dont understand

[John P]

Date: 2/7/2009 5:55:27 PM
Author: diamondbank

Some are missing the point forums are here to educate and give points of view on all types of subjects regarding diamonds...

Education requires dialogue but it seems like you're only interested in a monologue DB?

At the outset you challenged people to show why diamonds can't be traded as a commodity. People have answered your challenge but you make no direct reply to elements brought forward. For example in red, below. Simple questions - can you answer?

Date: 2/7/2009 3:44:27 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 2/7/2009 1:46:34 PM
Author: diamondbank
John my feeling like yours is that its a matter of taste and as we know tastes are different. But at base as a commodity and within strict standardized categories of certified diamonds. The trading price should be unilateral within those categories and be traded for cash at least for the trade and the investor/private who could add much needed liquidity to the market. The retailer/jeweler he should use the cash market to source to take advantage of cutting out his cost to purchase of the raw material by making sure that he gets the best price available for his demand. He can then add the added value that he is offering to his customer.

In the categories of color & clarity, consider diamonds called in from suppliers that get sent back for 'non-eye-clean' (SI clarity) 'durability' (feather, chip, etc), 'low color' (J that shows too much tint), 'lucky cert' (VS that should have been SI), etc. Can these be priced unilaterally with diamonds of the same category that will not get sent back?

That doesn't even touch on the category of cut quality, which is a strong area of focus around here. How can a trading price be unilateral on two GIA EX diamonds (both 1ct GVS2 xxx Nil) when a consumer looks at one and loves it, but looks at the other and does not?

 

[diamondbank]

Recent article posted online about investing in diamond funds by Chaim Evan-Zohar


"Anyone who understands the depth of the current credit crunch, and watches the size of the credit facilities shrink in tandem with either the decrease in trading activity or in the values of inventories, must and will applaud all efforts to bring outside capital into the business" Chaim Evan-Zohar



http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullEditorial.asp?TextSearch=&KeyMatch=0&id=31831

 

[WinkHPD]

You still have not answered John''s questions and continue to drive people off site to look at articles that you feel bolster your position.

I do not think you have anything useful to say or you would answer questions. Have a great day, I have fun things to do.

Wink, going home to play with grandkids now

 

[diamondbank]

Im trying to reply as much as possible but as you can see its been quite busy, so if i have missed a point my apologies.

Lucky cert i hope thats not what the customer thinks when buying.i dont think you give enough credit to the grading labs. These are diamond dealers illusions between the trade . As i said my beleif is that more and more the consumer is buying the certificate and then the stone. See blue nile results or as a matter of fact online diamond sales. I will try and get some stats out soon.

I believe that what you find beautiful someone else finds ugly. For example some countries i believe like big tables and some like small tables. What is important is what the cert says and that is where its value should be.

 

[John P]

Repeat post for DB: In hopes of getting answers to the questions in red - thanks.

Date: 2/7/2009 5:55:27 PM
Author: diamondbank

Some are missing the point forums are here to educate and give points of view on all types of subjects regarding diamonds...

Education requires dialogue but it seems like you''re only interested in a monologue DB?

At the outset you challenged people to show why diamonds can''t be traded as a commodity. People have answered your challenge but you make no direct reply to elements brought forward. For example in red, below. Simple questions - can you answer?

Date: 2/7/2009 3:44:27 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 2/7/2009 1:46:34 PM
Author: diamondbank
John my feeling like yours is that its a matter of taste and as we know tastes are different. But at base as a commodity and within strict standardized categories of certified diamonds. The trading price should be unilateral within those categories and be traded for cash at least for the trade and the investor/private who could add much needed liquidity to the market. The retailer/jeweler he should use the cash market to source to take advantage of cutting out his cost to purchase of the raw material by making sure that he gets the best price available for his demand. He can then add the added value that he is offering to his customer.

In the categories of color & clarity, consider diamonds called in from suppliers that get sent back for ''non-eye-clean'' (SI clarity) ''durability'' (feather, chip, etc), ''low color'' (J that shows too much tint), ''lucky cert'' (VS that should have been SI), etc. Can these be priced unilaterally with diamonds of the same category that will not get sent back?

That doesn''t even touch on the category of cut quality, which is a strong area of focus around here. How can a trading price be unilateral on two GIA EX diamonds (both 1ct GVS2 xxx Nil) when a consumer looks at one and loves it, but looks at the other and does not?

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/7/2009 6:24:17 PM
Author: diamondbank
I believe that what you find beautiful someone else finds ugly. For example some countries i believe like big tables and some like small tables. What is important is what the cert says and that is where its value should be.

Then go and buy and invest in them. You want to dump your money into a bottomless pit, it is your own business.

 

[John P]

Date: 2/7/2009 6:24:17 PM
Author: diamondbank
Im trying to reply as much as possible but as you can see its been quite busy, so if i have missed a point my apologies.

Lucky cert i hope thats not what the customer thinks when buying.i dont think you give enough credit to the grading labs. These are diamond dealers illusions between the trade . As i said my beleif is that more and more the consumer is buying the certificate and then the stone. See blue nile results or as a matter of fact online diamond sales. I will try and get some stats out soon.

I believe that what you find beautiful someone else finds ugly. For example some countries i believe like big tables and some like small tables. What is important is what the cert says and that is where its value should be.

These may have been your answers DB?

I am a huge fan of reputable labs. They are critical. However, if you stick around here you'll see the grading report is indeed important but consumers require more detailed information to make decisions. Matters of clarity, color (and especially cut on this board) like the ones I noted drive decisions between grading reports of seemingly equal pedigree here every day. Pricescope is filled with threads where selection is made based on information that didn't appear on the report.

I like to say there is no such thing as an ugly diamond (kind of like no such thing as an ugly baby...though I suspect we've each seen one or two)

. With that said, if you place a 1.00 GVS2 xxx Nil (optimum proportions) and a 1.00 GVS2 xxx Nil (steep/deep) in any country I suspect you'll see them all making the same choice-of-appeal.

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/7/2009 6:37:35 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 2/7/2009 6:24:17 PM

Author: diamondbank

Im trying to reply as much as possible but as you can see its been quite busy, so if i have missed a point my apologies.


Lucky cert i hope thats not what the customer thinks when buying.i dont think you give enough credit to the grading labs. These are diamond dealers illusions between the trade . As i said my beleif is that more and more the consumer is buying the certificate and then the stone. See blue nile results or as a matter of fact online diamond sales. I will try and get some stats out soon.


I believe that what you find beautiful someone else finds ugly. For example some countries i believe like big tables and some like small tables. What is important is what the cert says and that is where its value should be.

These may have been your answers DB?


I am a huge fan of reputable labs. They are critical. However, if you stick around here you''ll see the grading report is indeed important but consumers require more detailed information to make decisions. Matters of clarity, color (and especially cut on this board) like the ones I noted drive decisions between grading reports of seemingly equal pedigree here every day. Pricescope is filled with threads where selection is made based on information that didn''t appear on the report.


I like to say there is no such thing as an ugly diamond (kind of like no such thing as an ugly baby...though I suspect we''ve each seen one or two)

. With that said, if you place a 1.00 GVS2 xxx Nil (optimum proportions) and a 1.00 GVS2 xxx Nil (steep/deep) in any country I suspect you''ll see them all making the same choice-of-appeal.

i think that in fancy shapes you are right but in round brilliant they should pretty much be the same in terms of a customer not finding it ugly. Matters of clarity, color especially cut are all on the report. Im sorry if im not answering you question right. The report tells you the beauty of the stone

 

[John P]

Date: 2/7/2009 6:48:56 PM
Author: diamondbank

i think that in fancy shapes you are right but in round brilliant they should pretty much be the same in terms of a customer not finding it ugly. Matters of clarity, color especially cut are all on the report. Im sorry if im not answering you question right. The report tells you the beauty of the stone

That's the flaw in your logic. I absolutely agree that the best diamonds should be identified by grading reports. However, people often seek the "best" best possible. There are also different levels. Not many educated enthusiasts would be willing to pay the same for the GIA EX diamond in the first link below as a GIA EX with optimum proportions.

You've shared some interesting threads. Here are some that may be of interest to you.

Case study featuring two GIA EX diamonds with much different looks (see B and C)
http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/37/4/GIA-Excellent-Cut-Grade-Case-Study.aspx

Some threads showing what consumers are asking about diamonds which can be categorically the same on a report.
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/two-1-8-e-vs2-ex-ex-ex-stones-which-one-to-choose.86147/
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-hca-1-0-but-gia-vg-cut-what-gives.101412/
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/2-stones-please-help-me-choose.78579/
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gia-xxx-with-hca-ex-ex-ex-vg.89987/

 

[diamondbank]

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/two-1-8-e-vs2-ex-ex-ex-stones-which-one-to-choose.86147/

Difficult to comment on this as the they dont have a cut grade. However if the cut grade was x making the certificate xxx then i believe there is no price difference per carat. I believe ROUND 1.70-1.99 XXX NONE should have the same price per carat for both stones.



https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-hca-1-0-but-gia-vg-cut-what-gives.101412/

Both these stones should have a different price per carat.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:35:43 PM
Author: diamondbank
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-hca-1-0-but-gia-vg-cut-what-gives.101412/

Both these stones should have a different price per carat.

And which one do you think deserves a higher price per carat? #1 or #2?

 

[John P]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:35:43 PM
Author: diamondbank

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/two-1-8-e-vs2-ex-ex-ex-stones-which-one-to-choose.86147/

Difficult to comment on this as the they dont have a cut grade. However if the cut grade was x making the certificate xxx then i believe there is no price difference per carat. I believe ROUND 1.70-1.99 XXX NONE should have the same price per carat for both stones.

They're both E VS2 XXX (it's in the subject line of the thread). So, two questions about the links so far...

Question 1: If you say they should be valued the same why did all 4 consumers in that thread unanimously pick stone #1 as more desirable?

Question 2: Do you think diamonds B and C from the case study - both GIA EX - should be priced the same, if they were equal carat, color, clarity, fluor?

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:09:23 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 2/7/2009 6:48:56 PM

Author: diamondbank


Case study featuring two GIA EX diamonds with much different looks (see B and C)

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/37/4/GIA-Excellent-Cut-Grade-Case-Study.aspx

My feelings on this even though theres no cert on diamond B and C if they are within the same category ie (0.30ct- 0.39cts GIA XXX none) then they should trade under the same price per carat and both stones look beautiful especially when you will never see them like they are displayed there. You need special equipment to view a diamond like that. Both A and B would look equally beautiful on a ring

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:44:37 PM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 2/7/2009 7:35:43 PM

Author: diamondbank

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-hca-1-0-but-gia-vg-cut-what-gives.101412/


Both these stones should have a different price per carat.

And which one do you think deserves a higher price per carat? #1 or #2?

It does not say the weight of both stones. But If they were both 1.02 then i would go for the number 2 the second one, its XXX

 

[John P]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:49:05 PM
Author: diamondbank

Date: 2/7/2009 6:48:56 PM
Author: diamondbank

Case study featuring two GIA EX diamonds with much different looks (see B and C)
http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/37/4/GIA-Excellent-Cut-Grade-Case-Study.aspx

My feelings on this even though theres no cert on diamond B and C if they are within the same category ie (0.30ct- 0.39cts GIA XXX none) then they should trade under the same price per carat and both stones look beautiful especially when you will never see them like they are displayed there. You need special equipment to view a diamond like that.

Try the next page and look at photo 6. You can see skin through the table of the stone. The pavilion facets are steep enough that they're improperly acting as windows, not mirrors, which is what the tools were showing. You don't need tools to see the resulting dead zones in many lighting conditions.

Both A and B would look equally beautiful on a ring

Indeed. Interesting because A is GIA VG and B is GIA EX. Then you have C which is also GIA EX but will not be as beautiful as A or B.

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:48:50 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 2/7/2009 7:35:43 PM

Author: diamondbank


https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/two-1-8-e-vs2-ex-ex-ex-stones-which-one-to-choose.86147/


Difficult to comment on this as the they dont have a cut grade. However if the cut grade was x making the certificate xxx then i believe there is no price difference per carat. I believe ROUND 1.70-1.99 XXX NONE should have the same price per carat for both stones.

They're both E VS2 XXX (it's in the subject line of the thread). So, two questions about the links so far...


Question 1: If you say they should be valued the same why did all 4 consumers in that thread unanimously pick stone #1 as more desirable?


Question 2: Do you think diamonds B and C from the case study - both GIA EX - should be priced the same, if they were equal carat, color, clarity, fluor?

Question 1: I cant comment on their comments, to my eyes the cert shows them to be matching pairs. same price per carat

Questions 2: I need to see the full cert to judge the prices on that.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/7/2009 7:55:02 PM
Author: diamondbank

Date: 2/7/2009 7:44:37 PM

Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 2/7/2009 7:35:43 PM

Author: diamondbank

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-hca-1-0-but-gia-vg-cut-what-gives.101412/

Both these stones should have a different price per carat.

And which one do you think deserves a higher price per carat? #1 or #2?

It does not say the weight of both stones. But If they were both 1.02 then i would go for the number 2 the second one, its XXX

Even if they are both XXX I would prefer #1, which actually is VGVGX and I think most on PS would do that too.

 

[diamondbank]

I respect what you prefer for whatever valid reasons they may be.

But im reading a GIA certificate so number number 2 is more valuable than number 1. If you wanted to send both stones two AGS to see what grade they would get then fine . But they are not AGS they these two stones are GIA and they are GIA for a reason.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/7/2009 8:34:16 PM
Author: diamondbank
I respect what you prefer for whatever valid reasons they may be.

But im reading a GIA certificate so number number 2 is more valuable than number 1. If you wanted to send both stones two AGS to see what grade they would get then fine . But they are not AGS they these two stones are GIA and they are GIA for a reason.

So there will be market for diamonds based on different lab too? So theoretically I could buy the GIA VGVGX diamond on the market and send it to AGS and it could come back as a I/X/I and I resell it back on the market as an AGS stone and make a profit?

Even the color and clarity grading of a diamond is subjective. It is not like metal where pure metal is pure and you can test it and always get the same purity.

 

[John P]

Date: 2/7/2009 8:56:22 PM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 2/7/2009 8:34:16 PM
Author: diamondbank
I respect what you prefer for whatever valid reasons they may be.

But im reading a GIA certificate so number number 2 is more valuable than number 1. If you wanted to send both stones two AGS to see what grade they would get then fine . But they are not AGS they these two stones are GIA and they are GIA for a reason.

So there will be market for diamonds based on different lab too? So theoretically I could buy the GIA VGVGX diamond on the market and send it to AGS and it could come back as a I/X/I and I resell it back on the market as an AGS stone and make a profit?

Even the color and clarity grading of a diamond is subjective. It is not like metal where pure metal is pure and you can test it and always get the same purity.

Now there's a concept I could get into. Identify GIA VG in such a network with 40.6ish pavilions or atypical indexing that will grade as AGS Ideal and convert them. Buy low sell high.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/7/2009 9:53:20 PM
Author: John Pollard


Now there''s a concept I could get into. Identify GIA VG in such a network with 40.6ish pavilions or atypical indexing that will grade as AGS Ideal and convert them. Buy low sell high.

That does sound like fun :}

 

[denverappraiser]

Diamondbank,

I answered your question several pages ago and you ignored me but I’ll try again.

For an item to be traded as a commodity it MUST be fungible. Your premise seems to be that all stones with identical documentation are therefore identical and consequently interchangeable, rather like all 100 ounce bars of gold or all shares of a particular stock are interchangeable. This is a false premise, as has been pointed out repeatedly and with specific examples. You keep making the point that it would be great if this were the case because it would be then be theoretically possible to develop a more efficient exchange but without it, this is a specious argument. Your underlying premise is simply not true. If wishes were fishes then the whole world would be fat and happy.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[DiamondsDiamonds]

Date: 2/7/2009 11:00:04 PM
Author: denverappraiser

For an item to be traded as a commodity it MUST be fungible.

Well said, Neil.

That statement not only answers the issue, but is incontrovertible.

Period.

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/7/2009 11:00:04 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Diamondbank,


I answered your question several pages ago and you ignored me but I’ll try again.


For an item to be traded as a commodity it MUST be fungible. Your premise seems to be that all stones with identical documentation are therefore identical and consequently interchangeable, rather like all 100 ounce bars of gold or all shares of a particular stock are interchangeable. This is a false premise, as has been pointed out repeatedly and with specific examples. You keep making the point that it would be great if this were the case because it would be then be theoretically possible to develop a more efficient exchange but without it, this is a specious argument. Your underlying premise is simply not true. If wishes were fishes then the whole world would be fat and happy.


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver

Neil Im sorry if you feel ignored, iv tried to explain throughout many posts and i will try again.

Can you give me a logical reason why these two stones should trade at different price per carats.

Round GIA 1.05 Gvs2 xxx None
Round GIA 1.04 Gvs2 xxx None

If you could give the readers a valid explanation for this it would be appreciated.

If you read my posts correctly i am talking about ROUND BRILLIANTS being fungible.

By definition a commodity ''is an article of trade or commerce'' which retains an intrinsic value. It is hard to argue that a diamond does not fulfill this criteria. Therefore, it is the challenges of standardization that currently inhibit the logical conclusion of commoditisation.

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/7/2009 11:00:04 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Diamondbank,


I answered your question several pages ago and you ignored me but I’ll try again.


For an item to be traded as a commodity it MUST be fungible. Your premise seems to be that all stones with identical documentation are therefore identical and consequently interchangeable, rather like all 100 ounce bars of gold or all shares of a particular stock are interchangeable. This is a false premise, as has been pointed out repeatedly and with specific examples. You keep making the point that it would be great if this were the case because it would be then be theoretically possible to develop a more efficient exchange but without it, this is a specious argument. Your underlying premise is simply not true. If wishes were fishes then the whole world would be fat and happy.


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver

If they were all split up into different markets would you say that they are fungible? DODAQ is saying they are. What do you all think?

Lab- GIA IGI HRD

Shape Round Brilliant

Weight 0.30 Cts - 1.49 Cts

Colour D,E,F,G,H,I,J (No Equivalent or Tinge)
Clarity IF/LC,VVS1,VVS2,VS1,VS2, SI1
Cut Grade Excellent or Very Good
Polish Excellent or Very Good
Symmetry Excellent or Very Good
Total Depth % 58.0% - 64.3%
Table % 54% - 63%
Girdle Thickness No very thick
Culet Size None only
Fluorescence None, Slight/Faint, Medium, Strong
Comments No comments except Hearts & Arrows
Date 2007 - 2009 (HRD Antwerp - only new 2009 certificate)

source DODAQ

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/8/2009 4:06:35 AM
Author: diamondbank
By definition a commodity ''is an article of trade or commerce'' which retains an intrinsic value. It is hard to argue that a diamond does not fulfill this criteria. Therefore, it is the challenges of standardization that currently inhibit the logical conclusion of commoditisation.

And there you said it, standardization. Which lab are you going to trust and make it into the world''s standard? The one that give you more kickback?

Color and Clarity grading are subjective, how do you standardize a subjective thing? EGL from what I understand employs GIA graduated Geminologist and still gives looser grading from GIA/AGS standard. Even GIA/AGS sometimes gives different grades to a same stone. Cut is even worse, with cut variables given to maximize either beauty or weight or a compromise of the two for a give rough, how do you standardize that?

I have already given an example of how to change the value of a stone due to different cut grading of different labs. Tell me how can a round brilliant cut still be considered fungible?

 

[diamondbank]

Date: 2/8/2009 5:46:52 AM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 2/8/2009 4:06:35 AM

Author: diamondbank

By definition a commodity ''is an article of trade or commerce'' which retains an intrinsic value. It is hard to argue that a diamond does not fulfill this criteria. Therefore, it is the challenges of standardization that currently inhibit the logical conclusion of commoditisation.

And there you said it, standardization. Which lab are you going to trust and make it into the world''s standard? The one that give you more kickback?


Color and Clarity grading are subjective, how do you standardize a subjective thing? EGL from what I understand employs GIA graduated Geminologist and still gives looser grading from GIA/AGS standard. Even GIA/AGS sometimes gives different grades to a same stone. Cut is even worse, with cut variables given to maximize either beauty or weight or a compromise of the two for a give rough, how do you standardize that?


I have already given an example of how to change the value of a stone due to different cut grading of different labs. Tell me how can a round brilliant cut still be considered fungible?

I believe that they are offering different markets for different Labs. So there would be a GIA exchange and there would be a AGS exchange both trading @ different price per carat.

So i in your opinion, the GIA exchange would have a higher price per carat than the AGS exchange?

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/8/2009 6:06:14 AM
Author: diamondbank

I believe that they are offering different markets for different Labs. So there would be a GIA exchange and there would be a AGS exchange both trading @ different price per carat.

So i in your opinion, the GIA exchange would have a higher price per carat than the AGS exchange?

No, in the example given, the GIA stone is graded VGVGEX, but the cutting of the stone is close enough that AGS could give it a I/EX/I grade. So in effect, if both lab exchange has the same price for the same grade, I would be buying a tier 2 cut stone from the hypothetical GIA exchange, at cheaper price, get it graded at AGS and sell it as a tier 1 cut graded stone at the hypothetical AGS exchange. How is that fungible to you?

Same thing could happen with color and clarity grading especially stones with borderline grades, low F or high G for example. If a stone graded by AGS as a G, but a savy buyer think that it could be a F, send it in to GIA for a grading, comes back a F, the stone gains in value at the GIA exchange? No way is that fungible.

 

[Serg]

Date: 2/7/2009 4:04:02 PM
Author: diamondbank


Gold bullion is Gold bullion with a stand alone price examples of this see
Gold market


Gold jewelery is gold jewelery, price is including (Gold + production + brand)



Polished Diamonds are polished diamonds with a stand alone price

Polished Diamond jewelery are diamond prices including (Diamond+ setting+ brand)



I would not worry about the dangers of a stock market for diamonds it could only help as it has for other precious metals industries. History tells us diamonds are a good investment thats one of the reasons people buy them and will continue buying them.

Anyone has any thoughts on this article


HNIs shun equities for diamondsHNIs shun equites for diamonds

re:Gold bullion is Gold bullion with a stand alone price . Polished Diamonds are polished diamonds with a stand alone price

you can cut, melt ( combine) Gold bullions. It will same Gold bullions
Two Gold bullion are identical for consumer, investor.
how many identical diamonds could you find? What will price for such search?
Gold billion is commodity product, because
1) You can melt gold billion after year using and receive absolutely new gold billion( you can not do it with diamond at all)
2) Price for gold billion does not depends from shape.( only from weight) . It is not same for diamonds
2) Price for 1000 identical gold billions is less than 1000 prices one gold billion. It s not same for diamonds. 1000 identical diamonds have price much bigger than 1000 prices one same diamond

Gold bullion is Gold bullion, diamond is diamond. Its have quite different properties. Diamond have not necessary properties to become good commodity .
For example ASG0 1ct G/VS could be commodity for a short time. then it will fall .

 

[Serg]

Diamondbank,

do you have any relationships with DODAQ?