Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries #534660-00054

Submission Number:
534660-00054
Commenter:
Peter Luplow
Organization:
Ben Bridge Jeweler
State:
WA
Initiative Name:
Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries

Re: Jewelry Guides, Matter No. G711001 The proposed change to the FTC's "Guides for the Jewelry, Precisou Metals, and Pewter Industries" regarding platinum would most certainly NOT be in the best interest of consumers. A piece of jewelry containing only half platinum would never be as valuable or durable, regardless of the alloy mixture used. Marketing such a piece of jewelry to consumers as "platinum" would be misleading and unethical. The proposed change also includes a loophole that would allow companies to side-step the requirement to disclose the exact metal contents and percentage in their platinum merchandise. Ben Bridge Jeweler is in full support of comment submissions made by the Platinum Task Force. As a member of the Jewelers Vigilance committee, Jewelers of America and the American Gem Society, we wish to reiterate the following points: *Platinum/base metal jewelry should not be allowed to use the term "platinum," *the current FTC proposal is unworkable in terms of industry implementation and would be confusing to consumers, *it's not in harmony with international standards. We urge you to abandon the current proposal. Instead, please revisit a suggestion made by the Platinum Task Force in 2005, which recommended that the FTC consider a new and different name for jewelry comprised of platinum and base metals. I may be reached at 206-239-6851, or pluplow@benbridge.com. Sincerely, Peter Luplow Vice President/Merchandise Manager