Premium paid for Square Emerald Cut (aka Asscher) over other Emerald cuts?

[JulietRomeoTango]

Hi,

Do people here feel there is a premium payed for the Asscher cut over other non-square Emerald cuts? And if so, why? Is it marketing hype (e.g. recent popularity of celebrity rings being Asscher''s) or just a swing in fashion? I mean, they both seem to have similar retro-styling and should appeal to those with a penchant for Edwardian to Art-Deco sensibilities? Yet, the Asscher''s symmetry nearly always gives it a more expensive shape/weight ratio.

Take for instance the following two examples from James Allen:

1) Emerald Cut 1.12 Carat D-VS1 Ideal Cut [Item Number: 1109259]
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 66.8%
Table: 64.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.56*5.24*3.50
Ratio: 1.25

Price: $5,980

and,

2) 1.13 Carat D-VS1 Ideal Cut Asscher [Item Number: 1138534]
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 62.8%
Table: 64.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.94*5.65*3.55
Ratio: 1.05

Price: $6,990

I know there are slight differences but these were the two closest I could find in specs. Both look like very pretty stones, yet the Asscher commands a nearly 17% premium as far as I can tell. How come?

Sorry if the above is a naive question, but I have been scouring

the expertise on these forums for the past few weeks (beginning a search for an engagement ring for my girlfriend who is bonkers over everything fashionable during the early part of the 20th C - 1920s) and I have not been able to ascertain a satisfying answer. I would appreciate any help from the various Emerald and Asscher enthusiasts and experts (strmrdr, decodelighted, belle, cymbrie, kaleigh wink, mara, rhino and many others) here.

THANK YOU all for helping to educate me this far.

Cheers!

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 7/9/2009 12:41:47 AM
Author:JulietRomeoTango
Hi,

Do people here feel there is a premium payed for the Asscher cut over other non-square Emerald cuts? And if so, why? Is it marketing hype (e.g. recent popularity of celebrity rings being Asscher''s) or just a swing in fashion? I mean, they both seem to have similar retro-styling and should appeal to those with a penchant for Edwardian to Art-Deco sensibilities? Yet, the Asscher''s symmetry nearly always gives it a more expensive shape/weight ratio.

Take for instance the following two examples from James Allen:

1) Emerald Cut 1.12 Carat D-VS1 Ideal Cut [Item Number: 1109259]
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 66.8%
Table: 64.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.56*5.24*3.50
Ratio: 1.25

Price: $5,980

and,

2) 1.13 Carat D-VS1 Ideal Cut Asscher [Item Number: 1138534]
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 62.8%
Table: 64.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.94*5.65*3.55
Ratio: 1.05

Price: $6,990

I know there are slight differences but these were the two closest I could find in specs. Both look like very pretty stones, yet the Asscher commands a nearly 17% premium as far as I can tell. How come?

Sorry if the above is a naive question, but I have been scouring

the expertise on these forums for the past few weeks (beginning a search for an engagement ring for my girlfriend who is bonkers over everything fashionable during the early part of the 20th C - 1920s) and I have not been able to ascertain a satisfying answer. I would appreciate any help from the various Emerald and Asscher enthusiasts and experts (strmrdr, decodelighted, belle, cymbrie, kaleigh wink, mara, rhino and many others) here.

THANK YOU all for helping to educate me this far.

Cheers!

The pricing of fancies can often be all over the place and sometimes has no rhyme or reason. But here are a few trends I have noticed:

1) Sometimes a spreadier stone which will look bigger faceup can command a higher price. This is clear in your example the second one is shallower and thus has a bigger faceup appearance.
2) In many fancies (cushion cuts, emerald cuts etc.) the near perfect (LW=1 - 1.05) perfectly square stones(LW=1) fetch a higher price. Often this is because they are harder to find. Maybe a diamond cutter can tell me why there are more rectangular cushions but it may be due to the shape of the rough or in preserving carat weight.
3) In general I don''t think asscher cuts cost more than emerald cuts. Some suppliers might try to charge more due to their recent increased demand but there isn''t really a definite trend here.
4) Although in VS1s I wouldn''t expect this to be a major factor but the visibility of the inclusions within the same clarity grade can have a big effect on price. For example comparing two SI1s: The one with black inclusions under the table could cost less than the one with white inclusions that are much more difficult to spot and in the outside facets.

But whatever stone you are considering emereld cut or asscher get I would get an ASET image to confirm the light return before choosing it regardless of price or the other numbers. There is no such thing as ideal numbers for fancy cut diamonds.

 

[strmrdr]

more expensive rough that they are cut from is the biggest reason
Thank the princess cut for there not being more asschers available and the higher prices.

6.56*5.24*3.50 would only make a 5.24mm princess with a lot of waste.
5.94*5.65*3.55 would make a 5.65mm princess

 

[JulietRomeoTango]

If I calculate correctly, the Emerald cut (the first one) actually has a larger table surface area and therefore should look bigger than the Asscher. So it is still a mystery to me (the bigger looking stone being less expensive) which goes in line with your first statement that the pricing is simply all over the place without real rhyme or reason. At any rate, I appreciate that I should get an ASET image - is there some characteristic light return pattern that you recommend I look for? If I understand the geometry of the emerald and asscher cuts, there should be a good bit of light loss (lack of return). Thanks.

 

[JulietRomeoTango]

Aha! That does make sense. The missing variable: a third cut making the Asschers more rare and therefore more expensive. Thanks for your reply!

 

[Moh 10]

Plus there is an additional mark up for a well-cut asscher compared to a poorly cut one of the same specs.