I wonder if you missed or misunderstood this statement (?):

"This is not to say that Med. coral was not exploited before this time. This is the time of the industry that still exists in Naples, and remains the primary source for the world's gem-quality red coral."

When you say, "We have very early cases...," and "we have corals...," for whom are you speaking?

I am discussing PRACTICAL circumstances. And my belief is that red Mediterranean coral became "a thing" in Tibet, among Tibetans, around the time that the present coral industry (at Naples) was established and began trading their coral beads around the world. And I suggest that the popularity OF THIS CORAL supplanted the popularity of carnelian beads as "the preferred red material" for Tibetan beads.

And I would say this is an idea that counters your idea that pema raka beads "...Wear by mostly poor Tibetan people who can't afford corrals. Use to cheap throwaway beads only 20years ago" [sic].

In fact, pema raka were considered collectible and were not "cheap" even thirty years ago. Not that they compete with coral in relation to the current pricing structures caused by Chinese interest in Tibetan material culture that has happened in recent years. But the value of pema raka beads has climbed at the same time that coral prices have sky-rocketed. Nevertheless, I do not claim to know what the current thinking may be of Tibetan people, among themselves. So I don't know, and I don't claim to know, what their opinion(s) of pema raka beads may be now.

But I do think that, in the bigger picture of history, what I say is more accurate than what you have expressed.

JDA.