11 replies to this topic

[sharathpsasi]

Looking at princess cut diamond. Specs are:

D, VS1 0.55 ct
EX Polish
VG Symmetry
Table 77%
Depth 74%
Perfect square (1.006) 4.43 x 4.40
No FLuorescence
Crystal and Needle Inclusion
GIA certified
Girdle - medium - slightly thick

is this a good choice? Please advice. The stone looks good, but just wanted to make sure that the table would not ruin its price and the value quoted. What would be a good price range I need to pay for this stone?

Edited by sharathpsasi, 29 October 2010 - 06:18 AM.

[LaurieH]

If the diamond looks great in person, everything else about it looks fine. If you're happy with the store you're working with and getting a fair price (you can compare basic specs with online diamond stores to see what prices run and make sure you're in the right ballpark), I'd say go for it!

Worry less about numbers and more about making sure that you like the appearance of the diamond and you're getting the right value for money. After all, you don't wear the certificate, you wear the diamond.

Congrats!

[sharathpsasi]

Thanks a lot Laurie. I guess I will take your word on it since the diamond looks good.

Would you pay $1550 for this one? I tried to find price range online for similar ones but could not come up with much success. Do let me know!!

Thanks in advance.

LaurieH, on 29 October 2010 - 07:38 AM, said:

If the diamond looks great in person, everything else about it looks fine. If you're happy with the store you're working with and getting a fair price (you can compare basic specs with online diamond stores to see what prices run and make sure you're in the right ballpark), I'd say go for it!

Worry less about numbers and more about making sure that you like the appearance of the diamond and you're getting the right value for money. After all, you don't wear the certificate, you wear the diamond.

Congrats!

[davidelevi]

If you use the "diamond finder" at the top of the page, there's nearly 500 D/VS1 princesses between 0.5-0.6 ct. Look at price/ct to compensate for weight, and bear in mind that the broad range in price is justified by the quality of the cut, finish and secondary factors such as fluorescence. Don't put ANY weight on table and depth - they are largely irrelevant for princesses.

[sharathpsasi]

Thank you very much for your help!!!

davidelevi, on 29 October 2010 - 10:12 AM, said:

If you use the "diamond finder" at the top of the page, there's nearly 500 D/VS1 princesses between 0.5-0.6 ct. Look at price/ct to compensate for weight, and bear in mind that the broad range in price is justified by the quality of the cut, finish and secondary factors such as fluorescence. Don't put ANY weight on table and depth - they are largely irrelevant for princesses.

[davidelevi]

You are most welcome - I forgot to say: one meaningful attribute is the lab who did the grading. AGS and GIA are roughly comparable (and self-consistent). EGL, IGI and others are not - and most importantly are not consistent.

[sharathpsasi]

Thanks one again!! I am glad this diamond is GIA certified!!! One last question - how can I insure the diamond? Could you please suggest any reliable and national insurance providers for the same.
Thanks in advance!!!

davidelevi, on 29 October 2010 - 12:25 PM, said:

You are most welcome - I forgot to say: one meaningful attribute is the lab who did the grading. AGS and GIA are roughly comparable (and self-consistent). EGL, IGI and others are not - and most importantly are not consistent.

[denverappraiser]

Most of the companies that offer homeowners insurance offer a policy for jewelry. If you've got a policy, call your agent and ask what they have to offer. In standalone jewelry policies, www.jewelersmutual.com is very well regarded and easy to do business with.

[sharathpsasi]

Thanks a lot for all your help!!!
Have a gr8 weekend!!!

denverappraiser, on 29 October 2010 - 02:05 PM, said:

Most of the companies that offer homeowners insurance offer a policy for jewelry. If you've got a policy, call your agent and ask what they have to offer. In standalone jewelry policies, www.jewelersmutual.com is very well regarded and easy to do business with.

Edited by sharathpsasi, 29 October 2010 - 02:14 PM.

[LaurieH]

You might be overpaying a tiny bit, based on what I found online for comparison, but I'd say not enough to sweat if you've found something that you are happy with. Most companies, to the best of my knowledge, won't insure a stone unless it is set, so once you have the diamond you've chosen set in a ring, then call your insurance company (if you already have one) for a rider policy or just to add coverage on your existing one. Or there is a company called Jewelers Mutual, that specializes ONLY in insuring jewelry. You'll need a valid appraisal (look on the NAJA--National Assoc of Jewelry Appraisers) to see if there is an accredited appraiser in your area if your jewelry store doesn't give you a great one) for anywhere you insure, most likely.

Good luck and let us know what you wind up doing--and come back and show us the ring once it's all taken care of

[denverappraiser]

Laurie,

I've actually looked into this quite a bit and rates vary wildly from company to company, state to state and city to city. In many cases the homeowners companies are cheaper than JM and in others they are substantially more. It even varies a fair amount based on the details of the individual policy. It's not generically correct to say that JM is cheaper. They might be, but maybe not.

JM, in particular, does offer coverage that included damage during the setting process if it's properly documented in the first place. They aren't actually covering a loose stone, they are covering a ring that still requires assembly. It's a subtle difference but then the whole insurance business is all about sublty. In some cases, jewelers will accept the risk of damage during the setting process, especially if they sold the stone, the mounting or both. Ask.

Note of disclaimer. I've been a Jewelers Mutual client for decades both for my business and personally. I've been very happy with them.

[davidelevi]

Neil - I think Laurie was referring to overpaying for the stone, rather than the insurance. Still - valuable info for readers nevertheless.