Opinions needed! Wacky emerald cut . . .

[RockHuntin]

I know someone who is selling their emerald cut diamond engagement ring and an accompanying wedding band (the set is used).

The center stone has me a bit confused b/c of its wacky table %, girdle, and note on the GIA cert. Here is the info from the cert.

Emerald Cut
Measurements: 7.32 x 5.78 x 4.04 mm
Carat Weight: 1.50 carat
Color Grade: J
Clarity Grade: VS2

Proportions:
Depth: 69.9%
Table: 81%
Girdle: Extremely Thin to Thick
Culet: None

Finish:
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Fluorescence: None

Additional Information:
No cut grade has been calculated for this item, and the item would need to be submitted for an update, to receive a cut grade.

Yeah or nay? I would like to hear your thoughts before I mention the price I''m being offered.

 

[RockHuntin]

Forgot to mention . . .

I looked up emerald cuts on the following site: http://www.gemappraisers.com/oldcutgraderules.asp

The table % would fall into class 4B; girdle thickness would be either 4A or 4B. Depth % falls into class 3A.

I haven''t had the chance to see the diamond yet - is it worth it to see it in person? or is the wackiness too hard to swallow.

 

[Karl_K]

bleh
skip it

 

[emeraldlover1]

That table is just really large. The extreamly thin girdle bothers me too. So, based on the numbers I would pass but its hard to say without pictures and you seeing it in person. What price are they asking for it?

 

[RockHuntin]

Here is one pic. Let me know your thoughts.

 

[RockHuntin]

Here''s another pic of just the engagement ring.

 

[RockHuntin]

$5k or best offer - my impression is there''s lots of wiggle room. Oh, and both the engagement ring and wedding band are set in platinum (which would need to be sized).

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/13/2009 9:50:04 PM
Author: emeraldlover1
That table is just really large. The extreamly thin girdle bothers me too. So, based on the numbers I would pass but its hard to say without pictures and you seeing it in person. What price are they asking for it?

Ditto Karl and el1, with that huge table the diamond will look glassy and have a very shallow crown height so not much fire.

 

[chrono]

Date: 12/14/2009 5:50:36 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 12/13/2009 9:50:04 PM
Author: emeraldlover1
That table is just really large. The extreamly thin girdle bothers me too. So, based on the numbers I would pass but its hard to say without pictures and you seeing it in person. What price are they asking for it?

Ditto Karl and el1, with that huge table the diamond will look glassy and have a very shallow crown height so not much fire.

That''s correct to all the above. The girdle scares me too, not just due to the extremely thin part, but how huge the variation is.

 

[purrfectpear]

That''s not a table, that''s a landing strip

However, if they want to give it away at the right price...it might make a fun pendant.

 

[RockHuntin]

I''ve honestly never even heard of such a strange combination of attributes - maybe it has character(?)

Anyone have an idea of what the center diamond is worth (or a suggested negotiating bottom line)?

I did a quick search for a diamond with similar length, width, color, and clarity, but better depth, table, girdle, and cut grade. I couldn''t get an exact comparison, but this is what I found: http://www.yourdiamond.com/diamonds/view_cert.asp?ID=23161

It weighs 1.34 carats, as opposed to 1.5 carats. Because of its dimensions, it faces up similarly in size (aside from comfortable variance) because of the more appropriate cut, proportions, and depth.

As for the diamond I found online, the depth percentage is 64.3% (class 1A-2A range). The table percentage is 66% (class 1B range). The girdle is described as slightly thick to thick (class 1A-2A range). The one I found online is VS1 in clarity and K in color (fine with me, though a strange combination). It compares pretty closely with a variance of one grade in either direction. The polish, symmetry, and cut are all rated very good by GIA, which is a nice "endorsement".

The one online is priced at $3,579. It''s still marked up, as compared the leaner margin I should pay on an after market (used, or "well enjoyed") purchase.

 

[Rockdiamond]

RockHuntin,
There do exist larger tabled emerald cuts that you may find attractive.
I''m not saying this is one of them- but in general the charts you are referring to draw distinctions that may not hold water in real life.
You may prefer the looks of a stone which is supposedly less well cut based on the cut charts.
Of course you''d need to look at it to decide. The seller''s photos don''t give us enough info IMO
One big red flag I noticed is this comment:

Additional Information:
No cut grade has been calculated for this item, and the item would need to be submitted for an update, to receive a cut grade.

GIA does not issue cut grades for emerald cut diamonds- which calls into question if the diamond has a GIA report at all.

 

[RockHuntin]

Hi RockDiamond,

I really appreciate your insight. I''m thinking I should really see it in person before I judge it too harshly. I tend to favor the chunky look of antique engagement rings, so this might do the trick. Perhaps resetting it into a snug halo (bezel or low prong) would set off the large table nicely while protecting the girdle.

I was wondering what you meant about the "additional information" quote I pulled from the GIA cert verified online; I wasn''t sure if that language is just no longer used, or if they won''t issue a cut grade at all at this point. From what I recall, the cert was from 2005; I am trying the verification tool again to double check, but its not loading properly right now.

 

[Rockdiamond]

You''re welcome!
I do feel that many stones are judged harshly based on measurement, when in real life, they may be very attractive.

Here''s what concerns me: GIA does NOT issue cut grades on any fancy shaped diamonds- including emerald cuts.

Are you saying you got this info off the GIA website??

 

[RockHuntin]

Hi Rockdiamond,

I actually copied and pasted that "additional information" language directly from the report (I entered the report # and carat weight into the "verify a report" tool on the gia.edu website). When I pulled it up hours ago, I believe the report was dated 2005; I honestly can''t recall now, and am having trouble accessing the tool because of some server error on GIA''s end.

I thought the language in the report was peculiar, and was concerned when you mentioned GIA doesn''t grade fancy cut diamonds. If you would like to look up the report to see what I mean, I could give you the report number and carat weight.

Is it safe to post the report number on this thread?

 

[Rockdiamond]

There''s no problem whatsoever posting a GIA report number.
Do you have an image of the report?

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 12/14/2009 2:26:20 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
RockHuntin,
There do exist larger tabled emerald cuts that you may find attractive.
I''m not saying this is one of them- but in general the charts you are referring to draw distinctions that may not hold water in real life.
You may prefer the looks of a stone which is supposedly less well cut based on the cut charts.
Of course you''d need to look at it to decide. The seller''s photos don''t give us enough info IMO
One big red flag I noticed is this comment:

Additional Information:
No cut grade has been calculated for this item, and the item would need to be submitted for an update, to receive a cut grade.

GIA does not issue cut grades for emerald cut diamonds- which calls into question if the diamond has a GIA report at all.

In general, the "expert" you just saw quoted is known for referring to "opinions" that may not hold water in real life

In other words, do a search on the author before you assume veracity IMO.

 

[kenny]

Date: 12/14/2009 5:00:35 PM
Author: purrfectpear

Date: 12/14/2009 2:26:20 PM
Auth0r: Rockdiamond
RockHuntin,
There do exist larger tabled emerald cuts that you may find attractive.
I'm not saying this is one of them- but in general the charts you are referring to draw distinctions that may not hold water in real life.
You may prefer the looks of a stone which is supposedly less well cut based on the cut charts.
Of course you'd need to look at it to decide. The seller's photos don't give us enough info IMO
One big red flag I noticed is this comment:

Additional Information:
No cut grade has been calculated for this item, and the item would need to be submitted for an update, to receive a cut grade.

GIA does not issue cut grades for emerald cut diamonds- which calls into question if the diamond has a GIA report at all.

In general, the 'expert' you just saw quoted is known for referring to 'opinions' that may not hold water in real life

In other words, do a search on the author before you assume veracity IMO.

Yes I agree, RockHuntin; do a search on that author.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Gee guys, I was trained as a diamond grader by Harry Winston over 30 years ago- and have been continuously employed in the diamond business by some of the largest diamond companies in the world since then- till I opened Rock Diamond on April 1 1998. Rock diamond has many thousands of satisfied clients, and never a single complaint by an actual client here on PS.
I am giving my honest opinion based on personal experience. We deal quite a bit with emerald cuts. I have no idea of the professional diamond experience of the people criticizing me, maybe they can give you better advice. By all means read what people have written if you deem that necessary.

I have nothing whatsoever to do with the seller or the buyer, only donating my time to assist someone asking a question.

Rockhuntin- obviously it''s not only diamonds getting some harsh treatment around here....heheh


Do you have the image of the report- some of the things you''ve said do have me scratching my head.

 

[purrfectpear]

Based on the fact that you think that steep-deep is disparaging, and that leakage is disparaging, and that you insist on implying that the HCA is trumped by your "hired off the street with ZERO experience" training grading melee at Harry Winston years ago, I think you can pretty well expect more of the same in the near future. I would hate for someone to assume that just because you sell diamonds your opinion was to be accepted as gospel.

You will notice however, that no other dealer has had to have a disclaimer posted after their posts.

 

[Rockdiamond]

If you want to explain leakage and steep deep you're perfectly welcome to do so.
Based on the thousands of views my threads get, a lot of other readers may also find the way these terms are used adds no clarification to a diamond hunt.
Have you used HCA on a lot of emerald cuts Purrfect?
Do you have any interest in assisting the OP, or just trying to disparage someone you disagree with?


I see no disclaimer, nor any other dealers posting to assist the OP.

 

[kenny]

Date: 12/14/2009 6:12:47 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Do you have any interest in assisting the OP, or just trying to disparage someone you disagree with?

I see no disclaimer, nor any other dealers posting to assist the OP.

Other dealers don't need to defend the sale of poorly cut diamonds.


Are you suggesting asking someone to read your previous posts could be in any way disparaging?

 

[Rockdiamond]

I''m not defending anything.
How about assisting the OP?

 

[RockHuntin]

Hi all - I definitely didn''t mean to stir things up but appreciate the healthy discussion.

Maybe this will help:

Report number: 14335165.
Exact carat weight: 1.50.

I emailed the seller asking for a picture of the report. I will give an update when I receive an image from the seller. Unfortunately, I have had no luck this afternoon in accessing the GIA report verification tool (still a GIA server error). I sent an email to the webmaster - maybe that will help(?).

Until its up and running again, I wanted to reiterate - the language I posted about the "additional information" is verbatim from the verified report online. The quote is below:

Additional Information:
No cut grade has been calculated for this item, and the item would need to be submitted for an update, to receive a cut grade.

 

[Karl_K]

back on topic:
An EC with a table that large is going to missing the small and med sized sparkle that the crown facets provide that give them life.
In some lighting table glare will be all that is returned and that is why they are called glassy because they are not returning light.

Also with that larger a table and a shallow crown combined with the depth you have a very very deep pavilion that also causes issues.

This one is a cinch, there is a pretty 1ct diamond hiding in there but its not economical to have it recut.

 

[RockHuntin]

Sorry - I just realized what I wrote might be confusing.

To clarify: I retrieved the online GIA report from their verification tool this morning. I copied and pasted the text of it into the thread I started.

This afternoon, after receiving some inquiries about the GIA report and cut, I tried to access the verification tool again. Due to a GIA server error which started this afternoon, I have been unsuccessful in accessing the tool once more.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 12/14/2009 6:32:20 PM
Author: RockHuntin
Hi all - I definitely didn''t mean to stir things up but appreciate the healthy discussion.


Maybe this will help:


Report number: 14335165.

Exact carat weight: 1.50.


I emailed the seller asking for a picture of the report. I will give an update when I receive an image from the seller. Unfortunately, I have had no luck this afternoon in accessing the GIA report verification tool (still a GIA server error). I sent an email to the webmaster - maybe that will help(?).


Until its up and running again, I wanted to reiterate - the language I posted about the ''additional information'' is verbatim from the verified report online. The quote is below:


Additional Information:

No cut grade has been calculated for this item, and the item would need to be submitted for an update, to receive a cut grade.

So you''re saying the part in bold was from the GIA website?

I''d really need to see a picture of the GIA report- as well as a link to where you found that quote.

I agree that the table seems large. However without seeing better photos- or the diamond itself, all you have are "educated" guesses.
It very well may be a stone you''ll see and not like.
But the possibility certainly exists that you may see the stone and love it.
If the price is aggressive- and it actually does have a GIA report ( still a question in my mind) it might be a stone you want to consider.

It''s easy for people who have nothing at stake to knock stones. If they want to spend more to find a stone that they feel is cut better, why not?
But it''s YOUR money.

 

[RockHuntin]

Yes, the bold text was written in the report that was verified on the GIA website. Here is a link to the GIA reports and services page: http://www.gia.edu/lab-reports-services/index.html

The link to the report verification tool is the fourth one up on the left side of the page.

As soon as I get an image from the seller, or the GIA server is up and running again, I will let you all know.

Based on the specs, I''m getting the impression this diamond will not wow me in person. I''m thinking more "ice cube" than "fire"

I''m seeing room for negotiation based on the emails going back and forth between myself and the seller. From a buyer perspective (assuming my aggressive negotiating), what would be fair price for the set? Granted, there may be an upgraded setting in the future.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Something just doesn''t add up Rockhuntin

The statement in bold can NOT have been issued by GIA.
So, maybe someone else made that comment, and referred to a GIA report.
But GIA has NO cut grade for emerald cut diamonds, therefore the statement can''t have come from GIA.
GIA is open in California for another 40 minutes.
Their number is 760-603-4000 if you want to confirm that they do not issue cut grades for emerald cuts.

The reason I find this to be of concern is that we''ve heard of so many cases where someone was told a diamond had a GIA report, when in fact, it had an appraisal- or something other than a GIA report.
Maybe the stone does have a GIA report.
But resubmitting it will NOT get a "Cut grade"- and whoever is telling you that is giving inaccurate info. That, to me, is the greatest area of concern.

 

[RockHuntin]

Rockdiamond, I appreciate your inquisitive nature and skepticism, but I''ve actually stated it several times now - the language is in the report.

The seller hasn''t sent me anything other than that GIA report number and carat weight. No appraisal. No receipt. Nothing. I used the report number and carat weight to look up the report myself. I found the language. So there is no extraneous source of information here.

Are you suggesting that someone hacked into GIA''s online verification tool to add the perplexing "additional information" section?

I''m in the same room as my girlfriend, so I can''t call GIA in California right now. Anyone want to? Otherwise, I guess we''ll wait until the server is up or I get a picture of the report.