Princess Cut: The Black Sheep of Diamonds

[mdx]

Hi All
Here are extracts from an article I found recently from an insurance claim negotiator
Any Comments?

Wayne
Melbourne Diamond Exchange ltd (Australia)

Princess Cut:
The Black Sheep of Diamonds

It''s a matter of shape

Princess Cut:
It’s a matter of shape
They''re likely to get into trouble, these princess cut diamonds. Likely to get chipped, damaged. Likely to have to be replaced. Why is that?


When it comes to damage from chipping, round is the safest shape. A properly proportioned "round brilliant" diamond, for example, is strongest. That''s because it''s basically a circle (when viewed from the top), without large points protruding
The "princess cut" diamond, on the other hand, is square when viewed from the top. Four corners are exposed for damage. This shape is so vulnerable that some jewelry experts characterize it as an accident waiting to happen.

Diamonds are reputed to be quite hard. Do they really damage so easily?
Diamond is, indeed, the hardest gem. In gemological terms, hardness means resistance to scratching. A diamond can scratch other gems, but nothing can scratch a diamond except another diamond. Cutting and faceting of diamonds can be done only with other diamonds because only diamond can cut diamond. Their hardness also allows diamonds to take a high polish, which enhances their scintillation.
Toughness, however, refers to the ability of the gem to resist breakage, as from a blow or fall. Diamond''s toughness rating is only fair to good. Those sharp corners do make the princess cut diamond more vulnerable.
It comes down to carat weight
The princess shape was invented to get the biggest gem out of a piece of rough stone. Customers may not know much else about how to judge a diamond, but they will pay more for size (carat weight). Cutters often sacrifice beauty for a higher carat weight. Similarly, the princess cut sacrifices durability for carat weight.
What does it mean to the insurer?
Insurance companies have been routinely paying damage claims for chipped corners on princess cut diamonds. Really, they should NOT be paying on such claims. These vulnerable corners constitute inherent vice, and their chipping should be excluded by the policy. However, this would be difficult to enforce since past practice has been to pay on such damage claims. Policyholders might sue for bad faith claims practices. A better approach would be to exclude all damage on princess cut diamonds.
We hope that the jewelry industry will follow the lead of Sirius, a Canadian company that has modified the princess cut by clipping the tips off the corners. This does lighten carat weight somewhat but it also reduces the likelihood of damage. Sirius sells the modified princess cut under the name Arctic Empress™. These stones are truly cut for beauty.
FOR UNDERWRITING
Exclude breakage on all Princess cut diamonds.
Two other common shapes, though less popular than princess cuts, also have a high vulnerability to damage because of sharp points These are Marquise and Pear Shapes
Regarding inherent vice, shape is not the only consideration. In a diamond of any shape, poor cut proportions can produce places vulnerable to damage. A common problem is a girdle that is too thin.
Points along the girdle may be covered by prongs in the setting. Note, however, that the points are still likely to break under stress. A lot of princess cut diamonds incur point chipping when the stone is set, removed for resetting, etc., but prongs then hide the earlier damage.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Sounds like they've got a gemologist consulting them.

Although I don't agree with their reasoning on how to handle the sharp-cornered vulnerability, I will admit that I have seen more than my share of chipped princess cut corners.

Most of the cases I have seen occur upon setting. Often it was not disclosed upon sale.

It seems to happen much more often with a princess cut than with a marquise or pearshape. I hope these two shapes don't end up getting penalized by the insurance companies because of the princess cut.

The Sirius "Arctic Empress" sounds like a good compromise. A beveled corner princess cut. You get the look of a princess without the sharp cornered vulnerability.

 

[Binki]

The vulnerability of the corners can be resolved by the appropriate setting. My four prong setting has the prongs on the actual point. No breakage is possible.

 

[moremoremore]

Binki- I don't think that even the best Vcap setting can protect a very thin princess girdle from possibly chipping! (not that yours is thin...dont know what it is...but that is sure is pretty! )

 

[Nicrez]

If marquise and pears can have french tips, to reduce breakage, why can''t someone have a special tip cut for princess edges?

 

[denverappraiser]

Insurance companies have an assortment of pretty dumb practices that cost them money and this is the fragile tip of the proverbial iceberg.

In general, the premiums they charge are a function of the value of the item (which is a can of worms by itself), and the address and creditworthiness of the client. These all relate to the companies risk but it overlooks a significant amount of important information. They are, for example, remarkably willing to insure a princess cut emerald set into a ring that will be worn daily with a 5 digit value attached to it and calculate the premium using the same rules as they do for a round diamond mounted into a pin shaped like a Christmas tree (that will probably only be worn a few times per year) that is owned by the same client despite the fact that the risks of a claim are vastly different. IMO, the problem is the agents and the process for creating and binding the policies in the first place. It’s about time they delved into it. They shouldn’t be writing policies where they don’t understand their risks. This article is undoubtedly the result of a consulting gemologist and it’s about time. Endorsing a particular cutting house strikes me as a poor solution to the problem but at least they are asking the questions. Hopefully it’s not the result of lobbying by the cutters as a way of promoting their particular brand.

The whole inherent vice thing is a huge dodge of this whole issue. Theoretically, they can deny any claim they wish by the use of this exclusion combined with the requirement that the consumer take ‘reasonable care’ of their property. I''m all for companies refusing to accept liabilities that are beyond the scope of the policy and for charging extra when the risks justify it. These are issues that need to be addressed on the front end of the policy before they accept the first premium dollar, not during the claims process. The first thing they should do is stop accepting ''appraisals'' that don''t include enough information for the company to reasonably assess their risks. Then they need to actually do the risk evaluation and set their premiums accordingly.

Retroactively telling the client that their stone isn''t covered against breakage becaue of the fragile nature of the cut when this cut was specifically stated in the original documents is crap.

Neil Beaty
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 12/15/2004 2:10:34 PM
Author: denverappraiser

Insurance companies have an assortment of pretty dumb practices that cost them money and this is the fragile tip of the proverbial iceberg.

Nice one Neil

As i have said in another post specifically on princess tips - at maunfacture stage, flattening the tips will usually result in a larger yeild - not a smaller one.
Would you agree Johan?

 

[strmrdr]

There was a very simular piece floating around here about 6-8 months ago about them no longer writing policies on princess diamonds with under a med girdle at the thinnest point.
I have also seen one talking about charging 2x the amount for rounds to cover them.
One way or the other its going to happen eventualy if something causes them to have to pay claims the price either goes up or they dont write the policy.
In some areas some insurance companies are refusing to insure the top 10 most stolen cars for that area unless they have specific aftermarket alarm and tracking systems installed.

 

[i_like_tiffany_please_dont_hate_me]

in defence of the insurance industry... (six words I never thought I would utter...) if they are paying more out in claims than they are taking in in premiums on princess cut diamonds, then they are making a loss on those policies. therefore, EVERYONE is paying for other people''s princess cut in their premiums, they are paying more to cover the losses companies make on the princess cuts - is this fair?

if princess cut diamonds result in more frequent and more costly claims, surely it is only reasonable to charge a higher premium?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/15/2004 5:55:13 PM
Author: diamondgeezer
in defence of the insurance industry... (six words I never thought I would utter...) if they are paying more out in claims than they are taking in in premiums on princess cut diamonds, then they are making a loss on those policies. therefore, EVERYONE is paying for other people''s princess cut in their premiums, they are paying more to cover the losses companies make on the princess cuts - is this fair?


if princess cut diamonds result in more frequent and more costly claims, surely it is only reasonable to charge a higher premium?

Agree, if they cut the rate for rounds at the same time I dont have a problem with it.

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 12/15/2004 5:55:13 PM
Author: diamondgeezer

if princess cut diamonds result in more frequent and more costly claims, surely it is only reasonable to charge a higher premium?

No problems here. I absolutely agree. Premiums should be a function of the risks. Princesses aren''t the only issue. They aren''t even the worst. What about Opals? Emeralds? What about poorly designed or manufactured mountings? The agents are unable to become experts in everything they insure and the companies are unwilling to have people in the underwriting department that can spot the problems and bounce the application. Requiring a reasonable appraisal as a requirement of binding a policy is in the best interest of both the company and the insured. Instead they insist on binding policies on the strength of descriptions like ‘ladies diamond ring about the size of a pea - $8,000’. There is no way to settle a claim on such a policy to the satisfaction of both the clients and the stockholders. Vendors are welcome to supply a BS report that says the diamonds are super-excellent superb and are worth 10 times the actual cost if they want to. This adds unnecessary debris to the landfill and could be considered environmentally irresponsible but what makes this a serious problem is when the insurance companies write a policy based on them and start collecting premiums. Then when they have to pay a claim they want to blame the jeweler, they want to blame the appraiser, they want to blame the client. Phooey. It’s the companies own fault. They wrote the contract, they can fix it Other users of appraisal services, notably IRS and the courts, have worked through this process pretty well. Try making a charitable donation backed by a feel-good appraisal and see how long you can stand up for an audit.
Neil Beaty
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[JohnQuixote]

The practicioners will tell you it is an inherent risk due to the cleavage plane, which makes setting a risk regardless of girdle thickness.
The theorists look for possible ways to circumvent that risk.

At this time it is *ALL* in the hands of the setter.

The thread Garry started a while back is linked here. It's an interesting juxtapposition of positions for those with a few minutes to digest it.

 

[persistent]

I am a long time lurker and have read several of these threads about chipped princess cuts...I am awaiting my princess cut presently, which is being set in a G & A tension setting (http://www.mickyroof.com/tr117.jpg), in which the corners are shielded by the setting. Do the same concerns with chipping apply to the edges?

I have a marginal understanding of crystal lattice planes etc. and I''m intersted in understanding more about how crystal structure, influences the various cuts. Any good websites?

thanks,
-j

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The crystal associated risk affects the sides and edges of the stone. The big main triangular facets are very close to the major (111) octahedral cleavage direction (to learn more enter those terms into any search engine)

The tips are vunerable irrespective of cleavage - simply because they are sharp pointy and vunerable. A pear or marquise is vunerable too.

 

[tonysgeko]

There''s an interesting pic of a damaged princess diamond here jcrs for people ,like me, who have never seen what chipping looks like.