Tell me what you think of this workmanship.

[denverappraiser]

----------------
On 10/6/2004 9:13:06 AM Dadof4 wrote:

they are saying that's the best they can do; long weird prongs, or lose the stones.----------------

 

[reena]

i'm sorry, i think that's just ridiculous. i'm with everyone else--get your money back and start over. GOG should let you do that; if not, that speaks quite poorly of them in my book.




with respect to what you said about the setting working for RBs--isn't it the case that your particular setting is the one for princesses, not RBs? have they said that switching to the RB setting won't help at all, or are they not willing to do even that?

 

[Dadof4]

----------------
On 10/6/2004 9:26:48 AM reena wrote:


with respect to what you said about the setting working for RBs--isn't it the case that your particular setting is the one for princesses, not RBs? have they said that switching to the RB setting won't help at all, or are they not willing to do even that?
----------------

I don't know, but if the issue is crown angle, I doubt if the setting for RBs vs Princess will matter. Jonathan told me a few weeks ago that the setting for the RBs will work fine.

OK everyone, admittedly, all I have seen is what you have seen, i.e., the four pictures at the beginning of this post (and the two pictures from the Vatche website somewhere in the middle). The first picture I saw of the ring was the first posted here, and my first reaction was "yuch." Is it possible that if we saw the ring in person, or if the photos were take a little differently (angles, lighting, etc), that we would see no problem? Or am I just hoping in vain?

 

[strmrdr]

----------------
On 10/6/2004 9:44:29 AM Dadof4 wrote:

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

On 10/6/2004 9:26:48 AM reena wrote:



with respect to what you said about the setting working for RBs--isn't it the case that your particular setting is the one for princesses, not RBs? have they said that switching to the RB setting won't help at all, or are they not willing to do even that?
----------------

I don't know, but if the issue is crown angle, I doubt if the setting for RBs vs Princess will matter. Jonathan told me a few weeks ago that the setting for the RBs will work fine.


OK everyone, admittedly, all I have seen is what you have seen, i.e., the four pictures at the beginning of this post (and the two pictures from the Vatche website somewhere in the middle). The first picture I saw of the ring was the first posted here, and my first reaction was 'yuch.' Is it possible that if we saw the ring in person, or if the photos were take a little differently (angles, lighting, etc), that we would see no problem? Or am I just hoping in vain?----------------

hoping in vain.
At this point if you gave up and say we will live with it will it always bug you?
I know it would me.....
You should not have to tolerate second rate work and I dont buy the excuses they are giving.

 

[ep6585]

Dadof4 - the Vatche setting for my ring was the princess version. I was told that Vatche used the princess versions of their settings for all Jubilees.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/5/2004 6:07:47 PM denverappraiser wrote:

Dadof,

Vatche is telling you that the stones are not suitable for the mounting but that they are willing to do either of two second rate jobs in order to accommodate your requirements. You should not be expected to make such a compromise on a brand new item. If they feel the mounting is unsuitable to properly set the stones presented, they should decline the job and refund your money. You should not be asked to accept anything less than a Vatche quality piece and they should be unwilling to deliver anything less than what their name has come to stand for.

Neil Beaty, GG ISA
Independent Appraisals in Denver


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

I agree. But, clarify something for me as I am confused. Is it the nature of the Jubilee in general or just those two stones? If it's the nature of the jubilee than start over. If not, then couldn't you get stones that would work better?

 

[Dadof4]

----------------
On 10/6/2004 11:38:04 AM fire&ice wrote:

----------------
On 10/5/2004 6:07:47 PM denverappraiser wrote:

Dadof,

Vatche is telling you that the stones are not suitable for the mounting but that they are willing to do either of two second rate jobs in order to accommodate your requirements. You should not be expected to make such a compromise on a brand new item. If they feel the mounting is unsuitable to properly set the stones presented, they should decline the job and refund your money. You should not be asked to accept anything less than a Vatche quality piece and they should be unwilling to deliver anything less than what their name has come to stand for.

Neil Beaty, GG ISA
Independent Appraisals in Denver


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

I agree. But, clarify something for me as I am confused. Is it the nature of the Jubilee in general or just those two stones? If it's the nature of the jubilee than start over. If not, then couldn't you get stones that would work better?----------------

I don't know, but will try to find out. There wasn't a large selection of matching .25ct Jubilees to choose from for side stones. There were no measurements for them either, since they're small. I really would like to make this ring work (but be truly happy with it).

 

[headlight]

Dad--
I would say that in "real" life, any "flaws" to the ring won't be so apparent, not like they are blown up on a computer monitor as in this thread. Just think of how enlarged the ring is compared to its realistic size.
I am sure that had you not seen those photos and just received the ring in person, you might not have ever had an issue with it; or, if you had, it would be pretty minimal.
But, that is not the case and I have learned over the years that a HUGE element in liking (or not liking) one's jewelry/diamonds has to do with the MENTAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL perspective. Case in point: I was like a kid in a candy store when I received my dream-size diamond. However, when I found this forum and began to learn about ideal cut, HCA, Brilliancescopes, etc., my view of my stone was tainted. Fortunately, I have been able to "overcome" that and am finally at peace with the stone.
Obviously, you are not going to take "option B" and risk losing stones. So, given that the ring would either remain as is or have the stones removed and start over, I would suggest you have GOG bring it back in the store and you go and look at it. I don't recall if you are local or not, but if you are not then GOG should send it to you for your review, and specify in writing that it is on a conditional basis for your approval (and that your acceptance of the package in no way is an acceptance of the piece).
Once you have it in your possession and you are viewing it in its actual size, and you see it on your wife's finger, you may just fall in love with it and accept the setting issues.
Honestly, your only options for this "new" cut of diamond, at this point in time until the Jubilee becomes more mainstream and there are mountings made for it, is to accept the Vatche piece as is, or to go custom. You've had bad experiences with custom, and now with designer. So, I guess you, and only you can determine which is the "lesser" of two evils, so to speak.
Perhaps once you see it in person, you will think it isn't so "bad" and think it worth keeping rather than risk the trials and tribulations of having a custom piece done, which you know will have its own disappointments. It shouldn't be this way, but unfortunately I believe, from my experience with custom, the reality.
In any case, I hope that GOG does the right thing and stands by their customer.

 

[Rhino]

Greetings PS friends and especially Dadof4,




Of course we stand by you Do4. You are our client and we stand by you as if my own sister were getting the ring. Imagine our reaction when they presented these options to us! We've never heard of such a thing as well. Also their response that the crown angles are too steep doesn't make sense to us either since Jubilee's are cut with crown angles similar to ideal rounds. D04 ... bottom line ... if they can't get it right we'll either refund your money in full or find a designer who can and will do the job right. I'm thinking of turning this over to our friend Mark Morrell if I can't get a solid committment from Vatche. I just called them and Mr. Vatche was at lunch so I was instructed to call back in an hour. This *will* get resolved and in the end I personally guarantee your satisfaction. I know it will work out right no matter how we get it done.




On a side note. When we got the ring, the imperfections really looked minor and hardly noticeable at all. It is actually a very stunning ring. We do take some pretty close up shots so the prongs in those pics do look more pronounced than they do in real life. However we are more concerned about pleasing our clients and if they see something they want changed or different we will accommodate to the best of our ability. At times our hands are tied by the suppliers we do business with. In the case with Vatche rings they must be sent to Vatche for setting and if their warranty is to remain in tact they are the ones who must also do the setting work, not us. Let's see how the president responds to this concern of client care and I will report what action Vatche will take to make this right.

 

[strmrdr]

Dadof4, Like I said earlier GOG will make sure your happy with the final product and Rhino reafirmed it above. :}
Dadof4 I know it has to be frustrating for you right now try and relax, it will turn out awesome in the end.

While not getting into an argurement about how visible they are
the setting errors would have been imediatly odvious to me and would have driven me nuts.
Now that he knows what to look at its my guess they would Dadof4 also.

 

[Dadof4]

----------------
On 10/6/2004 3:38:53 PM strmrdr wrote:


While not getting into an argurement about how visible they are
the setting errors would have been imediatly odvious to me and would have driven me nuts.
Now that he knows what to look at its my guess they would Dadof4 also.----------------

I've been trying to not loose the forest through the trees, so I've been looking at as many close up pictures of rings as I can on this forum to see if I see any ugly prongs (in addition to asking people's opinion here). While I see some settings I don't care for, I haven't seen any others that make me go "yuch" the way the photo of my ring did. All the other settings I've seen look more uniform and finished, with no unusually long prongs. I will admit however, that there are only a few close ups of 5 stone rings where I could get a view of the prongs on the smaller sidestones.

Just to double check my imagination and see if I'm overly critical, I copied the picture of Vatche's 5 Stone Truffle (Round) to my computer so I could enlarge it. While the picture gets blurry, I can still see that the prongs are trimmed back and uniform. Is that not possible with Jubilee sidestones?

 

[Jax172]

If you could have Mark do the ring, I know he'd do it right. He does amazing work. I wouldn't want to deal with Vatche if they are actually offering you an option in which your stones would be unsafe.

 

[strmrdr]

----------------
On 10/6/2004 4:09:28 PM Dadof4 wrote:





. Is that not possible with Jubilee sidestones?
----------------

From what the experts said yes it is very possible.

I dont know what Vatche's problem is that they cant do it and do it so the stones wont fall out.

Im impationatly waiting for their reply to Jonathon and for him to post what he finds out.

 

[noobie]

Kudos to Jon for standing behind DO4! I'd be all over the Mark Morrell option

 

[Rhino]

Sorry for not responding earlier. I spoke with Vatche personally regarding this situation (btw, my first time speaking with Mr. Vatche himself). I had him personally look at the diamonds in the ring to see if there was any problem with those. None at all. I had him personally inspect the ring inside and out and expressed our concerns. He has reassured me that not only will the prongs be set properly over the diamonds but also reassured that there is not going to be any 80% chance of them falling out either. Do4 ... the diamonds will be set into the ring as they should, and you will stand no greater risk than anyone else who has had a 5 stone ring made. We were told the ring will be completed and shipped back to us within 24-48 hours. Do4, either Christen or myself will forward you pics of the ring as soon as it arrives which you can of course post here on the forum as well.




All the best,

 

[Kamuelamom]

Dadof4, it sounds like things are on the mend for you. Sometimes vendors need to take the front seat and go directly to the top! Kudos to Jonathan for seeing that his customer is served properly. I'm glad that DVatche himself got involved. Sometimes that's what it takes to keep your nose clean in the eyes of the consumer.

All the best. We can't wait to see the results.

Edited to add: The Mark Morrell option is-----WOOOOO HOOOOO!!!!!!

 

[headlight]

Dad--
Well, looks like this will have a happy ending, either through Vatche or Mark Morrell (great option!). AND, based on GOG's handling of the situation, you can rest assured that GOG is here to serve you, their customer. After this resolves successfully, I'm sure you will be more inclined to do further business with GOG because they earned your confidence and you know they will stand by their product/work to make it right for the valued customer. The fact that this went to the top of the priority list for you to see in 1-2 days is very impressive to me. Can't wait to see the revised photos!

 

[Dadof4]

Well, I''m finally about to receive my long awaited Vatche 5 stone ring with 5 Jubilees. Remember what Jonathan said, 24-48 hours? Multiply that by 11 times, and you have the amount of time it acutally took Vatche to trim the prongs back, i.e. another 22 days.

Date: 10/6/2004 5:24:43 PM
Author: Rhino


We were told [by Vatche] the ring will be completed and shipped back to us within 24-48 hours. Do4, either Christen or myself will forward you pics of the ring as soon as it arrives which you can of course post here on the forum as well.




All the best,

Following are the pics that Jonathan & Christen forwarded to me of the redone ring. It''s hard to tell from the pictures, but I think that the prongs are better. When I get the ring, I''ll see if I can take some more angles to show everyone.

 

[Dadof4]

Sorry, but I can''t seem to upload the pics from my computer. I get the message:

"An error occurred on the server when processing the URL. Please contact the system administrator."

I''ll try again later.

 

[reena]

try saving each of the pictures as a brand new document (a JPG!!!) with a new file name that you have never ever used before when uploading a picture onto this site. that should work.

 

[Dadof4]

Thanks for the upload tip. Here are the pics.

 

[Dadof4]

2

 

[Dadof4]

Well, I got the two picture up that Christen took, but I can''t get the other 4 up.

 

[strmrdr]

ummm
I opened both pics before and after and looked at them side by side..
Did they actualy change anything?

 

[sevens one]

Here is the old one:

and the new one:

 

[noobie]

Do4,

The differences do look very slight. Maybe you need to see it in person to really tell what you think. Rings can look very different in person.

Personally, I would be disappointed with the changes especially considering a 22 day wait. Your experience really tells me a lot about Vatche and their service.

It''s a shame you have to go through this given your investment of finances and energy into this project.

Is the Mark Morrell option still available?

 

[headlight]

I read into the 22 day wait from Vatche to mean that they didn''t quite know how to "fix" it.

 

[noobie]

Date: 10/29/2004 2:13:20 PM
Author: headlight
I read into the 22 day wait from Vatche to mean that they didn''t quite know how to ''fix'' it.

If they didn''t know how to fix it they should have just refunded his money and not let him wait 22 days. These guys are supposed to be "premium" designers. I actually read this another way, forgive me if this sounds harsh.

Vatche doesn''t like doing custom work so they put a large premium on anything that is not standard (I priced out the three version ring of this, but wanted larger sides and it was almost double of the stock piece) It''s not a high prority while they are busy selling as many stock pieces as they can to maximize margins at the "branded" price point they charge. It''s a great business model; create a premium brand image to be able to charge more and standardize your offerings to keep production costs low and maximize profit. Discourage changes by asking a hefty premium for them and if someone pays them, make lots of money.

At a minimum, they should have never let Do4 wait 22 days especially after teh intervention of Vatche himself.

 

[Dadof4]

I asked Christen at Good Old Gold to let me have the proviso that if my wife doesn''t love the ring, that we could get all our money back. After consultiing with Jonathan, she said that Vatche was unwilling to budge on money back, and that I could therefore only get my money back on the Jubilees from GOG. I would be out the money for the setting. Unfortunately, the diamonds are what I would want to keep. Then I''d go with Mark Morrell as some of you recommended.

Tomorrow I get to see it. I''m hoping that it will knock my wifes socks off. (I''ve kept her in the dark about most of what''s gone on here, and not let her see the pictures, so as not to have the ring "tainted" in her mind). We will see. And I''ll let you know.

 

[reena]

Date: 10/29/2004 2:45

2 PM
Author: Dadof4
I asked Christen at Good Old Gold to let me have the proviso that if my wife doesn''t love the ring, that we could get all our money back. After consultiing with Jonathan, she said that Vatche was unwilling to budge on money back, and that I could therefore only get my money back on the Jubilees from GOG. I would be out the money for the setting.

this, IMO, is absolutely outrageous.