit 17:9

fairly 22:12

FALEN 109:20

139:4 146:21

147:1,13

fall 25:8 53:13,20

falls 8:16

familiar 4:12 18:3

87:23,24,25

113:22

familiarity 80:12

83:4,5

fan 69:21

far 33:25 47:6 59:22

68:6 92:25 96:8

123:15 143:16

fashion 3:17 145:3

faster 124:3

Federal 1:2,13 2:1

9:8 10:13 58:6,24

77:8 155:9

feel 16:23 24:9

35:17,20 75:19

85:21 108:16

109:21 119:20

125:22 139:1,5

feeling 24:23 39:11

125:21

felt 12:25 13:6,6,7

58:25 84:5

field 79:21 82:15

85:22 100:8 104:4

106:21 110:7

112:13 116:15

125:22

fields 68:16 110:1

fifteen 102:17

fighting 56:2,6

figure 53:8,8 109:18

fill 129:16

filled 78:14 88:8

92:19 96:23

128:10 130:2,22

130:24

final 47:3 98:3 120:2

find 22:13 41:17

58:18 83:9 88:1

94:21,22 115:19

121:8

finding 55:21

fine 10:2 11:14,19

11:24 13:12 14:16

14:20 15:5,18 16:2

16:16 31:18 33:18

33:19,20,22 34:13

60:8 64:6,7,16

69:18 70:8 73:15

73:23 102:22

110:6 114:7

115:19 118:18

129:5

fineness 107:10

116:3,4

finer 114:23,24

finger 101:4

finish 139:17

finished 38:3

fire 3:16

first 3:11 6:6,15

7:17 8:21 9:3

10:23 12:15,21

15:5 44:23 65:8

96:21 104:7 108:7

109:21 113:3,8,20

141:15,22 142:14

143:1 148:8

153:22

fits 95:22

five 49:11 71:22

98:7 102:7 103:23

133:18 140:12

141:5

flag 60:24

flagged 95:19

FLAMM 79:13 83:2

86:4,8 87:10,19

88:4,25 89:9 95:3

100:6,22 101:14

111:18 123:14

124:16,21,24

128:6 133:2,25

134:25 135:3,8

136:15 137:3,18

137:21 141:9

143:3 148:7 149:2

150:10,13,17

151:14 152:15,22

flash 124:25 134:1

flashed 96:3 129:17

130:10 131:12,18

134:23

flexibility 131:3

floor 115:12 144:1

fluorescence 113:1

focus 78:23 107:4

126:25 129:13

focused 107:19

122:19 126:24

143:2

focuses 77:10 118:7

focusing 6:16

109:19 110:14

118:6

folks 4:19 5:5 28:17

40:14 49:4 65:2

116:17 117:2

follow 139:10

146:20

following 27:8

follows 15:7

follow-up 24:25

83:9 88:5 146:3
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[163]

font 137:17

foot 117:13

foothold 98:20

footnote 114:6

117:14

footnotes 117:16

force 50:10 122:21

123:6

force's 78:11

foreign 65:22 98:14

forever 147:15

form 36:24 37:8

54:6 112:9

formal 120:22,24

format 155:21

formula 51:1 100:7

formulas 20:3

formulate 47:24

formulated 122:6

formulation 20:12

53:14

formulations 20:1

forth 6:21 17:16

66:6 151:13

fortunate 52:17

fortune 148:16

forward 3:9

found 22:8 27:22

32:19 39:13 59:25

60:7 121:5,12

foundation 91:24

four 32:24 33:3 50:4

61:3 71:16

fraction 96:24,25

128:13

frankly 53:6 58:11

98:14 153:4

free 12:16

freely 11:10 12:1,3

frequently 139:13

front 3:21 4:19

68:25 110:23

128:13 129:11

135:25 139:25

140:4

FTC 3:8,13 4:11

5:16,22,24 9:5

10:5 11:4 18:11

29:3,13 39:21

74:17 80:3 84:25

85:7 87:2 114:5

119:4 123:23

127:11 135:17

137:5 138:4

FTC's 3:5 4:16

FTC.gov 4:8

full 43:12 44:18 48:9

54:8,9 63:7 72:15

114:4 155:7

fully 27:12 40:3 55:5

furnish 44:13

further 5:21 23:20

45:5 65:19 66:6

92:18 121:23

future 19:5

G

gain 68:9

gardening 101:5

Gardner 8:2 9:3

14:2 15:1,19 16:7

20:6,19 26:17

30:18 37:16 40:10

41:11 46:14,21

47:1,4 50:9 54:14

56:5,8,19,22,25

57:3,9,11,15,22

58:1,4 64:2 65:24

69:12 70:6 71:3

72:13 73:12,16,21

73:24 76:5

gem 137:24

gemstones 138:22

general 23:12,19,23

36:25 53:19 74:25

116:11 117:3

generally 55:9 134:3

136:16 137:5,6

143:21 149:10

gentleman 65:4

67:18 70:11

gentleman's 66:21

geologist 69:2

Georgetown 3:18

getting 41:5 42:3

48:1 55:1 65:22

69:23 86:2 88:14

94:12,17 145:21

147:6 150:17

Gilley 1:19 155:15

give 32:8 65:2 94:2

96:5 127:20

130:19 131:2

149:7

given 7:13 18:25

19:24 20:15 26:10

63:2 79:24 80:12

81:10 88:18 91:9

99:21 101:3 113:4

117:9 126:5 130:5

133:10 141:6

giving 44:14 54:7

125:22

glad 9:22 57:17,18

glass 115:14

global 133:9

go 3:3,11,14 4:1,13

12:2,2 17:5 19:18

20:11,17 24:4

26:23 32:3 33:8

35:23 38:6 41:4

45:16 47:2 50:25

58:2 62:5,6 65:12

65:19 66:6 95:11

99:4 106:3 109:1

117:15 118:19

130:8,24,25

131:22 132:9,17

132:19 133:25

136:14 139:3

144:14 148:19

goal 110:12

goes 36:12,13,15

45:5,5,19 62:20

70:3 133:6 135:19

going 3:11 5:13,17

7:18 12:15,20

15:16 21:18,19

29:16,17 36:2

38:14,15,16,24

39:13,19,20,21

43:3 63:13 64:2

66:8 67:21 69:4,24

76:1,7,10,11 78:15

79:9 83:14 90:18

95:5,25 101:20,21

101:23,25 102:3,5

102:6 105:9

106:21,25 107:22

111:12 112:2,23

113:18 114:8,10

115:18 117:18,19

119:1,4 120:7

125:3 127:23

128:20 130:20

134:4,6 136:8,10

144:1,2,3 149:16

153:7,17,22

gold 6:24,25 7:2 8:9

8:10 11:18,20

12:11 15:13 17:4

17:20,22 18:4

19:20 20:5 22:1,10

22:18 23:15,18

24:4,5,19,20 25:13

25:18,25 26:1,3,11

27:13,15,20,24,25

28:10,11,16,17,21

30:12,14 31:6,12

32:1,14,20 33:5

35:14,15,21,22

36:9 37:2,4,13,15

38:2,3,4,23,25

39:5 40:4,23,24,25

42:4,14 43:3,5

44:4,9 48:16,17,18

48:25 50:22 52:3

52:13 54:23 55:1,6

55:8,19,20 56:2,3

56:11,12,17,20

57:4,7 60:13,16,25

61:2 64:6,24 66:17

66:21 67:9,10 69:5

69:14 70:9,22,23

70:24 71:1,6,14

72:7,11 73:8,9,15

73:21,23 77:13,25

77:25 78:14,24

81:13 82:25 84:7

84:22 91:5 92:10

92:11,14,14,17

96:3,3 97:2 98:15

98:17 102:15

104:14,15 105:5

107:6,9,9,18,21

110:2,4,4,6,22

112:10,11,16,18

114:2,3,7,20,21

115:25 116:3,4,14

116:24 117:24

119:10 124:4,19

124:22,23,24,24

124:24 125:10

126:4,6,8,8,17

127:22,23 129:5

129:10,10,16

131:9,11,12,15,18

131:18 132:21

134:1,1,23,23

135:24 138:14

139:14,17,21,22

140:5,6 141:11,18

141:24,24,24

142:13 143:3,5,7,8

143:11,14,15

145:17 146:2

147:19,24 148:4

149:25 151:3,6,10

151:11,15 152:3,9

153:1,10,11,16,18

goldtone 126:17,19

128:21,25 129:8

132:21

gold-filled 84:3

90:10 92:14 93:7

96:3,23 106:15

gold-like 31:5

gold-plate 96:24

gold-plated 119:11

124:18 144:18

good 3:2 9:4,23

33:16 37:18 54:21

70:16 76:14 82:17

82:17 85:3,8 97:20

99:2 101:7 103:16
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[164]

103:16 104:24

105:1 122:11

127:3 129:13

134:17 138:8

145:6,9 146:11

148:13

goods 85:22 92:18

102:13 110:9

Google 27:17

go-to 100:11

grams 71:16

great 18:22 42:5

51:2 54:21 63:14

63:19 69:21 73:4,4

83:22 101:12

106:22 130:14

145:16 148:11

154:7

greater 79:25 96:9

Greg 106:13

group 3:10 13:7,20

16:3,10 53:15

54:15 58:15 64:21

75:7 78:10 81:17

88:6 91:18

grouped 91:7,9

grouping 90:25

groups 50:10 64:4

79:16 90:23,24,25

119:22

group's 59:1

growth 63:14

guaranteed 105:4

guess 19:17 90:20

101:18 135:12,20

136:3 153:19

guests 154:2

guidance 6:18 9:12

80:25 85:1 107:8

119:7 123:22

126:5 127:11

136:23 138:5

140:15,24 141:2

guide 5:20 94:4

116:4 127:8 154:5

guided 145:2

guidelines 9:9 60:6

84:25 85:6 105:3

127:12

Guides 1:6 3:5 5:23

6:1,3,21,23 9:15

9:21 10:15 25:15

29:25 46:10 53:11

58:13 72:4,16,20

74:6,19 77:12,21

78:3,17 88:18,21

89:20 91:2,10,13

92:1,5,12 95:10

96:14,16 98:25

100:4 102:20

107:7 110:14,15

110:24 116:10

123:5,19 126:25

127:15 128:1

130:5 131:11

133:6,7,21 134:8

134:22 136:4,16

141:2 142:4 144:6

146:6 155:3

Guide's 6:8

guy 74:2

guys 39:12 101:19

G-O-L-D 126:6

G711001 155:2

H

half 114:4

hand 5:1,8 52:20

113:19 135:11

handle 123:23

handled 58:22

hands 99:9

hangtag 43:23 138:2

Hanna 71:24 72:1,1

72:14 73:7,13,20

73:23 91:12,16

92:4,15 93:5,24

94:10 96:1 108:7

108:25 112:23

142:2,9,22

happen 62:8 147:7

149:5

happened 84:15

91:20

happening 33:4

happens 85:16

112:7 143:9

Happier 20:7 21:7

happy 18:23 19:1,17

20:4,6,10 21:7

80:3

harbor 91:4 117:24

hardness 42:23

61:16 109:6

harm 33:16 54:21

harmed 72:19

harmonized 72:8

hat 69:8

hate 145:21

head 104:12 137:4

hear 17:15 23:22

28:17 31:14 37:6

39:19,20,21 40:13

40:14,20 42:10

49:4 54:5,11 58:3

59:11 83:13 88:20

108:2 113:8,9

118:9 125:10

130:1 141:10,15

143:7,13 145:4

149:18

heard 5:10 62:4

65:7 79:25 86:8

87:2 134:22

hearing 17:1 80:16

86:11 130:20

144:17,22 153:1

155:8

heavy 78:24 84:9

97:2

help 6:18 25:24

36:25 37:9,20 40:1

41:18 47:25 48:12

55:5 74:16 80:16

95:5,23,25 96:1,14

127:12 128:17

helped 106:9

helpful 59:11,18

90:18 128:7 138:5

heritage 18:2 63:16

64:23

Herskovits 41:22

42:12 49:15 52:12

52:15 61:14 62:5

62:24 63:10 66:3

67:20 68:22,22

Herskovitz 7:21

hey 101:11 150:22

Hi 70:13

high 41:3 44:24

78:19 109:8

110:16,16 111:14

116:20 127:10

higher 14:8,24

40:15 41:10 42:8

42:14 53:25 85:25

105:5 108:18,18

108:19 115:14

116:4 126:12

131:2

highlighted 25:18

highlighting 25:13

highly 105:6

historical 118:4

history 58:5,9 64:22

91:10

hit 111:1,2

Hold 152:23

homogenous 91:18

honest 25:19 116:10

117:1

hope 9:22 63:14

hopefully 146:12

hot 132:3

hours 101:2

housekeeping 3:12

huge 61:9 87:3

148:14

hundred 121:10

122:1

hyphenation 155:20

I

idea 105:14 113:5

145:6,9 148:13

ideas 37:7 76:14

identified 11:14,22

16:19

identify 5:21 24:20

27:19 82:1 126:22

identifying 13:5

III 7:23

illegal 45:22

image 4:7 63:24

64:19 135:23

immediate 65:9

immersion 132:10

132:24

impact 5:25 100:1

116:1

imperative 51:3

implement 74:14,23

117:2

implemented 76:2

implying 6:25

importance 142:11

important 9:10,16

9:21,25 10:16

12:24 13:7 22:13

29:5 31:17 33:7

34:23 37:24 45:8

54:25 59:25 60:15

60:21 62:22 63:9

66:9,14 67:16

74:19,21 75:21,22

84:6 94:25 96:7

101:10 103:7

105:10 106:18

117:21 148:5

importantly 79:22

imports 65:23

impossible 76:12

impressed 121:16

improve 102:1

inability 112:21,22

inch 112:16,18

116:19,20 122:2,8

132:10

inches 45:6 104:15

105:5 121:5

137:19 147:4

include 30:23 51:24

97:18 99:16 100:2

100:3 113:21

135:6
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[165]

included 13:24

22:12 24:6 30:5

includes 121:9

including 12:3 30:6

30:12,14 31:12

81:16 120:1

128:16 130:4

inclusive 10:18

incorporated 121:3

121:24

incorrect 28:22

increase 79:24

99:23 118:25

increased 119:18

123:18

incumbent 44:25

139:6

indefinitely 4:8

independent 100:15

indicate 8:8,14

15:12 30:2 83:11

indicated 14:6 27:25

88:7

indicates 80:21

82:21

indicating 53:23

indication 19:4

27:15

indicative 107:25

108:3

indicator 9:16 40:12

indistinguishable

72:5

indium 49:18

individual 5:19

10:11 19:14

individuals 10:12

industries 65:6

79:20 100:14

106:1,9,22

industry 7:1,6,11

9:9,10,22 10:20,21

11:3,9,17 22:24

25:3 29:9 39:7,10

46:8 47:13 63:17

64:18,23 67:22,23

74:13,15,20 75:2

78:12,19,21 79:19

80:20,22,23,24,25

82:8,14,15 86:11

87:3,16,20 88:17

88:20,22 89:1,24

90:15,16,16 93:4

93:18,22,22 94:18

95:4,7,9,12,24

96:15 98:15,21

106:2,25 116:18

123:15 128:3

129:21 131:3

133:17 137:22,23

138:2,6 139:8

141:17 148:23

149:15

industry-wide 19:10

inexpensively 152:1

infancy 98:23

informal 4:18

information 8:25

18:24 28:10 41:24

42:11 44:14,14

45:1 49:5 50:24

55:4 59:22 106:19

107:1 121:9

125:19 126:1

128:4 136:3

informed 28:14

42:18

informing 49:6

ingots 70:22

inheritance 19:6

initially 66:18 87:1

input 76:15 154:4

inputs 10:12,19

inside 20:10

insight 27:17

insights 83:16

instance 13:9 28:20

86:16 105:23

instances 126:14

instantly 101:23

instilling 94:11,18

instructional 43:6

instructions 62:11

63:9

insure 45:1 110:17

insured 150:7

integrity 75:1

intelligent 24:2

intended 5:12

intent 72:16

intention 93:1

interact 40:21

interchangeable

17:10

interest 11:8 23:3

117:19

interested 4:20 9:13

49:13 52:21 55:17

55:21 81:7 99:3

interesting 50:9

interests 79:4

internally 22:4

internet-researchi...

94:20

interpret 138:6

interruptions 5:3

intervene 26:17

intrinsic 49:15,16

103:3,6

introducing 28:4

introduction 7:19

investigating 108:9

investigations 39:9

investment 148:15

invite 5:1

invited 10:10

involved 56:14

iridium 49:18

issue 6:11 8:6 22:23

26:19 31:1 46:18

46:20 52:24 56:13

63:2 64:25 66:10

72:10 79:15,17,18

80:3 89:12 112:15

115:24 116:6,13

116:21,22 126:25

145:18 146:5,16

147:20,21 148:3

151:24 152:25

issued 78:2 138:4

issues 5:21 6:6 22:21

22:21,22,22 64:14

64:15 77:10

109:21 127:1

item 12:19,20,24

13:8,14 14:12 19:5

25:16 30:1 43:18

56:3 69:7 97:7,9

100:7 102:4,10,11

102:18 104:13

120:5,7 124:6,18

124:22 126:7

153:8,11

items 3:12 13:4

21:12 22:19 23:10

29:18 129:5

it’s 71:10

J

JCPenney 85:11

Jersey 1:14 3:19

Jewelers 7:22,25

Jeweler's 8:2 69:2

jewelry 1:6 3:5 5:23

6:1,11,17 7:23 9:9

9:10 10:24 11:2,15

11:19,25 13:4,9

14:7,8,16,20 15:4

15:5,18 16:2,17

20:22 25:12,15

26:23,24 31:18

33:18,19,20,25

34:13 36:20 38:5,9

39:7 42:6,9 49:10

62:12 63:17 64:17

65:14,20 66:8,24

69:19 70:8 98:15

98:21 102:22

103:22 106:12,23

115:19 128:23

129:4,7 131:2

135:21 139:5,14

139:21 140:7

154:5 155:3

job 31:23 45:16 47:6

47:19 94:18

join 5:1 10:12

joined 84:1 97:22

joining 96:17,18

JTV 26:23

juice 33:11,12

jump 104:7

Jumping 25:1

JUNE 1:9 155:4

justification 118:12

JVC 8:3,13 10:2,17

13:19 37:23 39:8

39:20 74:15 79:10

87:7 88:6,6,15

93:12,14 118:20

122:21 123:23

150:5

JVCs 78:10 123:6

124:11 127:21

150:2

JVC's 8:17 22:15

K

K 14:24 18:3 51:7

karat 8:8 11:16,19

11:20 14:11,20,22

15:22,23 16:18

17:6,14,14 18:7

21:14 23:18,22

24:3,4,11,11,13,19

25:25,25 26:15,21

27:3,12,21,23,25

28:2,4,11,17 29:7

29:9 31:6,23 32:1

34:2,3,6 35:21,23

35:23,24 36:3,4,6

36:11,11,13,14,15

36:16 37:14,19

38:2,3,4,7,15,25

39:6,16,24,24 41:4

42:4,23 44:4 47:11

49:23,24 52:12

55:8 57:4 60:13,16

60:25 61:2,8,15,15

61:17 63:21 64:5

64:23 65:13,19

66:7 67:25 68:3

69:18 70:9,22,23

70:24,24 72:11

73:9 75:9 84:3,7
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[166]

84:22 85:5 93:25

96:2 97:10 107:9

107:13,19,21

110:2,4,21,22,23

111:20,22 112:2,5

112:10,11,16,18

113:2,2,6,6,22

114:1,4,20,21

115:2,6,7,9,10

116:12,13,18,19

116:20 124:4

129:10 137:25

142:11,12,12

144:18 149:22,23

karatage 12:6,12

18:7 31:17 38:20

41:1 47:16 108:16

108:18 114:3,14

115:6

karats 7:3 8:9 14:20

17:18,21,25 26:12

27:14 37:1,3 38:13

48:25 50:3 55:10

60:20 68:1,3,4,12

69:15 70:1,3,5

71:10 73:11 111:3

111:6,11,17,23

113:12,13

keep 5:11 57:20

127:9,10 150:21

keeping 9:23 75:21

82:12 83:12 122:7

Kelly 7:20 18:1

19:12,14,22 20:18

28:18 54:20 63:5,7

63:11 83:22 96:12

98:1 99:12 113:20

114:9,12,18

117:13 123:8

124:1 125:15,21

126:21 127:3,7

129:2 130:7,9

131:16,21 132:6

144:12,16 145:4,8

kept 90:7

key 29:20 44:13

112:4

Kim 2:6 3:2,6,7

13:17 15:10,15

16:6,25 17:17

19:23 20:7 21:21

23:11 24:24 25:22

26:5,10 27:8 29:22

30:9,14,21 33:14

34:24 35:5 36:10

36:23 40:5,11

41:12,23 44:21

45:22 46:3 47:22

50:8 51:16 52:13

53:10 54:3,16,19

55:13 57:16,25

58:2 59:10 60:10

61:11 62:3,16 63:6

64:1 65:1 66:12

67:4,18 68:20,24

70:11 71:21 75:4

76:13 96:11 137:1

145:24 146:19

147:9,16 151:23

152:5,19,23

kind 4:25 17:9 38:7

43:24 55:23 62:1

75:25 91:1 107:20

122:10 125:19

132:3,22 135:1

138:20 145:20

kinds 123:20

knew 133:19

know 4:19 5:7,24

6:18 10:16 11:6

12:2,9,16,25 14:3

15:5 16:21 17:2,7

17:8 18:23 20:21

20:24 21:3,6,7

23:4 24:15 25:14

26:18 27:9 28:9

29:1,8,14 30:22

33:17 34:5,13,21

35:7 36:17 37:2,13

37:20 39:5,7,19,25

40:15 41:6,18 42:5

42:7,12,20,22,24

43:4,9,14 44:6,17

44:19 46:8,13

47:25 48:15,20

49:17 50:9,12,13

50:21 51:12,15

52:24 53:10,18

54:4 55:7 57:17

58:5,7,9,18 59:6

60:6,15,25 61:17

62:7,10,10,13 63:2

63:23 64:6,25

66:18,22,25 67:22

68:4 69:9,10,13,18

70:4 71:1,6 73:1,5

73:25 74:3 75:15

77:12,25 81:9

82:11,24 83:8

85:23 86:2,12,13

88:12,13 89:4,17

94:6,12,16 95:14

95:20 96:5,8,16,20

99:20 100:9

101:11 102:12,18

102:20 106:13

107:6,14 108:3,17

113:3,4,12,15

114:18 115:17

116:22 117:10,21

117:22 120:7,23

121:17 122:20

125:10,23,24,25

126:2 127:21

128:21 129:15,25

130:4,19,25

132:17 133:18

135:24 136:2,9

137:9,24 139:18

140:7,18,19 141:3

142:10,16 145:9

145:22,23 147:3,5

147:6 148:3,23

149:3,17 153:5

knowing 103:9

148:18

knowledge 24:22

81:2 155:9

known 69:15

knows 45:2 113:4

Koss 3:7 77:3,7

82:19 83:13 85:10

86:3,7 87:5,14

88:3,5 89:8,17,25

90:11,19 91:15

92:3,7 93:2,11

94:9 95:1 97:23

98:10 99:1,13,20

101:13,17 104:6

104:10 107:2,4

108:21 109:16

110:13 111:2,5

112:19 113:7

114:8,10,16 115:4

115:23 117:6,12

117:18 120:15,18

121:2,22 122:3,12

122:16,18 123:9

123:25 124:9

125:13,16 126:20

126:23 127:5,14

128:20 129:12

130:8 131:9,17

133:1,24 134:21

135:1,4,10 136:6

137:7,19 138:8

140:11 141:23

142:7,20,24

143:25 144:9,14

145:11,13,15

148:6,21 150:1,11

150:16,25 151:4,8

151:20 153:19,25

KT 18:4

L

lab 42:21 108:10,10

label 35:7 54:9

labels 8:11

lack 20:3 29:14

53:24 63:21 65:17

122:20 123:3

136:13

landed 50:12 84:24

language 116:24

152:16

languages 43:17

lapel 99:10

large 27:2,6 37:19

82:3 116:17

largest 139:4

lasering 10:25

lastly 4:4

latest 93:13

Laura 3:6,7 5:14

26:10,17 45:22

77:7 96:11 137:1

145:24 146:19

147:9,16 151:23

152:5,19,23

Law 3:18

layer 6:12 77:10

80:1 81:14 89:6

91:19 112:10

124:17 127:16

LeachGarner

100:20

lead 35:10 139:6

lead-free 62:2

learn 34:7 38:14

70:2,3

learned 78:10

111:13

leave 3:17 33:15

leaves 3:13

leaving 59:5

led 32:25

Lee 7:22 17:1 19:16

30:20 31:16 44:22

45:23 46:11 47:5

52:16 54:2,17 57:1

57:13 59:17 71:4

left 7:20 71:22 77:5

122:10 129:14

150:19

legacy 63:16

legal 45:18,18,20

lesser 24:5

letting 125:9

let's 8:5 20:9 25:25

30:12 48:7 56:2

80:18 104:15

106:20 116:12

level 13:3 26:25

43:17 52:19 62:15
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[167]

79:20 82:14 85:23

94:7 95:10,20

102:22 109:8

110:25 119:19

125:22

levels 45:9 53:17

130:18

life 69:22

lifetime 148:18

lift 128:13

limited 77:14 98:22

line 37:25 38:1 61:3

95:6,18 119:24

linear 121:15

linking 19:6

Lisa 7:25 24:25

33:14 61:3 64:17

102:9

Lisa's 52:5,23

list 75:25 84:11

listed 141:22

listening 67:23

listing 35:8 53:20

54:8,8

literally 49:11

little 22:20 33:4,5

41:15 43:18 45:19

47:9,23 83:15 84:1

93:19 95:3 108:2

118:9,12 130:1

131:1 134:18

136:1 145:21

live 132:22 143:23

living 81:12

long 24:19 37:3

38:10 47:2 50:11

50:17 73:14

100:17,23 102:3

105:21 106:20

119:15 141:17

longer 89:14 100:13

133:5,16

longevity 114:21

115:18

longtime 64:15

long-lasting 96:9

look 20:10,11 31:5

31:10 33:11 40:22

41:1 61:1 67:16

74:15 75:15

103:16 109:10,12

121:8,12 147:8

151:22

looked 97:5 119:3,4

119:9

looking 3:9 28:2

31:8 46:6 48:6,10

80:25 119:23

looks 31:9 40:18,23

42:5 103:16

loose 21:2

loosely 130:16

lose 53:5 103:6

lost 71:3

lot 7:18 15:4 26:11

38:15,18,24 40:14

42:4 65:11 69:15

76:14 89:4,5,7

91:25 101:6

102:13 112:17

119:7 129:17,20

136:23 137:22

138:4 142:10

143:5 148:15

lots 35:19

low 107:13 111:22

116:18,19 126:9

127:9 132:7,9,18

132:19

lower 11:5,23 13:10

14:20,25 15:25

16:18 18:10 29:13

50:3 63:12 65:12

111:19 112:5

113:22 116:2

132:11

lowering 121:18

lump 92:24

Lustigman 70:13,13

71:5,12

M

M 155:15

machine 113:1

magic 47:14

main 5:20 110:12

maintain 37:24 64:5

64:23 75:1 96:23

109:8,9,14 110:16

138:18 145:9

147:11 148:17

maintained 64:10

75:3

maintaining 111:14

145:5

majority 32:21 76:2

87:11

making 13:22 29:20

73:17

managed 94:3

managing 135:17

mandate 104:17,21

manner 39:18 47:21

51:4

manufactured

79:21

manufacturer 19:15

32:10 44:24 45:15

48:4 95:14 116:2

125:8 134:1

manufacturers 9:16

19:25 20:3 21:11

23:2 45:21,23 66:1

74:23 75:11 76:3

85:1 90:2 107:13

146:10

manufactures 20:22

52:25

manufacturing 9:18

58:20 89:22 92:16

109:12 120:12,20

marginal 105:2

mark 6:25 7:5,11

8:20 11:1 18:4,6

19:3 29:3,9,14

63:21,22,22,24

65:2 69:20 72:1

90:20 108:1

118:15 138:12

141:25

marked 11:22 20:8

22:6 24:13,16 29:7

75:16

market 12:2 31:4

38:4 47:7 90:3

98:6 116:23

148:24

marketed 38:2 43:2

57:13 89:3,4

152:13 153:8,10

marketer 39:3

50:25

marketers 9:11,17

40:15 51:20 74:24

93:21 128:1

marketing 6:7,16,19

8:10,15 9:1,18

13:9 20:15 21:23

22:3 24:17 25:11

32:22 35:24 41:25

43:15 44:11 45:5,7

46:2 61:25 76:11

83:16 113:9

114:13 119:17

135:23,24 138:3

153:6

marketplace 42:25

90:5,18 123:3,7,10

131:19 134:15

marking 8:7,23

29:15,17 41:18

49:19

marks 34:2,3 63:17

63:18,24 75:8

mass 94:5

material 22:12

43:15 44:12 61:25

62:1 67:15 76:11

97:5 103:5,6,12

materials 8:11,15

9:1 13:24 20:15

22:16 23:8 24:17

41:25 98:13

106:14 138:3

147:3

matter 65:23 91:4

91:19 101:22

110:9 111:4

146:23

maximum 96:4

mean 16:3,5 18:4

19:24 27:4,5 36:1

38:9 46:22 71:14

73:1 76:6 81:23

82:11,22 85:18

86:12,17,20 87:4

92:20 96:6 101:22

108:6 110:22,25

111:8 115:11,13

117:7 133:23

135:16 136:8

138:19 140:18,19

141:6,7 147:23

148:23 149:12

150:18

meaning 80:22 84:6

95:13 103:4

140:20,22

means 21:8 28:4

38:20 52:3 75:15

75:17 86:14 89:11

114:17 117:4

137:6 142:19

meant 78:18,20

108:3 133:18,19

measure 36:7 94:5

107:24 108:13

112:22

measured 109:25

measurement

116:16

measures 92:25

mechanical 78:8

80:9 83:19 84:1

87:8,15,18,21 88:8

94:3 96:18,22

100:10 102:25

118:19 127:16

131:10 132:2,15

144:25

mechanically 86:18

97:22 103:4,19

mechanically-app...

130:12

media 4:9
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[168]

meet 9:17 11:15

26:1 81:1,22 114:5

118:5 122:22

meeting 5:15 114:23

127:17 128:2

meets 59:6 124:14

melding 32:24

members 10:8

memory 59:19,20

Menon 8:1 14:1,19

15:3,14,16 26:4,9

49:8,17 52:11 57:4

57:10 71:9

mention 28:18

113:20

mentioned 4:13

25:1 68:14 87:6

99:6,13 107:17

115:24 125:13

126:23 128:21

131:9 140:16

143:4

mentioning 141:25

145:25

merchandise 43:23

Merino 75:5,6,6

76:6 101:18

110:20 118:14

120:17,22 124:10

124:19 135:12,15

messier 41:15

met 51:13,14 58:25

metal 8:1,16,19 12:1

12:4,14,19 13:10

13:11,13 14:12,16

18:10,23 19:1,4,17

20:4,6,7,10 21:7,7

21:10,12 22:1,3,5

22:6,7 23:5,10

25:10,12,16 26:6

26:13 28:24,24

29:15,16 30:1,1,3

30:4,11 31:11 32:8

32:11 33:1 38:18

40:19,25 41:6

42:24 43:8,10,22

44:2,3 50:22 51:4

51:7,8,11,18,22

52:1,6,21 53:7

55:22 56:1,9,17

58:17 61:21 62:20

63:12,17 65:10,11

66:16 67:5 68:5,6

69:7,9 71:17 72:21

73:19 75:18 79:24

81:6,10,14 82:2

86:22,23 88:10

89:5,5 99:16,17,18

100:12,16,24

102:15 103:4,10

105:19 124:7,7,17

125:1,6 127:19

129:5 132:3 133:8

141:7,8,15,16,21

148:5,11 149:4,10

152:16 153:6,20

153:21,22

metallurgist 67:12

67:17 94:1

metallurgists

120:23

metals 6:8,13,20

7:15 11:6 12:7,9

12:20 16:9,22 17:3

18:21 22:11,19,23

28:25 30:15 31:12

32:24 33:3 42:13

42:20 44:7,7 48:17

48:18,19,21 49:11

49:14 50:16 52:5

53:15,22 54:15,23

55:3,20 56:3 57:5

57:14 58:15 59:4

62:22 65:18 66:22

66:22 67:9,10 69:5

70:10 77:11 80:2

81:16,17,20 82:5,6

84:2 96:17,18

103:9 121:13,20

133:10 138:14

method 78:5 83:25

116:16

methodologies

37:21 117:10

methodology 38:10

51:6 74:7 90:10

144:5,23 145:2

metric 17:7 34:7,8

68:15 69:22

Michael 65:5 89:17

91:17 98:10 99:1

99:14 103:24

108:10,24 109:1

111:11 116:7

121:2 143:25

150:25 152:25

micro 93:8 104:15

105:5 121:5 122:8

micron 88:13 92:22

93:16 97:10,12

114:3,5 115:16

120:17 121:11

microns 115:15

116:6 117:25,25

120:15 121:10

122:2 131:14

middle 67:19 70:12

136:9

Mike 120:25

Mike's 144:12

mill 146:18

millimeters 101:25

millionth 132:10

millionths 112:16

112:17 116:19,20

121:10,11 122:2

mills 119:10,12,15

119:19,19 120:2

120:11,14,17

124:13 146:18,18

mimic 106:6

mind 5:11 17:13

18:9 39:22 57:24

125:2

mine 123:8

minimal 58:17 59:3

64:8

minimize 5:3

minimum 6:8,20 7:9

8:17 11:5,15,18,23

13:10 14:10,17

16:1,9,11,18 21:9

26:1 29:3,16 57:11

63:25 64:5,24

73:17 77:22 79:2

83:21 96:25 99:5

100:3 107:19

109:22 111:1,2

112:11 119:5,15

130:21 146:9,10

146:14,22 147:10

minimums 94:15

99:22,23 124:14

131:8 134:5 135:9

142:17

minute 65:2 114:11

minutes 40:17 71:22

76:17 140:12

141:5 144:10

mirror 88:22

misleading 6:24

73:1

misrepresent 43:19

mistake 61:9

misunderstanding

25:7

mix 16:21 22:21

59:6 83:23 84:4

mixed 22:1 23:5

25:9,12 26:13 30:1

30:11 31:11 42:15

103:8 129:5

mixture 32:13,16,17

42:13

MJJ 7:21 42:12

MJJs 42:16

mm 92:22 96:4

Mm-hmm 20:18

73:24 86:3 89:8,25

90:11 91:15 98:1

99:12 101:13

104:10 112:19

113:7 123:25

125:15 126:20

131:16 147:13

151:4

moderating 3:8

modifications 6:2

moment 26:18

41:11 49:21

152:23

money 148:15

monitor 39:9 74:15

monitored 84:17

monitoring 135:17

months 101:3 102:5

morning 3:2 7:14

8:4,22 9:4 65:7

morning's 3:9

MORTENSEN

85:12 115:5

123:12 129:6

147:14,20 149:20

151:7,21

move 26:12 58:1

69:14 117:18,19

122:18

moving 77:9

multiple 43:17

49:22 61:16 65:18

multitude 106:1

N

N 2:2 155:1,17

name 3:6 8:18 13:12

18:20 19:7 21:12

32:24 43:8 44:3

68:7,11,21 77:4,7

85:4 114:1

names 33:6 68:8

84:8 97:18

natural 55:9

naturally 42:16

nature 76:1

necessarily 5:18

17:24 19:4 51:23

103:14

necessary 29:24

37:8 94:7 133:16

134:8 136:19

152:10

necessity 5:25

128:12

need 9:23 15:6

23:17,20 33:17
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[169]

34:16,20 38:10

43:4 46:24 50:18

54:21 73:3,5

101:19 111:5

114:2,4 117:14

119:5 127:2 133:5

133:20,21 134:6

134:13 136:5

138:16 139:9,10

149:1 150:5

needed 58:18

104:18 119:12

150:23

needs 34:18 36:7,8

70:17,25 91:23

96:18 107:24

109:21,25 114:23

125:25 139:9

142:14 150:9

negative 115:1

never 20:24 106:17

new 1:14 3:19 11:1

18:12 20:21 21:20

22:9 23:17 34:11

51:25,25 58:16

70:14 72:21,22,22

73:2 93:20 98:9

123:17,24

nice 14:19

nickel 34:20,20 52:5

52:23 105:21,22

109:6

nickel-free 52:25

61:22 104:17,20

nine 31:23 51:1

nitride 98:19

noncompliance 74:7

non-deceptive 25:20

non-electrolytic

132:24

non-platinum 54:15

58:15

non-precious 63:18

68:6

non-stamping 75:22

normal 106:7,7

139:19 140:7

147:7

note 79:17 97:20

98:3 117:13

noted 129:19

notes 88:15 155:7

noticed 90:21 91:6

notices 8:12

number 4:19 12:7,8

17:20 20:2 29:6

48:15 50:4,19

52:20 54:24 71:13

77:9 80:13 98:22

108:14 114:17

123:16 139:24

155:2

numbers 15:8 49:20

49:22 53:18 80:1

123:6

numerous 77:22

nutritional 35:7

54:9 75:25

N.W 1:14

O

O 155:1,1,1,17,17

155:17,17

object 63:18

objective 5:20

objects 97:4

obligation 51:13

150:22

obvious 39:15

obviously 44:23

118:24 119:25

122:7

Occasionally 84:2

occurring 112:12

offer 85:19 119:20

office 133:19

oh 32:3 46:21 63:5

okay 19:13 29:3

30:21 33:10 44:6

45:15 48:10 49:10

55:13 57:16 60:4

63:25 73:23 83:13

86:6 87:4,5 88:4

89:17 90:19 92:3,7

95:4 97:23,25

98:10 101:1 106:6

107:2,3 108:21

114:9 115:23

117:12,18 118:21

120:18,18 121:22

122:16 128:20

130:23 134:21

135:10 143:25

144:14,17 150:16

old 105:17

once 3:17,22 31:21

82:1 106:10 111:1

111:2 151:11

154:1

once-in-a-lifetime

31:21

ones 14:25 77:4,6

one-half 117:24

online 138:5

open 10:9 115:12,16

140:12 141:4

opening 115:13

operating 74:1

operationally 140:3

opinion 23:21 36:7

36:21 91:12 96:20

126:16 141:4

144:8

opinions 140:23

opportunity 9:5

29:10 45:10 54:20

61:5 65:3 72:17

79:14,23 130:14

130:18,23,25

opposed 12:5 13:24

88:23 94:4 99:9

147:17

option 18:22

optional 59:5

oral 5:12

order 11:24 16:16

25:14 75:1 84:10

85:4 112:11,25

114:5 138:17

139:17

orderly 3:17

original 117:16

originally 91:13

ought 12:15 21:3

ounces 70:23,24

71:16

outset 129:25

outside 3:18

overall 5:25 90:4

93:5

overlap 90:1,7,17

overlay 92:14

129:18 140:21

141:3,6 143:2,18

144:21,24,25

145:5,10

overseas 17:5 113:4

overwhelming

87:25

over-the-counter

63:20

P

P 155:1,17

page 2:4 40:7

paid 102:10

palladium 32:14

42:15 50:23 57:5,6

105:23

Pam 85:10 113:8

115:4 123:1

panel 2:8,10 5:5 6:6

6:11,16 7:19 37:6

72:13 76:17 77:1,4

77:9 150:14,14,18

panelist 4:24

panelists 4:18,24

7:19 8:22 40:21

144:11 154:2

panels 3:9

paper 76:11

parallel 28:5

parentage 73:20

parlance 16:13

part 6:2 7:1,6 13:19

37:19 59:25 73:14

77:18 80:23 92:12

93:20 128:7

134:12

participate 10:10

participated 37:23

participating 4:6

particular 6:6 8:5

10:4 12:25 19:11

21:22 23:8 29:8

41:21 50:25 53:14

59:2,15 87:8

104:13 105:6

116:24 136:20

153:9,15

particularly 22:16

34:25 37:2,3 40:21

51:24 54:5 59:11

72:6

parts 7:9 12:5,10,11

14:25 15:22 16:17

17:5 18:5 21:13

26:3,6 39:25 48:24

51:6 63:21

pass 104:20

passes 104:23

patent 22:22

patiently 71:23

pawn 25:16

pay 34:1,22 39:5

120:9

paying 120:8

pen 101:15

people 3:19 17:8,11

23:22 27:4,6 32:2

33:11 34:12 52:19

52:20 54:5,9 71:23

74:16,25 78:16

87:7 108:10,10

116:11 130:5

138:2 140:17,18

146:4,17 148:16

148:17 153:6,21

perceive 33:22

percent 17:25 19:20

19:21 20:5 27:18

27:24,24,25 28:8

28:10,16,21,21,25

30:12 32:19,20

33:2,12 35:14,15
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[170]

35:16,22 37:13

38:23 39:3,5,15

40:24 42:14,15,15

49:2,2,2 52:3,10

53:4 54:8 55:1,1,6

55:8,20 56:3,19

66:20,21 67:8,9,9

67:10,10 69:8 73:8

73:9 75:15 76:9

107:22 110:4

117:3 119:2,25

147:23

percentage 12:5,12

12:18 13:13 15:8

16:12,16 17:18,23

18:14 22:17 26:14

27:2,6,13,16 29:23

33:9 36:15 37:1

38:13 50:13 51:23

54:24 55:25 56:10

56:12,12,24 63:22

67:14,15 69:6,20

70:15,19 71:7 73:8

73:10,15,18,22

75:9 118:20

percentages 15:2

16:19 18:20,24

20:14 23:6 29:2

30:6 33:16 47:17

48:8,11,22 50:19

51:9 59:3,4,6

69:19

perception 13:1

14:5 16:14 26:20

33:20 35:13 52:8

82:21 107:25

108:3,4,6 109:17

110:8 111:13

131:6 142:25

153:17

perceptions 64:16

perfect 19:22 53:3

59:8,8

perfectly 10:21

perform 53:24 61:1

66:25 81:9,10,20

85:15 89:13

111:21 121:20

125:11 126:15

performance 54:10

61:8 64:7 79:7

97:6 105:4 112:1

114:22 116:1

127:13

performed 61:10

performing 39:16

39:17 85:9

performs 67:6

period 47:13

periodic 72:23

permanent 138:24

permit 11:5 13:7

16:8

person 3:22 152:24

personal 121:17

personally 145:17

perspective 37:22

44:22 48:4 83:14

121:18

pertain 153:2

pertained 10:23

64:9

pertains 153:1

phenomenon 112:8

123:24

photographed 4:5

phrase 72:6 142:3

phrased 83:3,5

physical 18:2,17

98:12,18

physically 20:13

pick 71:13 88:3

piece 10:24 11:2

19:2 21:14 25:11

25:12,16 28:10

38:4,8 40:18 41:4

42:5 51:15 55:4,11

55:15 66:23 70:8

82:16 103:22

124:5 140:6 147:8

pieces 18:2 55:15

pin 99:9

place 15:9 23:24

31:4 46:6,13 80:23

82:17 98:24 101:7

101:15 130:10

placed 97:3

plain 129:23 140:20

140:22

plan 122:12

planning 6:13

plasma 98:5

plate 78:14,24 80:17

82:24,25 90:24

91:5,6,8,14,22

92:10 110:2 114:1

114:4,21,21 120:1

121:6,11,12,14

124:4 127:22,23

128:10 129:16

139:16 141:24

149:22

plated 77:24 80:1

83:24 84:21 85:3

85:22,24 86:9

91:14,22 92:11,14

97:2,11,19 102:14

102:15 106:15

110:22,24 114:2

114:14 119:1,6

124:5,20 125:23

126:14 149:22

152:2,6,12

plates 110:6 145:19

platform 106:22

plating 70:14 77:19

78:6 84:6,25 85:13

85:17,24 92:21

97:1,24 98:2 100:9

101:25 102:6,19

102:25 107:13,18

107:21,23 109:4

109:24 110:5,21

111:16 115:2,7,15

115:21,25 118:4

119:19,24 138:13

146:23,23 147:17

147:25 148:1,18

148:22 149:4,10

149:11,15,24

150:3,4,20 151:16

151:24 152:8

153:14,14

platings 77:15 79:18

147:17 148:21,25

platinum 7:10,10

12:10 32:13,19

33:5 48:19,25

50:23 53:12,15,15

54:1 55:11,14

56:13 57:23 58:4,5

58:6,10,14 59:16

60:2,8,9 69:6,25

81:17 84:22 85:5,8

86:16,18,20

141:11 151:16

152:17

play 112:21

playing 79:21 82:15

85:22 110:1,7

116:15 125:22

please 3:16,22 4:3

5:11 68:21

plenty 47:11 104:11

plus 28:24,25 48:16

48:17,17 52:13

55:2,2,3,3 72:11

109:10

pocketbook 64:18

point 17:11 20:12

24:15 25:1 27:9

28:19 30:7 31:12

34:14 40:6 44:25

48:14 49:23 50:3,7

52:5,23 53:3,6

54:2 62:13 66:10

66:21 70:16 72:2

73:24 78:16 79:1

80:5 81:6 82:19

86:5,10,25 88:6,15

92:2 95:4,23 98:22

98:25 103:13

105:18 110:14

112:15 115:13,15

123:7 137:12

138:8 153:13

pointed 81:25

points 24:24 49:7

88:2 96:5 102:16

134:16

pool 62:7

poorly 66:25

portion 127:18

pose 41:20

position 15:1 25:7

46:8,9 62:14 64:5

72:25 118:16

124:11 149:2,3

150:2,2

positive 124:2

possible 5:23 6:1

42:19 46:1 49:10

49:11 59:7 100:25

133:10

possibly 94:15 115:2

posted 4:8

pot 122:8

Poteet 69:1,1,13

70:3,7 145:12,14

145:16

potential 64:12

potentially 35:10

56:6 66:14

practical 48:5 76:1

Practically 49:8,19

practice 25:4 138:13

145:25 146:11

151:10

practices 9:13

precede 114:14

precious 6:8,12,20

7:15 8:1,16,19

11:6 12:1,4,19

13:11,13 14:11,16

16:9 17:3 18:10,21

19:4 21:10,12 22:2

22:6,11,18 23:10

25:16 28:24,24

32:24 33:3 34:19

38:18 40:19,25

41:6 42:13 43:10

43:22 44:2,3,7,7

48:20 49:14 50:22

51:4,7,8,11,18,22

52:1 53:7 54:22
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[171]

55:18,22 56:1,9,17

57:5,14 58:17 59:4

62:20 63:12 65:10

66:16,22 67:3,5

68:4 69:5,6,9

71:17 73:19 77:11

79:24 80:2 81:5,14

81:16,20 82:2,5,6

84:2 86:23 88:10

89:5,5 99:17 124:7

124:17 125:1,6

129:5 133:8,9

141:7,15 149:4,10

152:16 153:20,21

153:22

preciousness 13:3

precise 127:18

128:5

predictable 112:1

predominant 12:14

30:3 87:20 141:16

predominate 12:21

30:4

predominately

17:13

prefer 24:11

premier 79:18 100:7

premise 37:18

premises 25:15

prepared 106:14

present 8:21 43:9

presentations 140:1

presented 34:12

presently 46:9

pretty 53:18 122:11

124:18,22 147:15

prevalent 128:24

149:14

prevent 78:20

105:15 112:12

125:8 146:6

152:10

preventing 11:8

78:17 88:19

prevents 95:16

price 23:15 31:9

39:17 40:8,8,11,16

41:2,3 71:9,14

102:13,16 115:13

115:14 116:14,23

120:8 131:2

134:16

priced 102:16

prices 39:18 41:13

79:25

primarily 108:4,11

primary 81:13

principal 53:19

prior 18:25 116:15

probably 4:12 17:4

21:9 40:6 45:19

74:19 94:1 132:18

problem 16:1 20:25

70:5 109:2 113:14

121:18 142:22

problems 112:3

146:16

proceed 3:18 4:22

proceeding 4:14

process 10:4,9,18

13:20 81:11 84:7

91:1,22 92:10 94:3

130:13 132:20

133:12

processes 81:5,8,19

82:10 89:20,22

92:15,16 94:24

98:9

producing 11:10

product 7:1,7,12

8:15,19 13:25 18:9

18:17,25 20:13,23

23:18 24:14,17,18

26:1 32:21 35:11

38:2 41:9,10 42:1

42:3,7 43:5,8,19

43:21 47:7 48:3

49:1 53:23,25

55:19 56:16 58:8

59:23 60:12,17

64:20 66:2 68:3,10

72:12 73:4,4 77:18

81:22,25 82:25

83:23 84:4,7,15,16

85:17,20 86:17

89:13,14 91:18

93:7 96:8 97:13,17

100:13 101:4

104:18,19,24

105:3 110:17

111:14 112:3

113:5,21 114:2,22

115:12,12,14

116:1,3,4 119:1,17

120:20 124:3,14

125:23 138:17

139:8 140:5

141:19 142:14

143:15 147:11

148:12,17 149:23

150:21 151:17

152:2,14

production 119:23

productive 3:10

products 6:7,12,17

6:19 7:15 9:19

11:15 21:20 22:25

25:7 26:13 29:7

31:4 35:6 37:2,12

37:14 39:15,17

41:8 42:7 43:2,3

43:24 48:7,15

59:16 67:6 77:11

77:24 78:5 79:7

80:1,8,9 81:1 82:1

83:17,24 89:2,3,7

90:3,9,13 92:13

95:13 98:22

104:17 107:8

111:20 123:4,10

123:16,20 125:9

126:14 131:4,13

133:11 134:3,4,14

135:21 139:15

143:10 145:22

146:2 152:3,6,9,11

153:3

product's 60:20

professional 104:1

program 44:14

project 106:20

prominent 136:25

137:1,13

prominently 147:22

promote 109:6

prompt 63:22

proofread 155:19

proper 85:17 139:7

139:10

properly 66:5 113:1

properties 22:10

62:21 63:1,3 66:25

proposal 8:13,17

13:18 96:20 136:8

137:9

proposals 84:11

136:11

proposing 19:10

proposition 22:15

108:17

proprietary 32:11

32:17 43:11

protect 39:23

134:18

protection 66:5

103:3 105:2

protective 99:14

protracted 5:12

proven 114:15

proves 16:14

provide 5:16 8:25

10:12 53:20,22

61:23 76:10 84:19

90:4 105:3 114:17

139:17 140:15

154:3

provided 10:5 20:14

20:16 41:24 45:1

60:23 61:22 62:11

85:1 99:2 106:25

108:24

provides 6:23 7:4

9:11 109:22

providing 48:7

90:17,22

provision 92:9

provisions 7:13

53:11 54:4 78:3

proximity 137:14

public 3:4 27:2

39:11 58:10 68:17

122:13

publicly-available

4:9

published 85:5

punctuation 155:20

purchase 19:1 31:21

71:20 137:12

purchases 31:18

purchasing 11:12

29:2 63:20 110:9

pure 7:8,10 24:4

53:15 101:22

119:2 120:14

121:14

purity 14:12 27:20

29:16 109:14

purporting 88:23

purpose 5:2,15

24:21 110:15

148:10 152:18

put 4:25 5:8 10:24

12:21 21:13,15,16

43:23 49:24,25

50:2 59:21,22

69:19 72:24

104:13 110:21

111:8 115:21

129:10 151:11

153:5

putting 50:6 69:7

135:23 146:14,18

PVD 98:11

p.m 154:10

Q

Qs 144:2

QUADE 155:24

qualities 60:21

quality 6:25 8:8,20

8:23,25 13:5,8

14:11 15:22,23

28:15 29:15 35:13

38:8 41:10 60:12

79:7 105:9 111:20
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[172]

111:22 116:1

quantities 22:12

quantity 14:12

21:14

query 29:23

question 7:17 8:21

10:23 17:19 18:8

28:1 34:24 37:18

38:17 41:21 48:6

48:19 54:3 55:16

57:22,23 60:11

63:23 66:19 72:3

73:7 78:23 83:5

87:5 88:15 90:19

104:8 105:12

107:16 108:15

109:17 110:19

126:3 127:3 133:2

136:7 138:11

142:2,7 144:12

146:3

questioning 84:13

questions 4:23 5:14

10:13 28:12 83:2,7

83:9 140:13

144:11

quick 7:19 72:17

87:5

quicker 103:5

quickly 47:16

103:12

quite 22:3 72:5

97:10,17 98:14,14

108:8 116:10

117:1 121:16

QVC 7:20 83:16

85:25 97:3

Q&A 5:5

R

R 155:1,1,1,1,17,17

155:17,17

raises 28:1

raising 70:16 140:21

ranges 137:25

rarer 33:24

rate 103:21,23 104:3

rates 127:9

ratio 128:12

rational 68:18

reach 134:16,16

read 95:10 113:2,5

116:24

ready 61:23

real 28:8 98:15

108:13 112:15

142:2

realize 52:3

really 5:15 8:3 9:24

10:17 15:4 20:6,24

22:4,14 28:13,14

29:8 31:9 32:16

42:23 43:4 44:8,19

47:24 49:4,5,10

50:21 51:12 53:5

54:12 57:12 60:2,8

63:1,14 68:12

69:10,20 70:5

72:17 74:21 76:15

83:10 85:13 86:1

91:3 93:9 96:10

99:2 105:24

108:16 112:14

129:10 130:1

132:6,6 133:6,13

133:15,20 134:14

141:25 145:15

148:4,12 149:13

153:13 154:7

reapplication

147:11

reapplied 140:10

147:7

reason 11:7 24:6

34:2 67:21 68:17

89:11 106:18

110:13 116:13

reasonable 77:17

109:23 135:7

150:6

reasonably 48:2

reasons 9:11 103:1

143:4

received 6:5 8:13

113:14 139:13,20

recess 76:19

recognition 23:13

23:19 68:9

recognize 46:24

recognizing 27:14

recommend 134:5

135:9

recommendation

90:22 111:23

118:7,13 121:24

122:8 135:4,15

150:15

recommendations

122:6

recommended 8:13

82:12 104:14

107:12 118:8,21

121:19 122:1

123:6 140:14

144:7

recommending

56:23 125:7 146:9

147:1

reconvene 76:17

record 4:15 5:22

57:17 68:21

122:13 142:16

recorded 4:5

redefine 96:21

Reenah 2:6 3:2,6

13:17 15:10,15

16:6,25 17:17

19:23 20:7 21:21

23:11 24:24 25:22

26:5 27:8 29:22

30:9,14,21 33:14

34:24 35:5 36:10

36:23 40:5,11

41:12,23 44:21

46:3 47:22 50:8

51:16 52:13 53:10

54:3,16,19 55:13

57:16,25 58:2

59:10 60:10 61:11

62:3,16 63:6 64:1

65:1 66:12 67:4,18

68:20,24 70:11

71:21 75:4 76:13

81:24

reentering 3:15

refer 92:19,21

117:14,23 128:22

131:11 144:6

reference 124:25

125:5 149:4,9

referenced 149:13

references 124:16

referencing 133:4

referred 27:23

referring 93:3 126:7

refers 87:8 114:6

116:5

Refining 8:1

reflect 5:18 77:22

88:21 108:20

reflected 84:20

reflects 87:20

regard 13:16 75:24

regarding 33:18

79:6,12

regardless 36:10

118:2

registered 21:15,16

regular 60:9

regulate 46:20

regulated 20:25

21:1

regulation 146:17

regulations 74:6

relate 93:9

related 7:7,11 22:22

68:23 75:8 139:13

Relatedly 127:14

relates 102:8,9

relating 53:12

relationship 36:16

relative 103:18

121:20

relatively 4:17 41:3

121:21 123:24

relevant 51:18

relying 26:13

remain 3:25 23:24

remainder 28:21

remaining 26:5

remains 89:20 90:16

remember 31:18

remembering

148:10

remind 9:7 78:16

reminds 86:5

remove 65:22

repeated 84:20

replated 148:20

150:9 152:1

replating 138:16

148:14

Reported 1:19

reporter 57:19

reports 61:23

represent 7:6 63:24

70:14

representation

136:20

represented 10:8

representing 79:10

151:14

represents 10:17

reputation 75:2

require 23:5 84:10

126:13 130:11

136:18 147:11

required 3:14 45:9

51:10,23 81:10,22

110:21 128:14

143:22 146:2

150:21

requirement 16:23

23:7 73:17 148:13

requirements 21:10

29:13 74:2 85:7

114:6 125:14,19

138:25 149:11

research 13:1 24:8

27:1,17 35:19

80:10,20 81:24

87:22 97:8,21

100:7 106:8

118:23 141:13

researching 42:23
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[173]

resembles 41:9

reserved 16:2

reserving 5:4

resistance 82:4

respect 26:22 60:13

respects 42:5 54:11

61:11

respondents 27:16

27:19

respondent's 27:24

responders 37:22

response 8:12 10:2

55:9

responses 5:16

rest 34:5 52:4,21,22

66:21 70:9

result 23:14

retail 47:3 54:6 55:7

58:23

retailer 19:15 43:1

44:22,25 45:13,17

45:24 47:20 61:24

62:12 76:10 85:19

85:25 95:15

135:18 139:5

retailers 59:12

63:23 74:24 75:11

86:8 87:2 89:10

90:3 113:17

123:20 127:7

149:18

retailer's 48:4 62:14

83:14

retain 141:2

retained 140:24

retaining 93:17

retreated 150:9

return 127:9 133:2

returns 146:12

review 6:3 136:10

154:5

reviewing 62:19

reviews 5:22

revise 108:11

revised 88:21

108:21,22

revision 10:15

revisions 5:23 9:24

rhodium 138:13,15

139:16,19,23

140:5,8 146:23

147:17,25 148:1

148:11,22 149:11

149:24 150:3,4

151:5,11,15,16,24

152:2,7,8,12 153:5

153:12

rhodium-ed 139:16

rhodium-plated

148:9 152:14

153:3,8

rhodium-plating

148:10 152:16

Richline 72:1 93:12

107:17

rid 128:12

right 3:21 4:21

14:21,23 15:3

21:11 24:1 26:4,9

31:10 32:3 45:24

47:8 50:20 52:12

56:25 57:9,15

59:23 62:24 73:1

76:5 83:23 91:21

93:11 94:9 99:19

110:13 113:7

122:16 128:23

133:24 137:7,18

143:3 144:9,24

146:16,25 150:1

151:8,14 152:4

153:15,19

rightfully 89:12

ring 61:2 97:9 99:8

125:24 126:23

rings 97:11 126:15

risk 26:14 30:24

35:10 107:14

111:10

road 44:24

Robert 7:21 41:20

44:23 68:23

rolled 21:20 40:1

78:14,24 82:25

96:24 127:22,23

129:15 130:22,23

141:24

rolling 42:1

room 32:9 36:18

40:14 66:1

roundtable 1:6 3:5

4:12 5:11 6:5

155:3

row 65:4 67:19

68:25 70:12

rub 139:19

Rubado 72:19,19

Rubedo 21:24,25,25

Rubido 72:19

rubs 139:18

rules 6:3

running 46:10 85:8

runs 143:6

R&D 46:25

S

S 95:2

sadly 39:8

safe 91:3 117:24

154:6

safer 3:25

safety 66:10

sale 20:16

sales 43:16 58:23

140:1,3 147:23

satisfaction 127:10

saw 79:23

saying 15:17,20,25

16:8 19:16 39:4

54:10 70:5 82:24

87:4 91:21 93:15

93:20 102:21

118:1 120:19

121:23 126:6

141:21 144:17,18

144:20 145:7

146:22 149:22

150:4

says 20:10 28:10,11

28:16 31:11 35:15

49:1 52:9 91:4

106:24 109:9

119:7

scale 61:18

scenario 19:23

67:13

scheme 128:18

science 25:23

scientific 94:7

scientist 69:22

screening 3:14

Seated 7:21

second 6:11 48:14

76:17 92:12

112:14

secondly 9:4,15

65:17 103:11

109:24

seconds 32:2

secret 32:15,17

secrets 76:7

section 6:22 7:4,8

138:21

sections 133:7

sector 10:20

sectors 10:8

security 3:12,14 4:3

see 15:4 17:20 19:20

21:6 24:6 27:10

31:9 32:23 39:7

41:7 44:1 45:7,16

49:1 52:2 61:5

63:14 69:18 70:5

72:7 74:20 84:11

85:24 103:11

105:20 108:19

137:11 142:21

145:21 149:16

153:4

seeing 31:3 48:24

52:9 139:24

seeking 74:12

seen 115:1 142:24

segue 99:2

seldom 31:19

self-selected 26:24

sell 32:11 55:15

115:12,12,13,16

seller 25:11 124:16

125:8 134:1

sellers 6:18 8:14,18

134:15 136:18,20

selling 125:9 134:17

140:6 151:15

semantical 145:21

sense 11:7 20:22

21:2 74:25 100:12

101:7 123:22

141:14 150:14,17

152:7

sensitive 34:17,20

sent 42:20

sentence 49:9 136:1

sentiment 46:5

sentiments 62:18

separate 54:22

89:23 90:8 92:8

96:19 132:13

138:21

separated 91:23

separately 18:6 90:8

separating 93:1

94:13,24

September 118:17

serious 63:2

serve 79:4

serves 59:19,21

service 87:3

Session 2:4

set 6:21 44:15 67:24

74:8,22 78:18

102:20 105:4

109:3 142:17

sets 74:17

setting 96:25

seven 112:16,17

share 47:9 76:3

125:25

shared 114:25

sheet 43:19

Sheldon 70:13

shelf 105:16

shiny 31:5

shocked 147:24

shopping 95:11
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[174]

short 6:10

show 43:21 47:7

49:12 81:21

showcase 43:3,25

44:5

showed 97:8 100:15

shower 62:9

shown 32:22 81:24

shows 27:1 80:10

sic 17:11

side 54:6

sidewalk 3:21

signal 60:24

significance 8:22

13:22

significant 27:16,22

40:12 77:18

112:21 122:10

signify 79:3 90:25

91:11

silver 7:7,8 12:9

19:21 22:2,10,18

25:18 28:21 30:15

31:12 32:14,21

42:15 48:17,18,24

50:23 54:23 55:1

56:11,12 57:6

66:17 67:10 69:5

72:7,10 73:19

75:10,15 77:15

81:16 101:21,22

102:15 105:13,14

109:6 112:6

117:20,23 118:24

119:2,3,6,15,24,25

120:2,9,13,14

121:4,6,10,11,14

121:14,14 122:9

141:11,11 143:5

149:22 153:5,6,7

silvertone 126:19

128:21,25 129:8

silver-plated 119:16

120:5

silver-plating

105:13

similar 30:2 79:22

103:8 104:15,25

120:6 138:20

similarly 7:4 130:3

simple 31:25 38:17

45:3 47:21

simpler 22:24

134:19

simplify 128:8

133:11 143:22

simply 5:2 20:9

21:11 22:7 25:13

29:25 30:2,7,10

35:14 49:1 52:7

67:7 148:18

simulate 100:25

single 107:24

sir 68:20

sister 145:14

sit 69:4

sites 4:10

sitting 4:20 44:4

72:2 77:5

situation 25:10,17

30:8 55:24

six 102:5

sized 125:24

sizing 126:15,23

sky-rocketed 116:14

small 4:25 84:4

135:21 136:2

smart 53:7

social 4:9

sold 29:18 52:19

147:22 153:11

solicited 10:7

solid 124:4

solutions 58:25

somebody 19:18

somewhat 17:10

35:18 47:18

sooner 6:14

sophisticated 26:22

31:3

sorry 15:19 35:4

39:25 55:11 63:5

108:22 145:13

sort 4:23 17:17

19:25 20:21 22:24

25:23 28:4 35:7

38:22 44:5 46:5

48:14 56:2,4 60:10

60:22 64:17 69:14

81:18 95:22

103:15 123:22

sought 5:24

sounds 32:15 68:19

space 4:25 43:25

speak 4:24,25 5:7

54:9 55:12,14

56:13 57:21,22

59:17 61:4 89:18

95:3 98:5 102:23

116:8 118:11

131:24

speaking 17:17

136:9,10

speaks 38:22 62:1

86:10

special 58:5 124:5

125:14 138:24

146:1 148:12

150:23

specific 18:23 54:22

77:22 78:21 79:6,8

79:12 84:14 88:24

91:8 110:14

129:24 130:18

137:9,16 151:3

specifically 6:17

78:3,6 79:11 88:7

92:12 122:19

129:15,20 133:5

134:9 141:1,21

143:2

specification 146:17

specifications 9:17

specified 100:4

specify 30:15 107:12

136:4

specifying 79:2

spelling 155:20

spend 73:6

spent 108:8 142:10

spin 104:12 124:2

spoke 143:18

spot 4:2 84:24 111:8

131:1

SRF 114:15

staff 5:16 140:18

stakeholders 10:20

11:4

stamp 8:8,18,20,23

8:25 12:24 13:4,11

13:23 14:11 15:21

17:11 21:12 75:16

75:20,20,22

stamped 13:8 14:7,8

15:12 19:1 20:13

22:7 41:1 59:21

75:12

stamping 10:25

14:24 15:17 22:5

22:18,21 23:9,25

24:2 34:10 57:7

59:19

stamps 29:7

stand 91:24

standard 11:23

14:10 16:1,10,18

19:10 21:10 22:25

23:22 24:11 25:3

30:10 35:1,6 36:8

55:17,21,24 58:8

64:6,24 66:23 67:2

68:1,3 73:25 74:12

86:1 87:17 93:17

93:18,21,23 98:13

101:10,15 106:12

106:23 109:22

116:17 117:16,23

118:2,7 128:3

146:22

standards 11:6,15

14:17 16:11 24:7

29:3,16 35:25 58:9

66:15 67:25 74:4,8

74:9,17,22 78:19

79:22 81:1 82:13

86:1 95:12,24

96:25 98:24

110:17 111:14

118:4 126:9,10,12

139:9,11

standing 126:7

standpoint 42:17

start 8:5 9:2 32:6

53:2,3 65:22 78:15

79:9 80:24 82:17

83:14 113:18

123:1 128:15

134:20

started 3:4 77:3

119:1

starting 3:12 83:11

starts 149:3

state 8:17 68:21

107:7 127:15

134:23,23

stated 45:11 78:3

statement 53:1

107:23

statements 4:15

states 127:21

statutes 74:6

statutory 74:1

stay 147:15

step 69:25

Stephanie 1:19

155:15

stepping 15:7

sterling 7:23 36:20

72:10 75:10,14

84:7 93:12 101:21

102:14 107:17

118:24 119:2,2,24

120:7,9,13 144:18

149:22

stick 9:24 51:9

sticking 77:8

stone 33:24

stones 33:22 137:25

stop 39:3 112:12

store 43:17 52:18

59:23

stores 32:12 52:17

140:2

story 40:17

strange 46:13
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[175]

streams 10:6

street 3:19

striking 150:18,23

stringent 109:25

strong 84:21

strongly 13:6 63:8

Stuart 7:22 16:25

31:15 44:21

Stuart's 62:13

stuck 37:2

studied 26:19 117:2

studies 14:5 120:24

study 26:20 119:22

121:3

stuff 134:20 149:5

subject 50:12,18

65:23

submission 16:3

82:12 108:8

submissions 9:8

10:5

submit 4:7 122:12

submitted 10:14

13:19 14:4,6 27:10

121:25

Subsequent 108:8

substantial 77:19

119:8

substantiate 145:5

substitute 25:6

substrate 99:17

149:16

successful 97:16

sudden 48:25

Sue 20:21 64:2

85:12 129:6

sufficient 125:18

suggest 27:11 45:12

134:6 141:2

suggested 23:6 24:1

30:3 99:23 117:22

123:5 150:5

152:15

suggesting 16:10

133:4

suggestion 11:2,25

30:22 56:9 59:2

73:16

suggestions 13:15

58:23 141:20

suggests 7:9 25:4

summer 5:24

supply 84:10

supposed 102:7

sure 3:24 5:9 15:6

16:6 24:22 25:6

29:20 40:13 41:22

42:18 45:25 49:9

50:5 57:19,20,25

58:19 61:21 66:4

71:24 77:12 86:7

87:7 104:6 107:7

116:25 118:14

127:11 134:21

surely 29:18

surface 6:12 77:10

77:13,15,16,24

79:3,17 80:1 81:14

89:6 91:18 124:7

124:17 126:8

127:16

surfaces 77:18

surface-plated 83:1

surprise 121:4

Susan 7:20 17:25

28:17 54:19 63:6

83:15 90:21 95:2

96:11 99:1,6 113:7

113:8,18 115:24

117:4 123:1

125:13 128:20

144:14

suspicious 4:2

Suzan 79:10 87:6

95:1 133:1 136:7

136:12 140:16

148:6 150:1

sweat 61:16 62:3,5

sweet 84:24 131:1

swim 62:9

swimming 62:6

switching 28:6,8

symbol 18:14

symbols 18:16

system 17:7 41:18

51:25 68:15 69:22

systematic 6:2

systems 49:19 109:5

T

T 155:1,1,1,17,17

Taber 100:14,21

105:25 106:1,3,6,9

106:16,21 121:15

table 72:23 86:14,19

tag 149:25

tags 8:11

take 6:10 31:24 37:8

39:8 43:4 44:25

45:3 62:8,10,12

64:5 96:5 100:13

100:17,24 102:3,5

102:6 104:21

105:22 106:19

149:2

taken 42:17 63:3

76:20 118:25

155:8

talk 16:7 55:10

65:11 73:10 79:1

79:11 80:4 93:2

97:23 102:12

111:12 123:3

129:9 141:5 142:1

talked 45:15 52:18

115:11 118:10

122:21 129:15

138:12,13,14

talking 23:23 34:10

34:11 72:6,8 81:4

86:22 92:1,22 93:4

93:6,6,7,8 94:14

97:24 102:14

142:11

talks 92:9 93:14

Tannery 65:5

Tanury 100:19

tarnish 61:12,14

82:3 101:21,22,23

105:14 112:9

151:13 153:7

tarnishability 60:14

tarnished 139:22

tarnishing 101:23

105:12,15,17

107:15 113:16

task 50:10 74:14,14

78:10 88:6 122:21

123:6

taught 34:3

teach 148:2

technical 88:14 95:9

technically 26:2,6

technology 11:1

31:2

Television 7:24

36:21

tell 32:12 38:10 53:7

67:24 68:2 69:16

83:10,15 89:10

125:3 137:16

147:25

telling 54:8

tells 15:21,23

temporary 132:7

ten 23:13 51:1 98:7

102:16 103:23

144:9

tended 91:17

tents 77:4

term 25:5,9 33:18

65:15 72:21 83:6

84:11 85:2 87:6,13

87:24 88:1,11,17

88:24 89:15 91:8

110:24 119:13

129:23 130:19

141:12 143:9,10

143:20 144:21

terming 90:23

terminology 24:3,12

96:17

terms 18:3,15 22:8

28:23 29:4 34:25

35:8 42:22 58:24

61:17 63:5,7 77:23

78:12,21,24 79:3,5

79:8,12 80:7,12,16

80:17 82:11,13,14

82:22,23 83:7,12

83:16 84:13,25

85:3 86:9 87:1,4

88:7,9,23 94:2,15

95:8 96:22 97:1,5

100:4 103:3,10

113:9 114:12

122:22 126:4

127:12 128:9,11

128:14,23 129:1,3

129:14,17,20

130:2,15 131:6,7

131:11,17,22

133:3,4,13,13,14

133:15,25 134:2,4

135:5 139:1

140:14,20,24,25

141:5 142:17

143:12,13,19

144:4 145:20

149:6

territory 142:18

test 61:15,16,17

62:3,5 66:2 88:13

101:2 104:18,20

104:22 106:2,6,12

106:13,21,22,24

121:15 122:4,11

143:3

tested 121:21

tester 100:15

testing 61:20 88:12

93:16,22 100:19

100:20,21,22

102:24 104:17

105:11,18,24,25

106:1 107:5,15

108:5,23 120:21

121:23 122:13

tests 61:16 81:21

97:8 100:14

thank 3:4 9:3,5

16:25 18:1 19:12

35:5 60:7 68:20,24

71:21 75:4 76:13

76:18 79:13 83:22
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[176]

96:11,12 130:9

137:3 154:1,6

Thanks 37:16 77:8

144:16

thick 84:18

thicker 85:8 107:23

116:2

thickness 77:16,20

79:2 85:4 92:21,23

93:25 94:4 95:20

97:6 98:8 99:5,23

100:3,11 101:16

106:11 108:16,18

109:22 112:8,11

113:24,25 114:5

115:20 119:5,8,12

124:13 130:18

146:24 147:10

thicknesses 77:23

84:9,14 99:22

144:7

thin 123:16 131:22

143:11,21

thing 5:8 14:2 17:10

20:8 21:6 38:13,19

38:22 39:1 40:14

75:24 86:5,12,14

102:2 104:25

115:5 134:17

135:22,24

things 31:16 35:20

38:11 54:18 60:15

62:9 85:18 125:11

125:24

think 3:3 9:23 11:7

11:13,21 12:14,18

12:23 17:1 18:1,13

18:17,18 19:2,3

20:19,25 21:2

22:20,23 23:12,16

23:21 24:7,12,21

27:5,18 29:5,12

30:18,20,22 32:1,5

33:2,7,15,17,23

34:8,9,12,18 35:21

36:12,13 40:6,13

41:5 45:20 46:5,19

50:24 51:2,12

52:17 54:20,22,24

55:2,23 61:6 62:4

63:1,13 64:11

66:13 67:11,12,13

68:19 69:4,19 70:4

70:15,16,17 72:9

72:18,20 77:3 79:9

81:24 83:4 84:16

84:24 89:11,19

90:2,7,13,17 92:11

93:12,24 94:13

95:17,22 96:1,7

97:14 98:7 99:1,2

102:8,8 103:16,24

105:6,9 109:20

110:11 111:11

115:8,8,10,21

116:7,9,11 117:6

118:14,15 120:16

122:25 126:18,24

127:1,3,7 129:8,12

130:9,14,17,24

131:7,23 132:13

132:21 136:6

138:11 142:2,12

142:20 143:7,14

143:16 144:3,16

145:17,19,20,24

146:5,8,16 147:20

148:5 149:20

150:10 151:1,16

153:13

thinking 18:19,21

40:8 75:25 125:11

thinks 115:9

thinner 116:3

thinning 100:25

third 112:20

thought 27:23,25

88:25 131:5

136:15 143:19,23

thoughts 42:10

136:13

thousand 7:10 12:5

12:10,11 14:25

15:22 16:18 17:6

18:5 21:13 40:1

48:24 51:6 63:22

three 42:13 44:7

48:20 49:19,20

57:5 59:7 61:2

86:23 88:2 102:19

threshold 8:17

23:22,24 26:7

35:25 48:7 58:17

59:3 64:8 67:15

69:11 88:16 99:7

122:22,23 123:11

134:24 146:9

150:4

thresholds 6:9,21

7:16 22:2,6 25:8

26:1 28:6,7 29:24

31:13 32:6 53:13

53:20 57:12 63:25

83:21 117:20

118:9 123:4 130:5

146:14

throw 4:23 66:11

99:25 111:18

tie 109:18 111:15

tied 87:15

Tiffany 7:24 21:23

34:12 35:24 47:5

time 5:4,6 20:16

29:14 39:8 47:13

58:12 60:18 66:11

75:3 76:14 92:2

96:22 98:25

103:21 108:9

109:15 113:21

117:19 119:11

122:5 139:18

142:10 146:24

147:13 152:24

153:25

times 18:6 71:2

86:23 96:4,6

tiny 143:10,10,11

TITLE 155:3

today 5:13,17 6:13

9:6 23:23 33:11

52:24 58:16 77:9

79:9 94:21 102:14

134:3

today's 3:4,10 6:5

64:21

told 101:11 128:1

141:14

tolerance 97:10,11

146:10

tone 124:23,24

126:17

top 120:14

total 56:10 94:5

totally 46:4 142:13

touch 106:4,5

115:23

touched 98:4

trade 1:2,13 2:1 9:8

9:12 10:10,13 58:6

58:24 76:6 77:8

155:9

trademark 21:15,16

22:7,21

trademarked 19:18

tradition 64:16

traditional 60:9

78:12

traditionally 37:4

80:7 128:1

train 148:2

trained 140:3

transcribed 4:14

transcript 4:15 5:3

155:6,7,19

transition 129:13

translate 49:3

translates 17:24

translation 17:18

transparency 139:7

transparent 47:10

travels 154:6

treated 125:23

treatment 138:10,20

138:23

treatments 137:24

138:22

tremendous 94:2,18

trends 115:1

tried 68:15 103:25

117:2

triggered 125:1

136:19

true 52:11 124:21

152:3,5

truth 95:6

try 5:14 41:15,16

92:24 101:1,8

103:17 106:20

119:4 129:8 138:6

141:19

trying 14:15 25:15

44:19 45:21,23

53:2,4 65:21 90:1

90:6 105:24

109:11,17 111:7,9

133:22 135:13

143:22

TSI 75:6 118:1

141:2

TSIs 117:22

turn 6:11,15 62:7

turned 124:1

turns 148:14

tweaking 20:3 62:23

twelve 102:17

twice 100:16,17,17

two 6:6 9:11 10:6

12:8 17:2 18:13

31:16,20 37:20,21

37:24 38:1,11

39:24 60:19 61:2

67:25 70:21 71:16

75:7 77:1,9 81:4,8

81:19 82:6 86:8,9

92:24,25 94:24

95:18 103:1,25

109:20 129:9

two-part 60:10

type 42:9,10 47:24

51:7 55:25 97:7,13

132:1

types 6:16 18:16

22:25 37:12 49:5

53:12 59:16 60:22

84:17 131:4 152:6
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[177]

152:11

typically 27:14

141:10 148:22

152:11

U

Uh-huh 122:3

unassembled 98:23

unaware 139:15

153:12

uncharted 142:18

undefined 142:13

142:18,20,23

underbelly 39:7

underneath 21:8,9

149:17

understand 13:18

13:21 16:12,15

17:20,24 18:9

23:16,16 24:4,10

25:22 26:2,11,21

26:25 27:5,12

28:13 33:10 35:20

36:6,18,21 37:10

37:19 38:12,21

43:1 44:16 48:1

50:20 51:11,17

54:25 55:5 61:20

70:17,25 74:13,18

74:22 75:12,14,17

78:12,13 79:5 80:5

80:24 81:6 85:13

85:14 87:17 88:24

89:9 93:10 94:23

95:24 96:8 110:19

114:16,20,22

115:10 116:12

117:4,17 119:4

121:22 127:22,23

129:1 131:19

137:11 142:8,9,25

148:1,4,24 151:23

153:21

understandable

12:8

understanding 25:2

25:24 29:4 37:1

59:14 62:18 82:7,8

82:9,22 87:10

111:19,24 114:1

119:9 128:15

understands 12:22

24:3,7,13 36:19

75:9 117:5

understood 13:2

22:5 28:19 31:22

50:15 58:19 78:22

96:2 116:21 117:1

129:3 150:12

uneven 85:21

unfair 7:5

unfairness 78:18

88:19

unfamiliar 130:3

unfortunately 102:7

unified 90:22

uniform 12:12 36:8

64:25 78:19

110:16 111:14,25

unify 133:7

unique 147:16,18

United 8:1

universe 28:2,5 35:1

37:12,19 51:21

universes 37:24

38:1 39:24

unscrupulous 25:11

unsophisticated

67:22

untrained 41:10

unused 142:21

unwind 69:12,13

upfront 41:19

upped 85:3

upset 149:19

urge 154:3

usable 58:20

use 6:24 7:7,10 13:3

14:21 21:1 33:6

65:8 68:8 72:21

79:2 82:14 84:8,11

85:4 86:9,19 87:2

87:12,20 88:17,20

93:16,18,21 95:8

98:15 99:11 101:3

101:3,24 103:21

104:3 107:13

116:18 119:12,14

120:14 121:1

128:24 130:20

131:22 134:2

135:5 141:12

149:5,6

useful 83:7 88:2

uses 34:6 86:11

116:2

usually 98:18

144:22

U.S 17:12 139:5

V

vague 117:11

Valerie 90:20

107:16 108:1

111:8 138:12

144:15 145:11,14

145:24 146:19

valuable 112:17

154:4

value 13:2 14:8,13

22:9 28:16 33:25

35:13 40:12 41:6

46:17,18 49:16

53:9 71:18 89:23

90:14 96:9 102:9

103:3,6,10 107:22

107:25 108:3,4,6

108:17,19 109:17

110:1,3,8 111:13

112:15 114:13

122:8 153:9

vapor 98:5,6,12,18

variation 97:12

varieties 109:10,12

variety 10:19 80:15

82:5 85:23

various 64:3 67:23

vast 29:6 32:20

123:15

vendors 84:10 85:6

verbiage 96:19

vermeil 77:14 80:17

Veronese 84:23

Veronica 69:1

145:12,13

versa 90:13

versus 37:1 38:13

42:23 67:9 70:24

85:25 104:15

108:13 118:22

119:1 142:11,12

viable 103:15,15

vibe 106:16,23

vibratory 100:19

106:13

vice 90:13

Vickers 61:18

video 43:6 44:17

videotaped 4:5

view 59:1,1 147:9

views 5:18 10:7 14:3

37:21

Vigilance 8:2

violated 74:9

violations 74:10

violators 139:11

volume 18:2

voluntarily 23:7

voluntary 58:8,8

W

Wagner 7:23 23:12

35:17 36:12

waiting 70:12 71:23

123:22

wallet 33:20

wand 47:14

want 6:17 7:13 9:2,7

9:24 10:1,3 14:1

15:20 18:12 24:25

25:6,17 32:16

34:22 41:20 42:9

42:18 49:9 50:2,21

51:2,12,15 53:17

56:8 57:19,20

62:10 65:15 67:24

68:2 70:18 71:13

71:21,24 73:6,25

76:7,16 78:16

85:19 92:7 94:21

95:3 96:12 102:12

105:20 106:19

107:4 108:2 113:8

113:9,20 115:23

116:7,8 122:18

123:1 129:13,25

134:15,16,21

136:12 137:10

146:19 148:24

151:19

wanted 10:21 14:2

28:18 37:17 43:9

43:11 61:21 64:4

66:11 88:17,20

89:18 97:19 99:25

103:11 118:9

140:13 141:4

150:16 152:19,24

154:1,3

wants 50:25 80:3

142:1

warning 95:20

124:12,15 135:16

135:19 136:4

149:7

warnings 135:21,22

wash 131:9 132:21

134:1 149:23

washed 96:3 124:24

129:17 130:10

131:12,18 133:3

134:24

washes 29:8

washing 99:9 101:5

145:19

Washington 1:15

wasn't 103:14 119:6

watch 97:9 99:8

116:18

watches 97:11

waved 47:14

way 4:22 9:14 11:13

11:16,21 12:6,13

14:18,19 16:7 19:6

21:3 25:20 31:9
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[178]

32:1,22 36:4,5

39:14,16,22 41:17

42:1,17 45:24 46:1

47:2 48:12 51:25

53:25 58:18 59:7

61:2 62:25 70:4

71:8,9 82:17 83:3

83:4 89:1 90:2

91:23 92:5 94:23

95:8 117:4 120:1

134:2 136:16

141:10,10,19

143:20 150:11,19

152:15

ways 17:3 48:21

50:15 82:6

wear 81:20 97:13

99:8,10 100:13,14

100:16,17,22

101:2 102:5

103:18,21,23

104:3,9,12 105:1

105:11 106:7,7,7

106:21 120:9

124:3 126:11,13

138:15 139:19

140:7,8 146:24

151:25 153:14,15

153:23

wearability 102:4

106:2

wears 66:5 102:19

151:12,21

website 4:8,16 44:15

weeds 47:23

weighing 4:20

weight 15:24 70:20

71:7,7,10 92:20

93:6,14,23 94:3

106:4,5,10,11

127:17,18,18

128:5,11 137:25

weights 77:23

welcome 2:6 3:1,3

134:2

well-defined 129:4

130:16

well-embraced

97:15

well-established

97:15

well-known 80:21

well-taken 80:6 81:7

well-used 72:5

went 47:14 59:22

60:6 121:15

weren't 83:3 123:19

we'll 4:23 6:10,15

77:3

we're 10:2 11:6

18:11 34:10 47:8

52:16 69:23 73:14

73:16 75:10 94:14

95:25 110:5 136:8

138:7 144:1

153:25

we've 10:17 14:5

24:8 32:10 34:3

42:17 49:8 51:12

51:14 67:18 79:25

84:24 91:10

118:16 126:24

129:14,15 138:1

139:25 141:17

white 57:4 138:14

139:14,16,17,21

139:22 140:5,6

145:17 146:2

147:8,19,22,24

148:4,5,11,12,25

149:25 151:3,6,10

151:11,15 152:3,9

153:1,6,10,11,16

153:18

whiter 151:17

152:18

wholesaler 76:8

wide 10:19,19 11:16

widely 14:7

wish 4:24 13:11

woman 68:25

wonder 38:16 86:4

wonderful 32:13,15

wondering 91:7

122:25 125:16

137:8

word 6:24 7:10 8:10

13:4 18:14 20:4

21:2 23:4 53:24

65:8,9 80:14 84:8

86:20 87:20 91:6

91:14 96:22 97:4

114:14 125:10

126:4,6,17,17

130:21 136:25

142:13,14,18

145:1,5

wording 150:7

words 74:5 80:18,21

80:25 81:2 86:10

86:13,15 89:3

95:13,24 121:24

133:23 134:9,13

149:6 152:7

wore 103:5,12 121:6

139:23

work 10:6 52:17,25

54:12 68:19 75:13

79:16 80:11,19

worked 85:2 106:3

108:9 138:1

working 13:20

50:10 54:12 64:4

works 43:14

world 18:12,12

20:21 23:17 34:5

47:8 52:16 58:16

65:11 81:13,15

89:6 105:8,12

108:13 109:4

112:22 132:23

worldwide 47:15

world-famous 106:9

worried 39:1

worst 33:2

worth 70:25 103:10

150:24

wouldn't 30:15 34:9

110:24 121:18

143:22

wow 39:4

write 49:9

written 18:15,24

53:12 92:5 123:19

147:3

wrong 24:1 118:1

132:16

X

x 2:2 54:10

x-ray 113:1

Y

y 54:11

yards 51:1

yeah 15:3,14 27:5

30:13 32:3 49:15

56:5 63:11 69:13

71:4 73:1 89:19

114:8 127:7

128:16 132:5

146:7 151:7

year 102:6 104:3

123:18

years 19:19,19

23:13 31:20,23

32:10 47:14 52:18

52:19 54:4 56:14

58:13 61:3 93:23

98:7 100:9 102:7

102:19 103:23,23

118:25 120:13

133:18

Yellora 43:7,8 44:2

44:8,16 61:6,9,19

72:18

yellow 42:16 44:2

124:4 149:16

Z

z 54:11 95:1

0

0.16 71:2

0.175 116:6

0.5 68:4 93:7 114:2

115:16 117:24,25

0.999 120:2

0417 50:4

1

1 2:8 49:23 50:1

55:1 67:10 68:3

70:9 92:22 97:9

120:17 146:18

1,400 140:2

1.75 131:14

1/20th 84:3 88:10,16

89:4,7,13 92:19,20

93:6,18,23 96:2,4

127:17 128:2,2,10

130:22,24

1/40th 89:15 127:20

127:24 128:10

130:21,22,24

10 7:3 11:16,19,20

14:24 17:14 23:18

23:22 24:19 25:25

25:25 26:3 28:21

32:2 35:21,24 36:3

36:4,11,11,13,14

36:16 38:2,3,4

39:24,24 40:16

42:4,23 44:4 49:24

50:1 57:4 60:12,16

60:20 61:2,7,15,17

64:5,23 65:13,19

66:7 67:25 68:1,3

68:11 69:18 70:22

70:24 73:9,9 107:9

107:21 110:2,21

111:2,11,16 112:2

112:16 113:2,6,12

10K 49:20 57:8,9

64:13 69:12

10:45 76:18

100 27:25 47:14

49:12 54:8 96:4,6

100:9 122:7,10

100% 48:12

12 112:2 114:4

12:25 154:10

12:30 6:13

120 61:18

128 61:19

14 14:22 15:15 17:6

17:14 18:7 27:23
First Version

Jewelry Guides Regulatory 6/19/2013

(301) 870-8025 - www.ftrinc.net - (800) 921-5555

For The Record, Inc.

[179]

27:24,25 31:6,23

32:1 44:4 47:10

52:12,22 61:2,10

61:15 72:11 75:9

84:3 96:2 113:22

114:20 115:2,6,9

124:4 149:22,23

14K 15:14,17,23

16:9 49:20

15 32:2 65:2 76:16

16 27:24

18 17:6,14 18:8

28:11,16 37:14

38:15,25 39:6,16

41:4 45:6 53:4

55:8 70:23,24 84:7

84:22 85:5 97:10

114:21 115:6,9

144:18 147:3

18K 49:20

18,000 140:1

19 1:9 155:4

1996 64:9,11

2

2 2:10 20:5 32:19,20

33:12 42:15 49:2

67:9 70:24 97:12

146:18

2.5 121:10 122:2

20 19:19 28:10,16

30:12 56:3 66:20

119:10,12,15,19

200 116:19,19

2013 1:9 155:4

21 42:14

22 49:1 108:11,14

108:22,22 109:9

110:3,6,22 111:23

113:13

22-plus 112:18

23 108:9 112:10,11

113:2,6

23.22 138:22

23.4 6:23 77:21

23.5 107:19 108:13

109:3,8,14 110:3

113:25

23.6 7:4

23.7 7:9

24 24:4 35:4 113:25

25 19:20 33:2 42:14

28.1 27:23

3

3 2:6,8 66:21 67:8

104:15 142:12

146:18

30 19:19 28:20

38:23 39:2,4,15

40:17 56:19

33 19:20 35:14,15

37:13 40:24 52:2,9

52:13 55:19

37.5 27:18

39 121:14

4

4 70:23 73:8 142:11

4.32 88:13 93:16

40 119:19 120:2,2

120:11,13,14,17

121:5,11,19

122:11

41 107:22

416 14:22

417 49:24,25

4170 49:24 50:5

44 49:2

5

5 35:23 36:15 40:16

50 35:22 55:1 69:8

500 7:9

583 18:7

5833 14:22

585 14:22 15:12,21

15:21 16:9 17:5,6

17:12 47:10 52:22

585/CO/CU 59:19

6

6 70:5 142:11

6,000 121:15

6.9 96:4

6/25/2013 155:12

60 28:25

601 1:14

67 35:15

7

7 92:22 104:15

105:5 120:15

7.5 76:9

70 147:23

75 55:8

750 14:22 17:5,12

18:7 47:10

7500 15:5

77 2:10

8

8 35:23

80 147:23

9

9 8:8,9 60:25

9.97 39:25

90 117:3

900 60:5

92.5 75:15 119:2,25

925 48:24 49:20

75:12,16 120:14

925/1000 7:8

950 60:5

97 67:9,10