25 replies to this topic

[galatie]

Hi all,

I think after months of searching, we have finally narrowed down our search for an engagement ring!!

There is one stone on U.S.A certed diamonds which I particularly like. They do not have idealscope or aset images for the stone, but they can send it to a local appraiser before we purchase the stone. The price is 35K, USD. I would appreciate any advice on this stone:

2.40 carats
F colour
SI1
excellent cut
excellent polish
excellent symmetry
no fluoresence
8.53-8.60 x 5.3 mm
table: 57
depth: 61.9
crown: 34.5
pavillion: 40.8
girdle: medium to slightly thick

It has an HCA score of 1.4. The only thing I am concerned about is:

1. the inclusions are on the center of the table - I've been told that the diamond is completely eye clean, should I still be worried about the inclusions?
2. GIA report saids under comments that "additional clouds are not shown" and "surface graining not shown". Is this something I should be worried about?
3. girdle goes from medium to slightly thick and is faceted - is this ok?
4. overall, is this a good stone? Anything I should be concerned about? Are dimensions good?

Looking forward to finally ending this search and getting my ring made, so any thoughts would be appreciated!

Thank you!

Edited by galatie, 26 January 2012 - 06:23 PM.

[Rshamsaei]

I think this too over priced.

[denverappraiser]

Rshamsaei, on 26 January 2012 - 06:47 PM, said:

I think this too over priced.

The paper looks good.

The price looks competitive too. Rshamsael, can you find something comparable for less?

Edited by denverappraiser, 26 January 2012 - 06:58 PM.

[Rshamsaei]

This stone should be around $14K per CT per Rapaport, so should be around $33.5K , if he wire , he should get additional discounts too.

[davidelevi]

And exactly how is a Rap price - which is supposed to be average wholesale - relevant to one particular retail transaction? Do you think that there are no stones trading at above or below Rap?

Edited by davidelevi, 26 January 2012 - 09:08 PM.

[davidelevi]

Galatie:

1. Probably not, but the only way to be sure is to see it. People's tolerance for inclusions varies. Certainly there is no structural danger.

2. Very unlikely. When things are noted in comments is because they are minor.

3. Yes.

4. It looks good on paper. Proof of the diamond is in the seeing...

[galatie]

Thanks for all the replies! Relieved that our search may be over! My fiancee and I live in London, and have been ring shopping in London and Antwerp over the last few months, and the prices we've seen online, and from American jewelers in general, is cheaper than what we've seen in Europe.

The price was originally $35,308, and the vendor said the best price he can do is $34,800, not sure it's worth trying to bargain down anymore. It's a bit daunting to spend so much on a single transaction, particularly since it's from online and something neither of us have seen with our own eyes yet. We will have the stone sent to an independent appraiser before purchasing, so I'm hoping this will give me further piece of mind that it's a good stone.

[Liz]

Hi Galatie,

Congratulations on your upcoming engagement! Sounds like you found a nice stone. It looks very clean and my guess is that they rated it an SI1 due to the inclusions being right under the table. As long as the crystals are white (or gray), you shouldn't see them with the naked eye.

[denverappraiser]

‘Wholesale’ is a massively deceptive word in this business. Not all stones of the same shape/weight/clarity/color trade for the same price as the Rap list implies and the premise that there is some bottom line ‘wholesale’ number that is the price paid by jewelers is simply false. Dealers do, of course, make a profit at what they do but it’s nowhere near this simple a formula. They don’t all pay the same prices even for the same stone, much less when you consider off-list sorts of variables like cutting.

Rshamsaei,
Let me rephrase the question. Can you find a comparable stone (GIA/2.4x/xxx/f/si1) for less money elsewhere? Where? Link please. Maybe you can, I haven’t hunted around and I don’t know how good a shopper you are but, what someone who has never seen the stone calls a theoretical ‘wholesale’, whatever that means, has nothing to do with it.

Edited by denverappraiser, 27 January 2012 - 05:25 AM.

[galatie]

Thanks everyone, for the helpful advice so far! I just want to make sure that the 2.40 F SI1 triple x is the perfect stone for me. There was another stone that we were considering as well, it is a 2.30 F SI2 from James Allen. At $26,800 it fits our budget much better and with an HCA score of 0.8. The specs are:

2.31 carats
F colour
SI2
excellent cut
excellent polish
excellent symmetry
faint fluoresence
8.51-8.55 x 5.2 mm
table: 56
depth: 61.2
crown: 35
pavillion: 40.6
girdle: thin to medium

I am told that the inclusions are not visible at eye level from 10-12 inches. If we were to get this stone, although the specs may not be as good, it would save us 8k... any thoughts?

Thanks! : )

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by galatie, 27 January 2012 - 08:26 AM.

[jan]

I have a gorgeous GIA EX EX EX 2.03 ct. SI1 G for $24900 credit card price that is eye clean and get's 3 very highs in light performance. It is currently set in an 18kt and platinum solitaire but we can remove it from the setting.

[jan]

Here is a photo of the stone in ring.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[jan]

Here is the light performance.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[davidelevi]

Visibility of - and tolerance for - inclusions is really a very individual thing. The James Allen stone looks "as good" on paper as the first one, other than the clarity.

JA has a 60 days return policy; you could start by getting the SI2, seeing if you like it and the inclusions are bearable; if you don't like it, you have plenty of time to return it and go for the first diamond - or consider Jan's stone, which clearly is eye-clean!

[galatie]

Feel like tearing my hair out! Just when I feel like we are ready to buy, one more stone pops up which Iooks like a contender as well. It's still an SI2, but it's 2.11, F, SI2, hearts and arrow ideal cut. The price seems reasonable at $24,780... any thoughts? I am not very familiar with the hearts and arrow type of cut, would it differ from a GIA triple excellent rated stone?


[url="http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1315169.asp"][url]http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1315169.asp[/url][/url]

Edited by galatie, 29 January 2012 - 07:39 PM.

[Liz]

Hearts and Arrow diamonds must be cut to ideal proportions, superior physical and optimal symmetry, and have a very specific method by which to cut each facet in order to produce the distinctive hearts and arrows pattern. Hearts and Arrow diamonds take up to 4x’s longer to cut than other diamonds, have a lower yield from rough, and better overall cut quality.

I don't like how many crystals are in the table of the diamond that you picked out. It may still be eye-clean, you'll just need to call and ask them to look at the stone for you.

Another alernative at JA:

[url]http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/K-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1447158.asp[/url]

Shows 1.3 on HCA Scale: [url]http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/holloway_cut_adviser.htm[/url]

I know that this stone is a "K", so it will be a little warmer than your original F color. But, the diameter is 8.83mm, which gives it a nice spread and makes it look very large.


If you don't want to go that warm, here's another option:

[url]http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1442316.asp[/url]

[Liz]

As for your question on GIA's triple excellent rated stone:

"There is a presumption in the trade today that the Excellent Cut designation on GIA reports is synonymous with Ideal or Hearts and Arrows cutting. While it is a fact that all true H&A Ideals submitted to GIA would garner their top grade, one should not assume that all “Triple Excellent” stones are automatically Hearts and Arrows. It is important to understand what Excellent means and how the GIA arrived at their top grade."

from [url]http://heartsandarrows.com/hearts-arrows-ideal-cut-diamonds-america-cut-grades-arrive.aspx[/url]

[denverappraiser]

The GIA cut grading scale looks at 3 measurements that relate to each other. That is to say, the acceptable range for each one will change based on the others:
Average table size over average girdle diameter
Average crown main angle from the girdle plane
Average pavilion main angle from the girdle plane

There are 10 additional attributes that stand on their own and must fall within certain ranges:
Average star facet length
Average lower girdle facet length
Average girdle thickness
Symmetry and polish, which are separately evaluated must be ‘very good’ or better (These are the other two 'excellents' in the triple-x).
Culet size.
Max and minimum girdle thickness (not just the average) must not be at the extremes.
The azimuth of the upper and lower girdle facets must be close to standard (this is known as painting and digging)

Hearts and Arrows is a pattern seen in the stone when it’s viewed through a special reflecting tool. It requires getting the right crown and pavilion angles, star and lower girdle lengths and the symmetry must be very precise.

Obviously there’s some overlap in these two lists but they are not exactly the same. In reality, nearly all of the people who are going to go through the trouble to cut an H&A stone are going to want to meet the ‘excellent’ standards as well so they can get a higher price but it’s not actually necessary. The exception is that there are SOME H&A cutters, like eightstar and one of the Whiteflash lines, using painting and digging to maximize the look they’re going for and GIA will drop them to Very Good or even Good as a penalty. I actually like the look but it’s been commercially a disaster since the GIA scale came out in 2006 and you rarely see it any more in new production stones. Pity. It's not that vanilla is a bad flavor, but it's a shame that GIA is driving everyone to produce it or else.

Edited by denverappraiser, 30 January 2012 - 07:18 AM.

[davidelevi]

Good post, Neil! It should go to an FAQ list...

[Liz]

Hi Neil,

I actually have a super ideal WF diamond, and I can attest to it's gorgeous sparkle and brilliance.

Thought this was a interesting observation from Brian Gavin:

...."In 2006 GIA’s cut grading system started downgrading diamonds for a certain degree of painting. While this was good for discouraging poorly produced commercial diamonds, the decision also penalized some Tolkowsky-make superideals with no performance issues. Objections were raised by diamond manufacturers and wholesalers from centers of the trade in Antwerp, India, Japan and other places. Dialogue with GIA resulted in some revisions - but their system is not sophisticated enough to assess individual diamonds on a case by case basis as the AGS does......I want to be clear that I believe GIA is a good organization. I believe their new cut grade is positive for the world’s consumers on the whole...Since 2006 there has been an increase in deep pavilion angles and more abundant steep/deep combinations that can hide weight since those configurations fall into the new GIA EX..."

from: [url]http://www.pricescope.com/forum/rockytalky/whiteflash-new-line-t61363-30.html[/url]