A Discussion On Bias

[Sam82]

Obviously there is a lot of history going on that i know nothing about regarding Excel, so I will say no more about it.

Whatl I will say is that I made my decision to go with James Allen because of the following reasons:

1. They offered a large selection of yellow gold settings
2. Their website is very user friendly
3. They offer enough info to satisfy me
4. I like that they have an upgrade poilicy
5. I like the 30 day money back gaurentee
6. So far they have been very helpful and very responsive to my e-mails
7. Their prices are reasonable

This was not meant as anything against any other vendors. I considered at least 4 other vendors and I chose JA.
FWIW, my opinion to go with JA was not because of anything other PSers said, but due to my own research (which included checking with the BBB).

 

[Lula]

CCL -- wow. You have guts!

I have to say I wondered if there was a hidden agenda behind this thread. You just don't see any of the "favored" PS vendors instigating this sort of thing. Rather, you see them posting amongst the long-time pro-sumers and the newbies, engaging in a conversation, i.e., where both sides listen and respect each other.

I still consider myself new here, even though I lurked for awhile before I started posting. But I have to say to any vendors wondering why they aren't "feeling the love" on PS, CCL's recommendations about what to offer customers makes a lot of sense to me. You might want to re-read her post and take some of it to heart.

Do you guys have any idea how much work Storm, Ellen, Jet, Stone, Lorelei, Gypsy, Deco, Dreamer -- too many to name, but all of the pro-sumers -- spend on this site helping out newbies, just like me? It must truly be hours of their time. And for what? Not profit, not respect obviously, but simply, I believe, because they remember what it was like to be a newbie and are simply trying to help out others in the same boat. You better believe that vendors who provide an easily-searchable website with easy access to pictures and certifications, etc., make their job easier. They literally recommend thousands of stones, and patiently answer questions. They often call out posters who appear to have an agenda or who are steering the newbie in a wrong direction, and overall I believe the pro-sumers go out of their way to be unbiased.

I have no sympathy for vendors who will not make their websites accessible in this day and age and yet have the nerve to come on here and complain that certain vendors are always recommended "at the expense of other vendors." Sit down sometime with a high school kid and ask him/her to search your site for a one-carat diamond of particular clarity and color, and then ask the kid to go on HPD's site, or GOG's or Whiteflash's or Todd's or BG's site (which isn't even fully functional yet and is still easier to use than many other companys' sites!). See how long it takes said high school kid to navigate your site compared to the other "preferred vendors' sites" and ask yourself, if I was a consumer who was nervous about getting engaged, working full-time, watching my budget, and trying to pick out a setting, whose site would stand out?

What I see is that the preferred vendors take the time to respond here - a while ago a newbie expressed shock and delight because Rhino answered a question of the newbie's -- and this made a huge impression on the newbie. I wouldn't be surprised if that person went on to buy from GOG. I remember how cool I thought it was that Garry posted a comment about an IS image I had posted with a question.

I see Wink, Rhino, Todd, Paul Sleger, John Pollard, Dave Atlas, Rich Sherwood, Garry, and even Serg, posting on here regularly, right alongside the pro-sumers, and their jovial commentary and genuine feelings of respect and fondness for one another is remarkable. The vendors who do well here are not condescending to the pro-sumers, even when there are the occasional disagreements (some legendary!) I don't see the vendors who are complaining posting as much. I realize taking the time to review the posts and commenting is time-consuming, but if you only knew how much those posts mean to a newbie, you'd be showing your smiling faces around here a lot more often. There is no easy way, no shortcut to earning a good reputation. Retailing is hard work -- that's why I no longer own my own business -- and the web is here to stay, so those businesses who know how to thrive in a web-based environment will have an advantage. And I daresay cut education is here to stay as well.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

I feel like I am an a unique position to comment on this subject because I am neither a consumer nor a vendor, but an independent appraiser who is known as a consumer advocate for the past 10 years but was also formerly a vendor for the 20 years before that.

In other words I think I'm in a position to see both sides of the fence that not many here do.

There is no doubt that the prosumers on this forum have been a big help to consumers in finding beautiful diamonds. Some work tirelessly and diligently at it. Take Ellen's 22,000 posts and Gypsy's 14,000 posts in a relatively short period of time for example. I've been on this forum since 2002 and have yet to rack up 5,000 posts, and I consider myself a fairly prolific poster. Their dedication is to be commended.

In the same breath, I am well aware of the history with both David of Diamonds by Lauren and Judah from Excell Diamonds. In fact, I was one of the Pricescope members who asked Andrey to extend a general amnesty to them (and many others) who were (in my opinion) given a raw deal in the previous Pricescope administration (God bless you Leonid and Irina, I love you but you were mighty heavy handed). I'm so glad that Andrey extended this amnesty to David, Judah and others (such as Richard Wise in the Colored Stone section). This forum is much richer for their input. These are serious experts in their fields, and the loss of their input was a sad day for Pricescope, in my opinion. I am deeply grateful for Andrey's open-mindedness in allowing them back in.

I find David's and Judah's attempts to show the vendor's side of things and to buck the general Pricescope trend (such as David in regards to cut) courageous and refreshing.

As much as consumers and prosumers would like diamonds to fall into a nice, quantifiable set of "boxes" so they can more easily make decisions, the truth is that some of the allure and beauty of diamonds falls outside of those boxes. I applaud David's efforts to emphasize this even though it makes him unpopular here to some of the members. What they regard as efforts to pass shoddy merchandise I regard as an attempt to buck the trend and show that there are a multitude of beautiful diamonds which break the mold.

Okay, so maybe these aren't "safe" choices. But that doesn't mean they are ugly, or wrong. It just means that they will appeal to sellers and buyers who are willing to trust their eyes over a categorized set of numbers. I happen to be one such buyer, as I own many gemstones which don't fit in the "safe" categories, but are simply beautiful. Often I have gotten very good deals on them for just this very reason.

One of the things that bothers me the most is what I consider the unfair treatment of vendors by prosumers here on Pricescope. Not just member vendors, but vendors outside the Pricescope world. I know this is not a popular topic with this being a "consumer" site, but the truth is that vendors both here and outside Pricescope have suffered many injustices through the harsh criticism of Pricescope prosumers. I know for a fact that many sales of perfectly beautiful diamonds have been "kaboshed" by the negative criticism of Pricescope prosumers who really didn't know what they were talking about. They were speaking from the base of knowledge they had at that time, but that knowledge fell woefully short of what an "expert" should be advising a consumer. I say "expert", because to the unknowing consumer the authoritative words of a Pricescope prosumer sound "expert" in their opinion.

Part of my dismay in regards to this is because I see both sides of the fence. I see the plight of vendors who work their hearts out to help their client, finding them perfectly gorgeous stones at reasonable prices through considerable effort and expense on their part. I see them making a sale, and satisfying their customer. Then I see that diamond being "shot down" by prosumers for often relatively minor reasons (62% depth, good polish, figures slightly out of ideal, etc, etc, etc) with alternate recommendations being made for other vendors stones (after a consumer has already purchased the diamond, and was thrilled with it!).

I think if some of the prosumers here could see the heartache that their words cause they would think twice before "dissing" stones which in real life are probably perfectly gorgeous, purchased from an integrity vendor doing the best that he can for his client.

I know this is probably not a popular topic on a "consumer" site, but I feel like fair should be fair all the way around. I think vendors deserve fairness, just as consumers do. I think that many vendors have been unfairly and shoddily treated on this site. My post here is made in an effort to try and shock some of the prosumers here out of their "anti-vendor" attitudes, and make them realize that they might just not know as much as a vendor who deals with diamonds on a daily basis does.

What's the solution?

I believe we're seeing it take place here, within the principle of free speech, where everybody states their opinion, and then it is left to the individual to decide. I don't think anyone should be shut down or shouted down or black-balled. I think everyone has the right to put forth their opinion, and I am so glad to see this Pricescope administration allowing it without undue censorship or banning.

 

[treefrog]

First of all, I'm quite certain no vendors are forced to be here. I don't have 7,000 - 30,000 posts like some of these highly dedicated people have. That is dedication. For what? Not even a penny. Because they care about people, care to educate people, and care to see people make diamond selection one of the least stressful parts of an engagement (Pricescope is more diverse than that but suffice it to say most people are probably here buying engagement/wedding rings, are here for a week, and write maybe 10 posts.)

I was initially surprised there were vendors co-mingled in here. I was, however, very pleased when I saw their posts. By and large, they watch carefully and chime in often with what is typically very helpful information. Yet they restrain themselves and don't trash others, belittle, chastise, or even try to direct or manipulate somebody towards their business. Rather, they immerse themselves in with the consumers and prosumers to help and educate. It takes time and effort to build customer confidence. Few can expect to succeed without hard work. People post their comments about dealing with various vendors on here. I did notice the comment about Excel recently. Given time, that would probably pay off and begin to multiply. Nothing happens overnight though. There are over 39,000 users here. Many came here initially looking for a diamond. Most have friends... who have friends. Do the math.

Since I'm not an 'expert', my comments may not matter but please remember...

1) We are people. Real people. Not just weird names or funny icons. We work hard for our money and want it to go as far as possible.
2) No, we don't post our names here. Not because we are hiding something but because we are individuals that post a lot of information here in a not so nice world. We aren't advertising or selling anything and have no reason to toss any kind of contact information around. We are here to educate and help others (or get educated and helped).

I encourage the experts to correct us when we're wrong. Educate us with quantitative and qualitative data and it will pay dividends down the road.

Lastly, I wonder if vendors have even bothered to look at the About PriceScope page (a portion follows)?
By the way, you merchants can advertise here, but it only will work for you if you are honest and provide good products and services that customers appreciate. If you don't behave, they will splash your name all over the forum, and then anyone who searches for your name will find out if you're naughty or nice. And before saying "I know everything because I've been in this business for 20 years", we recommend listening to people's concerns first, and don't ever talk down to them– they are engineers, doctors, lawyers and really smart people disguised as dumb customers.
Personally, I think it sums things up very well and could have prevented a lot of wasted time and misery had it been heeded.

Treefrog

 

[Moh 10]

Richard, wonderful post.
It sure gives me pause.

One reality remains though.
This is the Internet age.
People buy online now.
They can't see the stone.

They have to use something to make a decision.
Tools like the HCA, Idealscope and ASET pics, proportions and specs help increase the odds of getting near the center zone of a safe cut-bullseye.
It also puts pressure on cutters to cut better.

The alternative of "just trust the seller" may have been all we had 10 years ago with the B&Ms.
But the Internet is not going away, and every year more and more diamonds WILL be sold, sight unseen, based on these tools.
People are hesitant to trust diamond sellers 3000 miles away with a $10,000 emotion-packed purchase.
People want protection from paying too much for a bad stone.
People want to trust lab reports, facts and science that makes sense to them.

Buying without seeing the stone is not a perfect situation.
Not fair to those beautiful stones that fall outside the "narrow-minded-safe-zone".
Not fair to vendors who carry them.

But what is the alternative in this Internet age?

 

[Lula]

Great post, Richard. I can''t comment on the past since I know nothing of what happened during the early years of PS, but I do believe that everyone deserves a second chance.

On another note, it was so nice to read RockDiamond''s comments on the thread from a week or so ago that Glitterata started on lower colors -- S through Z. A totally different and much more positive interaction on that thread! That''s how you "win friends and influence people" IMHO.

And I have seen a trend among pro-sumers to present balanced commentary, whether it''s a thread about a stone''s specs or someone asking about which vendor to choose. I have also seen a number of posts where pro-sumers have helped a newbie avoid certain disaster, i.e., clarity enhanced stones, jewelry repairs gone wrong, possible online scams, etc.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 7/25/2009 1:52:38 AM
Author: Moh 10
Richard, wonderful post.
It sure gives me pause.

One reality remains though.
This is the Internet age.
People buy online now.
They can't see the stone.
They have to use something to make a decision, so they use tools like HCA, IS ASET pics and proportions and specs to help increase the odds of getting near the center of a safe cut-bullseye.

The alternative of 'just trust the seller' may have been all we had 10 years ago when all we had were B&M stores but the Internet is not going away, and every year more and more diamonds WILL be sold, sight unseen, based on these tools.

Not a perfect situation.
Not fair to those beautiful stones that fall outside the 'narrow-minded-safe-zone'.
Not fair to vendors who carry them.

But what is the alternative?

Moh, I'm not against internet buyers using numbers and technology for themselves to make a "safe" purchase.

What I'm upset about is internet "numbers and technology people" dissing diamonds purchased on a visual basis by consumers who were perfectly happy with their purchase. (Which is still the way the VAST majority of diamonds are purchased, by the way).

 

[Richard Sherwood]

There's an old saying which can be applied to jewelers as well.

"If you don't know stocks, know your stockbroker." If you don't know diamonds, know your diamond vendor...

I can't tell you how many times I've had to reassure a consumer who bought a diamond (which was perfectly gorgeous, and they were thrilled with), from a trusted jeweler or vendor, only to be filled with doubt and dismay when some "expert" told them it was a "bad stone" for one reason or another.

This is what I'm talking about.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:06:44 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood


Moh, I'm not against internet buyers using numbers and technology for themselves to make a 'safe' purchase.


What I'm upset about is internet 'numbers and technology people' dissing diamonds purchased on a visual basis by consumers who were perfectly happy with their purchase. (That is still the way the VAST majority of diamonds are purchased, by the way).

I see your point. (But since the vast majority of stones are not cut for optimum light performance that fact that most are selected by sight means they had no well-cut stones to compare them to.)

BUT - And this is a big but.

(Caveat: I acknowledge some stones outside the "safe zone" can be beautiful. The following point is for those outside the "safe zone" that are NOT beautiful, which number plenty.)

Many people who were "happy with their purchase" were not educated on cut.
They bought an inferior cut because they didn't know any better.
They didn't know how good a diamond could look because they are rare and they had never seen one.
They were ignorant.

After cut education they return the poorly-cut stone and get a better-cut stone that is more beautiful.

So should we have left them ignorant but "happy" with their inferior-cut stones?

Let me approach this from another angle.
What if every diamond buyer had 3 or 4 superbly cut diamonds next to the one they were considering?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 7/25/2009 1:57:23 AM
Author: sarap333
Great post, Richard. I can''t comment on the past since I know nothing of what happened during the early years of PS, but I do believe that everyone deserves a second chance.

On another note, it was so nice to read RockDiamond''s comments on the thread from a week or so ago that Glitterata started on lower colors -- S through Z. A totally different and much more positive interaction on that thread! That''s how you ''win friends and influence people'' IMHO.

And I have seen a trend among pro-sumers to present balanced commentary, whether it''s a thread about a stone''s specs or someone asking about which vendor to choose. I have also seen a number of posts where pro-sumers have helped a newbie avoid certain disaster, i.e., clarity enhanced stones, jewelry repairs gone wrong, possible online scams, etc.

Yes, I''m hopeful that the commentary will become more balanced, which is why I take the sometimes unpopular postion of speaking up about it.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:14:10 AM
Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/25/2009 2:06:44 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood


Moh, I''m not against internet buyers using numbers and technology for themselves to make a ''safe'' purchase.


What I''m upset about is internet ''numbers and technology people'' dissing diamonds purchased on a visual basis by consumers who were perfectly happy with their purchase. (That is still the way the VAST majority of diamonds are purchased, by the way).

I see your point. (The vast majority of stones are not cut for optimum light performance so in this case majority does not mean it is a good thing.)

BUT - And this is a big but.

(Caveat: I acknowledge some stones outside the ''safe zone'' can be beautiful. The following point is for those outside the ''safe zone'' that are NOT beautiful, which number plenty.)

Many people who were ''happy with their purchase'' were not educated on cut.
They bought an inferior cut because they didn''t know any better.
They didn''t know how good a diamond could look because they are rare and they had never seen one.
They were ignorant.

After cut education they return the poorly-cut stone and get a better-cut stone that is more beautiful.

So should we have left them ignorant but ''happy'' with their inferior-cut stones?

Let me approach this from another angle.
What if every diamond buyer had 3 or 4 superbly cut diamonds next to the one they were considering?

I''m not talking about poorly cut diamonds, Moh. I''m talking about well cut diamonds which don''t deserved to be trashed because they are not ideals or super ideals.

 

[Moh 10]

When I saw my first well cut diamond I was converted.

It was like discovering seks.

Okay so you are talking about the nice ones that got unfairly rejected.
Acknowledged!

Now what about the poorly-cut ones?

And of 100 stones that are rejected because of PS savezoneism what % were well or poorly cut?

 

[Lula]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:11:34 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood
There's an old saying which can be applied to jewelers as well.


'If you don't know stocks, know your stockbroker.' If you don't know diamonds, know your diamond vendor...


I can't tell you how many times I've had to reassure a consumer who bought a diamond (which was perfectly gorgeous, and they were thrilled with), from a trusted jeweler, only to be filled with doubt and dismay when some 'expert' told them it was a 'bad stone' for one reason or another.


This is what I'm talking about.

Interesting analogy -- I think you'll find that the same sort of struggle is going on in the world of stocks -- online trading companies vs. B&M bankers and stockbrokers. Many of the same arguments used here have been heard in that business as well, i.e., "trust the experts; don't waste time on self-education," etc. We know how that turned out

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:25:56 AM
Author: sarap333

Date: 7/25/2009 2:11:34 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood
There''s an old saying which can be applied to jewelers as well.


''If you don''t know stocks, know your stockbroker.'' If you don''t know diamonds, know your diamond vendor...


I can''t tell you how many times I''ve had to reassure a consumer who bought a diamond (which was perfectly gorgeous, and they were thrilled with), from a trusted jeweler, only to be filled with doubt and dismay when some ''expert'' told them it was a ''bad stone'' for one reason or another.


This is what I''m talking about.

Interesting analogy -- I think you''ll find that the same sort of struggle is going on in the world of stocks -- online trading companies vs. B&M bankers and stockbrokers. Many of the same arguments used here have been heard in that business as well, i.e., ''trust the experts; don''t waste time on self-education,'' etc. We know how that turned out

Very good analogy, Sara.

The truth is though, most people don''t have the time to become expert in stocks, or diamonds. So they find an expert they trust, and ask him to do his best for them.

Many of the people here on Pricescope could be likened to people who start trading their own stocks, instead of using a stockbroker.

That''s fine if they bring themselves to a level of knowledge where they can do as well on their own (or better) than a professional stockbroker could do for them.

But if not, they''re better off working with a trusted professional who does it for a living.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:43:36 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood



The truth is though, most people don't have the time to become expert in stocks, or diamonds. So they find an expert they trust, and ask him to do his best for them.


Many of the people here on Pricescope could be likened to people who start trading their own stocks, instead of using a stockbroker.


That's fine if they bring themselves to a level of knowledge where they can do as well on their own (or better) than a professional stockbroker could do for them.


But if not, they're better off working with a trusted professional who does it for a living.

Except that consumers are turning to each other after being not treated right by some experts.
Those that help educate and gather information together for them thrive.
That is exactly what happened here at pricescope.
It is the future of commerce because many experts in both stocks and diamonds have proven that they can not be trusted and only look after their own self interest.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/25/2009 1:29:25 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood

I believe we''re seeing it take place here, within the principle of free speech, where everybody states their opinion, and then it is left to the individual to decide. I don''t think anyone should be shut down or shouted down or black-balled. I think everyone has the right to put forth their opinion, and I am so glad to see this Pricescope administration allowing it without undue censorship or banning.

Letting the very few trade people who think they can act like jerks and run over consumers remain here is no answer.
That was tried at another forum and was as expected a huge failure.

 

[Moh 10]

I think we all agree that picking a round diamond with an AGS 0 cut rating and an HCA of 1.0 and located in the center of the AGS cut range is safe.
You don't need to see it; it will perform superbly.

What's wrong with using such tools to be sure you are getting a well-cut diamond?
Sure I may reject a stone that is not in this cut bullseye and has a chance of looking good, but so what?
I don't want to take chances; I want to be as sure as possible when I buy a diamond sight unseen.

Let those "unfairly rejected" yet beautiful stones (and the dogs) go into B&M showcases where people can see them; Richard just said most diamonds are purchased in person.

I hear they already send a higher percentage of D IFs to Asia than to the USA.
They send a higher percentage of J SI2s to America than Asia.
The marketplace has been matching supply to local demand for a long time.
Apparently now Internet sellers should mostly stock stones in the bullseye of good cut as defined by these tools.

I'm really having a hard time understanding why this is a bad thing for buyers or for Pricescope.
Sellers must adjust and stock what is in demand in their B&Ms and online; it will be different.

Sorry but Internet customers are not going to get a GG diploma and 30 years of experience before buying their engagement diamond.

And sorry but this is 2009 and the idea of just trusting a jeweler to pick a stone for you is loosing its grip. They have to sell every stone in their safe.

The tools are here to stay.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:21:43 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood

Date: 7/25/2009 2:14:10 AM
Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/25/2009 2:06:44 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood


Moh, I''m not against internet buyers using numbers and technology for themselves to make a ''safe'' purchase.


What I''m upset about is internet ''numbers and technology people'' dissing diamonds purchased on a visual basis by consumers who were perfectly happy with their purchase. (That is still the way the VAST majority of diamonds are purchased, by the way).

I see your point. (The vast majority of stones are not cut for optimum light performance so in this case majority does not mean it is a good thing.)

BUT - And this is a big but.

(Caveat: I acknowledge some stones outside the ''safe zone'' can be beautiful. The following point is for those outside the ''safe zone'' that are NOT beautiful, which number plenty.)

Many people who were ''happy with their purchase'' were not educated on cut.
They bought an inferior cut because they didn''t know any better.
They didn''t know how good a diamond could look because they are rare and they had never seen one.
They were ignorant.

After cut education they return the poorly-cut stone and get a better-cut stone that is more beautiful.

So should we have left them ignorant but ''happy'' with their inferior-cut stones?

Let me approach this from another angle.
What if every diamond buyer had 3 or 4 superbly cut diamonds next to the one they were considering?

I''m not talking about poorly cut diamonds, Moh. I''m talking about well cut diamonds which don''t deserved to be trashed because they are not ideals or super ideals.

I hear you Rich and take what you say seriously, I will watch not only myself but if I think this is happening I will broach the subject.

 

[oldminer]

Although I am relatively well known for the AGA Cut Class parameters, they are called the "Old" cut class grades on the gemappraisers.com site of my old firm. I actively now promote and use a non-parametric system developed by ImaGem, Inc which measures light performance without regard to parameters. I strongly believe certain characteristics of diamonds must be included in cut craftsmanship, such as girdle thickness, culet size, polish, symmetry, and total depth, but the light return characteristics can now be accurately and scientifically measured. This sort of system allows any configuration of diamond to compete with related ones. I have no agenda about using or not using "parameters", but only came up with parameters during the early period, the late 1980''s and early 1990''s which solved many problems for communication of what I would term cut quality.

I believe the future of cut grading will be in direct measurement of light return combined with certain requisite craftsmanship characteristics which assure durability, finish and good visible size to weight ratio. This strategy welcomes a wider variety of diamond cut configurations while safeguarding those who must basically shop from a distance. As more firms investigate this method of cut grading, we will see drastic changes in what becomes recommended for purchase.

 

[jet2ks]

Some absolutely great posts and comments on this page. This is the type of discussion I wish could be held more often without the animosity that occasionally crops up. Educational, informative and not-confrontiational, even though different points of view are being represented.

Richard, you have some very valid concerns about beautiful stones being dissed or rejected. On this point, though, I have to agree with Moh.

Date: 7/25/2009 2:14:10 AM
Author: Moh 10
I see your point. (But since the vast majority of stones are not cut for optimum light performance that fact that most are selected by sight means they had no well-cut stones to compare them to.)

BUT - And this is a big but.

(Caveat: I acknowledge some stones outside the 'safe zone' can be beautiful. The following point is for those outside the 'safe zone' that are NOT beautiful, which number plenty.)

Many people who were 'happy with their purchase' were not educated on cut.
They bought an inferior cut because they didn't know any better.
They didn't know how good a diamond could look because they are rare and they had never seen one.
They were ignorant.

After cut education they return the poorly-cut stone and get a better-cut stone that is more beautiful.

So should we have left them ignorant but 'happy' with their inferior-cut stones?

Let me approach this from another angle.
What if every diamond buyer had 3 or 4 superbly cut diamonds next to the one they were considering?

As a specific example.
My fiance's hairdresser and friend got engaged shortly before we did. Her boyfriend bought her a diamond that she was happy with when she received it, then she saw my fiance's ring with a really well cut stone and the serious difference in performance (100% thanks to PS, or I might have bought a poorly cut stone, too). She is now not happy with her ring and it is too late to return it. She attributes the difference to color and clarity, so what is going to happen when she upgrades? She will pay more for another poorly cut stone but with higher color and clarity and still not be happy because it doesn't look as good.

I could be wrong, but I think this situation is more common than beatiful stones that fall outside traditional parameters being dissed for the following reason. People who prefer to shop with their eyes for things, not just diamonds, do not generally shop on the internet. They beat the bricks to several stores and look for themselves before making a decision.

Date: 7/25/2009 1:29:25 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood

They were speaking from the base of knowledge they had at that time, but that knowledge fell woefully short of what an 'expert' should be advising a consumer. I say 'expert', because to the unknowing consumer the authoritative words of a Pricescope prosumer sound 'expert' in their opinion.

I just want to point out how true this comment is, but I also want to point out that the average Pricescope prosumer is much better educated as to diamonds than the average jewelry store SA. When I was first looking at engagement rings, I took the authoritative words of poorly trained jewelry store employees to be "expert" advice and was lucky not to get swindled. Yes, there are many true experts out there in the jewelry field--in all the stores I looked at for e-rings and wedding bands, I've found two. TWO--that's it! After talking to dozens of sales associates, clerks, and managers, there are only two that I would now trust to give good advice on future jewelry purchases and luckily one of them is local. Without PS, I wouldn't have known the questions to ask and the answers to expect.

I've found more true experts that I would trust on Pricescope than in all the stores I visited combined. That is why many times I and others have given the advice to ask (insert name here) at the poster's favored PS vendor and listen to what they say. To me, true expert eyes on site are always the best tool. Better than ASET or IS, photos, Sarin or any other numbers. I just want to know that when I recommend to a newbie to trust someone's eyes, I am recommending someone I personally would trust and use.

 

[Regular Guy]

Having just caught up a bit on this thread, I'll only share a couple of points.

I think Storm has made some important contributions here. Also, the main thrust of Rich's comments have been important, too.

Some history may yet, by the way, be due clarification, though I don't know that anyone can do this apart from the history makers.

Really, this thread has taken on many themes...and although the main theme of the thread is one I'm not addressing, a sidebar has developed, that...as it happens...is fundamental to what Pricescope is about, and needs some kind of attention.

I did spend 10 minutes looking for an old joke thread about how, if diamonds might be compared to cars, maybe someone will compare cars to diamonds...but could not find it.

But, stocks are another thing.

Date: 7/25/2009 2:43:36 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood


That's fine if they bring themselves to a level of knowledge where they can do as well on their own (or better) than a professional stockbroker could do for them.

But if not, they're better off working with a trusted professional who does it for a living.

Richard, maybe you're stretching too much to make your point. Frankly, in other earlier discussions, you've suggested you ignore stocks for real estate, so go figure. But, to your point...although an industry has been built up of stock brokers, in fact, I do think the better research favors the individual investor working with index funds. And, if this is the case, the situation is in important ways comparable to what Pricescope is about. In this world, education, that needn't take a lifetime, may serve the shopper better than a majority of professionals. And, in this case, it would be in the consumers enlightened self interest to either get educated here, or develop some highly sensitive skills at finding out who that minority of professionals are who ARE going to help them.

Is it a minority?

Unfortunately, I'm inclined to think so, based on the modest relative incremental expense a consumer has to invest to purchase a premium piece of jewelery.

Regards,

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 7/25/2009 1:43:22 AM
Author: treefrog

I encourage the experts to correct us when we''re wrong. Educate us with quantitative and qualitative data and it will pay dividends down the road.


Lastly, I wonder if vendors have even bothered to look at the About PriceScope page (a portion follows)?

By the way, you merchants can advertise here, but it only will work for you if you are honest and provide good products and services that customers appreciate. If you don''t behave, they will splash your name all over the forum, and then anyone who searches for your name will find out if you''re naughty or nice. And before saying ''I know everything because I''ve been in this business for 20 years'', we recommend listening to people''s concerns first, and don''t ever talk down to them– they are engineers, doctors, lawyers and really smart people disguised as dumb customers.

Personally, I think it sums things up very well and could have prevented a lot of wasted time and misery had it been heeded.


Treefrog

Great post, I agree completely Tree, especially with the red quote!

 

[Rockdiamond]

There is absolutely no need for animosity such as we have seen here.

I don''t want to put words in anyone''s mouth, but the way I read it David Atlas has a new system using light performance as opposed to measurements to classify cut on fancy shapes.
Bravo!
Essentially, this means we agree.
I prefer using the eye to measure light performance, David Atlas chooses other tools in addition to his eye.
The bottom line is that tying to use a chart to grade the cut of a diamond relates to the problems being discussed here.
If, for example you could tell such important info using a chart, the pro-sumers would be on perfectly solid ground recommending, or knocking stones using the chart. The fact is , any chart describing what to buy in a diamond is lacking. Great stones will be excluded arbitrarily, and other that are not so great get on.

Richard, I and the majority of the professional diamond world use our eyes as the primary instrument to judge a diamond''s cut, color and clarity.
There are some extremely well regarded professionals here using tools like ASET/IS to great effect.
Years ago I scoffed at IS, and I was wrong to do so.
Isn''t is best to allow for different points of view?

Speaking of that..... CCL- thank you again for going over our site.
Please tell everyone you know NOT to look at our site.

In terms of valid criticism, the smartest thing a professional could do was listen and learn.
Bashing...not so much.

However there is one point you seem to miss CCL.
What if people that have Daussi cushions are reading this? What if they bought a stone based on it''s visual characteristics and they love it. There''s plenty of places beside DBL to buy a Daussi ring.

Clearly many people posting have no problem with insulting vendors with baseless bashing- but what other consumers, and their well loved diamonds?

 

[Ellen]

Rich,

I've read your post (the main one) and started to reply at length several times. In the end, I chucked it. It was going to end up way more pointedly negative than I want to get. I like to back up my points, so to do so was going to go places I've decided we don't need to go. It probably wouldn't change anything anyway.


I personally think you've painted your "dissapointents" on this board with we prosumers, with a rather broad brush. I've seen way more posts where those very things don't happen/get said. And I've seen many vendors get the sale, every day, for "free", without having to lift a finger. I suppose it's a double edged sword to a certain extent.... Nothing is perfect Rich, and that includes PS. But it does work rather well... certainly not a trainwreck.




Also, you said this:

" think if some of the prosumers here could see the heartache that their words cause they would think twice before "dissing" stones which in real life are probably perfectly gorgeous, purchased from an integrity vendor doing the best that he can for his client"

That's just it Rich, this isn't real life.



Lastly, if you are unhappy with what is being said sometimes, why don't you jump in and add your very valuable opinions? I think that might help a lot more than just berating us in public.

You are one of my favorite people on here, I think you know that. I both like, and respect you very much (the latter was earned btw, the former was instant

). So I hope you take my thoughts with the sincere intentions they were written.

For those who mentioned their appreciation for my contributions, thank you very much.

 

[DiamondFlame]

I can't deny that there is a certain bias here agst non-PS vendors though I don't believe it is done deliberately. PS'ers are confident of recommending certain vendors if they have sufficient info relating to the diamonds on offer or have had prior experience working with the particular vendor. You can't possibly expect them to recommend vendors they know next to nothng about. Likewise I shd not expect PS'ers to recommend beautiful stones that fall outside of the safe category because many don't have the experience to do so.

Many valid points have been raised in this thread though one can't help but roll one's eyes when sidetracks happen, esp with the same specific issues that have been extensively debated in other threads. No one likes to be told that their diamonds are less than stellar, but isn't beauty in the eye of the beholder? But if every stone looks good to the untrained eye, how do we then pick THE ONE? Perhaps the concept of beauty in diamonds need to be more inclusive, though how well this sits with the consumer depends very much on their comfort level. But there shd not be any room for 'bigotry'; e.g. dissing a particular cut just because we happen to prefer other cuts. Dismissing niche/designer cuts when one has limited experience of or lacks the aesthetic sensibilities to appreciate them is simply insulting to those who happen to love them.

I thank Judah for starting this thread as prosumers and vendors alike do need to be more self-aware, and check their bias at the door before offering advice. I believe a little humility goes a long way in the search for knowledge; instead of being dismissive, let's start thinking that "maybe, just maybe this guy has a point." It's not that hard is it?

 

[Todd Gray]

There is no place, nor need for animosity on a forum like Price Scope... As noted, most of the vendors who contribute regularly on the forum get along with each other - as an insider of that circle, I feel that it is because we share a passion for diamonds which have been carefully cut to exhibit exceptional beauty. We realize that our niche in the market is one which is exceptionally small and the reality is that we truly need each other in order to promote the enthusiasm which we share for the diamonds which we have chosen to sell. When we are offended by something that another one of us said (often inadvertently) on the forum, I like to think that we're not quick to respond to it in writing on the forum, but rather have a close enough relationship that we pick up the phone or shoot off a quick email along the lines of "Huh? Did you eat burnt toast this morning, or what?" and sometimes it's a little more "WT#" ?!?!

I can honestly say that I don't have any animosity for any of the vendors that I walk the halls of PS with, those who know me (truly) will attest that I tend to be quite transparent to the extent that if we have a problem, we're going to work it out. And to that note, I feel it important to state that I don't have issue with Judah or his father Barry, SuperbCert, Excel, whatever, nor David of Diamonds by Lauren. But I'm a dealer, not a consumer and not a pro-sumer, and granted my perception and understanding of their operations is going to be different.

I've known Barry for as long as I can remember in terms of my time in the industry, we're competitors - good ones. I think it is pretty cool that his son Judah is working with him and I think he brings the enthusiasm of youth to the equation (at 42 Judah, you're "youth" to me) - I would love one of my sons or my daughter to want to work with me! But they're chasing their own dreams and I'm just as excited about that. I don't know what mistakes Barry or Judah might have made previously on the forum, I didn't do any back research because I'm more interested in the present, but I will say that I've been kicked off a forum or two in my time and I've always found PS to be a place that is willing to extend a second chance when it is deemed appropriate.

With regards to David at DBL, I know that there is some tension running behind the scenes and I'm not sure what it is, but I know that we disagree about the importance of the numerical data of a diamond in terms of the selection process and I'd like to say "so what" because I think it makes for good conversation - and I also realize that we largely move in different circles within the diamond market and "numbers" don't apply to the fancy color market - they REALLY don't! because fancy color diamonds are cut to bizarre dimensions (by colorless / near colorless standards - my standards because that is my market) because fancy color diamonds are cut for "depth of color" so it is natural for David to constantly insist that the numbers have nothing to do with beauty and that it is necessary to look at the diamond in order to determine whether it is exceptional. The reality is that I can buy colorless / near colorless round brilliant ideal cut diamonds all day long off of the numerical data provided by a manufacturer's Sarin | OGI | Helium | report BUT I would NOT dare to even attempt to do so with a fancy color diamond (which is David's primary market).

I love the wonderful comments that have been shared by Gypsy and others about me, I truly appreciate them. But I have to say that I am recognized for who I am within the industry largely as the result of my friends within the industry, many of whom are my direct competitors. Those of you who have been on PS for awhile know me as "Nice Ice" and were a little confused when I popped up flying the flag of HPD while Nice Ice is still up and running... As explained on another thread, I accepted the offer of helping Wink promote the launch of HPD here on PS because he, John Pollard and Paul Slegers realized that I needed something to distract me from the details of a heinous lawsuit which was filed on me / the estate / the company by Robin's family (a lawsuit BTW which was just terminated in my favor after a mediator determined that their claims lacked "any" merit). You should know that when I won the lawsuit two short weeks ago, that I received numerous phone calls and email messages from my competitors sharing their excitement - again, they should have been crying, but every one of them said "what can I do to get you up and running strong, faster?" and this includes Wink who obviously benefits directly from every post I currently make on PS under his flag (okay, from most of them when I'm not on a rant!).

Think about what I just said "I accepted the offer to help Wink launch HPD because he, John Pollard and Paul Slegers realized that I needed something to distract me..." and Wink was a direct competitor of mine at the time! As such he should have been reveling in the promise of my suffering and the potential demise of Nice Ice - but he wasn't, he was worried about me and concerned that he might lose the insight of a web site that promotes a passion for diamonds of exceptional cut. Throughout the past few years while "all of this" was going on, I've received many, many, many phone calls offering support in the form of "anything you need" from Jonathan at GOG; Brian & Lesley of BGD; Jim at James Allen; Barry & Judah of Excel; Debi (CEO) White Flash; a friend at Blue Nile; Scott at Union Diamonds; and a few others who I won't mention because they are "those who shall not be mentioned" on the forum and a host of others who escape my mind at the moment - but the point is, our community is as cooperative as it is competitive and I like to think that we're all having a lot of fun promoting our love of diamonds while promoting our individual brands - think about this, while "Infinity" is a brand - every Infinity dealer is a brand of their own because we each tend to select a niche of diamond quality within the brand to fit our own "bias" or preferences and we argue about those preferences passionately when we get together

Awhile back there was a thread that expressed appreciation for the fact that Jonathan and I at GOG worked really well together, it was the result of a client asking me to help him find a stone through Nice Ice which I couldn't find, but I looked around and discovered that Jonathan had one - and the fact is that I used the diamond search engine here on PS to search "in house" diamonds and compare the details and prices (just like the pro-sumers do) - so I sent the client a link to the diamond and said buy it there... But at the same time, I also referred people to other dealers like BGD, WF, JA, BN and some of them purchased and others were confused by the concept. But the reality is that like the pro-sumers on this forum, I was merely looking for a diamond that fit the profile of the characteristics of the diamond that the client expressed and interest in within the confines of my own personal selection criteria which has been developed by fine tuning my own preferences over the years, the development of my own bias towards exceptional cut quality.

I know that as dealers we probably don't express our gratitude enough for the pro-sumers who frequent the forum and make selfless contributions beyond the depths of reason or understanding, but you all should know that as dealers we truly appreciate the passion which you clearly share of our love for diamonds, colored gems and fine jewelry. Of course we often ask ourselves "how the heck does [insert whatever name you want] find the time to respond to all those questions on PS? I'm in the industry and I don't have the time to make such a commitment (thought: because I have to earn a living)" but the fact that you (all) continually refer people to the lot of us (who you are familiar with) without compensation is proof to anybody who bothers to take more than a second to look for your impartiality to know that it is genuine. So thank you!

 

[bowral1]

Can you give constructive criticism without offending someone? I think it’s easier said than done. The Prosumers on this site are saying that vendors need to take the advice on this post and use it to improve. Agree? Yes I do too.

However what Richard was saying and also something I was trying to tactfully point out . . . . Is that the prosumers can also take the advice on this blog and use it to improve, not get defensive (just as the vendors did). He is giving his opinion and trying to bring up a valid point. I don’t think he was trying to bash or berate anyone. He was simply pointing out some faults he has seen on this site. Just as many people on this blog have pointed out the vendors faults.

The problem is people are very passionate about diamonds. This blog has a lot of people who invest a lot of their time. So when someone criticizes you its hard not to feel upset and take a defensive stance instead of accepting the criticism and working towards being better person. Whatever that may entail.

Prosumers/PS’ers you have commented about how vendors have offended you on this blog, but haven’t you also offended them? With both sides taking a defensive stance? So this leads to more criticism and we start the cycle all over again.

I am not trying to offend anyone as I respect you all and will be asking for your opinions in the future.

 

[bowral1]

I forgot to also point the reason why this site is so good is because of the Passion! I have been reading mortgage blogs and people just don’t seem to care as much as the PS’ers

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:43:36 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood

Date: 7/25/2009 2:25:56 AM
Author: sarap333

Date: 7/25/2009 2:11:34 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood
There''s an old saying which can be applied to jewelers as well.


''If you don''t know stocks, know your stockbroker.'' If you don''t know diamonds, know your diamond vendor...


I can''t tell you how many times I''ve had to reassure a consumer who bought a diamond (which was perfectly gorgeous, and they were thrilled with), from a trusted jeweler, only to be filled with doubt and dismay when some ''expert'' told them it was a ''bad stone'' for one reason or another.


This is what I''m talking about.

Interesting analogy -- I think you''ll find that the same sort of struggle is going on in the world of stocks -- online trading companies vs. B&M bankers and stockbrokers. Many of the same arguments used here have been heard in that business as well, i.e., ''trust the experts; don''t waste time on self-education,'' etc. We know how that turned out

Very good analogy, Sara.

The truth is though, most people don''t have the time to become expert in stocks, or diamonds. So they find an expert they trust, and ask him to do his best for them.

Many of the people here on Pricescope could be likened to people who start trading their own stocks, instead of using a stockbroker.

That''s fine if they bring themselves to a level of knowledge where they can do as well on their own (or better) than a professional stockbroker could do for them.

But if not, they''re better off working with a trusted professional who does it for a living.

i don''t trust "Mr. Madoff" the diamondbroker.

 

[Gypsy]

My thoughts today...

Some of you have asked whether the thread had a valid point about bias.

Yes. It did. And I know that as Ellen and Lorelei and others have expressed I too have taken it to heart. What I've gotten from this post, in a positive sense, is a reminder that when we are posting we have certain responsibilities (though not to the vendor's bottom line) to ensure that our posts do have as little bias as we can manage. The reminder is fair and welcome, of course.

The issue that I had was not with that point, but rather some of the other comments that were inserted.

I would like to think that the original thought behind the post was just to make us all think and to start a discussion. Now, when it came to typing out those thoughts, perhaps other concerns or considerations worked their way in and affected the tone of the post, intentional or not. At that point there were then several points expressed, some of which may have detracted from the original thought behind the thread. A couple of those points, as stated, I took issue with.

I am sure that distraction happens to all of us, as I know that it has happened to me. Hopefully the good from this thread can be taken to heart, by both the pros and the consumers.

Todd, what you say is very heartwarming. I had heard the news about you suit and was so happy for you. And I cannot wait to see Nice Ice up and running once again. And I am so glad that so many of the vendor circle has offered you assistance and support because you deserve it. And thank you for expressing appreciation for what the posters here who aren't professionals do.

One minor point, I do not consider myself a prosumer. I know settings and I like design. That is my strength. Now, I'm not saying that I haven't picked up some diamond knowledge along the way, and I can read an ASET and an IDEAL scope a Hearts Image and an Arrows shot, and look at the numbers and make remarks, but I am no where in the league of Lorelei or Storm or Ellen. And actually my 'cheat sheet' for advice on numbers is all from their posts, copied directly into a word file I open and use. I did start to independently look into ovals and pears because there was a time when no one was really an 'expert' on those, and at that same time others looked and saw the lack as well, and started getting more educated, so now some of us can comment on pears and ovals to help the consumers who are looking for them. My point is this. Not only am I not a professional. I don't even consider myself a prosumer. I offer what I can where I can however.

Now, I do plan on taking the GIA online course plus lab to get my GG, and do plan on getting some serious CAD training in. Starting this fall... so I hope to be able to offer more constructive advice at that point. And again, it's for my own personal knowledge and comes from my own personal desires. There is no monetary again in it. It's just for fun right now. But maybe... after all of that, I can be called a prosumer.

But I wouldn't want to misrepresent myself in this thread, or anywhere else as a prosumer, by any means.