Should I be concerned buying a diamond whose GIA was dated in Feb 2003? Should I assume this means the diamond is hard to sell. I have not seen the diamond in person, and only have the GIA and sarin information. It is from Diamonds by Lauren.
Since you have the Sarin, crunch the HCA and see how the diamond rates.
There are any number of reasons a diamond can have an older Cert. It's not really anything to worry about as long as the diamond is a good performer and priced appropriately.
I would not assume it's hard to sell...it also may have been sold and returned for an upgrade or other reasons...I would be very interested in the specs of the stone? Is it a fancy colored stone...David sells quite a lot of them...I'm not sure the market for colored is as strong as for white ...that could be a reason...More info please!!!!
Thanks for your replies. As so kindly requested, here is more info on the stone. It is a E colored princess cut .90 carat stone. Please note the variations in sarin vs. GIA too...should this be of concern?
GIA:
5.46 X 5.44 X 3.70
DEPTH: 68%
tABLE: 64%
bIRDLE: stk TO thk
cULET: None
pOILISH: Excellent
sYMMETRY: Very Good
cLARITY: VS1
Color: E
Flourescence: Faint
I know the crown is not ideal (seems from my readings bigger is better), the retailer has said it is very well cut and is one of the best princess cuts he's seen.
Carrie- that's messed up. First, I was shocked to see that the crown was only 9 with a 64 table. That would be WEIRD.....It is more understandable with the depth at 68 and the table at 69. SOMETHING IS WRONG. I know David has a good rep on the other site...but that would scare me off...I would ask him to send it out to an indep appraiser first...The GIA is off I bet...is it the same stone?
My husband has been doing the talking with Dave/Marc...and I don't think he has asked either one. I thought the variation was strange too. Hmmm. Thanks for the input...we'll have to get a separate apparaisal as you suggested. For my understanding, why do you assume the GIA is incorrect and not the sarin?
Hmmm, I don't know enough about the sarin to tell.. maybe something could have caused the error...I would ask him to run it again...There could be a problem with the machine? Dunno. BUT what shocks me is that Diamonds By Lauren has not made an issue of this...that is absurd.
I think considering the spread of the stone and the 68 table and 64 depth, I would expect a greater crown %... I would expect a 9 from a 68 depth and 69 table...that's what's weird to me.
The depth % might be solely a result of the pavillion arrangement/depth. It would have no bearing on the crown height or the table %. That is to say that you could have two diamonds with the same diameter, table, and crown with different pavillions, which would lead to different depth % but the other numbers would remain the same.
That's what I'm wondering too. If the crown % will increase if the GIA is accurate.
My husband spoke with Diamonds by Lauren and he offered to redo the sarin. He is positive this is the correct GIA for this stone. He (the retailer) said the table % may vary from sarin to GIA because depending on which facets you use to do your calc. you may get a different result, but he too was wondering why such the drastic difference. I'll keep you updated on what happens. Thank you all for your interest, advice, and help!
Feel free to post your comments/thoughts/predictions on this issue.
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.