how do we really know a D color is more rare than....

[Dancing Fire]

E-F-G....etc,etc when nature was making these diamonds i don''t think nature knew the difference between a D or Z.

 

[valeria101]

You don't !

kind'a asked myself the same, but found no data easily and gave up. At some point I set out to check if in any other gem extreme saturations of color (colorless and vivid something ) are rare - just about like anything else extreme. But that assumption of "normal distribution" might not hold: for some reason, anchroite and leuco garnet and colorless spinel are unsual, while colorless sapphire, topaz and beryl are less so. Only highly saturarated vivid colors (not by grading, just loosely so) seem to be rare in any gem species.

So... I am left with no working rule of thumb and the question

 

[denverappraiser]

Dancing,

I see no reason to believe that they are. I suspect the mining companies have some clue to this statistic but it strikes me as a pretty academic kind of issue. Interesting in it''s own right but not likely to lead to any useful conclusions. Have you come across a source that''s making this claim?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/16/2005 7:44:37 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Dancing,


. Have you come across a source that''s making this claim?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

no Neil,that''s why i ask the question.so.....basically an I-J-K color would be just as rare as an D.

 

[Antwerpman]

I have seen a LOT of diamonds and D colour is more rare than lower colour categories just as IF is more rare than the lower quality categories.

Remember that the lower colours (and qualities) are the result of impurities or the influence of the environmental condions when the diamonds were formed. Then think how difficult it is to paint your window frames without getting a fly or some dirt in the paint before it is dry and you will soon begin to realise why stones with zero defects or environmental influences are formed less frequently than those with them.

If anyone still does not believe me I am happy to test their conviction by swapping their D IF stones for equivalent (and equally rare in their opinion) M P3 stones

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

It is very simple to check for yourself.

just do some searches by each color grade of the hundred odd thousand diamonds listed here on Pricescope and see how many come up.

You will indeed see that D is rarer.
And please spare me the thought that someone is holding all the D''s from the market to raise the prices.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

got a normal distribution using the preset search functions above on VS2

D 287
E 574
F 778
G 924
H 480
I 175
J 145
K-M 75

Of course the stones listed here are more likely those that are sent to better labs. So lower grades would not be as likely to end up here with grading reports - they will be better represented in the Mall''s.

 

[oldminer]

One might conclude that D color is no less rare than E or F, but because of the perception of higher value, there is more marketability to slightly lesser colors at more interesting pricing. The color of diamonds related to their ACTUAL supply in nature is not actually known to anyone on Pricescope including me. I don't see evil at work here, but I would suspect a large game of marketing to make such a regular price matrix from a natural product.

The range of diamonds being offered on Pricescope, or anywhere else, is not much of an indicator of the true supply. I see it more as an indicator of what is best offered to American consumers for their consideration for purchase. It happens that there appears to be logic in this and one might construe it as an indicator of actual supply. I see it more as a response from sellers stocking what might best be sold to potential clients. If you wanted a load of D color stones and had the money, they would come out of the woodwork for you. I don't see much shortage or lack of supply other than man-made ones.

 

[denverappraiser]

I think we all agree at a D color will generally make a stone more expensive than an otherwise similar stone with a different color but this doesn’t make them more rare. The distribution of offerings on Pricescope isn’t a very good test, nor is the observation of stones being offered to a particular diamondtaire in Antwerp for reasons that Dave has outlined. I would even be inclined to question statistics from the publicly reporting mining companies about their output because the mines don’t all produce stones with the same profile. What you’re looking for is global mining output as measured by color, which I seriously doubt is available.

It’s kind of an interesting question. If, for example, there is a distortion that causes E color to be more plentiful than F color and this could be traced to a particular mine that produces a lot of marketable E stones, it may be a good idea to buy stock in that particular mining company. It strikes me as a bit of a stretch but Wall Street is full of people who enjoy a good stretch.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[Antwerpman]

I have seen the ACTUAL distibution of colours for the largest rough supplier in the world at a time when they controlled considerably more than they do now (lets say at least 65% of world production at that time) and their own sorting showed that D WAS considerably rarer than the other colours.

I have sorted run of mine, worked in polishing factories, audited large and small diamond companies specialising in all areas of the industry from $1.8 million per stone to $0.18 per stone and I can honestly say I have never seen anything other than evidence to indicate that the higher the colour the rarer they are (with the exception of fancies of course)

Of course if you want to believe otherwise it is your choice, but just remember that conspiracy theory is not a theory and we ARE out to get you

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 4/18/2005 10:47:36 AM
Author: Antwerpman
I have seen the ACTUAL distibution of colours for the largest rough supplier in the world at a time when they controlled considerably more than they do now (lets say at least 65% of world production at that time) and their own sorting showed that D WAS considerably rarer than the other colours.

I have sorted run of mine, worked in polishing factories, audited large and small diamond companies specialising in all areas of the industry from $1.8 million per stone to $0.18 per stone and I can honestly say I have never seen anything other than evidence to indicate that the higher the colour the rarer they are (with the exception of fancies of course)

Of course if you want to believe otherwise it is your choice, but just remember that conspiracy theory is not a theory and we ARE out to get you

Antwerpman,

It sounds like you have better data than I and I''m not surprised that this is the case for D because the grading standards are so grim at that level but are you confident that this pattern holds true for all colors? For example, is P really more common than K? At least in the marketplace here, this is not the case. A customer who wanted to buy a VS1-Q would find it significantly more difficult than a customer seeking a VS1-G.

I''m certainly not supporting the notion that this is evidence of any form of conspiacy on the part of the miners, the cutters or anyone else in the chain.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[oldminer]

Antwerpman:

Thank you for your well informed views. I think you are the only person I have met, although only electronically, that knows some of the facts. I have no conspiracy theory in mind, but just thought it was mostly smart marketing that created the matirx of "value". In overall nature we may have fewer D colors than E colors, but in a single mine we might have just the opposite. That is very sensible.

In the retail market we have many G-VS1''s with GIA reports but extremely few Q-VS1''s with GIA reports. This is a function of demand, not supply, one must suppose, because if there suddenly became a desire for Q color diamonds I feel certain there are some in reserve to fill it. Prices on Q colors might even rise if demand exceeded the demand for higher colors. We''d assume higher colors would rise in concert with demand for lower colors, but there is plenty of difference between the colors and actually the lower colors could rise quite a bit in value before higher colors rose at all.

It is a great topic and I appreciate the very interesting input from all. Thank you.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 4/18/2005 8:4:14 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
got a normal distribution using the preset search functions above on VS2

And since the normal is symmetrical, it would mean that both highest and lowest colors are "rare". You have explained away one tail ("low colors are not in demand here"). Why wouldn''t the same logic apply to the other extreme ? Since D are the most expensive... perhaps they are not so much in demand for that reason. And this is why I didn''t run the serach for evidence myself.

Now... colorless was the most valuable before any market controll happened. I believe the conclusion of an old free market.

One would think that the stats about color distribution and rarity would make front page adds since "rarity" is a good thing among gemstones. Any idea why that is not the case ?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Color is not as highly desired over clarity in Asian markets. I suspect that there are more D''s on offer in USA and that the numbers above truly over represent the availability of D.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Maybe, we should say that most diamonds are tinted, either in the yellow or in the brown range.

In the case of yellow, the tint comes from nitrogen, and the almost complete absence of nitrogen would make the stone a D-colour. More than 90% of diamonds are of the type that is coloured by nitrogen.

It is highly improbable, for a diamond being formed in an atmosphere containing nitrogen, to have no nitrogen in that specific diamond.

In the case of brown, the tint comes from structural defects, meaning that the atomic binding between C-atoms is not perfect. Also, in this case, an absolutely perfect atomic binding would be graded a D-colour.

Also in this case, it is highly improbable to have a diamond without any structural defects.

It is like walking through the rain without getting wet.

Live long,

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 4/18/2005 7:51:55 AM
Author: Antwerpman

If anyone still does not believe me I am happy to test their conviction by swapping their D IF stones for equivalent (and equally rare in their opinion) M P3 stones

I love it.

(Excellent info from both of the Antwerpmen)

 

[Antwerpman]

I think there is some form of `normal` distribution (although possibly skewed) at work as the intensly (Fancy) coloured and D colours are both rare. So in answer to an earlier question, at the centre of the distribution the frequency of occurence should be roughly the same for colours at an equal standard deviation away from the normal.

Unfortunately I no longer have access to the detailed information (change of employer

) so I cant tell you exactly where the median is, but my feeling would be that it is somewhere around the K-L region, but that is an experienced based estimate so may be biased by the types of goods I have been exposed to.

Certainly each mine of origin will have a different distribution and it would not surprise me to see the availability of certain colour ranges change as the Canadian mines contribution to world production increases, as they have their own unique profiles.

With regards to availability of stones outside the `norm`, then of course to find a certified Q VS1 will be difficult, even to find one of these stones without a cert will be difficult as there is little or no money to be made by differentiating a Q from a P or an O, so what tends to happen in these ranges is that the colours are grouped together in to arbitary categories (eg TLC - top light colour) which will contain a range of colours and qualities and these will then be sold for use in lower price point jewelry where the color and quality are not declared. Should there suddenly be money to be made from selling certified Q VS1`s then you can be sure there would be a plentiful supply

Finally (for now) it is nature who decides the rarity of a particular colour or purity, but it is the markets, consumers and marketeers who dictate the price differentials between these categories, Just because a D is twice the price of an H does not mean it is twice as rare (can possibly be more or less). It is a personal choice, heavily influenced by our experiences, to decide if it is worth it to us as an individual to pay the extra for the increase in quality and/or colour and/or size. Just be sure that the upgrade you are seeking is really an upgrade which will make a difference to you and not just to your `bragging rights` or you will find yourself falling in to the marketeers cleverly laid traps to get you to spend more $$$

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/19/2005 3:45:51 AM
Author: Antwerpman
Unfortunately I no longer have access to the detailed information (change of employer

) so I cant tell you exactly where the median is, but my feeling would be that it is somewhere around the K-L region, but that is an experienced based estimate so may be biased by the types of goods I have been exposed to.

For the benefit of many readers who might have noticed that Antwerpman is a pretty smart dude, he did once work for a very very big company in the Diamond world, and these days he works more with $$$ in the diamond biz.

We are lucky to have some smart and well informed AntwerpPeople

 

[Antwerpman]

Thanks for the kind words Gary, perhaps you did not hear that I have since left the $$$ part of the business and moved back to the `real` diamond business

Good to be back working in the `thick of it` again and I am sure Paul can update you with the details.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 4/19/2005 6:52:12 AM
Author: Antwerpman
Thanks for the kind words Gary, perhaps you did not hear that I have since left the $$$ part of the business and moved back to the `real` diamond business

Good to be back working in the `thick of it` again and I am sure Paul can update you with the details.

Hey Antwerpman,

I tend to keep such info for myself.