- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,223
To put things in context- yes I did not introduce any other factors beside the HCA score in my comment about people potentially preferring a 5 over a 1. However the vast majority of users and people posting about it don't take any other factors into account.Hey Rickdiamond, I'm aware that HCA is a rejection tool and their are many proportions that score 2 to 4 that I'd prefer to others that score less than 2. For example id much rather. 35/41, 35.5/40.8 even a 35.5/41 over a 33/40.5. But then HCA is not just for erings and I see it purely as a means to calculate theoretical light return which as you have many times discussed is only one attribute and does not dictate beauty. I understand all that.
I apologise if I was vague in my comments, I was commenting on two particular stones where one was 5.3 and the other 1.3, not a generalisation. Also I was expressing my particular opinion on a stone with 41.6 pav which I have seen before and not liked.
I have seen lots of stones although not a drop of a vendors experience. I have a strong preference for lower HCA stones, particularly when viewed outside the store lights. Your examples of people preferring 5 and 3 are quite arbitrary without any proportions, other vendors stated they have blind tested their customers with strong preference to super ideal proportions in general in the majority. Unfortunately I know of no controlled double blind study so further chat is just individual experience of both vendors and consumers alike. As to hinting vendors of financial incentives, it works both ways and I think it's useful to have variation of opinion and the ability to be able to express as such without such comments; although I feel you hinted in a similar fashion towards superideal vendors. I apologise if I misinterpreted
I have not interjected any comments into threads where an online shopper is using HCA for years.
That's because the tool works for acceptance. Stones scoring below 2 are always extremely well cut, in my experience.
The rejection side is the issue- and even then only on threads like this.
Someone owns a diamond, learns of the HCA and it unseats their confidence.
I am extremely lucky in that I am located in the middle of one of the last active wholesale trading areas in the diamond business. I have gotten to look at countless stones and parcels over the years.
I will use HCA on pretty much any RBC we're considering.
There's a lot of stones with scores below 3 that are amazing in person.
If I was buying a 1.00 G/VS2 I'd likely skip any HCA scores above 2 because there's a gajillion of them on he market. And that type of buyer would be more likely to reject a stone based on HCA.
What if it's a 3.75 M/I1 - totally eye clean scoring 4 on HCA yet being amazing in real life?
So I look at both high scoring and low scoring stones and have a feel for the fact that there's plenty of great stones below 3.
About vendor motivation. Wink probably didn't mean to use insulting language. I know him. He probably didn't consider the language as closely as I did.
Kenny is seemingly on attack mode no matter what I do. Truly unfair as I don't know him.
But in general- since super ideal cuts sell for a premium, it seems clear that there's financial motivation for convincing people they are hands down better.
Since we sell both I don't have a horse in he race on either side in particular. If a client wants super ideal, that's what we show them. If they ask about the difference we get a super well cut non super ideal which are generally 10%+- less and let them make up their own minds. We don't have fancy jewelry store lighting.