Recently, I was thinking about upgrading the diamond on a 1.16 ct. solitary diamond, 18kt yellow gold ring I bought at diamondsafe.com six years ago. The ring cost $4,500. It was our first diamond and I knew very little about diamonds at that time. When I pulled out the EGL cert. on the stone I was reminded that it was a VS2, I but discovered that the table was 65%. I have read that a diamond with a table of 65% isn''t good at all and probably shouldn''t even be bought.
After reviewing diamondsafe.com website I decided on a replacement stone priced at about $8,800. I emailed diamondsafe with my desire to upgrade along with detailed information on the ring that I had purchased from them in 2001. Diamondsafe.com ignored my email so I emailed the GIA certified sales person (Marcy Friedman) at diamondsafe.com who had originally sold me the ring. She ignored my email as well.
Can you figure out why diamondsafe.com would decide to ignore a request for "after sale service"? Wouldn''t it be better to reply to a past customer''s request and simply say that they are not interested in participating in the upgade?
Lastly, after looking around, I found Diamondsafe.com''s $8,800 diamond on another website for over $1,000 less. It was the same diamond since it has the same GIA number 15864895.
After reviewing diamondsafe.com website I decided on a replacement stone priced at about $8,800. I emailed diamondsafe with my desire to upgrade along with detailed information on the ring that I had purchased from them in 2001. Diamondsafe.com ignored my email so I emailed the GIA certified sales person (Marcy Friedman) at diamondsafe.com who had originally sold me the ring. She ignored my email as well.
Can you figure out why diamondsafe.com would decide to ignore a request for "after sale service"? Wouldn''t it be better to reply to a past customer''s request and simply say that they are not interested in participating in the upgade?
Lastly, after looking around, I found Diamondsafe.com''s $8,800 diamond on another website for over $1,000 less. It was the same diamond since it has the same GIA number 15864895.