shlo_mo_shun
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 12
OK, first, I wanted to thank all the members here on PS. I have been lurking for over a month, and really taken alot from all of you. Not being smug (ok, maybe a little) but I feel like I know more about diamonds than some of the sales people I''ve talked to when viewing stones. So thanks to all of you.
Here''s the stone I am considering:
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-312250.htm
Carat: 1.261
Color: G
Clarity: SI1
HCA: 1.1-EX ex-ex-ex-vg
Other: AGS0 H&A ACA
Depth/Table/Crown/Pav.: 61.8% 55% 34.7° 40.7°
Girdle: thn-med f
Polish/Sym: id id
Flour: no
Dimensions: 6.91-6.95x4.28
Cert: AGS
I spoke with Katie at WF today and she was very helpful. I had concerns about it''s ''eye-cleanliness'' as the inclusions are quite visible on the enlarged view and even on the idealscope it seems. But she read me their internal review that said that the inclusions weren''t visible from either viewing distance they check (4in and 10in?). So I''m feeling real good about that.
So here''s my question. I''ve seen people talk of going one of 3 ways after purchase:
#1 Have it sent loose, take to an appraiser, send it back to WF for mounting, then take it back to appraiser for a final doublecheck.
#2 Have it sent mounted, take to an appraiser to confirm the stone.
#3 Just use WF documentation for insurance. No appraisal.
I know I want someone to verify that the stone is what I bought, so #3 is out. But what advantage is to be had by #1? I''m going to of course give it good looks during the 10 day return period, and get it appraised, so what other advantage am I missing by going with #1 over #2. And what sort of cost difference can I expect between the two.
Thanks so much,
Mark
PS: Im willing to listen to anyone that thinks they can find a better stone. All challengers welcome.
Here''s the stone I am considering:
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-312250.htm
Carat: 1.261
Color: G
Clarity: SI1
HCA: 1.1-EX ex-ex-ex-vg
Other: AGS0 H&A ACA
Depth/Table/Crown/Pav.: 61.8% 55% 34.7° 40.7°
Girdle: thn-med f
Polish/Sym: id id
Flour: no
Dimensions: 6.91-6.95x4.28
Cert: AGS
I spoke with Katie at WF today and she was very helpful. I had concerns about it''s ''eye-cleanliness'' as the inclusions are quite visible on the enlarged view and even on the idealscope it seems. But she read me their internal review that said that the inclusions weren''t visible from either viewing distance they check (4in and 10in?). So I''m feeling real good about that.
So here''s my question. I''ve seen people talk of going one of 3 ways after purchase:
#1 Have it sent loose, take to an appraiser, send it back to WF for mounting, then take it back to appraiser for a final doublecheck.
#2 Have it sent mounted, take to an appraiser to confirm the stone.
#3 Just use WF documentation for insurance. No appraisal.
I know I want someone to verify that the stone is what I bought, so #3 is out. But what advantage is to be had by #1? I''m going to of course give it good looks during the 10 day return period, and get it appraised, so what other advantage am I missing by going with #1 over #2. And what sort of cost difference can I expect between the two.
Thanks so much,
Mark
PS: Im willing to listen to anyone that thinks they can find a better stone. All challengers welcome.

