Can I beat this diamond!?

[pfunk]

Not yet! think that was the small push I needed!!

Should I get it from B2C for
Price: $23,412.00
Bank Wire Price: $22,709.64
OR
Adiamor
PRICE: $23,594
BANK WIRE PRICE: $23,240

I think a lot of folks here are happy with B2C. I don't know much about Adiamor but haven't heard anything bad. I know Adiamor has price matching so they may come down and match B2C if you end up going through them. The upgrade policies are different. At B2C you can upgrade to any diamond that is at least as expensive as your current one, BUT they will charge a 20% restocking fee. In your case, that's a hefty fee. With Adiamor, there is no fee to upgrade but the new diamond must be twice the cost of the original which means you would have to spend a lot to upgrade from this stone. If upgrades arent a big deal to you, I'd just lean towards B2C as they have the best up front pricing and free shipping both ways in the (unlikely) event you need to do a return.

 

[WinkHPD]

looks like the enchanted diamond one was sold..so back to square one.

is this the best stone out there for me then? http://www.adiamor.com/Diamonds/F-VS2-Affinity-Cut-Round-Diamond/D23571594

please share your suggestions!

You will deal with this a lot when you work with a Virtual Inventory. This is why many experienced folks here would encourage you to work with a vendor that has inventory in-house.

If you want to find a stone you like and actually be certain you can purchase it, shop with a vendor that has stones in-house: High Performance Diamonds, Whiteflash, Good Old Gold, and Brian Gavin Diamonds are four good options to start with.

If you end up going down the Virtual Inventory road again, there is no guarantee you won't end up in exactly the same spot.

Best of luck!

I think James Allen, Enchanted diamonds, blue nile, and a host of others would disagree with the statement that you deal with this "a lot" when working with vendors who deal in virtual inventory.

Obviously.

But it has been my personal experience, and the experience of many others who have shopped via VI. This is not some isolated anomaly.

What isn't an anomaly? That a well cut, well priced stone is purchased within 2 weeks after it is first recommended and is no longer available when you eventually look to purchase the diamond? Or that a vendor has it listed as available when it no longer is (not even sure if this is even the case)?

In any case, I don't see it as a reason to steer people away from vendors dealing in virtual inventory. It would be like steering folks away from the vendors you listed because they have to charge more for their stones as a result of keeping inventory on hand. There are pros and cons to each, and when this particular consumer's requirements seem unable to be met when shopping at the very vendors that you recommended, I don't see the usefulness in avoiding virtual inventories because someone else might snag a stone before you're able to get it purchased.

While selling the top top cuts do cost more, it is NOT because of the cost of keeping inventory. It is because it costs more to source the starting stone, plan the stone, inspect the stone after each and every step of the cutting process and then make any necessary corrections before sending the diamond to AGS to have the diamond grading report issues and also to take the proper images. We regularly look at more than 100 candidates for each that is bid on, and we do not get all that we bid on as it is a competitive market for the starting stones. To top it off, the cost to do all that work is more than the cookie cutter cutters spend, and the size of the finished diamond is smaller as we cut away more of the "fat" to end up with the brightest, sparkliest possible diamond.

THAT is why the diamonds cost more.

I do agree with you that they are not the only diamond for every one. There are many valid reasons for choosing a diamond that is not the best possible cut and budget is one of the big ones. The diamonds that you recommend are still beautiful, but many people CAN see the difference between the top cuts and the nearly top cuts.

It is their privilege to choose whether or not they want the very best, for appearances or for mind cleanness. It is our obligation to give them valid information, and saying our diamonds cost more because we spend the money to have them in inventory is not valid information, as there is so much more to the real reason.

Wink

 

[pfunk]

WInk,

Is keeping inventory on hand one of the reasons you (or other brick and mortar stores) have to charge more for your diamonds? I wasn't saying it is the ONLY reason why you charge more. In my discussion with Rocky, I was stating that it would be foolish for me to steer people away from b&m simply because they have to charge more as a result of their business model and decision to keep a very expensive inventory of diamonds on hand. He was dismissing the virtual inventory model and recommending vendors who deal with superideals despite the fact that none of the vendors had stones on hand that met the OP's requirements. There are pros and cons to each, as you very well know, that should be factored in. I was in no way trying to state that your stones are more expensive ONLY because you have to invest in obtaining an inventory. It was simply an example to support my point that it isn't a good idea to completely rule out a certain business model because of one of the cons. It leads to people sacrificing something they wanted (color, carat, clarity, etc) because they are scared into believing they are going to have repeated poor experiences when going through a virtual inventory vendor as a result of the supposed unknowns and uncertainties.

 

[RockyRacoon]

In my discussion with Rocky, I was stating that it would be foolish for me to steer people away from b&m simply because they have to charge more as a result of their business model and decision to keep a very expensive inventory of diamonds on hand. He was dismissing the virtual inventory model and recommending vendors who deal with superideals despite the fact that none of the vendors had stones on hand that met the OP's requirements. There are pros and cons to each, as you very well know, that should be factored in. I was in no way trying to state that your stones are more expensive ONLY because you have to invest in obtaining an inventory. It was simply an example to support my point that it isn't a good idea to completely rule out a certain business model because of one of the cons. It leads to people sacrificing something they wanted (color, carat, clarity, etc) because they are scared into believing they are going to have repeated poor experiences when going through a virtual inventory vendor as a result of the supposed unknowns and uncertainties.

Please don't speak for me.

I stated the drawbacks of the Virtual Inventory model, which you continue to want to minimize, but which are very real issues.

And what made you think the vendors I suggested didn't have something that met the OP's specs? Just because you couldn't find it online? I would wager if he reached out to them, many, if not all of them would.

You can continue to blindly defend the model, but until you admit there are very real drawbacks that diminish the value of the VI model for MANY consumers, you aren't acknowledging the facts. I have personally have had multiple experiences (even pre-PS) where VI was an issue, so there is no 'supposed' about it - it is the reality.

 

[pfunk]

In my discussion with Rocky, I was stating that it would be foolish for me to steer people away from b&m simply because they have to charge more as a result of their business model and decision to keep a very expensive inventory of diamonds on hand. He was dismissing the virtual inventory model and recommending vendors who deal with superideals despite the fact that none of the vendors had stones on hand that met the OP's requirements. There are pros and cons to each, as you very well know, that should be factored in. I was in no way trying to state that your stones are more expensive ONLY because you have to invest in obtaining an inventory. It was simply an example to support my point that it isn't a good idea to completely rule out a certain business model because of one of the cons. It leads to people sacrificing something they wanted (color, carat, clarity, etc) because they are scared into believing they are going to have repeated poor experiences when going through a virtual inventory vendor as a result of the supposed unknowns and uncertainties.

Please don't speak for me.

I stated the drawbacks of the Virtual Inventory model, which you continue to want to minimize, but which are very real issues.

And what made you think the vendors I suggested didn't have something that met the OP's specs? Just because you couldn't find it online? I would wager if he reached out to them, many, if not all of them would.

You can continue to blindly defend the model, but until you admit there are very real drawbacks that diminish the value of the VI model for MANY consumers, you aren't acknowledging the facts. I have personally have had multiple experiences (even pre-PS) where VI was an issue, so there is no 'supposed' about it - it is the reality.

Indeed you stated the drawbacks, as you so often seem to want to do whenever virtual inventory might be able to be blamed. I'm not minimizing the drawbacks either. Like I said, people run into issues from time to time with the availability of stones not being accurate. Those issues are usually* caught before any money changes hands. There are MANY MANY happy customers of the many vendors who deal primarily in virtual inventory. When those isolated incidents happen the vendors are typically responsive with an eagerness to please the customer in the end. They realize the system has flaws, like I said, but I am confident they do their best to keep the buying experience a good one. Your wording isn't fair, IMO, to the many good vendors who deal in virtual inventory and I apologize for side tracking the thread but I think it needs to be opposed for the OP and others reading this. Folks can get a lot more info about stones and can have a pleasant experience by simply reaching out to the VI vendors too. They can easily confirm availability and provide more info in a timely manner. Is it as quick as an in-house vendor... probably not. But there are advantages to going the VI route, and lower prices isn't the only one. Knowing the pros and cons to both models empowers the consumer towards a better buying process.

 

[yssie]

The virtual model does have some very real drawbacks, and I think that in general the more valuable or coveted the type of stone, the more likely a consumer is run into those roadblocks.

From the end-consumer's perspective I think there are two fundamental problems with the virtual inventory: availability and content.


Re. availability: the multitude of manufacturers and vendors all sourcing from the same pool means that unless there are clear methodologies to "check in" and "check out" stones and all participants are meticulous about following these processes (any process that requires human input will never be completely reliable), and unless all systems reading this inventory are constantly polling for updates (they don't, and there's no central master pushing updates either), there will be inconsistencies (there are). When I bought my first stone (I found it on BN and had WF pull it for inspection) it stayed in BN's online listing for months after I'd been wearing it on my finger... one anecdote, I know, but a real-world example of "worst-case" ineffectiveness nonetheless.


Re. content: this is where things get murkier. It is, in my humble opinion, misguidedly narcissistic of PS consumers to assume that we as a collective have a better handle on the innards of this industry than industry professionals themselves - enough to eschewing traditional retail outlets and go directly to the virtual inventory to "game the system" and avoid retail markups... there is a very, very, very long line of people in-between cutting rough and listing a finished stone, and every single one of those people has devoted his life to making money off the process. The better question is where the money is!

Take, for example, sub-1ct stones. They're a dime a dozen in all sorts of combinations in the virtual listings - in that collection there will be firecrackers, good ones, bad ones, and total doozies. It's probably not worth professionals' time to sort through that mass to find the gems at each step of the assembly line so your "odds" of running into a great one are pretty good. It won't be precision-cut, because manufacturers who precision-cut are doing so for select clients, but that's certainly not a priority for all end-consumers. Once you start getting into the 2, 3ct range, though... the eyeclean SI2s or the ones with perfectly prong-able inclusions, the particularly white GIA Js, the 1.95caraters, the specimens with standout cut are going to be picked off by private industry resources long before they wind up in the pile of cast-offs that is the public consumer-accessible virtual inventory.

There are exceptions, of course: some beauties that are manufactured out-of-country will make it all the way to the virtual inventory without being scooped up, there will be some stunning trade-ins that bypass much of the assembly line second time 'round, but for the most part larger, higher-value stones that wind up in the virtual inventory are there because they were inspected and no-one in the trade wanted to claim them. I'm not referring to the few boutiques that have stones specially cut for them - I'm referring to all the online stores and B&M vendors that cherry-pick and house-brand nicer stones they come across... and there are a great many establishments that do this!! I would recommend that any PSer looking to purchase from a drop shipper sourcing from this virtual inventory prepare to wait a while, and go into it with the mindset of "so, what's wrong with this stone?" - and perhaps he will be happily surprised to have found the rare uncontested beauty that somehow fell through the cracks - or perhaps he will discover that some of the characteristics that most in the industry value aren't things he personally prioritises, and so walk into a wealth of opportunity.

A fun little story - I've been searching for a stone to match one I already own. It's an odd size: 2.7ct. I searched a number of sites - including drop shippers - every day, and several weeks into the hunt I happened on the *perfect* stone newly listed on both JA and Adiamor - it couldn't have been cut with more similar proportions. I chatted with JA that afternoon to request an IS pic, and the rep told me that it would take 5-6 days to get it in-house. As I didn't have all the money right at that moment I decided to hold off, and three days later the stone had disappeared from Adiamor's list, had been labelled a JA True Hearts and brought in-house, and had been bumped up several hundred dollars. Cherry-picking in action!


Buying a diamond is definitely not a one-size-fits-all process but I completely agree with all previous posters - knowing the pros and cons of your vendor's business model is vital. A one-time buyer whose primary concern is up-front cost may espouse different priorities, but I will also say that it isn't accidental that the vast majority of long-time RT posters choose to avoid drop-shippers and vendors who deal only in virtual inventory... For consumers who value knowledgeable vendors and sales reps, who are passionate about cut quality and balancing value, costs, and benefits (generous upgrade/trade-in/buyback policies, full-package discounts, repeat business perks) the vendors who own the stones they sell or have invested in specific brands - CBI, HoF, etc., - are, in general, the sorts of establishments most likely to provide fulfilling purchasing and ownership experiences.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Buying a diamond is definitely not a one-size-fits-all process but I completely agree with all previous posters - knowing the pros and cons of your vendor's business model is vital. A one-time buyer whose primary concern is up-front cost may espouse different priorities, but I will also say that it isn't accidental that the vast majority of long-time RT posters choose to avoid drop-shippers... For consumers who value knowledgeable vendors and sales reps, who are passionate about cut quality and balancing value, costs, and benefits (generous upgrade/trade-in/buyback policies, full-package discounts, repeat business perks) the vendors who own the stones they sell or have invested in specific brands - CBI, HoF, etc., - are, in general, the sorts of establishments most likely to provide fulfilling purchasing and ownership experiences.

And I am one them. I will not go on a wild goose chase for a cyber stone, b/c I would go broke paying back and forth shippings.. that's the reason why I only buy from vendors with in-house stones.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The virtual model does have some very real drawbacks, and I think that in general the more valuable or coveted the type of stone, the more likely a consumer is run into those roadblocks.

From the end-consumer's perspective I think there are two fundamental problems with the virtual inventory: availability and content.


Re. availability: the multitude of manufacturers and vendors all sourcing from the same pool means that unless there are clear methodologies to "check in" and "check out" stones and all participants are meticulous about following these processes (any process that requires human input will never be completely reliable), and unless all systems reading this inventory are constantly polling for updates (they don't, and there's no central master pushing updates either), there will be inconsistencies (there are). When I bought my first stone (I found it on BN and had WF pull it for inspection) it stayed in BN's online listing for months after I'd been wearing it on my finger... one anecdote, I know, but a real-world example of "worst-case" ineffectiveness nonetheless.


Re. content: this is where things get murkier. It is, in my humble opinion, misguidedly narcissistic of PS consumers to assume that we as a collective have a better handle on the innards of this industry than industry professionals themselves - enough to eschewing traditional retail outlets and go directly to the virtual inventory to "game the system" and avoid retail markups... there is a very, very, very long line of people in-between cutting rough and listing a finished stone, and every single one of those people has devoted his life to making money off the process. The better question is where the money is!

Take, for example, sub-1ct stones. They're a dime a dozen in all sorts of combinations in the virtual listings - in that collection there will be firecrackers, good ones, bad ones, and total doozies. It's probably not worth professionals' time to sort through that mass to find the gems at each step of the assembly line so your "odds" of running into a great one are pretty good. It won't be precision-cut, because manufacturers who precision-cut are doing so for select clients, but that's certainly not a priority for all end-consumers. Once you start getting into the 2, 3ct range, though... the eyeclean SI2s or the ones with perfectly prong-able inclusions, the particularly white GIA Js, the 1.95caraters, the specimens with standout cut are going to be picked off by private industry resources long before they wind up in the pile of cast-offs that is the public consumer-accessible virtual inventory.

There are exceptions, of course: some beauties that are manufactured out-of-country will make it all the way to the virtual inventory without being scooped up, there will be some stunning trade-ins that bypass much of the assembly line second time 'round, but for the most part larger, higher-value stones that wind up in the virtual inventory are there because they were inspected and no-one in the trade wanted to claim them. I'm not referring to the few boutiques that have stones specially cut for them - I'm referring to all the online stores and B&M vendors that cherry-pick and house-brand nicer stones they come across... and there are a great many establishments that do this!! I would recommend that any PSer looking to purchase from a drop shipper sourcing from this virtual inventory prepare to wait a while, and go into it with the mindset of "so, what's wrong with this stone?" - and perhaps he will be happily surprised to have found the rare uncontested beauty that somehow fell through the cracks - or perhaps he will discover that some of the characteristics that most in the industry value aren't things he personally prioritises, and so walk into a wealth of opportunity.

A fun little story - I've been searching for a stone to match one I already own. It's an odd size: 2.7ct. I searched a number of sites - including drop shippers - every day, and several weeks into the hunt I happened on the *perfect* stone newly listed on both JA and Adiamor - it couldn't have been cut with more similar proportions. I chatted with JA that afternoon to request an IS pic, and the rep told me that it would take 5-6 days to get it in-house. As I didn't have all the money right at that moment I decided to hold off, and three days later the stone had disappeared from Adiamor's list, had been labelled a JA True Hearts and brought in-house, and had been bumped up several hundred dollars. Cherry-picking in action!


Buying a diamond is definitely not a one-size-fits-all process but I completely agree with all previous posters - knowing the pros and cons of your vendor's business model is vital. A one-time buyer whose primary concern is up-front cost may espouse different priorities, but I will also say that it isn't accidental that the vast majority of long-time RT posters choose to avoid drop-shippers and vendors who deal only in virtual inventory... For consumers who value knowledgeable vendors and sales reps, who are passionate about cut quality and balancing value, costs, and benefits (generous upgrade/trade-in/buyback policies, full-package discounts, repeat business perks) the vendors who own the stones they sell or have invested in specific brands - CBI, HoF, etc., - are, in general, the sorts of establishments most likely to provide fulfilling purchasing and ownership experiences.

This is quite a good analysis and I agree with most of it. Virtual inventory is an interesting development in our industry and what we see today is a product of the evolution of information technology and an industry that is struggling to adapt to the new economy and a new selling channel. In a way the basic concept is not new at all. Jewelers have for many decades used lists of inventory from their suppliers, and even electronic databases of multiple vendors to source diamonds for their customers. What used to be known as "memo" business has morphed into "virtual" business through the emergence of powerful web technologies. What is new is the just-in-time "click and buy" marketing approach with companies making specific representations about the diamonds that they have never seen, based upon digital information driven by the upstream suppliers. Vast numbers of diamonds can now be listed for sale from dozens or even hundreds of different suppliers. The problems arise (as Yssie explains) from lack of standardization, coordination, and discipline among this large collection of disparate businesses. And the problems are more far reaching than just availability.

The biggest uncertainty is not whether the vendor can deliver and do so in a timely fashion, but rather with the diamond itself. Is it in the condition represented by the cert? Are important aspects not knowable from the cert alone (or even images) going to be detrimental? Are the light performance images associated with the diamond listing, which are relied upon by the consumer at the time of purchase, themselves accurate and reliable? Are the merchants who are selling on the basis of this second hand information verifying it with their own imaging before passing along? With vendors now listing diamonds that are housed overseas, returns and stock balancing are more complicated resulting in inducements to merchants to pass along problems that may go unnoticed by a consumer. It therefore becomes critical that you trust your merchant completely to do a thorough, accurate and ethical assessment of the diamond prior to delivery.

Yes, there are some cost advantages that can be passed along through operating a virtual model, and there is the advantage of being able to fish with a bigger net by offering an unlimited range of merchandise. And we are still in the early days of development of this business model, so it will likely improve over time. Presently though, most consumers in the market are still unwilling to buy diamonds online. Of those who are willing to do so, many want the added certainty knowing exactly what they are getting by shopping from in-house, thoroughly vetted inventory. When you consider that most online diamond sales are being driven by a new generation of young people buying engagement rings, because of the emotional nature of the product as well as timelines involved, the uncertainties involved in going the virtual path become much more problematic.

 

[pfunk]

The virtual model does have some very real drawbacks, and I think that in general the more valuable or coveted the type of stone, the more likely a consumer is run into those roadblocks.

From the end-consumer's perspective I think there are two fundamental problems with the virtual inventory: availability and content.


Re. availability: the multitude of manufacturers and vendors all sourcing from the same pool means that unless there are clear methodologies to "check in" and "check out" stones and all participants are meticulous about following these processes (any process that requires human input will never be completely reliable), and unless all systems reading this inventory are constantly polling for updates (they don't, and there's no central master pushing updates either), there will be inconsistencies (there are). When I bought my first stone (I found it on BN and had WF pull it for inspection) it stayed in BN's online listing for months after I'd been wearing it on my finger... one anecdote, I know, but a real-world example of "worst-case" ineffectiveness nonetheless.


Re. content: this is where things get murkier. It is, in my humble opinion, misguidedly narcissistic of PS consumers to assume that we as a collective have a better handle on the innards of this industry than industry professionals themselves - enough to eschewing traditional retail outlets and go directly to the virtual inventory to "game the system" and avoid retail markups... there is a very, very, very long line of people in-between cutting rough and listing a finished stone, and every single one of those people has devoted his life to making money off the process. The better question is where the money is!

Take, for example, sub-1ct stones. They're a dime a dozen in all sorts of combinations in the virtual listings - in that collection there will be firecrackers, good ones, bad ones, and total doozies. It's probably not worth professionals' time to sort through that mass to find the gems at each step of the assembly line so your "odds" of running into a great one are pretty good. It won't be precision-cut, because manufacturers who precision-cut are doing so for select clients, but that's certainly not a priority for all end-consumers. Once you start getting into the 2, 3ct range, though... the eyeclean SI2s or the ones with perfectly prong-able inclusions, the particularly white GIA Js, the 1.95caraters, the specimens with standout cut are going to be picked off by private industry resources long before they wind up in the pile of cast-offs that is the public consumer-accessible virtual inventory.

There are exceptions, of course: some beauties that are manufactured out-of-country will make it all the way to the virtual inventory without being scooped up, there will be some stunning trade-ins that bypass much of the assembly line second time 'round, but for the most part larger, higher-value stones that wind up in the virtual inventory are there because they were inspected and no-one in the trade wanted to claim them. I'm not referring to the few boutiques that have stones specially cut for them - I'm referring to all the online stores and B&M vendors that cherry-pick and house-brand nicer stones they come across... and there are a great many establishments that do this!! I would recommend that any PSer looking to purchase from a drop shipper sourcing from this virtual inventory prepare to wait a while, and go into it with the mindset of "so, what's wrong with this stone?" - and perhaps he will be happily surprised to have found the rare uncontested beauty that somehow fell through the cracks - or perhaps he will discover that some of the characteristics that most in the industry value aren't things he personally prioritises, and so walk into a wealth of opportunity.

A fun little story - I've been searching for a stone to match one I already own. It's an odd size: 2.7ct. I searched a number of sites - including drop shippers - every day, and several weeks into the hunt I happened on the *perfect* stone newly listed on both JA and Adiamor - it couldn't have been cut with more similar proportions. I chatted with JA that afternoon to request an IS pic, and the rep told me that it would take 5-6 days to get it in-house. As I didn't have all the money right at that moment I decided to hold off, and three days later the stone had disappeared from Adiamor's list, had been labelled a JA True Hearts and brought in-house, and had been bumped up several hundred dollars. Cherry-picking in action!


Buying a diamond is definitely not a one-size-fits-all process but I completely agree with all previous posters - knowing the pros and cons of your vendor's business model is vital. A one-time buyer whose primary concern is up-front cost may espouse different priorities, but I will also say that it isn't accidental that the vast majority of long-time RT posters choose to avoid drop-shippers and vendors who deal only in virtual inventory... For consumers who value knowledgeable vendors and sales reps, who are passionate about cut quality and balancing value, costs, and benefits (generous upgrade/trade-in/buyback policies, full-package discounts, repeat business perks) the vendors who own the stones they sell or have invested in specific brands - CBI, HoF, etc., - are, in general, the sorts of establishments most likely to provide fulfilling purchasing and ownership experiences.

A lot of interesting input here Yssie. One thing I think is important to note is that virtual inventory vendor does not necessitate drop shipper. Many are not and do make sure to inspect the stones prior to shipping to the end consumer.

Regarding the JA story, I assume you had the stone on hold for them to call it in for imaging? Did you then decide against the purchase, at which point the price increased? I am almost certain I have seen Jim on here confirming that once a stone is placed on hold for imaging, the price is locked in as well, so as to avoid something like you describe where the price all of a sudden jumps when the stone turns out to be a real winner.

 

[yssie]

The virtual model does have some very real drawbacks, and I think that in general the more valuable or coveted the type of stone, the more likely a consumer is run into those roadblocks.

From the end-consumer's perspective I think there are two fundamental problems with the virtual inventory: availability and content.


Re. availability: the multitude of manufacturers and vendors all sourcing from the same pool means that unless there are clear methodologies to "check in" and "check out" stones and all participants are meticulous about following these processes (any process that requires human input will never be completely reliable), and unless all systems reading this inventory are constantly polling for updates (they don't, and there's no central master pushing updates either), there will be inconsistencies (there are). When I bought my first stone (I found it on BN and had WF pull it for inspection) it stayed in BN's online listing for months after I'd been wearing it on my finger... one anecdote, I know, but a real-world example of "worst-case" ineffectiveness nonetheless.


Re. content: this is where things get murkier. It is, in my humble opinion, misguidedly narcissistic of PS consumers to assume that we as a collective have a better handle on the innards of this industry than industry professionals themselves - enough to eschewing traditional retail outlets and go directly to the virtual inventory to "game the system" and avoid retail markups... there is a very, very, very long line of people in-between cutting rough and listing a finished stone, and every single one of those people has devoted his life to making money off the process. The better question is where the money is!

Take, for example, sub-1ct stones. They're a dime a dozen in all sorts of combinations in the virtual listings - in that collection there will be firecrackers, good ones, bad ones, and total doozies. It's probably not worth professionals' time to sort through that mass to find the gems at each step of the assembly line so your "odds" of running into a great one are pretty good. It won't be precision-cut, because manufacturers who precision-cut are doing so for select clients, but that's certainly not a priority for all end-consumers. Once you start getting into the 2, 3ct range, though... the eyeclean SI2s or the ones with perfectly prong-able inclusions, the particularly white GIA Js, the 1.95caraters, the specimens with standout cut are going to be picked off by private industry resources long before they wind up in the pile of cast-offs that is the public consumer-accessible virtual inventory.

There are exceptions, of course: some beauties that are manufactured out-of-country will make it all the way to the virtual inventory without being scooped up, there will be some stunning trade-ins that bypass much of the assembly line second time 'round, but for the most part larger, higher-value stones that wind up in the virtual inventory are there because they were inspected and no-one in the trade wanted to claim them. I'm not referring to the few boutiques that have stones specially cut for them - I'm referring to all the online stores and B&M vendors that cherry-pick and house-brand nicer stones they come across... and there are a great many establishments that do this!! I would recommend that any PSer looking to purchase from a drop shipper sourcing from this virtual inventory prepare to wait a while, and go into it with the mindset of "so, what's wrong with this stone?" - and perhaps he will be happily surprised to have found the rare uncontested beauty that somehow fell through the cracks - or perhaps he will discover that some of the characteristics that most in the industry value aren't things he personally prioritises, and so walk into a wealth of opportunity.

A fun little story - I've been searching for a stone to match one I already own. It's an odd size: 2.7ct. I searched a number of sites - including drop shippers - every day, and several weeks into the hunt I happened on the *perfect* stone newly listed on both JA and Adiamor - it couldn't have been cut with more similar proportions. I chatted with JA that afternoon to request an IS pic, and the rep told me that it would take 5-6 days to get it in-house. As I didn't have all the money right at that moment I decided to hold off, and three days later the stone had disappeared from Adiamor's list, had been labelled a JA True Hearts and brought in-house, and had been bumped up several hundred dollars. Cherry-picking in action!


Buying a diamond is definitely not a one-size-fits-all process but I completely agree with all previous posters - knowing the pros and cons of your vendor's business model is vital. A one-time buyer whose primary concern is up-front cost may espouse different priorities, but I will also say that it isn't accidental that the vast majority of long-time RT posters choose to avoid drop-shippers and vendors who deal only in virtual inventory... For consumers who value knowledgeable vendors and sales reps, who are passionate about cut quality and balancing value, costs, and benefits (generous upgrade/trade-in/buyback policies, full-package discounts, repeat business perks) the vendors who own the stones they sell or have invested in specific brands - CBI, HoF, etc., - are, in general, the sorts of establishments most likely to provide fulfilling purchasing and ownership experiences.

A lot of interesting input here Yssie. One thing I think is important to note is that virtual inventory vendor does not necessitate drop shipper. Many are not and do make sure to inspect the stones prior to shipping to the end consumer.
This is an important distinction in terms of business model, I agree: one benefits the end-consumer far more than the other. However, I assert that both types are avoided by long-term PSers for the same reasons - the philosophical disparity between vendors who are comfortable labelling, recommending, and selling stones they don't own and have never seen before pulling for a client and vendors who take pride in owning their own stones/brands bleeds into other aspects of the purchase (side benefits, knowledgeable sales personnel, etc.) I realised I had lumped them into one category and edited my original post as above.

Regarding the JA story, I assume you had the stone on hold for them to call it in for imaging? Did you then decide against the purchase, at which point the price increased? I am almost certain I have seen Jim on here confirming that once a stone is placed on hold for imaging, the price is locked in as well, so as to avoid something like you describe where the price all of a sudden jumps when the stone turns out to be a real winner.
I'm afraid you've missed my purpose in telling this story - perhaps it needs clarification. My intent with this story was to describe having watched the "cherry picking off the virtual inventory" in real-time. As I mentioned, I did not put the stone on hold nor did I move forward with it in any way at the time I first spotted it, so JA (or any other vendor) was certainly free to do as they pleased - and, unsurprisingly, they chose to add it to their own in-house inventory. The point is that this is the *expected* outcome - beautiful stones above certain pricepoints don't languish in virtual inventory, they're scooped by people in the industry along the way before they ever reach the end-consumer. In this case the scooping happened to happen rather later than usual, giving me, one of those end-consumers, a rare opportunity to watch...

 

[pfunk]

This is quite a good analysis and I agree with most of it. Virtual inventory is an interesting development in our industry and what we see today is a product of the evolution of information technology and an industry that is struggling to adapt to the new economy and a new selling channel. In a way the basic concept is not new at all. Jewelers have for many decades used lists of inventory from their suppliers, and even electronic databases of multiple vendors to source diamonds for their customers. What used to be known as "memo" business has morphed into "virtual" business through the emergence of powerful web technologies. What is new is the just-in-time "click and buy" marketing approach with companies making specific representations about the diamonds that they have never seen, based upon digital information driven by the upstream suppliers. Vast numbers of diamonds can now be listed for sale from dozens or even hundreds of different suppliers. The problems arise (as Yssie explains) from lack of standardization, coordination, and discipline among this large collection of disparate businesses. And the problems are more far reaching than just availability.

The biggest uncertainty is not whether the vendor can deliver and do so in a timely fashion, but rather with the diamond itself. Is it in the condition represented by the cert? Are important aspects not knowable from the cert alone (or even images) going to be detrimental? Are the light performance images associated with the diamond listing, which are relied upon by the consumer at the time of purchase, themselves accurate and reliable? Are the merchants who are selling on the basis of this second hand information verifying it with their own imaging before passing along? With vendors now listing diamonds that are housed overseas, returns and stock balancing are more complicated resulting in inducements to merchants to pass along problems that may go unnoticed by a consumer. It therefore becomes critical that you trust your merchant completely to do a thorough, accurate and ethical assessment of the diamond prior to delivery.

Yes, there are some cost advantages that can be passed along through operating a virtual model, and there is the advantage of being able to fish with a bigger net by offering an unlimited range of merchandise. And we are still in the early days of development of this business model, so it will likely improve over time. Presently though, most consumers in the market are still unwilling to buy diamonds online. Of those who are willing to do so, many want the added certainty knowing exactly what they are getting by shopping from in-house, thoroughly vetted inventory. When you consider that most online diamond sales are being driven by a new generation of young people buying engagement rings, because of the emotional nature of the product as well as timelines involved, the uncertainties involved in going the virtual path become much more problematic.

Bryan,

Regarding your second paragraph, are these issues with the representation of diamonds known issues or are they what you see as potential problems for the shopper going the virtual route? Is it a known problem that stones from suppliers to the vendors of virtual inventories aren't matching up with the images that were provided to the consumer? Are vendors passing along stones with known issues to consumers in order to avoid the costs of returns?

Certainly it is imperative to work with a vendor who you can trust and who has a record of sound, ethical business practices, but at the same time I think it is important to refrain from allowing *potential* pitfalls to deter consumers from a particular business model as a whole. I would hope that VI vendors themselves are helping to prevent a lot of these things from happening by refusing to work with suppliers who are not sharing accurate information about their stones. It leads to a waste of time for both the vendor and the consumer, which ends up reflecting poorly on the vendor; afterall, it's the vendor who the consumer deals with, not the supplier. Maybe some of the VI vendors will be able to comment as to how they handle these issues?

It seems apparent that it all comes down to trust in the vendor that you are working with as opposed to a trust in a certain sort of business model. There are vendors who stock in house inventory that you can't trust any farther than you can throw, just as there are with virtual inventory vendors. The VI vendors who are willing to face the challenges that their business model presents while still putting customer satisfaction at the forefront and refusing to compromise in that area are the ones who succeed and do well.

It is my belief, which I have shared with many here, that it is in everyone's best interest to get an independent opinion on any diamond purchase and feel like an independent appraisal is worth every penny of the cost. A good appraiser will be able to catch these sorts of issues if they happen to accidentally slip by an honest vendor or are kept in the dark by a dishonest one.

 

[pfunk]

The virtual model does have some very real drawbacks, and I think that in general the more valuable or coveted the type of stone, the more likely a consumer is run into those roadblocks.

From the end-consumer's perspective I think there are two fundamental problems with the virtual inventory: availability and content.


Re. availability: the multitude of manufacturers and vendors all sourcing from the same pool means that unless there are clear methodologies to "check in" and "check out" stones and all participants are meticulous about following these processes (any process that requires human input will never be completely reliable), and unless all systems reading this inventory are constantly polling for updates (they don't, and there's no central master pushing updates either), there will be inconsistencies (there are). When I bought my first stone (I found it on BN and had WF pull it for inspection) it stayed in BN's online listing for months after I'd been wearing it on my finger... one anecdote, I know, but a real-world example of "worst-case" ineffectiveness nonetheless.


Re. content: this is where things get murkier. It is, in my humble opinion, misguidedly narcissistic of PS consumers to assume that we as a collective have a better handle on the innards of this industry than industry professionals themselves - enough to eschewing traditional retail outlets and go directly to the virtual inventory to "game the system" and avoid retail markups... there is a very, very, very long line of people in-between cutting rough and listing a finished stone, and every single one of those people has devoted his life to making money off the process. The better question is where the money is!

Take, for example, sub-1ct stones. They're a dime a dozen in all sorts of combinations in the virtual listings - in that collection there will be firecrackers, good ones, bad ones, and total doozies. It's probably not worth professionals' time to sort through that mass to find the gems at each step of the assembly line so your "odds" of running into a great one are pretty good. It won't be precision-cut, because manufacturers who precision-cut are doing so for select clients, but that's certainly not a priority for all end-consumers. Once you start getting into the 2, 3ct range, though... the eyeclean SI2s or the ones with perfectly prong-able inclusions, the particularly white GIA Js, the 1.95caraters, the specimens with standout cut are going to be picked off by private industry resources long before they wind up in the pile of cast-offs that is the public consumer-accessible virtual inventory.

There are exceptions, of course: some beauties that are manufactured out-of-country will make it all the way to the virtual inventory without being scooped up, there will be some stunning trade-ins that bypass much of the assembly line second time 'round, but for the most part larger, higher-value stones that wind up in the virtual inventory are there because they were inspected and no-one in the trade wanted to claim them. I'm not referring to the few boutiques that have stones specially cut for them - I'm referring to all the online stores and B&M vendors that cherry-pick and house-brand nicer stones they come across... and there are a great many establishments that do this!! I would recommend that any PSer looking to purchase from a drop shipper sourcing from this virtual inventory prepare to wait a while, and go into it with the mindset of "so, what's wrong with this stone?" - and perhaps he will be happily surprised to have found the rare uncontested beauty that somehow fell through the cracks - or perhaps he will discover that some of the characteristics that most in the industry value aren't things he personally prioritises, and so walk into a wealth of opportunity.

A fun little story - I've been searching for a stone to match one I already own. It's an odd size: 2.7ct. I searched a number of sites - including drop shippers - every day, and several weeks into the hunt I happened on the *perfect* stone newly listed on both JA and Adiamor - it couldn't have been cut with more similar proportions. I chatted with JA that afternoon to request an IS pic, and the rep told me that it would take 5-6 days to get it in-house. As I didn't have all the money right at that moment I decided to hold off, and three days later the stone had disappeared from Adiamor's list, had been labelled a JA True Hearts and brought in-house, and had been bumped up several hundred dollars. Cherry-picking in action!


Buying a diamond is definitely not a one-size-fits-all process but I completely agree with all previous posters - knowing the pros and cons of your vendor's business model is vital. A one-time buyer whose primary concern is up-front cost may espouse different priorities, but I will also say that it isn't accidental that the vast majority of long-time RT posters choose to avoid drop-shippers and vendors who deal only in virtual inventory... For consumers who value knowledgeable vendors and sales reps, who are passionate about cut quality and balancing value, costs, and benefits (generous upgrade/trade-in/buyback policies, full-package discounts, repeat business perks) the vendors who own the stones they sell or have invested in specific brands - CBI, HoF, etc., - are, in general, the sorts of establishments most likely to provide fulfilling purchasing and ownership experiences.

A lot of interesting input here Yssie. One thing I think is important to note is that virtual inventory vendor does not necessitate drop shipper. Many are not and do make sure to inspect the stones prior to shipping to the end consumer.
This is an important distinction in terms of business model, I agree: one benefits the end-consumer far more than the other. However, I assert that both types are avoided by long-term PSers for the same reasons - the philosophical disparity between vendors who are comfortable labelling, recommending, and selling stones they don't own and have never seen before pulling for a client and vendors who take pride in owning their own stones/brands bleeds into other aspects of the purchase (side benefits, knowledgeable sales personnel, etc.) I realised I had lumped them into one category and edited my original post as above.

Regarding the JA story, I assume you had the stone on hold for them to call it in for imaging? Did you then decide against the purchase, at which point the price increased? I am almost certain I have seen Jim on here confirming that once a stone is placed on hold for imaging, the price is locked in as well, so as to avoid something like you describe where the price all of a sudden jumps when the stone turns out to be a real winner.
I'm afraid you've missed my purpose in telling this story - perhaps it needs clarification. My intent with this story was to describe having watched the "cherry picking off the virtual inventory" in real-time. As I mentioned, I did not put the stone on hold nor did I move forward with it in any way at the time I first spotted it, so JA (or any other vendor) was certainly free to do as they pleased - and, unsurprisingly, they chose to add it to their own in-house inventory. The point is that this is the *expected* outcome - beautiful stones above certain pricepoints don't languish in virtual inventory, they're scooped by people in the industry along the way before they ever reach the end-consumer. In this case the scooping happened to happen rather later than usual, giving me, one of those end-consumers, a rare opportunity to watch...

Yssie,
I apologize as it appears I did miss what you were getting at. I was thinking you had requested the images but then later decided it wouldn't work for your budget. I didn't realize you had never placed the stone on hold to begin with when you inquired about getting images.

What I wonder then, is how JA or any other vendor knows which stones to cherry pick just by going off the grading report and notes from the supplier? Or do they have more to go off of? I realize this was a unique size which may have factored in, but what else tips them off that it could be a true hearts worthy stone that warrants further inspection? Use the 2 carat size for example... there are stil a LOT of diamonds out there around 2 carats and many are cut to similar proportions. What prompts a vendor who has never seen the stone before to call it in for inspection for that slight chance that it might be a real special one?

 

[soldat88]

ugh so more fun ironic news..the diamond was sent out to the las vegas diamond convention and they won't be able to confirm if its available until june 12th! woohoo back to the drawing board for now. PLEASE send your diamond suggestions this way! thanks

 

[pfunk]

ugh so more fun ironic news..the diamond was sent out to the las vegas diamond convention and they won't be able to confirm if its available until june 12th! woohoo back to the drawing board for now. PLEASE send your diamond suggestions this way! thanks

Ugh! The drawbacks are making themselves readily apparent for you! Terrible luck.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

This is quite a good analysis and I agree with most of it. Virtual inventory is an interesting development in our industry and what we see today is a product of the evolution of information technology and an industry that is struggling to adapt to the new economy and a new selling channel. In a way the basic concept is not new at all. Jewelers have for many decades used lists of inventory from their suppliers, and even electronic databases of multiple vendors to source diamonds for their customers. What used to be known as "memo" business has morphed into "virtual" business through the emergence of powerful web technologies. What is new is the just-in-time "click and buy" marketing approach with companies making specific representations about the diamonds that they have never seen, based upon digital information driven by the upstream suppliers. Vast numbers of diamonds can now be listed for sale from dozens or even hundreds of different suppliers. The problems arise (as Yssie explains) from lack of standardization, coordination, and discipline among this large collection of disparate businesses. And the problems are more far reaching than just availability.

The biggest uncertainty is not whether the vendor can deliver and do so in a timely fashion, but rather with the diamond itself. Is it in the condition represented by the cert? Are important aspects not knowable from the cert alone (or even images) going to be detrimental? Are the light performance images associated with the diamond listing, which are relied upon by the consumer at the time of purchase, themselves accurate and reliable? Are the merchants who are selling on the basis of this second hand information verifying it with their own imaging before passing along? With vendors now listing diamonds that are housed overseas, returns and stock balancing are more complicated resulting in inducements to merchants to pass along problems that may go unnoticed by a consumer. It therefore becomes critical that you trust your merchant completely to do a thorough, accurate and ethical assessment of the diamond prior to delivery.

Yes, there are some cost advantages that can be passed along through operating a virtual model, and there is the advantage of being able to fish with a bigger net by offering an unlimited range of merchandise. And we are still in the early days of development of this business model, so it will likely improve over time. Presently though, most consumers in the market are still unwilling to buy diamonds online. Of those who are willing to do so, many want the added certainty knowing exactly what they are getting by shopping from in-house, thoroughly vetted inventory. When you consider that most online diamond sales are being driven by a new generation of young people buying engagement rings, because of the emotional nature of the product as well as timelines involved, the uncertainties involved in going the virtual path become much more problematic.

Bryan,

Regarding your second paragraph, are these issues with the representation of diamonds known issues or are they what you see as potential problems for the shopper going the virtual route? Is it a known problem that stones from suppliers to the vendors of virtual inventories aren't matching up with the images that were provided to the consumer? Are vendors passing along stones with known issues to consumers in order to avoid the costs of returns?

Certainly it is imperative to work with a vendor who you can trust and who has a record of sound, ethical business practices, but at the same time I think it is important to refrain from allowing *potential* pitfalls to deter consumers from a particular business model as a whole. I would hope that VI vendors themselves are helping to prevent a lot of these things from happening by refusing to work with suppliers who are not sharing accurate information about their stones. It leads to a waste of time for both the vendor and the consumer, which ends up reflecting poorly on the vendor; afterall, it's the vendor who the consumer deals with, not the supplier. Maybe some of the VI vendors will be able to comment as to how they handle these issues?

It seems apparent that it all comes down to trust in the vendor that you are working with as opposed to a trust in a certain sort of business model. There are vendors who stock in house inventory that you can't trust any farther than you can throw, just as there are with virtual inventory vendors. The VI vendors who are willing to face the challenges that their business model presents while still putting customer satisfaction at the forefront and refusing to compromise in that area are the ones who succeed and do well.

It is my belief, which I have shared with many here, that it is in everyone's best interest to get an independent opinion on any diamond purchase and feel like an independent appraisal is worth every penny of the cost. A good appraiser will be able to catch these sorts of issues if they happen to accidentally slip by an honest vendor or are kept in the dark by a dishonest one.

P,
I agree that the VI business model in and of itself is not the question. It makes sense, and it is beneficial to businesses and consumers when done well. It is a natural evolution of the e-commerce channel, it is here to stay, and it will get refined over time and become more reliable.

As you know, we have had a virtual inventory component to our business for many years and we are very familiar with the challenges. Yes, there are known issues in all of the areas I referenced, and others not mentioned. All the participants in the VI circuit are managing inventory lists and associated digital data that are constantly changing. Most of the data problems occur at the supplier level and flow downstream. To paraphrase a post on the subject from one of the VI vendors sometimes recommended here, “Some suppliers are really bad about managing their data”. And I will attest to the accuracy of that statement. Most people would be surprised at how “traditional” many diamond manufacturers are in terms of their business organizations and operations. A great many important suppliers are small family operations. They are very smart people but Silicon Valley it is NOT!

Problems with availability are usually caught fairly quickly. Problems with the diamond are not caught until later in the process. This is where both a rigorous quality control system and uncompromising ethical practice are paramount. The detection of a problem at this point is a source of disappointment and frustration for all parties, but especially for the consumer. A merchant who takes shortcuts on QC or succumbs to the temptation of passing along a discovered issue rather than having an unpleasant conversation that may result in a lost sale and an expensive return, is a legitimate concern given the nature of the enterprise.

One of the issues, and why I think this discussion is valuable, is that average consumers generally do not appreciate the differences between virtual inventory and in-stock, pre-vetted inventory. They may not understand the significance of a listing that says something like “usually ships within 5-7 days”. And they may have no idea of the potential issues and challenges involved in fulfilling their order.