Jump to content

Some Opinions On This Gem?


Charsiu
 Share

Recommended Posts

Finally taking the plunge and will be proposing to my significant other! Using some guidelines on depth/table ratios I've found this one for about £7500 GBP~
 
Only thing that strikes me is the medium-blue fluorescence - I've read up about it, but without having seen it myself I wonder if anyone has any real life experience when view such a trait?
 
Thanks all!
 
Carat weight
1.02
Cut
Ideal
Color
E
Clarity
VVS1
Length/width ratio
1.00
Depth %
61.7%
Table %
54.0%
Polish
Excellent
Symmetry
Excellent
Girdle
Medium
Culet
None
Fluorescence
Medium
Measurements
6.53 x 6.50 x 4.02 mm

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fluorescence: don't worry. It's going to be invisible in pretty much any circumstances, and only noticeable where UV is very abundant - discos and tanning salons. For more details: http://www.gia.edu/doi/10_5741-GEMS_33_4_244

 

As to the rest... you haven't posted some very important pieces of information:

 

1. Who has graded the stone

2. Crown and pavilion angles

 

Depth and table are largely irrelevant to determine cut quality. The reliability of the lab has paramount importance to determine whether the price is fair: if you check on the Diamond Finder, you can compare prices for similarly graded diamonds; you will also notice that GIA and AGS diamonds are "more expensive" than diamonds graded by EGL, IGI or other labs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops! Graded by GIA.

 

Angles are: 35 (the top) and 40.8 (the bottom).

 

I've been using http://www.diamondadvisor.ca/diamond-advice/diamond-buying-guide/ as a reference point for proportions.

 

 

Property Ideal Value Total Depth between 59 – 61.8% Table Diameter between 53 – 57.5% Crown Angle between 34.3 – 34.9 degrees Pavilion Angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees Girdle Edge thin to medium
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angles are good - and so is the cut; the guidelines above are not wrong but way too simplistic and unnecessarily restrictive in some respects. BTW, GIA does not use the word "Ideal" anywhere on their reports, so that's a vendor evaluation (and it is a pretty big clue as to who the vendor is).

 

On price - it sounds in line with competitive offers; if it already includes VAT @20% it's remarkably good.

 

Any reason why you are aiming for such high colour and clarity? Do you realise that a G/VS2 will look pretty much indistinguishable once set?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input, i'm aware that GIA uses "Excellent", where as another grader uses "Ideal".

 

The price is already inclusive of VAT, I also made comparisons as to whether i'm better off flying Stateside for a few days to pick one up from James Allen instead and it's roughly the same.

 

As for the high clarity and colour grades, i'm a simple man and just want the best I can afford for my SO :)

 

I figured that Diamonds are a commodity that will largely retain/increase in value so I won't lose any money even if it is unnecessary, additionally, as I won't be able to inspect the diamond myself (not that I will notice anything) having a VVS2+ grading means by definition there will be no flaws visible to any naked eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, having a VS2 clarity pretty much guarantees that there will be no visible flaws (rare exception sometimes if you have a dark crystal right under the table, but those can be spotted on paper). VS1 is more than adequate; VVS is overkill (or at least: it's paying for something you will never see).

 

Be careful with financial assumptions about diamonds:

 

1. Real (inflation adjusted) prices of diamonds are still below the peak they hit in 1979-80; they have been rising for the last 5-6 years partly as a response to uncertainty. Who's to say that tomorrow they won't drop again? And that it will take another 35-40 years of more-or-less continuous rises to get back?

 

2. The killer of diamond financials is not the "retail price", but the transaction costs. There are valid reasons for high transaction costs: trust/risk of fraud; choice (qv our discussion on E/VVS1 vs. G/VS2: "I don't want your diamond; I want one like that but different colour and clarity/cut/size/fluorescence/whatever") and financing/cash flow all play a part, but the minimum you can expect is a 50% haircut the next day (20% VAT + 30% "true loss").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I figured that Diamonds are a commodity that will largely retain/increase in value so I won't lose any money even if it is unnecessary,

 You might want to look into this assumption.

 

In a certain sense it’s true that diamonds are a commodity but the core assumption in the statement that you won’t ‘lose any money’ is that you will always have the option to resell the stone at some future date and get your cash back.  This is not accurate.  The resale market is a completely different set of problems and nearly everyone takes a haircut on resale.  Diamonds are a terrible financial vehicle and a far more sound approach is to go into this assuming you will never see your money again.  There are still perfectly valid reasons to buy them but don't buy into the BS that this is a bank account. 

 

This is the case with most commodities by the way.  Buy a barrel of oil or a bushel of soybeans and see how you do on the resale market.

Edited by denverappraiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've worded that pretty badly, I don't have the intention of selling it, if anything would like it to be passed down my generation (kids, grand kids, etc) :) .

 

 

What I was trying to convey was, unlike for instance, a brand new 2014 car which would pretty lose 20% of it's value the moment it touches the ground and then a further 10-15% per year there after, diamond values wouldn't fluctuate as much in the same period of time (or at least I thought!).

 

If my diamond cost £10,000 today, and five years later a near identically graded diamond cost £9,000 on the market - i'll be happy as it hasn't depreciated a great deal (i'm not talking about resell value whereby the buyer needs a haircut at my expense in order to profit)

 

As for the VVS2 vs VS2/1 - more food for thought, i'll check the differences in price and ponder over it - thanks for the input and insight thus far  :D

Edited by Charsiu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather like cars, there's a giant hit right up front.  If you buy a diamond and immediately sell it, you'll likely take a loss of somewhere between 25-50%, and that's not counting the setting.  The bright side is that's the whole of it.  There's no additional 'depreciation' that occurs over time unless you/she damage it in wear so, eventually, this can get overtaken by the steady climb in diamond prices. 

Edited by denverappraiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angles are good - and so is the cut; the guidelines above are not wrong but way too simplistic and unnecessarily restrictive in some respects. BTW, GIA does not use the word "Ideal" anywhere on their reports, so that's a vendor evaluation (and it is a pretty big clue as to who the vendor is).

 

Hi David,

 

Which of the guidelines do you feel is far too restrictive?

 

Initially I used them as a filter to rule out 95% of the diamonds, I mean after all, it's difficult to pick one out of literally hundreds that are all practically identical to me. I've got to the point where my specific criteria returns about 20-30 diamonds, if one you had to amend one of the attributes, which one and values would you change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not any-one of them; it's the whole lot that feels (to me) unnecessarily restrictive. There is nothing wrong per se with a 41° pavilion angle, just like there is nothing wrong with a 33.5° crown angle or a 58% table.

 

There is a significant amount of personal taste that goes into these things, and while following those guidelines will not result in a bad looking diamond, you may prefer something else instead (e.g. a lot of people prefer larger tables than 57%). However, to know what you would prefer, you need to go out and look at diamonds; there is no theoretical "ideal" stone that looks "best" to everybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...