topic Re: Judith Ripka ring in Jewelry

Judith Ripka ring

lil sophie — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:04:37 GMT

I figured it out why JR rings get such low reviews now. Her rings are made in Vietnam. You can see it plainly in the pictures. Remember when her rings were made in Thailand?

Re: Judith Ripka ring

lil sophie — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:07:36 GMT

Here's a JR selling now:

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Kachina624 — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:11:41 GMT

Okie doke, so what's the difference? They both appear to be equally nice craftsmanship for being factory-made products.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

fthunt — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:13:32 GMT

Things made in Vietnam I have no problem with. Thailand either.

In fact I welcome it compared to some places.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Still Raining — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:15:01 GMT

@lil sophie wrote:
I figured it out why JR rings get such low reviews now. Her rings are made in Vietnam. You can see it plainly in the pictures. Remember when her rings were made in Thailand?

That under gallery of the Thai ring is a disgrace.

Her line went down when she sold it.

I would not buy either ring.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

MarkeieMark — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:36:49 GMT

I have a ton, and Thailand pieces had issues. Love it all none the same, and had fun buying when Judith was on.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

lil sophie — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:53:43 GMT

I saw her ring selection and there are still JR rings made in Thailand today like this one:

Re: Judith Ripka ring

lil sophie — Thu, 06 May 2021 17:57:10 GMT

but the review said it all about the ring above - please BRING BACK THE JEWELRY SHE USED TO MAKE?? IN HIGH QUALITY?

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Johnnyeager — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:06:28 GMT

Xcel Brands, the Ripka owner, has basically written the brand down after a recent charge and a limited useful life. It was a fine product years ago.

Effective January 1, 2020, we determined that the Ripka Brand, inclusive of all its trademarks, has a finite life of 15 years, and began to amortize these trademarks on a straight-line basis accordingly. During the year ended December 31, 2020, delays and uncertainty in implementing the brick-and-mortar retail store strategy for a portion of the Ripka Brand, primarily as a result of the novel coronavirus disease pandemic, indicated that the carrying value of the Ripka Brand trademarks may not be recoverable. Therefore, we performed an impairment test of finite-lived intangible assets, and as a result, recorded a $13.0 million impairment charge related to the Ripka Brand trademarks.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Kachina624 — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:19:48 GMT

When they hand out those MBAs, I wish they'd also require those guys to speak English. It's like reading a medical journal, you understand about every fifth word.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Johnnyeager — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:24:11 GMT

Translation: Ripka is now worthless to us and we are taking its value on our books down to 0 (zero.)

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Mindy D — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:44:05 GMT

@Johnnyeager wrote:
Xcel Brands, the Ripka owner, has basically written the brand down after a recent charge and a limited useful life. It was a fine product years ago.

Effective January 1, 2020, we determined that the Ripka Brand, inclusive of all its trademarks, has a finite life of 15 years, and began to amortize these trademarks on a straight-line basis accordingly. During the year ended December 31, 2020, delays and uncertainty in implementing the brick-and-mortar retail store strategy for a portion of the Ripka Brand, primarily as a result of the novel coronavirus disease pandemic, indicated that the carrying value of the Ripka Brand trademarks may not be recoverable. Therefore, we performed an impairment test of finite-lived intangible assets, and as a result, recorded a $13.0 million impairment charge related to the Ripka Brand trademarks.

If anyone is wondering about the term impairment charge, Wikipedia defines it as :

"An impaired asset is an asset which has a market value less than the value listed on its owner's balance sheet.[1]

According to U.S. accounting rules (known as US GAAP), the value of an asset is impaired when the sum of estimated future cash flows from that asset is less than its book value. At this point an impairment loss should be recognized, which is done by taking the difference between the fair market value (FMV) and the book value and recording this amount as the loss. This basically records the asset as if it were being acquired brand new at its FMV, recording this as its new book value.[2] This is a common occurrence for goodwill where a company will purchase a target company for more than the value of its net assets. Under US GAAP, goodwill is tested annually for impairment."

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Mindy D — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:32:18 GMT

@Kachina624 wrote:
When they hand out those MBAs, I wish they'd also require those guys to speak English. It's like reading a medical journal, you understand about every fifth word.

@Kachina624 @It's much harder than reading a medical journal. I wish I knew much more about finance than I do.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Johnnyeager — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:34:37 GMT

Xcel had an indefinite useful life for Ripka immediately before amortizing the remaining life to 15 years. Obviously, they have no faith in the brand going forward, bottom, bottom line.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Mindy D — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:39:01 GMT

@Johnnyeager wrote:
Xcel had an indefinite useful life for Ripka immediately before amortizing the remaining life to 15 years. Obviously, they have no faith in the brand going forward, bottom, bottom line.

@Johnnyeager @Good posts. Thanks.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Mindy D — Thu, 06 May 2021 18:53:02 GMT

I haven't bought any Ripka in years. Are the CZs the same Diaminque that Q is using now. This Diamonique looks very fake to me.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

fthunt — Thu, 06 May 2021 19:00:33 GMT

@Johnnyeager Why did they buy the line then? If smart you'd think they did their homework BEFORE.

Must have needed a tax write-off.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Kachina624 — Thu, 06 May 2021 19:04:00 GMT

@Johnnyeager wrote:
Xcel had an indefinite useful life for Ripka immediately before amortizing the remaining life to 15 years. Obviously, they have no faith in the brand going forward, bottom, bottom line.

@Johnnyeager I think most of us kissed Ripka goodbye when we heard who had bought it. Without Judith it's nothing special.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Kachina624 — Thu, 06 May 2021 19:07:46 GMT

@fthunt wrote:
@Johnnyeager Why did they buy the line then? If smart you'd think they did their homework BEFORE.

Must have needed a tax write-off.

Sometimes they buy a line and cheapen it to eliminate competition for another chosen brand. Isn't Xcel a Chinese-owned company? Doubtful they'd need a tax write off.

Re: Judith Ripka ring

Johnnyeager — Thu, 06 May 2021 19:11:16 GMT

Xcel is not Chinese owned. It is a publicly traded corporation with headquarters in the Garment District of New York.

Ripka was purchased in 2014 when I think it still got a lot of QVC airtime with Judith.