denverappraiser

A-List Appraiser
  • Content count

    6835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

425 Excellent

About denverappraiser

  • Rank
    Ideal Diamond

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Denver Colorado, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

2009 profile views
  1. As always, a huge part of this decision has to do with deciding what you want. We know what led you to the first one, it was pitched as a great bargain. What led you to this one? What were/are your parameters?
  2. A 'natural' is part of the original crystal surface that's still visible on the surface after the stone is polished. They're normally right around the girdle. 4 is a lot. You can see them on the pavilion side of the plot. That's probably the heart of why the symmetry got dinged although there may be other issues too.
  3. Yes, it was probably cut a while ago, say 1970’s. Yes, AnchorCert is a reputable lab. No, I don’t think that’s a counterfeit although I’ve seen neither the stone nor the report so I’m mostly guessing. The reason this has Anchor paperwork rather than GIA is the missing question. Anchor called this a ‘good’ cut on their scale, which I don't really understand and which is not explained on their website (as far as I found from a quick hunt but it's a big site). GIA probably would call it ‘fair’. That’s a giant deal in this business. The issue is in the crown, the girdle, and possibly the symmetry. All of those may be just fine for you, and it doesn't mean it isn't lovely, but a GIA-F is a nearly unsaleable stone and a giant problem for a dealer. Hence the off-brand lab. You would be hard pressed to find a GIA-F anywhere in the market for this reason. It's not that they don't exist, it's that they're sold with different brand paper. There’s also the more mundane answer. You’re in the UK. The stone is in the UK. The dealer is presumably in the UK. GIA isn’t. That throws in some logistical challenges that can be solved by using a local company.
  4. Start by checking the fluorescence directly instead of just reading the report. UV lights are cheap and your client will appreciate you going the extra mile for them. It’s always possible that there was an error at the lab or that the stone you’re looking at isn’t the same one they looked at. Failing that, I’m inclined to agree with Davide, what you’re seeing is likely a reflection of the environment, in this case, the blue in the sky. Put on a red hat and look into the stone. You'll notice that now there’s a lot of red in the there.
  5. ‘Scam’ is a harsh word but, basically, yes. What the insurance company is usually agreeing to do in the case of a loss is to replace with ‘like kind and quality’, or words to that effect, in the case of a loss. What they’re NOT agreeing to do is cut you a check for the face value of the policy. That’s a point of confusion for a lot of people and it leads to the scam question you’re asking. The appraisal is setting the maximum limit of liability, not the expected budget in the case of a loss. This is one of the reasons they’re asking you to supply it rather than simply doing it themselves. They have Google too. They don’t want the legal exposure and by asking you to it, they avoid the whole issue. So why are appraisals higher than online prices? Sometimes quite a bit more. Deciding on the appropriate value is a bit tricky. If you have a loss, they can’t just mail you a diamond from their vault and call it good, even if that’s exactly what you do when you buy. People would never stand for that as a replacement procedure. People want to see a store. They want to talk to a human. And those humans want to be paid. How much they’re paid is a point of negotiation, but the cost to replace usually really is more than what the discount internet joints are charging. The other problem is a tradition with retailers. Stores like to list things as ‘worth’ more than they’re charging because it makes the store look good. They’re your buddies and it’s all about the love. Tossing in a report with a high value conclusion on it doesn't cost very much and it makes customers feel good about the sale. As a side benefit, it keeps you out of the appraisers office where you might learn something that interferes with their sale. The bright side is that this can all be dealt with by hiring a real appraiser rather than using the report that came in the packing materials. You’ll get a better description, you’ll get a more accurate replacement, you might learn something useful, and you’ll save money on your insurance (usually).
  6. I think he operates out of an upper floor office in a commercial building in downtown Houston. Yes, it's a credible company. I have no clue how he handles international shipping and what options are available. Surely he's happy to talk to you about that if you ask.
  7. H&A is a symmetry thing. They usually are well-cut stones, because it’s extra work to do it and if they’re going to do that they might as well go all the way, but it’s not necessary. Interestingly the one you show above is clearly showing that it’s NOT H&A. Given that, I wonder why they gave you those images. FWIW, I like the optical symmetry of the H&A’s but yes, it’s a matter of taste.
  8. 4 prongs settings have heavier prongs, which makes them harder to bend. I count it as purely a matter of taste. FWIW, the insurance companies will assume the risk for pretty reasonable prices if you’re inclined to worry about it and they charge exactly the same premiums either way. It’s not that they’re dumb, they just don’t see it as a risk factor. ED is comparatively new in the Internet diamond business but they're a large company that's been around for a good long time. You've heard of Blue Nile because they've been around for decades and spent hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising. There's something to be said for that, and they're a fine company too, but I'm not sure it's fair to hold it against Enchanted. They have lots of happy customers and I have yet to see a serious complaint. Check them out on the various review sites like yelp, ripoffreport, and google+.
  9. Beautiful. Congratulations.
  10. As you know, ring budgets can go from a few hundred dollars to millions. The issues tend to change based on where you want to be on that continuum. Not D but not yellow dud goes E to abut L. That’s more than half of the scale. For some it goes all the way to Z. Not flawless but not scratched up junk goes from VVS1 to I1 or even I2. For all practical purposes, that’s the ENTIRE scale. Put bluntly, you haven’t narrowed it down a bit. The guys above gave the standard advice for diamond shoppers. SI1+/- 1 grade, H +/- a grade. Xxx firm. Set your budget, lock in those specs and then shop for what you can find. That’s the safest path but it’s not the only path. It may or may not be the best for you. A lot of people with I-1’s are very happy. vg-vg-vg shows some lovely stones that can be comparative bargains if you're paying attention. Strong blue fluorescence is very unpopular right now, which drives down prices for those who are willing to look beyond the lab report. Bear in mind that you’re buying a ring, not just a diamond. The most bling for your buck happens with all of those side stones, especially if the budget is really tight. On the other hand, some brides (and grooms) focus almost exclusively on the center stone and count that other stuff as cheating. More money spent on a fancy mounting means less money on the center stone. The difference here is in her, not in the diamonds, but it’s important to understand as part of the shopping process.
  11. It sounds like you’re looking for demerits. I see none. It’s comparatively cheap. It’s textbook middle of the road for cut, clarity, color, symmetry, polish, and fluorescence. Presumably, that’s your objective and what led you to choose this one. I could, of course, make something up, but you’ve already done that and already know the above so I’ll just leave that it looks good on paper. I’m sure it’s lovely.
  12. I think your people on that other forum are being overly harsh. 35.5deg with a 15% crown is just fine. I actually like that look. 41 vs. 40.8 is, quite literally, a rounding issue (GIA rounds pavilion angles to 0.2deg). I also have no problem with the inclusion. It's likely that it'll be eye visible if you know what to look for and where to look, but that's hardly the usual viewing condition and it's the reason SI1's are so popular. For the benefit of others who may want to comment. Here's the stone he's talking about. https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R340-4096076Z2
  13. I"m just teasing. The admin just did a major upgrade, like yesterday, and one of the things that changed is the way it handles pictures. At least on my screen (Chrome 59.0), there's a 'choose files' link at the bottom of the box where I'm typing and I can upload anything I want. Is that not what you're seeing? What are you using for a browser?
  14. Awesome, although usually people provide more details.
  15. This one? http://www.ebay.com/itm/3-50-CT-ROUND-CUT-D-SI1-CUSHION-HALO-DIAMOND-ENGAGEMENT-RING-14K-WHITE-GOLD-/162575447118?epid=0&hash=item25da40744e:g:a4YAAOSw~XpZWYj-#rpdCntId