Jewelry

[Oliveria]

i

[Oliveria]

i agree Hsn when it does it sales are good prices.  They just did one and i broght errings.

Elive is good too.  I like Samual B stuff. .

Qvc i just buy Honora and Danny N Stuff.  i skip the othe stuff.

[ellaphant]

I have read in business articles QVC very upfront in saying jewelry sales had been declining for years. That;s why they have reduced the jewelry shows. Makes sense.

[Katcat1]

I certainly don't watch many jewelry shows any more.  I still enjoy Carolyn Pollack even though I don't purchase.  There is one new host that has such a loud, piercing voice, I have to change the channel.  

[SANNA]

---

@Shanus wrote:

---

@BirkiLady wrote:

The Deasey's didn't add to QVC with knowledge or quality. That's not a loss! Paul Deasey and family scoured the world for over a year picking up junk gems and is now selling his "contact stuff" on Evine. You don't want that stuff. Doubt QVC would touch it with a 10' pole. 

If the Q is lacking in the jewelry line, isn't in the design of their items? Who wants gemstones in sterling or bronze or stuff filled with wax? Seems like yesterday QVC offered some lovely items from reputable vendors. I purchased some heavy weight 14K gold from Eterna (both white and yellow gold), which have been signature pieces for decades. Have to honestly admit, I've never purchased a gemstone on-line and never would. But in years past, I did enjoy watching those shows. They were interesting and had some pretty pieces set in really attractive settings. Things that one could have worn throughout a lifetime. Today's offerings are skimpy on the metals and won't last long enough to pay off your easy payments! And plain ugly. New designers were needed a long ago. Doubt QVC will be selling jewelry much longer. 

---

@BirkiLady  You do make some valid points. Keep in mind the viewing age is mostly retired women on either fixed incomes or have drawers full of jewelry and with a change of lifestyle, just don’t need more. 

The great designers like Michael Dawkins couldn’t sell enough or was too governed by QVC’s “instructions” to allow for creative freedom. Or Paz & Carolyn Pollack seem to be the low price point & mass produced jewelry that appeals and is selling. Gold is too high priced now to offer anything substantial at a dollar amount we’d pay.

Consider the dept. store and jewelry store sales. Their numbers are so much less than Q prices, they’re still making a profit, so look at the markup the Q is adding to the jewelry items. There’s also a lack of originality of design and constant repetition of the same jewelry and....well, not so great for their bottom line.

---

Totally agree. The clientele is no longer there. Young people do not watch or buy, the older folks do not need more of expensive jewelry. And for cheap we get what we get.

[Kalli]

For folks who miss some of those pieces made by the bigger name vendors who regularly presented on Q years ago, the secondary market can yield some great deals.

I miss the good old days on Q when gold was much more affordable and I was collecting different gems but back then I was basically starting from scratch.  Now the gems I’m looking to buy are not citrine, blue topaz, garnet, etc., because I already have them. Q doesn’t seem to offer what I’m looking for now.  

[CalminHeart]

---

@Kachina624 wrote:

QVC has not been competitive in selling jewelry but it has nothing to do with the Deaseys.  They sell a lot of inferior, cheap gemstones, the workmanship is often poor and you have no recourse if something breaks.  Theres no way they are going to fix anything.  They're so full of hot air, I can't stand to watch them.

QVC was years late in introducing druzy, black spinel and Morganite, not selling them until the customers had bought all they wanted elsewhere.  This was the fault of their buying team.  Then there was the bronzo fiasco; nobody wanted it and they insisted that's all they'd sell us.  I wouldn't be surprised if they discontinued jewelry sales since theyre losing money there.

---

Agreed.  I've said for years that Q is missing the boat, particularly on gold jewelry.  They sell cheap ****** or Arte'd Oro.  They are missing everyone in the middle.  Then they complain when their quarterly/annual reports show decreases in jewelry sales.

And I wouldn't watch the Deaseys.  They sell cheap stuff for way too much money.  Besides, Paul comes across like a stereotypical sleazy used car salesman.

[VegasBusinessWoman]

@Kalli  I agree about the gemstone selection.  How many citrine, topaz, garnet pieces can you buy?  I want apatite, spinel (other than black) sapphire (other than blue) and other colored gemstones to add to my collection.  Many semi-precious stones are relatively inexpensive, although you wouldn't know it by the prices on the Q.  There are certainly other sources for gemstones set in gold; Q is for sure missing the boat.

[Kalli]

---

@VegasBusinessWoman wrote:

@Kalli  I agree about the gemstone selection.  How many citrine, topaz, garnet pieces can you buy?  I want apatite, spinel (other than black) sapphire (other than blue) and other colored gemstones to add to my collection.  Many semi-precious stones are relatively inexpensive, although you wouldn't know it by the prices on the Q.  There are certainly other sources for gemstones set in gold; Q is for sure missing the boat.

---

@VegasBusinessWoman I wanted a nice bicolor tourmaline, half pink, half green.  And I wanted little to no inclusions.   Had to look for a long time to find exactly what I was looking for.  Never saw one offered on Q. 

[GinaV24]

yeah I don't buy anything from the Deasey's lines either but I agree that QVC has fallen behind in its designs. The silliness with the bronze jewelry and acting like it was "gold" simply because of the color was a major turn off for me and Q ran it thru EVERY line except for Ripka. Now there is nothing original to be seen except maybe in the Or paz line. Plus I don't plan to spend mega $ for uninteresting jewelry. I'll wear what I already have and shop elsewhere if I feel the need to buy jewelry.