Originally, when a repaired piece—such as a broken amber bead—was offered for sale, and the repair itself was charming (in any sense of that word), people—meaning collectors and dealers—would say "the repair is so nice, it does not detract from the piece, and does not lower its value." (Not everyone would agree.)

OK, so, you pay the same price for a broken piece as you do an intact piece, based on a presumption that it was "so dear to its owner that it could not be tossed out." (We read a LOT of stuff into the things we see, and are offered. Some of it may be true....)

But now? Now we are going to be told that a repaired item is actually worth MORE than an intact item? Who made-up that rule?

Jamey