Montblanc Is Lying To Buyers About The Material Of Their Pens - Confirmed

[paradigm]

On one of the forums in the announcement of the sale of the Montblanc Czar Nikolai 1 pen, I saw a comment that the cap was made not of malachite, but of plastic (resin).

I decided to check this information, and it turned out that on the Internet the overwhelming majority of sellers believe that the cap is original (solid) malachite. Only 2 resources managed to find a mention of the fact that it is plastic.

I posted a discussion on that forum to discuss this issue.
A person appeared in the discussion, identifying himself as the official representative of Montblanc, who complained about how dealers and other sellers allegedly distort information about pens. At the same time he gave 3 completely different answers to the question about the material of the cap. After a short chat, he erased all his messages from the thread.

I wrote inquiries to the Montblanc offices in Russia and the USA, as well as to one of the online sellers I respect, with questions about cap material.

Also raised a topic on this forum with a request to provide official information from checks, brochures to the pen or Montblanc catalogs about this pen.

General conclusion - Montblanc deliberately lying (misleading) to its customers regarding the material of this and other pens.

But he does it in such a way that it would be possible to fight back in court if they are served on them (and they have probably already been sued more than once).

The problem affects many of the Montblanc pens, including Citrine, Ramses, Nikolai, and probably other series.


Visual debunking of lies about natural malachite in Czar Nikolai

For those who think that in "Czar Nikolai" a cap made of solid real malachite.

Natural malachite:

Imitation malachite:

 

Caps Montblanc fountain pens "made of natural malachite":

http://i106.fastpic.ru/big/2018/1114/e8/dfb0a5f220ebfb9b641faad627dff2e8.jpg





Correspondence with Montblanc Officials


Request to the Russian Montblanc office:

Message 1:
Good day! I have a question on the previously produced model "Czar Nikolai". Does the cap material use natural solid malachite or plastic "under malachite"? Also a question on the pen "Ramses" from this same series. Is there lapis lazuli or something like lapis lazuli? Thank!

Montblanc Answer:
Montblanc "Meisterstück Ramses II" and "Meisterstück Czar Nikolai" pens use natural materials, lapis lazuli and malachite, respectively.

Message 2:
Please specify more precisely.
"Natural materials are used" is a very vague answer. It can be plastic with several grains of malachite, it can be artificial malachite, or some other variant.
Many thanks.

Montblanc Answer: .. no answer


Request to the Montblanc US office:

In English, I immediately asked a detailed question composed of messages 1 and 2.

Montblanc: no answer.



What did the official Montblanc answers give?

1. The company clearly has a desire to hide information about the real material or the composition of the cap.

2. In the manufacture of a cap of unknown composition an unknown amount of malachite was used (but this is not accurate;).




Photos of pens "stone" in high resolution for evaluation

Citrine, Czar and Ramses in high resolution #1


Citrine, Czar and Ramses in high resolution #2


And the trinity of "Czars"


I draw your attention that it is possible to chop lapis lazuli in a large volume and make some kind of compound for thin coating of the surface.
This is possible due to the fact that lapis lazuli sometimes meets a uniform color.

But with malachite this can not be done.




Photos of Montblanc brochures, booklets and catalogs


At the top left of the sheet is written "Solitaire Malachite Fountain"









Summary

All the wording of the text from Montblanc is aimed at misinforming the buyer and creating a false impression that the Czar Nikolai pen uses integral real malachite.

A similar problem exists in other series: Citrin, Ramses, and, possibly, others.

[bass1193]

As a geology student who has closely studied these minerals (rock, in the case of lapis) I doubt very much that those are not plastic, judging from the pictures.

[Pen Nut]

"I doubt very much that those are not plastic" so, does that mean that you think they are plastic ?? I keep re reading it and cant decide.

[Uncial]

Montblanc grinds the stone to be added to a resin. You can see the same thing on the other pens you mention along with the Schiller cap from the writer's series (which I think is probably the most successful of all these types due to the way it catches the light). If you hold any of them in your hand this becomes immediately apparent. I haven't read anything from Montblanc that suggests these caps are formed from solid stone so I'm not sure what the issue is.

[paradigm]

Montblanc grinds the stone to be added to a resin.

 

Can you prove your information?

 

Why representatives of Montblanc could not say about this?

 

Why is there not a single official source of information that differs from “we used natural malachite somehow”?

 

 

I haven't read anything from Montblanc that suggests these caps are formed from solid stone so I'm not sure what the issue is.

 

That is, “genuine malachite” is something completely different in English than “natural malachite”?

[Freddy]

Utterly Fascinating and a Expert Witness {Voir Dire....Time..Then a cold brew}

Good Luck.

Redacting: Op should go after Cross..the discontinued Jade and Lapis lazuli use the same process.....

Four years of Google and three years of the TV show Heavenly Court with Mikhail Porechenkov.

And you can also represent yourself...and take on the big boys....Dontcha love the twenty-first century.

 

Still your friend and mine..

 

Fred

Edited November 14, 2018 by Freddy

[Uncial]

Well, surely even an idiot would be able to tell instantly the moment they lift the pen that it isn't carved out of stone? I mean, it has weight, but not that kind of weight. I remember reading the speil about the Schiller and Montblanc were perfectly explicit about how it was formed. I don't see anything in what you've posted from Montblanc that would suggest they are making a claim that it is carved out of stone either. They are careful I guess to use phrases like 'encased in', 'features malachite' and 'genuine malachite has been used'. Perhaps you could accuse them of a bit of misdirection at a stretch, but I'd hardly go to court over it. When you look very closely at the cap you can see small fractals of light across the ground stone and it's very obvious under a magnifying glass. If they made the caps on these models entirely out of stone the balance of the pen would be terrible and even in lifting it to cap and uncap would feel more than a little odd.

[paradigm]

I remember reading the speil about the Schiller and Montblanc were perfectly explicit about how it was formed.

Give us proof, please.

Links to official texts from Montblanc. Or photo / video, where the manufacturing process is shown.

 

So far, what I see on the official Montblanc website about this pen at https://www.montblanc.com/en/discover/limited-editions/writers-editions/schiller.html looks like this:

 

Characteristics:

• Cap made of amber

 

[Uncial]

You can prove it to yourself: lift the pen in your hand and you'll notice immediately it isn't made of solid carved stone. It's also warm to the touch, which is pretty much a dead giveaway. Honestly, I think you might be getting slightly over excited about this.

 

Sorry, missed the Schiller bit....

The Schiller cap is a little different from the others you mentioned because the amber is in much larger flecks in the cap resin along with an amber dust. You can see the flecks very easily with the naked eye without having to bring it up to your face. But even touching it you can feel the cap is resin.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Uncial

[paradigm]

Well, surely even an idiot would be able to tell instantly the moment they lift the pen that it isn't carved out of stone? I mean, it has weight, but not that kind of weight.

You take in your hand not a pebble of malachite, but a cap in some kind of covering similar to malachite.

Inside the cap is metal. And he can give you as much weight as the designer wants. So imitation of the weight of the stone due to the metal inside can be accurate.

 

And the surface can be covered with a kind of concrete, in which the desired color is recreated using plastic. And this coating will give a feeling of cold in the hand.

[Kalessin]

If I remember correctly, when the pens were current in Montblanc's model lineup, they never claimed that the caps were made of solid lapis or malachite. What I do remember is reading that the material is made of ground stone (lapis lazuli, malachite, etc) with a resin binder, which is to say, a glue. The Citrine, Ramses and Czar Nikolai probably used the same process.

Paradigm, I'm not sure why you say malachite can't be ground and glued together. Malachite's ability to be ground to a fine powder and used as a pigment is well documented. For an online example including a photo of malachite powder: https://geology.com/minerals/malachite.shtml

 

This is the exact same idea as "quartz countertops" in kitchens. They are not solid quartz, but are made from ground stone with a resin glue binder, and are available in many colors and patterns. My own countertops are Cosentino Silestone, a fairly well-known brand of what is often called "quartz countertops" in the USA.

I couldn't find any original print advertising (from a magazine or whatever) of the models online. Here's a Montblanc catalog page from a google image search for "montblanc ramses nikolai". In it, the material description is "lapis lazuli casing fused with 22kt gold particles". Fused means glued or otherwise joined together. This is not a description of solid lapis lazuli. "Lapis lazuli casing" doesn't have a formal meaning in jewelry, just as the word "gold" in jewelry descriptions doesn't necessarily mean "solid gold", it can mean any of the material, the color, gold paint, or gold plating. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/32/e9/d5/32e9d5d65418a1075950b529990fceba.png

On the page from the same catalog for the Czar Nikolai, they say "malachite casing". Not "solid malachite casing", just "malachite casing", which doesn't have a formal meaning. "Genuine malachite" and "natural malachite" from the scans posted above doesn't mean "solid malachite" in the same way that "genuine gold" and "natural gold" doesn't mean "solid gold"; it can mean "genuine gold plating" just as easily. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6e/96/28/6e9628dd9eadeb00f2792647cad51245.png

I'm not sure where the expectation of solid stone malachite, lapis lazuli, or other stone comes from. And as far as what sellers of used merchandise say, that would not be Montblanc lying, that would be the sellers' own descriptions.

[bass1193]

"I doubt very much that those are not plastic" so, does that mean that you think they are plastic ?? I keep re reading it and cant decide.

Sorry for the unclear wording there! I was indeed saying that these don't look like they're carved from solid pieces of rock/mineral.

 

If they used crushed malachite in resin, they did have to go to some trouble to get the streaked effect. They'd have to use different shades, obviously, which would be expensive to obtain.

[paradigm]

Malachite's ability to be ground to a fine powder and used as a pigment is well documented. For an online example including a photo of malachite powder: https://geology.com/minerals/malachite.shtml

 

Malachite as a pigment. This looks like a good defense for Montblanc.

They used malachite dust in a pen which cost $3000 with a cap that looks like malachite. This seems to be true.

And they wrote "genuine malachite". OK.

 

 

 

"Genuine malachite" and "natural malachite" from the scans posted above doesn't mean "solid malachite" in the same way that "genuine gold" and "natural gold" doesn't mean "solid gold"; it can mean "genuine gold plating" just as easily. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6e/96/28/6e9628dd9eadeb00f2792647cad51245.png

 

Why, in this case, in the picture that you gave, we do not see "genuine gold" but see "gold-plated"?

 

Why about gold-plated steel nibs do not write "genuine gold" or "made using gold"?

[Freddy]

The same technique applies to the accessories and the aforementioned Cross in my post.

 

Fred

[Kalessin]

 

Malachite as a pigment. This looks like a good defense for Montblanc.

They used malachite dust in a pen which cost $3000 with a cap that looks like malachite. This seems to be true.

And they wrote "genuine malachite". OK.

 

 

 

 

Why, in this case, in the picture that you gave, we do not see "genuine gold" but see "gold-plated"?

 

Why about gold-plated steel nibs do not write "genuine gold" or "made using gold"?

 

Sorry to be confusing. They used "gold plated" in descriptions of the metal trim on the pens. They used "22kt gold-leaf particles" in their description of the lapis lazuli material, to quote exactly: "Top features lapis lazuli casing fused with 22kt gold-leaf particles."

 

22kt gold leaf does have a formal meaning; with the inclusion of a karat statement, there is now a formal description of the gold used. Gold leaf also has a specific meaning, of course, and that means that not very much gold material was needed to produce the effect. "Fused" very strongly implies that the material is not solid stone.

 

"Gold plated" in US jewelry terminology (legally defined in the 1800s) means just that, electroplating using gold; it is inexpensive because the amount of gold used is pretty small. For contrast, "gold toned" in the US (used for watches and jewelry, among other things) is used to designate gold coloring that doesn't necessarily contain any gold at all.

[Kalessin]

Here is an informal reference for the USA usage of "gold top" (which is now obsolete), "rolled gold", "gold plate", "gold washed":

 

http://junkboxtreasures.com/blog/gold-plate-gold-fill-gold-wash-confused/

[Freddy]

Why, in this case, in the picture that you gave, we do not see "genuine gold" but see "gold-plated"?

Let us do a discovery:

 

They are usin' gen-u-ine Au to plate the Ag.

 

So..Au plated over the Ag then becomes genuine Vermeil which it is........

Vermeil {French} is Ag which has been plated with Au.............Both pens are made of vermeil.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Freddy

[penparadise]

...

 

All the wording of the text from Montblanc is aimed at misinforming the buyer and creating a false impression that the Czar Nikolai pen uses integral real malachite.

 

 

 

I don't see any misinforming as the material of the cap does contain real malachite (and lapis and amber and ...) but Montblanc doesn't say "solid" or "integral" or did you read it somewhere? Montblanc writes "Malachite casing" — Ok, that might be imprecisely but it is not insincere.

 

But you want an answer to the question how they do the progress? — Then you will get somewhat like this:

"All technical data are proprietary to xy and constitute trade secrets for pursposes of the Trade Secret and Freedom of Information Acts."

The material is powdered and hardened again with resin and I accept that it is a business secret how they do it.

 

So my summary is:

Enjoy the look and the touch of and the writing with the pens!

[Michael R.]

Not sure if this will be resolved or is actually desired to be resolved.

 

During the late 1990s a new paint/coating/resin was offered for various uses which was based on natural pigments (from ground minerals like lapis, malachite,...). Of course other ingredients were added to allow mineral powder to be applied like a more conventional paint.

 

Unfortunately I did not find any current internet refernces but I remember seeing different tv documentations about it including a car painted for 1000s of $$$ with a lapis based paint.

 

Therefore it appeared plausible that Montblanc uses a similar coating/paint on their pens discussed above.

 

(Please note that more expensive pens were made by Montblanc with a sleeve from actual minerals like granite, lapis (on the unicef LE), Jade, ... but those were in a different price range)

 

So actually the statement that actual malachite, lapis, ... was used for the pens also appears plausible.

 

The rest is marketing ...

 

Of course thebselling price exceeds costs of material alone by a very high factor (the same would be true for solid silver pens).

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[inkstainedruth]

And this, boys and girls, is why I don't buy Monteblanc pens or buy into their hype (with their "precious resin" being marketing-speak for "plastic that will shatter when you drop the pen on the floor"...).

If people didn't buy into the "luxury item" BS that MB spins, they'd have to make more reasonably priced pens. I tried someone's 146 a few years ago and was not overly impressed (as in, the 1960s era Parker 45 I found for under $11 US including tax had a smoother nib, although to tell the truth we're talking an M on the Parker vs. the F on the MB). The guy's 149 did have a nicer nib than the 146, but the pen was way too large and heavy for me. As for the LE pens? Mostly they are overpriced and also kinda tacky looking (if the stripe-y Beatles pen hadn't cost and arm and a leg, I kind of liked it -- it amused me -- but the other one, with the finial designed to look like a microphone? Blecch. Made me wonder if they were aiming at the Montegrappa "tacky is good" customers.

I do like a few of the inks (even, admittedly, a couple of the LE ones -- I'm really happy with the color and behavior of the Beatles Psychedelic Purple, and Tolstoy is an interesting color). But overall? My experience with their products has been "meh"....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth