Radiant Problem

[Jean]

Hello all,

I have a quick question/concern. My boyfriend ordered my ring on Affinitydiamonds.com recently. The suprise is that I do not know when I am getting it but we were both active in deciding what to get. It is a 1.20 Radiant cut, here are the basic specs below..

1.20
G
SI1
Radiant
6.58x5.78x3.37
Depth 58.3
Table 65

We know that it is a sqaure radiant and we are ok with that. It looks like a great stone, my concern is that I was searching on pricescope to get some other quotes just for HA HA''s on radiant''s with the same specs and the SAME EXACT stone with the SAME EXACT flaws came up on Abazias diamonds with the same GIA report. Is it possible that there could be two of the exact same stone. My ring is paid for and being set, but now we are a little concerned!
Any thought

s

 

[chialea]

I believe Azibas drop ships stones, which means they have a listing of stones owned by all sorts of dealers, which are updated by the dealers -- they just republish them and act as a broker. It just means it hasn't been updated yet. If you want to double-check, look at the GIA ID number for the two stones. If they're the same, it's just database lag.

 

[Jean]

That was a very quick response. Thank you very much for your advice! Also, if anyone wants to chime in on the quality of the stone mentioned above that would be useful as well!

Thanks again

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Hi Shana. Not to worry. You're diamond was probably owned by a diamond manufacturer and being marketed by a couple different diamond wholesalers.

Kind of like a real estate listing, where you have a couple different realtors all marketing the same house, hoping they'll be the one that makes the sale.

Abazias will probably drop the listing when they update their database.

 

[Jean]

Thanks for the response, that made me nervous. Any advice on the quality of the stone I listed.

Thanks

 

[Richard Sherwood]

The radiant is not a square, by the way. It has a length to width ratio of 1.14 to 1.00, which is slightly rectangular.

G/SI1 is a nice color/clarity combination.

It's a slightly shallow stone, which means it will have a large surface area and perhaps a lively "shattered glass" or what I call "breaking surf" reflection pattern under the table.

This is common with a lot of radiant cuts, and many people are fond of the pattern, while others prefer a more orderly reflection pattern, such as seen on a princess cut.

Have you seen the diamond yet?

As I advise everyone, I would make the sale contingent upon the diamond appraising out to your satisfaction with an independent appraiser, with a right of return for ANY REASON.

Then you can ask the appraiser questions to your heart's content, asking him to be critical in his observation of the pros & cons of the diamond. Following this procedure, there's no way you can lose.

 

[Jean]

Thanks a lot. Ok, so it is more rectangular... either way is fine with me, thanks for you help. We have not seen it but we did so much research. There is a 30 day money back, so if we do not like it, that is ok, it will just go back. One more question, when you say shallow, does that mean that since the top is larger the stone may actually look larger than its carat weight?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/24/2004 12:40:30 PM Jean wrote:



One more question, when you say shallow, does that mean that since the top is larger the stone may actually look larger than its carat weight?

----------------

Yes, this is what it means... Actually, it is not usual for radiants to be cut below 60% depth, 58% is quite a bot less. However, this stone has a rather thick girdle which does dimminish such gain in size - if you shift PS a bit, you will find radiants a bit over 60% deep with the same surface area. The few ones I found were square and quite a bit more expensive than what your stone is (still) being quoted for.

If the 58% depth is in fact a detraction (cutting off brilliance) can be known for sure only with the stone in hand since this depends on all those proportions put together: the smaller table paired with not-so-deep cut could work nicely this time. If this stone does prove attractive, than it is quite a find (given the price and size)

 

[valeria101]

This is the inclusions plot on the report of your stone (taken from DCD's posting which does classify this stone as "premium cut")... and it is the first like this I see! I know that these shapes are not supposed to look like the stone exactly, but there is some resemblance, usually. With GIA only spelling out "modified brilliant cut" for the model, this could be one interesting piece... Hope you get to see it and tell the story further.

 

[Jean]

Thanks for your help! I should have it soon and I will post it to let you know...