ACA stone rejects

[ezwinner701]

I''m not assuming that. I''ve done my research and there is a premium on the ACA stones.

Date: 2/2/2007 6:21:11 AM
Author: coda72

Date: 2/1/2007 8:37:29 PM
Author: ezwinner701
so in conclusion I doubt there''s ever been any of them like that, so my last question is why pay for the extra premium for the ACA when you can just get the AGS 000 from somewhere else.

Well, I don''t think there is much of a premium for an ACA. Not long ago, I found a beautiful ACA stone on WF. I decided to upgrade an ES stone I had bought the previous year. When I did a PS search to compare prices, this stone turned out to be the lowest price AGS0 stone in the 0.7-0.75 carat price range. So, of course I jumped on the ACA stone, and I don''t regret it in the least bit. So, don''t assume that an ACA is always more expensive than an unbranded AGS0.

 

[ezwinner701]

I really doubt WF will just not send to get the new report because it is "too expensive". That is just a silly logic, especially when you are talking about stones that are 10k+.

Date: 2/2/2007 12:03:04 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/1/2007 8:37:29 PM
Author: ezwinner701
so in conclusion I doubt there''s ever been any of them like that, so my last question is why pay for the extra premium for the ACA when you can just get the AGS 000 from somewhere else.

EZ, I think you''re still missing it. It''s possible that many of the stones in the ES inventory would earn the AGS000 grading reports (new DQDs) IF they were submitted for that level of report. They don''t have DQRs because they weren''t capable of making the more elite DQD; it''s because WF chooses the DQR report for ES stones.

They do this because DQR reports are less expensive, and they can therefore offer ES stones for exceptional value, and that''s what ES stones are all about.....value for the money.

Maybe an example would be helpful:

Two purebred, AKC-registered dogs mate and produce 5 puppies. The litter of 5 puppies is registered with the AKC; therefore, all 5 puppies would be to earn the AKC registration pedigree. If one of those puppies is adopted by a family (who has no interest in showing the dog or breeding it), they may decide it''s not worth paying the $200 to register the dog.
This doesn''t mean the dog *couldn''t* be a pedigreed dog or that it''s inferior in any way; it simply means the owners made an economic choice not to pay the premium to obtain the piece of paper (registration) that is the pedigree.

I''d bet that many of the ES stones would get the AGS000 report IF they were submitted for it.

To your question above...''why pay the premium for an ACA?'' Because to some folks, knowing their diamond exhibits that H&A pattern is important to them.....no different than folks who buy VVS stones. They can''t discern the difference visually, but they get satisfaction from knowing that the ''pedigree'' says it''s VVS quality.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/1/2007 10:04:39 PM
Author: shiatsu

Date: 2/1/2007 8:37:29 PM
Author: ezwinner701
so in conclusion I doubt there''s ever been any of them like that, so my last question is why pay for the extra premium for the ACA when you can just get the AGS 000 from somewhere else.

It''s all just marketing. GIA and AGS are the authorities, which is why we send our stones in to them to get graded and we don''t send them to the Whiteflash or Hearts on Fire companies. If GIA or AGS says it''s nice it''ll be nice. With branded diamonds you just get another source saying it''s nice, in ACA''s case both AGS and Whiteflash agree it''s nice. And this ca be a great service to their customers. But nearly any GIA Ex-Ex-Ex or AGS-000 is going to show nice hearts and arrows unless there is some serious graining issues or something. Hearts and arrows have just become a sales aid. They bring out the viewer and you ooh and ahh and they''re much more likely to get the sale than if they didn''t. Just remember this: there is no such thing as better than AGS-000. Some people may disagree, but this is what I''ve been told and am yet to see different.

Your wrong on so many levels I don''t know where to start....

1: neither AGS nor GIA grade optical symmetry, non h&a diamonds can get both grades.
2: The PS standard of cut is well beyond gia ex and ags0 - both lab grades are a very low end starting point and we go up from their.
3: A gia-ex stone can blow away 99.9% of AGS-0s and match the other .1%, wifey2b has one on her finger right now.
4: GIA ex is around the top 10% of diamonds, AGS0 is around the top 3% to 5% where we as a group with exceptions prefer the top 1% if there are even that many. Within that 1% there are various levels.
5: a stone can miss ags0 for reasons that have nothing to with performance but are workmanship issues of meet point symmetry and polish. Many of WF ES stones are in this class.
6: the pricing issue is simple comparing apples to apples in diamond cut and finish the price is similar, sure in some cases you can save some money by stepping down a little in performance or workmanship.
7: very few of the stones rated AGS0 would make 8* and its likely that practically none of them not cut by 8* would. 8* cuts to a very specific pattern that some like and some don''t. They are cut with painted girdles, short lgf% and specific c/p angles to pop the arrows all the time.(too much of a good thing to my eyes.)

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/2/2007 7:14:42 AM
Author: ezwinner701


I'm not assuming that. I've done my research and there is a premium on the ACA stones.

Compared to what?
see my other post....
We can argue all day if Brian's idea for visual balance is the best(its one of), painting blah blah blah or if a few split hairs separate them from the competition but the FACT that similar cut and finish stones on PS are in the same price range is a FACT.

 

[coda72]

Date: 2/2/2007 7:14:42 AM
Author: ezwinner701


I''m not assuming that. I''ve done my research and there is a premium on the ACA stones.

I''ve done research also, and I have found that it is not always the case. I just told you I got an ACA for cheaper than any other AGS0 listed at the time in the 0.7-0.75 carat price range. Are you accusing me of lying?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well, you can say that, and there may be a difference on some stones, but I just bought two .75 ct. ACA stones (1.5 ctw) from WF and the total was just under $6000. Just before that I had bought two .70 stones (1.4 ctw) from another respected vendor with the same specs (AGS0) and the total price (without settings) was $5300. So in reality, I got more carat weight for just under $700 more. So I consider that they were very close in price considering the weight of the stones.

Many of the ES stones will be ideal cut, but they would not all meet the 0 in light performance. WF evaluates them before they go to AGS, and they submit stones that wouldn''t meet the AGS000 qualifications as well as the ACA parameters for the lesser report, and some are sent to GIA apparently, because they do have some GIA stones in their ES inventory.

Personally, I like having the AGS000 report, but I have another H&A diamond that has a GIA Excellent report. And I am sure it was not less than an ACA. The diamonds with the very best numbers will have a little premium on them. As I looked at certain vendors that appeared to have lower cost "ideal cut" diamonds, theirs did not have the most desirable numbers.

 

[strmrdr]

While on the subject of branding...
The ACA branding is a form I like there isn''t a name premium like hof compared to similar cut stones in the same market but there is a justifiable performance and craftsmanship premium.
You get something for the added cost over over "common" stones unlike a lot of branding.
It is rather unique that we have 3 brands we talk about here and a few near brands that do that.
WF ACA, Paul''s Cut by Infinity, Pearlman''s triple cert, near brands: GOG classic, NiceIce Private Reserve.

 

[aljdewey]

Author: ezwinner701

''m not assuming that. I''ve done my research and there is a premium on the ACA stones. ......

Author: ezwinner701

I really doubt WF will just not send to get the new report because it is ''too expensive''. That is just a silly logic, especially when you are talking about stones that are 10k+.

Very simply, EZ.......since you claim to have done "research" and apparently feel as though you know everything there is to know, why bother even asking here?

Honestly, buy what you like and what you value. If you don''t value ES stones or branded ACAs.......DON''T BUY EM. It really doesn''t matter to anyone here....none of us has a vested interest.

To each his own, yanno?

But I gotta tell you, if it''s agreement with your ill-informed opinion that you''re seeking here, you''re going to be disappointed. You''ve come to your own conclusion, and one that works for you, so I think you should just be happy and satisfied with that result.

 

[hikerchick]

Date: 2/2/2007 6:21:11 AM
Author: coda72

Date: 2/1/2007 8:37:29 PM

Author: ezwinner701

so in conclusion I doubt there''s ever been any of them like that, so my last question is why pay for the extra premium for the ACA when you can just get the AGS 000 from somewhere else.

Well, I don''t think there is much of a premium for an ACA. Not long ago, I found a beautiful ACA stone on WF. I decided to upgrade an ES stone I had bought the previous year. When I did a PS search to compare prices, this stone turned out to be the lowest price AGS0 stone in the 0.7-0.75 carat price range. So, of course I jumped on the ACA stone, and I don''t regret it in the least bit. So, don''t assume that an ACA is always more expensive than an unbranded AGS0.

Coda, I think you are absolutely right here. EZ, please do a search on the PS "search by cut" listed above. Pick a range, any carat, color and clarity. Limit it to excellent cut only, then sort by price, you will see WF ACA diamonds with prices near the bottom end of the spectrum, will it be the lowest price, no but within a few hundred dollars of the lowest and certainly lower than MANY other AGS 0 diamonds listed there. Just try it . . .

Like someone else also said, it certainly doesn''t matter to me where you buy, I have nothing invested in WF but I just don''t understand where you see this supposed inflated prices on WF ACA diamonds.

 

[the other Jake]

Hiker that is very interesting... I was orignally posting to argue with you, but you''re right! They are very close. I personally own an ACA and see it worthy of a premium.

 

[hikerchick]

Date: 2/2/2007 11:17:16 AM
Author: the other Jake
Hiker that is very interesting... I was orignally posting to argue with you, but you''re right! They are very close. I personally own an ACA and see it worthy of a premium.

Yeah I implied that the ACA was not hugely overpriced earlier in this thread but didn''t feel I knew that enough to make a bold statement but as the thread progressed, I went and checked out the prices and am pleasantly surprised that it is indeed true. I think it is pretty great that people like myself and my BF can get a gorgeous diamond at a reasonable price . . .

 

[:)]

Date: 2/1/2007 4:16:58 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/1/2007 2:42:47 PM
Author: ezwinner701
Thanks for the links, but I had said in the initial thread the criteria was with not any fluoro. And those two had strong blue.

I still have not found any that has the following.

AGS 000 with light Pro at 0
no fluoro
and no funny girdles.

I doubt that you''ll be able to find many instances of your above criteria because of this reason:

My guess is that Brian evaluates the stones for H&A quality prior to sending them to the lab. If they don''t meet the H&A standard and won''t make ACA, they''d be submitted automatically for DQR reports because he already knows they''ll go into ES, and the company has decided to pay for the lesser-priced DQR report on ES stones.

This would also explain why there are a few stones with fluor that have DQD/0 light performance reports.....because until the grading report comes back, it''s tough to tell how much fluor the lab will say it has. If it comes back as ''strong fluor'', it''s already got the DQD at that point, but it would miss the ACA brand due to amount of fluor. This would account for the instances of Ktn and Hiker''s stones.

(Speaking of which......Ktn and Hiker - I did note that the scenarios I listed above were just two *possible* reasons that I could think of, realizing that there may be other reasons (such as yours) that I hadn''t thought about.)

All of that said, it''s entirely possible that a number of those ES stones would earn the AGS0 with light performance distinction if they were to be submitted for those more expensive reports.

Alj, is this true? Degree of fluoro affects ACA grade?!! I could see if it actually had a visual effect, but what about blue whites without effect, etc?

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/2/2007 6:39:56 PM
Author:

Date: 2/1/2007 4:16:58 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/1/2007 2:42:47 PM
Author: ezwinner701
Thanks for the links, but I had said in the initial thread the criteria was with not any fluoro. And those two had strong blue.

I still have not found any that has the following.

AGS 000 with light Pro at 0
no fluoro
and no funny girdles.

I doubt that you'll be able to find many instances of your above criteria because of this reason:

My guess is that Brian evaluates the stones for H&A quality prior to sending them to the lab. If they don't meet the H&A standard and won't make ACA, they'd be submitted automatically for DQR reports because he already knows they'll go into ES, and the company has decided to pay for the lesser-priced DQR report on ES stones.

This would also explain why there are a few stones with fluor that have DQD/0 light performance reports.....because until the grading report comes back, it's tough to tell how much fluor the lab will say it has. If it comes back as 'strong fluor', it's already got the DQD at that point, but it would miss the ACA brand due to amount of fluor. This would account for the instances of Ktn and Hiker's stones.

(Speaking of which......Ktn and Hiker - I did note that the scenarios I listed above were just two *possible* reasons that I could think of, realizing that there may be other reasons (such as yours) that I hadn't thought about.)

All of that said, it's entirely possible that a number of those ES stones would earn the AGS0 with light performance distinction if they were to be submitted for those more expensive reports.

Alj, is this true? Degree of fluoro affects ACA grade?!! I could see if it actually had a visual effect, but what about blue whites without effect, etc?

I understood it to be so based on anecdotal info from Ktn's post earlier in this thread and what she said she was told during her purchase of a strong blue fluor stone from Whiteflash.

Honestly, though, you really should clarify it with WF.....go to the source.

Maybe John Pollard can clarify?

 

[:)]

Thanks Alj - I just asked JP to clarify for us - I am very curious if maybe this was a brand decision that was made maybe due to Brian Gavin''s philosophy on fluoro.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 2/2/2007 7:13:14 PM
Author: aljdewey

I understood it to be so based on anecdotal info from Ktn''s post earlier in this thread and what she said she was told during her purchase of a strong blue fluor stone from Whiteflash.

Honestly, though, you really should clarify it with WF.....go to the source.

Maybe John Pollard can clarify?

I hath. Here''s the anecdote antidote: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/calling-john-pollard-aca-fluoro-question.57243/

 

[Adylon]

I don''t think the analogy of the GPA of 3.75 vs 4.00 is fair to say. An AGS000 stone may "perform" just as good as the best branded superideal cut diamond. I''m not knocking anyone''s brand, there is definatley a market for perfection in everything and rightfully so there should be a premium associated with that.

But I think a more fair analogy would be 2 journalist students both with a GPA of 4.0. Both write terrific articles, speak well, are very friendly, etc.. but one is a little chunky and has crooked teeth and the other is stunningly beautiful They may perform the same and be just as profecient in doing what they do, but one will be offered an anchor position on CNN while the other becomes a writer for the NY Times

If I''m wrong then someone please correct me, but I guess what I''m saying is performance-wise I don''t think an AGS000 takes any disadvantage to the best branded superideals out there...