Good Old Gold Clarity Enhanced diamond

[kindred]

Good Old Gold posted a link to this diamond on Facebook: http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8753

I am really surprised to see them listing a clarity enhanced diamond, especially in an August Vintage cut, and I feel that it cheapens the brand. I'm also surprised to see that the AGS report does not mention the clarity enhancement. Would a GIA report have listed it?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

They would likely have been unable to sell the stone as it was originally. When they buy rough and have it cut into AVR or AVC stones, they get what comes in the parcel. So that is why you'll see all clarities. With clarity that poor, the improvement to the visual appearance must have made it worth doing the enhancement. The price will still reflect the low clarity, and someone will be able to access a fabulous stone for a low price. It is rare that this happens, but I 100% trust GOG to make the best decisions on how to make the stones most attractive to a buyer. I imagine the AGS cert is based on the stone as it was before enhancement. So that is why it isn't mentioned on the report. The buyer pays for the stone as I2, it's original condition even though it's appearance has improved.

 

[JulieN]

Don't worry, I'm sure someone will jump on it. GOG knows what they are doing, and it even comes with their lifetime guarantee.

 

[zephyr]

I don't think it cheapens the brand at all. If they didn't disclose it, yes, then maybe.

I love GOG. They are the bestest people in the world.

 

[wakingdreams53]

I noticed that too, but definitely didn't have thoughts like yours!
They had a CI diamond a few months ago that became gorgeous!!

This K I2 was listed for a WHILE and wasn't selling, I think CI treatment was the smartest move. If I were looking to buy an AVR of that size, I'd buy it instantly.

 

[kindred]

Interesting. 159 views and only 4 replies. Maybe I should have made a poll. I'm interested in what others think. Keep the replies coming!

 

[armywife13]

I agree with the previous posts. I believe the clarity enhancement wasn't listed on the certification by AGS because it was enhanced afterwards. The I2 clarity was it's clarity prior to the enhancement.

With regards to them offering clarity enhanced diamonds, I see no problem with it. They fully disclosed that it was enhanced, and for the money it is a great deal-especially with the lifetime guarantee they offer..

If I had the money, I would snatch it up right now and bezel it in a bracelet like LGK's. Yum.

 

[yssie]

I agree with the previous posts. I believe the clarity enhancement wasn't listed on the certification by AGS because it was enhanced afterwards. The I2 clarity was it's clarity prior to the enhancement.

With regards to them offering clarity enhanced diamonds, I see no problem with it. They fully disclosed that it was enhanced, and for the money it is a great deal-especially with the lifetime guarantee they offer..

If I had the money, I would snatch it up right now and bezel it in a bracelet like LGK's. Yum.

Interesting... I'm surprised too, precision cutting is pricey and I'd have thought they'd have decided it wasn't worth it on a stone that would wind up so low in clarity... An experiment to see if there's a market maybe?

ETA: No, I don't think it cheapens the brand either.

 

[misssoph]

I woudnt want it for an engagement ring. But wouldn't it make a lovely pendent........

 

[Mayk]

I was also thinking cool pendant... Neat cut for a lower price.... No it doesn't cheapen the brand... I like the info DS gave about receiving rough and cutting the stones... Interesting...

 

[HopeDream]

I trust GOG's good judgement.

With the economy the way it is, it's smart for a vendor to try and meet as many budgets as possible.

They're very up front about it, and a buyer knows exactly what they are getting. I think buying CE stones is a personal decision and if strapped for cash, it's nice to have that option.

If there is any durabillity risk with setting the stone in a certain way (ring vs pendant) I'm sure they'd inform the buyer.

I wonder if it fractured during cutting or a re-cut?

I think refurbished scruffy diamonds benefit from the extra leeway afforded by a more vintage style. It's like taking a damaged antique and restoring it.

I own an AVC but I don't feel that this diamond's condition threatens the value of my stone or the value of the brand. If you look at the ASET, the light performance is still consistantly good even in the CE I2 stone. For me the light performance is a hallmark of the August vintage "brand"

If August Vintage's top selling feature was ultra-clear stones, and then they presented this, I would start to get a little worried.

 

[armywife13]

I agree with the previous posts. I believe the clarity enhancement wasn't listed on the certification by AGS because it was enhanced afterwards. The I2 clarity was it's clarity prior to the enhancement.

With regards to them offering clarity enhanced diamonds, I see no problem with it. They fully disclosed that it was enhanced, and for the money it is a great deal-especially with the lifetime guarantee they offer..

If I had the money, I would snatch it up right now and bezel it in a bracelet like LGK's. Yum.

Interesting... I'm surprised too, precision cutting is pricey and I'd have thought they'd have decided it wasn't worth it on a stone that would wind up so low in clarity... An experiment to see if there's a market maybe?

ETA: No, I don't think it cheapens the brand either.

I am not sure why they did decide to have it cut,unit I am sure they had their reasoning. I think after it was listed and never moved they probably decided to do the enhancement...I don't see it being something the would do often.

For the price though, I don't think it would be bad to make into a nice bracelet, even if it only lasted a few years. I wonder with their guarantees of their products, if they would continually re-enhance it when it starts to wear off. I don't know it that is even possible...

 

[Christina...]

...and it looks like someone has snatched it up. Its been put on hold.

 

[Rhino]

Greeetings PS friends,

Most of you have hit the nail on the head. Truth be told we do purcahse estate diamonds or commonly cut diamodns from the public very often. Everything has its price. If we see the potential to recut it into a diamond that will be beautiful and it makes financial sense (ie. the shipping and recutting don't cost more than the diamond itself!) and can afford to offer it at a good price we'll go ahead and do that. It isn't often but I see no harm if we disclose all the information up front as we do with everything we publish.

For the record AGS Labs will not grade a clarity enhanced diamond, nor will GIA. I think its a benefit to the consumer who sees what the clarity grade is before enhancement as on today's market if one is considering a clarity enhanced diamond they generally do not know what the clarity grade was prior to enhancement. The information IMO is useful.

With regards to the clarity enhancement process there are only 3 things to my knowledge that can cause it to become unenhanced which would be placing the diamond in fire, boiling acid or the heat/friction of a cutters wheel (cutting it again). Most consumers will not expose the diamond to such conditions but we outline these in our tutorials of things to be careful for should one consider it. In that particular diamond the enhancement came out GREAT. Went from a diamond with obvious eye visible inclusions to eye clean for the layman.

All the best,
Jonathan

 

[madelise]

All the best,
Jonathan

I think Jon had posted a video re: clarity enhancement a while ago, too, right? I remember there was a beautiful August Vintage Cushion that I had asked about because of the CE, and I was sent a video explaining when/why you chose to CE it. With the lifetime guarantee at GOG, I wouldn't see why not to purchase it?

 

[madelise]

Oh, silly me, I just searched my email history and found it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NQs0xnWz9k&feature=channel_video_title

that was SUCH a beautiful AVC! I wish I snagged it up!

 

[MrsBettyBoop]

Jon,

You're awesome.

 

[texaskj]

Jonathan, would you marry us?

 

[Gypsy]

I don't think it cheapens the brand, as a one off. As in, they made a mistake and weren't able to move this piece and decided the solution was to have this one CE. I wouldn't appreciate it and do think it would cheapen the brand if they did it routinely.

I'm sure someone will snatch it up for a pendant, though for the price I'd rather have an unenhanced 'real' antique OEC BY FAR rather than an enhanced AVC.

 

[zephyr]

I don't think it cheapens the brand, as a one off. As in, they made a mistake and weren't able to move this piece and decided the solution was to have this one CE. I wouldn't appreciate it and do think it would cheapen the brand if they did it routinely.

I'm sure someone will snatch it up for a pendant, though for the price I'd rather have an unenhanced 'real' antique OEC BY FAR rather than an enhanced AVC.

I am not sure I'd call this a mistake. A business has various and all kinds of clients. I see no reason why a business shouldn't cater to all of them if they can.


It is already gone.

 

[Gypsy]

I don't think it cheapens the brand, as a one off. As in, they made a mistake and weren't able to move this piece and decided the solution was to have this one CE. I wouldn't appreciate it and do think it would cheapen the brand if they did it routinely.

I'm sure someone will snatch it up for a pendant, though for the price I'd rather have an unenhanced 'real' antique OEC BY FAR rather than an enhanced AVC.

I am not sure I'd call this a mistake. A business has various and all kinds of clients. I see no reason why a business shouldn't cater to all of them if they can.


It is already gone.

The mistake I'm referring to is picking that particular rough to make into an AVC.

What I mean is, it would cheapen it for me if they routinely used very included, inferior, rough that required clarity enhancement of the final product to make it eyclean.

As for a business catering to all. To me, if you upcharge heavily for a brand name the way GOG does with the AVCs-- there is an implication of exclusivity and of quality. And CE diamonds are inferior to natural ones-- which is why they cost so much less. They are enhanced. They are not top quality.

You can't have it both ways. Either you can justify your branding upcharge with exclusivity and quality assurances-- in which case you are responsible for monitoring your brand to ensure that you maintain that quality and exclusivity-- OR you can NOT upcharge for brand and try to reach a broader customer base by lowering your costs using inferior (like the CE) materials. But to do both doesn't work. And you will loose customers if you upcharge for brand while at the same time using inferior quality materials. Just the reality of the market place. It it was a good idea to do this you can BET that Hearts on Fire or De Beers would have done it before now. It's not, and it cheapens your brand.

ETA: If it were me, I would never have sold a CE AVC. If I had a stone that needed CE I would not have branded it with the AVC line name and I would have used it for a promotional item-- a free facebook giveaway or something. But like I said, I can excuse a one off CE AVC, but if they make a habit of it... I do think it is a mistake.

 

[elliemay]

Jonathan, would you marry us?

Just think of the e-ring we'd get!

 

[Imdanny]

Interesting. 159 views and only 4 replies. Maybe I should have made a poll. I'm interested in what others think. Keep the replies coming!

I'm not sure what your question would be but I don't like clarity enhanced diamonds. I don't like the clarity enhanced diamond in your link. QED. In fact, one of the things I like best about diamonds is that you don't have to worry about treatments.

 

[TristanC]

I don't think it cheapens the brand. That would only happen if the treatment was not disclosed.

I don't see the point of clarity enhanced diamonds to be honest - to me they rate below lab created diamonds. But everything at a price, and a price for everything.

So although I don't see the point of a precision cut clarity enhanced diamond - I'd rather take a simulant and be done with it and save a lot more, to whoever it appeals to, I'm sure that they enjoyed it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The one thing I am sure of after being here 6 years is that there is something for everyone. Some won't go below F color and there are others who actively look for J and K. Some won't go below VS clarity and others actively look for SI or lower. I would personally save longer and wait to get a nonenhanced diamond just like I would get a smaller rb with higher color and clarity than a large one with lower color and clarity.

The fact is, Jon could have had that stone cut into a rb and it might have sat there forever. But he is a really smart guy and knows how popular AV stones are, so he had it cut into that instead. And it was gone the day it was posted on here.

 

[zephyr]

I don't think it cheapens the brand, as a one off. As in, they made a mistake and weren't able to move this piece and decided the solution was to have this one CE. I wouldn't appreciate it and do think it would cheapen the brand if they did it routinely.

I'm sure someone will snatch it up for a pendant, though for the price I'd rather have an unenhanced 'real' antique OEC BY FAR rather than an enhanced AVC.

I am not sure I'd call this a mistake. A business has various and all kinds of clients. I see no reason why a business shouldn't cater to all of them if they can.


It is already gone.

The mistake I'm referring to is picking that particular rough to make into an AVC.

What I mean is, it would cheapen it for me if they routinely used very included, inferior, rough that required clarity enhancement of the final product to make it eyclean.

As for a business catering to all. To me, if you upcharge heavily for a brand name the way GOG does with the AVCs-- there is an implication of exclusivity and of quality. And CE diamonds are inferior to natural ones-- which is why they cost so much less. They are enhanced. They are not top quality.

You can't have it both ways. Either you can justify your branding upcharge with exclusivity and quality assurances-- in which case you are responsible for monitoring your brand to ensure that you maintain that quality and exclusivity-- OR you can NOT upcharge for brand and try to reach a broader customer base by lowering your costs using inferior (like the CE) materials. But to do both doesn't work. And you will loose customers if you upcharge for brand while at the same time using inferior quality materials. Just the reality of the market place. It it was a good idea to do this you can BET that Hearts on Fire or De Beers would have done it before now. It's not, and it cheapens your brand.

ETA: If it were me, I would never have sold a CE AVC. If I had a stone that needed CE I would not have branded it with the AVC line name and I would have used it for a promotional item-- a free facebook giveaway or something. But like I said, I can excuse a one off CE AVC, but if they make a habit of it... I do think it is a mistake.

You make some excellent points.

 

[yssie]

I don't think it cheapens the brand, as a one off. As in, they made a mistake and weren't able to move this piece and decided the solution was to have this one CE. I wouldn't appreciate it and do think it would cheapen the brand if they did it routinely.

I'm sure someone will snatch it up for a pendant, though for the price I'd rather have an unenhanced 'real' antique OEC BY FAR rather than an enhanced AVC.

I am not sure I'd call this a mistake. A business has various and all kinds of clients. I see no reason why a business shouldn't cater to all of them if they can.


It is already gone.

The mistake I'm referring to is picking that particular rough to make into an AVC.

What I mean is, it would cheapen it for me if they routinely used very included, inferior, rough that required clarity enhancement of the final product to make it eyclean.

As for a business catering to all. To me, if you upcharge heavily for a brand name the way GOG does with the AVCs-- there is an implication of exclusivity and of quality. And CE diamonds are inferior to natural ones-- which is why they cost so much less. They are enhanced. They are not top quality.

You can't have it both ways. Either you can justify your branding upcharge with exclusivity and quality assurances-- in which case you are responsible for monitoring your brand to ensure that you maintain that quality and exclusivity-- OR you can NOT upcharge for brand and try to reach a broader customer base by lowering your costs using inferior (like the CE) materials. But to do both doesn't work. And you will loose customers if you upcharge for brand while at the same time using inferior quality materials. Just the reality of the market place. It it was a good idea to do this you can BET that Hearts on Fire or De Beers would have done it before now. It's not, and it cheapens your brand.

ETA: If it were me, I would never have sold a CE AVC. If I had a stone that needed CE I would not have branded it with the AVC line name and I would have used it for a promotional item-- a free facebook giveaway or something. But like I said, I can excuse a one off CE AVC, but if they make a habit of it... I do think it is a mistake.

Since I do have confidence that the cutters of GOG's AVCs and AVRs are experts, and would have known that that particular bit of rough would result in a very low clarity stone, that's my question too - moreso than the CE after it was cut:
Why on earth would one pay to precision cut an I2??

There's just no point, from where I'm sitting - any benefit in light return that precision cutting yields the intrusively low clarity offsets. The only reason that I can see to commission such a stone is if the vendor or manufacturer believed that the brand carries the sort of cache that would entice people to want to own a little piece of it, irrespective of that specimen's technical qualifications - a la Tiffany, say - and I don't believe the AVR brand has anything approaching that sort of reputation, no disrespect intended. And I rather imagined GOG aimed for a different niche anyway.

ETA: CE a same ol' same ol' RB makes total sense. Apparently CE this stone made total sense too, given how quickly it's gone...

 

[Imdanny]

I see the point Gypsy's making about this being a one off sort of thing or more exactly this was a good business decision to do this with this one. I don't think anyone's doubting that. But to be fair, if Tiffany started selling clarity enhanced diamonds, I'd bet most of PS would say it cheapened their brand in a heartbeat. I've never read any advice on PS other than to stay away from clarity enhanced diamonds and to look for something else.

 

[junebug17]

I see the point Gypsy's making about this being a one off sort of thing or more exactly this was a good business decision to do this with this one. I don't think anyone's doubting that. But to be fair, if Tiffany started selling clarity enhanced diamonds, I'd bet most of PS would say it cheapened their brand in a heartbeat. I've never read any advice on PS other than to stay away from clarity enhanced diamonds and to look for something else.

Danny, these were my exact thoughts when I first read the initial post. To be fair though, I do have a recollection of a few members saying they might consider a CE stone for a pendant - but the general impression I've always gotten in my short time here is that CE stones are looked down upon on this forum. I can recall several times when a poster has asked for an opinion on a CE diamond, and the responses are negative. And now I'm reading posts defending and supporting CE diamonds in this particular instance. But I guess members are supporting the vendor's right to sell such items, not necessarily advocating buying one. Idk, the change in attitude that I'm picking up is a little confusing to me. I guess the fact that the vendor is trusted and known to be reputable is a factor?

I really liked Gypsy's post - I think she made some good points.

 

[Circe]

Since I do have confidence that the cutters of GOG's AVCs and AVRs are experts, and would have known that that particular bit of rough would result in a very low clarity stone, that's my question too - moreso than the CE after it was cut:
Why on earth would one pay to precision cut an I2??

There's just no point, from where I'm sitting - any benefit in light return that precision cutting yields the intrusively low clarity offsets. The only reason that I can see to commission such a stone is if the vendor or manufacturer believed that the brand carries the sort of cache that would entice people to want to own a little piece of it, irrespective of that specimen's technical qualifications - a la Tiffany, say - and I don't believe the AVR brand has anything approaching that sort of reputation, no disrespect intended. And I rather imagined GOG aimed for a different niche anyway.

ETA: CE a same ol' same ol' RB makes total sense. Apparently CE this stone made total sense too, given how quickly it's gone...

Looking at the "before" image in microscopic format ... I'd bet a minor flaw resulted in a massive feather on the wheel. Once you sank the money into precision cutting rough that looked like it would yield maybe an SI1, now "ruined" for all practical intents and purposes, why not recoup a little money?

Jon's a smart businessman. I doubt we're going to see GOG manufacturing a lot of these deliberately: it just wouldn't pay off on the CE stones, and it would dilute the brand over time, as people waited around to get the cheaper version, or felt miffed about the perceived depreciation (monetary or rarity-wise) of their stones and opted for other cuts. But on the occasions when a stone goes whacky on the wheel? SWOOP IN, people. Excellent bang for the buck for stones that won't get a lot of banging about ...