Good Old Gold Clarity Enhanced diamond

[LibbyLA]

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously???? I find it hard to understand. The only people whose business it is whether an AV diamond is clarity enhanced or not is the current owner and any potential buyer. As long as both parties are happy, what anyone else thinks is irrelevant.

Horses for courses.... A CE AV may not be your horse for your course, but the rare one may be just what someone with a tight budget or someone who appreciates a bargain is looking for.

Jonathan makes some lemonade out of a very nice lemon and someone gets some tasty lemonade at a great price. In the meantime, you're concerned about whether every glass of lemonade you see others drinking is sweetened with sugar or artificial sweetener and whether it has any liquor in it even though you're not drinking lemonade...

liz

 

[Laila619]

As one of many AVC owners, it does not cheapen the line at all to me. They are so beautiful, I am not sure what would cheapen them!

DITTO, except I'm not an owner.

 

[Gypsy]

Thank goodness for Yssie. Ditto to the whole post and a big hug to you Yssie.

Jon, you take things too personally sometimes-- on PS GOG has 'favored vendor' status so you are cut a lot of slack, that doesn't mean that you don't make mistakes and that doesn't mean you get to be rude to people when they call you on one. And it is my opinion that you made a mistake in this case, and when asked my opinion I merely replied honestly. I understand how that stone came into being and I do understand the diamond market, definitely not as well as you do, but none of the information you imparted to me so condescendingly was new to me.

I still stand by what I wrote-- all of it. After the accident on the wheel, I would not have branded that diamond as an AVC. I would have used it for a promotional purpose or sold it separately BUT in ANY event I would have stated clearly that while it is faceted like an AVC and precision cut it is NOT an AVC because it is CE and the AVC line doesn't include clarity enhanced diamonds. Like it or not your AVC diamonds are expensive, HOWEVER: no one said that the pricing of the line was unfair, or unwarranted. That is an assumption YOU MADE and then decided to take offense to. That's on you.

My point was, your stone are branded and that DOES mean that you are attesting to a certain level of quality. SO the take away is: keep your eye on the prize-- the reputation of the entire line of stones-- and don't jeopardize that line to make a good return on a single stone by allowing a CE in that line.

I will use an example to make my point, maybe it will help. The majority here loves fluorescent stones, right? And they are considered a good value. But they are discounted by the powers that be and considered by some to be inferior. Now take BGD. They COULD have decided to include Fl diamonds in their Signature line. No one would have objected too strongly on PS. BUT-- BGD knows that some people (right or wrong) would have considered that to cheapen his Signature line. So what did he do? He created a new line. BGD Blue. The lesson: If you want to carry CE stones-- don't cheapen your AV line with them. The solution is to create a new line: AVCE for example. That way you keep your AVC/AVR's safe, but are able to offer CE stones.

 

[zephyr]

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously???? I find it hard to understand. The only people whose business it is whether an AV diamond is clarity enhanced or not is the current owner and any potential buyer. As long as both parties are happy, what anyone else thinks is irrelevant.

Horses for courses.... A CE AV may not be your horse for your course, but the rare one may be just what someone with a tight budget or someone who appreciates a bargain is looking for.

Jonathan makes some lemonade out of a very nice lemon and someone gets some tasty lemonade at a great price. In the meantime, you're concerned about whether every glass of lemonade you see others drinking is sweetened with sugar or artificial sweetener and whether it has any liquor in it even though you're not drinking lemonade...

liz

Liz: Can I just say: THANK YOU! That is precisely my point too.

 

[zephyr]

It seems like a few people understood what I was getting at (Gypsy, Kenny and Yssie), while others almost seem to have taken offense at what I wrote. I'm surprised, because every previous thread I've seen about clarity enhanced diamonds was full of replies saying that they are not worth buying. Don't get me wrong, I love Good Old Gold, I own a diamond from them, and I know that they can do whatever they want with their brand. I was just very surprised to see them choosing to sell a clarity enhanced diamond at all, let alone one of their special branded A.V. ones.

To me, it's not an issue of whether people would want to buy a C.E. August Vintage diamond. It's a question of whether the non C.E. ones will suffer as a result. I know that from now on, whenever I hear about an A.V., I will wonder "Is it one of the C.E. ones?", whereas in the past I would have never questioned it.

I don't understand why you'd wonder. They stated clearly that it is CE. It is not like they hoodwinked you or anyone else.

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

I think your logic is broken. You didn't buy a CE diamond, you weren't misled into buying one. The diamond in question was clearly labeled so I don't understand why the doubt would run through your mind. I just don't see how that would happen.

If you had the trauma of buying one and were misled, then I can see, yes, that you would wonder. But in this case, it is not your diamond but you are worried about how it makes the other diamonds look?

I don't get it.

You buy what you want to buy and let others buy what they want.

Now the question of branding is different. As I read about AVRs and AVCs (I am a n00b), it doesn't say anywhere that they can't be CE. It is a specific cut CUT.

When I think of a AVR or an AVC, the thought that runs through my mind is Gee, I wonder when I can have my first one and how I will get the next ginormous one.

 

[Laila619]

I will use an example to make my point, maybe it will help. The majority here loves fluorescent stones, right? And they are considered a good value. But they are discounted by the powers that be and considered by some to be inferior. Now take BGD. They COULD have decided to include Fl diamonds in their Signature line. No one would have objected too strongly on PS. BUT-- BGD knows that some people (right or wrong) would have considered that to cheapen his Signature line. So what did he do? He created a new line. BGD Blue. The lesson: If you want to carry CE stones-- don't cheapen your AV line with them. The solution is to create a new line: AVCE for example. That way you keep your AVC/AVR's safe, but are able to offer CE stones.

The big difference is that Jon is not going to be 'carrying' CE stones. If anything, this was a completely rare occurrence.

 

[CharmyPoo]

DISCLAIMER: I did not read all the posts so apologies if the points have been made or if I am stepping on anyone's toes

In my opinion, it is up to Jon to decide what his brand promise is and up to him to decide the risks he wants to take on the August Vintage brand. As an AVC owner, I have interpreted the brand to mean a diamond cut consistently for light performance with a very specific look. I have never seen the AVC promising specific color, clarity or even enhancement treatments. As such, I don't believe that this diamond cheapens the brand - people buy an AVC because they want a well cut cushion with a consistent facet pattern and guaranteed light performance. Consumers can choose from a wide range of carat, color and clarity option (and now even enhancements) based on their preference and budget.

GOG has a reputation for being focused on cut and being an honest vendor with a strong focus on consumer education. I will not be wondering if I am buying a clarity enhanced AVC or not because I trust that this information will be made up front and readily available. I also believe that GOG will educate consumers around the concerns and risks with purchasing a clarity enhanced diamond (and of course the benefits on price). They back up their clarity enhanced diamonds as they would a non-clarity enhanced AVC.

ETA: While I believe it does not impact the AVC brand to me, I do agree that it would be a much lower risk to have just not branded this diamond as an AVC. GOG rarely clarity enhance AVCs and they have no intentions of making it a regular practice so why lump it with the AVCs. Just sell it separately.

 

[Gypsy]

I will use an example to make my point, maybe it will help. The majority here loves fluorescent stones, right? And they are considered a good value. But they are discounted by the powers that be and considered by some to be inferior. Now take BGD. They COULD have decided to include Fl diamonds in their Signature line. No one would have objected too strongly on PS. BUT-- BGD knows that some people (right or wrong) would have considered that to cheapen his Signature line. So what did he do? He created a new line. BGD Blue. The lesson: If you want to carry CE stones-- don't cheapen your AV line with them. The solution is to create a new line: AVCE for example. That way you keep your AVC/AVR's safe, but are able to offer CE stones.

The big difference is that Jon is not going to be 'carrying' CE stones. If anything, this was a completely rare occurrence.

I know Laila. My original post, and one I still stand by, is that a single 'one off' the CE stone branded as an AV stone, while not what I personally would have done in GOG's place, doesn't cheapen entire the line for me. It happened, it sold, it's over. BUT going forward, I wouldn't have any other CE AV stones. I don't think it's a good idea even occasionally. It was a mistake (IMO), but that happens, learn from it and don't do it again. If it happens again that a stone comes back from cutting with very visible inclusions, don't brand it as an AV line stone. Just use it for a promotion OR sell it as a one off CE -- BUT NOT as an AV branded CE stone. AND if GOG thinks they are on to something with precision cut CE stones and want to keep selling them-- create a different line for them.

 

[heather2012]

VERY well said Charmypoo!

 

[Imdanny]

It seems like a few people understood what I was getting at (Gypsy, Kenny and Yssie), while others almost seem to have taken offense at what I wrote. I'm surprised, because every previous thread I've seen about clarity enhanced diamonds was full of replies saying that they are not worth buying. Don't get me wrong, I love Good Old Gold, I own a diamond from them, and I know that they can do whatever they want with their brand. I was just very surprised to see them choosing to sell a clarity enhanced diamond at all, let alone one of their special branded A.V. ones.

To me, it's not an issue of whether people would want to buy a C.E. August Vintage diamond. It's a question of whether the non C.E. ones will suffer as a result. I know that from now on, whenever I hear about an A.V., I will wonder "Is it one of the C.E. ones?", whereas in the past I would have never questioned it.

I don't understand why you'd wonder. They stated clearly that it is CE. It is not like they hoodwinked you or anyone else.

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Exactly. Now when I think of this brand ("brand"- ALL of them- that's what a "brand" means) I will know that e.g. one for sale on the used market might be clarity enhanced.

 

[zephyr]

It seems like a few people understood what I was getting at (Gypsy, Kenny and Yssie), while others almost seem to have taken offense at what I wrote. I'm surprised, because every previous thread I've seen about clarity enhanced diamonds was full of replies saying that they are not worth buying. Don't get me wrong, I love Good Old Gold, I own a diamond from them, and I know that they can do whatever they want with their brand. I was just very surprised to see them choosing to sell a clarity enhanced diamond at all, let alone one of their special branded A.V. ones.

To me, it's not an issue of whether people would want to buy a C.E. August Vintage diamond. It's a question of whether the non C.E. ones will suffer as a result. I know that from now on, whenever I hear about an A.V., I will wonder "Is it one of the C.E. ones?", whereas in the past I would have never questioned it.

I don't understand why you'd wonder. They stated clearly that it is CE. It is not like they hoodwinked you or anyone else.

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Exactly. Now when I think of this brand ("brand"- ALL of them- that's what a "brand" means) I will know that e.g. one for sale on the used market might be clarity enhanced.

How is that even possible? It is not like it wasn't disclosed that it is CE. If it is properly disclosed, I see no issues.

If we are really getting down to semantics and as you mention brand, in this case, the CUT (CUT) is the brand. NOT the clarity.

Note again: The CUT is the brand, not the CLARITY.

The cut has various levels of clarity and one of them was enhanced AND properly disclosed.

 

[Imdanny]

Goodness. is about right - Heather, I think you need to *read* my and Danny's posts and understand what we're saying before jumping down our throats, our point (I think we're saying the same thing) is not to compare GOG's and Tiffany's goods or services, it's to point out the various effects of various choices and directions on the cache of a brand. We aren't saying GOG isn't a great vendor, or discounting the beauty of AV stones, or implying that the two August Vintage lines aren't worthy of appreciation - precisely the opposite in fact!




Jon, I gotta say your reply to Gypsy is positively dripping with condescension. It's not flattering.
Some thoughts to your responses in bold -


By answering Gypsy's post it will answer most questions.

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.

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself more clear but in my post I stated that we frequently purchase estate diamonds from the public which we will then recut. This is the case with that particular diamond. When we purchase rough to cut to AVC/AVR my aim is really for no lower than VS2 however its almost impossible to not pick up a business of rough, when it becomes available and not avoid getting SI's. In the clip posted previsouly of the 1.7xct that is something that did happen on the cutters wheel. An unfortunate event that caused the diamond to be an Imperfect with a large feather right under the table. It was unmarketable with that large feather (as was the .8xct) and clarity enhancing the diamond only made sense. Today someone is enjoying an eye clean 1.7xct AVC they purchased at an "I" price. Due to the nature of how we go about producing the August Vintage line these are exceptions to the rule.

This was not clear to me either from your previous post, but now I understand how you wound up with a precision cut I2. Intent does matter - making the best of an accident is a very different (and from a Branding perspective very much more forgivable) circumstance from *choosing* to cut and market an I2, and planning to do so again and often...

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.

Gypsy, do you understand why ideal cut diamonds are cut in the first place? AVC's aside, as I perform a national query for round diamonds, GIA Ex's (not even counting VG, G, F, P) 1ct H SI1 I pull up hundreds of options with prices ranging from $5700 to over 8k. And this within the Excellent grade alone. We are talking over a 30% difference in value. Can you even begin to fathom what seperates the least expensive to the most valuable among these GIA Ex's? Would you equally claim the most valuable are heavily upcharging? If so, you are sorely mistaken. Gypsy, please understand that the goal of my service, our business model as GOG is to answer those questions for the public. To show and demonstrate why one GIA Ex does indeed cost over 30% for sound gemological reasons.

When I began cutting the AV line I knew we would lose roughly 20% of the weight from the rough when we were going to cut these. I could very easily do what 99% of other cutting facilities are doing and cut for weight. That is not the path I have chosen. One facility looks at a piece of rough and says I can get a 1ct out of this. I look at the same piece of rough and say I want a diamond that will shine like no other even if it weighs 15-22% less.

Gypsy's point that diamonds enhanced by filling (I deliberately exclude permanent treatments like drilling and bleaching) are inferior technically and by repute to unenhanced diamonds is indisputable.

It would be polite not to assume that we consumers are idiots. We do in fact understand some of the reasons diamonds that are similar on paper may prove to be quite different IRL, and we also understand that those real-world difference translate into ranges in pricing - and that there are other things to consider like extra info the vendor may provide on the stone, vendor type, location, policies... As consumers we aren't privy to all the details, but if there are important considerations we're missing, well, there are rather more diplomatic ways to point that out.

As to the question of branding - if "exclusivity" and "implication of quality" is not one of your business concerns, why do you bother with branding in the first place? You Brand because you want your customer to be assured that they have purchased a quality stone with an excellent reputation and pedigree. A CE stone, whether it's a one off or a regular offering, does not live up to that reputation of quality.

What that does to the brand - if anything - is a different question, one that depends on intent, and whether that intent is shared with the consumers, which I addressed earlier.

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.

You're not getting it Gypsy. As stated ... CE AVC/AVR is an exception to the rule and you need to try to understand why within the GIA EX grade alone there is over a 30% difference in value. I have devoted my life and my business to understanding why. It's why we do what we do. If you'd like some videos I've produced on these very subjects demonstrating why I can begin to help you to understand what makes these seperations.


As far as I know GOG's precision-cut AVCs and AVRs are the *only* such lines. DBL's branded cushions are cut for colour retention, which requires a different design... Which also means that we have no basis for comparison re. pricing. That does not mean that I think the pricing of AV stones is unfair, or anything else - it just means that from my perspective it is what it is and if I want one I've got to pony up for it.

Jon, I hope you know that I have no ill-will toward you or GOG. I don't normally post like this either, but your post really rubbed me the wrong way - it made me uncomfortable, and I'm disappointed with some of the implications therein, but I know that Gypsy and I both agree that by opening the windows and letting the fresh air in GOG is doing the industry a service. I have no objection to a branded stone commanding a premium simply because it's branded - I fully intend to buy an Octavia one day, Brand premium and all - but a Brand's image can be a fickle thing, and at the very least you now have confirmation that many PSers would not welcome CE stones as deliberate, regular AV offerings!
[/quote]


I'd like to clarify that " " was what I posted before I edited my post and no, Yssie and I are not saying anything different than each other in this thread.

I haven't read all of the recent posts but I think I'll return to something I was trying to say earlier- fracture filled diamonds are not analogous to low colored diamonds, they're not in the category of anything PS has ever recommended, and the fact many here wouldn't want them AND wouldn't associate them with a premium brand (internet brand just the same) should not be surprising.

 

[Imdanny]

It seems like a few people understood what I was getting at (Gypsy, Kenny and Yssie), while others almost seem to have taken offense at what I wrote. I'm surprised, because every previous thread I've seen about clarity enhanced diamonds was full of replies saying that they are not worth buying. Don't get me wrong, I love Good Old Gold, I own a diamond from them, and I know that they can do whatever they want with their brand. I was just very surprised to see them choosing to sell a clarity enhanced diamond at all, let alone one of their special branded A.V. ones.

To me, it's not an issue of whether people would want to buy a C.E. August Vintage diamond. It's a question of whether the non C.E. ones will suffer as a result. I know that from now on, whenever I hear about an A.V., I will wonder "Is it one of the C.E. ones?", whereas in the past I would have never questioned it.

I don't understand why you'd wonder. They stated clearly that it is CE. It is not like they hoodwinked you or anyone else.

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Exactly. Now when I think of this brand ("brand"- ALL of them- that's what a "brand" means) I will know that e.g. one for sale on the used market might be clarity enhanced.

How is that even possible? It is not like it wasn't disclosed that it is CE. If it is properly disclosed, I see no issues.

If we are really getting down to semantics and as you mention brand, in this case, the CUT (CUT) is the brand. NOT the clarity.

Note again: The CUT is the brand, not the CLARITY.

The cut has various levels of clarity and one of them was enhanced AND properly disclosed.

And by "enhanced" you mean fracture filled. Yssie covered this in her post.

Associating a brand, any brand, of diamonds with fracture filling is associating it with substandard quality.

 

[LittleSparkle]

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously???? I find it hard to understand. The only people whose business it is whether an AV diamond is clarity enhanced or not is the current owner and any potential buyer. As long as both parties are happy, what anyone else thinks is irrelevant.

Horses for courses.... A CE AV may not be your horse for your course, but the rare one may be just what someone with a tight budget or someone who appreciates a bargain is looking for.

Jonathan makes some lemonade out of a very nice lemon and someone gets some tasty lemonade at a great price. In the meantime, you're concerned about whether every glass of lemonade you see others drinking is sweetened with sugar or artificial sweetener and whether it has any liquor in it even though you're not drinking lemonade...

liz

Agreed in entirety. If you are buying an AVC/R on the secondary market, I assume that you would take the time to obtain the certificate and note the documented color and clarity ratings. A quick comparison of this stone's visual appearance and the AGS cert. would indicate that it had been clarity enhanced. And if CE stones aren't your cup of tea, you can pass on it. I don't believe that having a few CE AV stones on the market, when the vendor is open and honest about the enhancement, should have any effect on the brand. I would, however, be rather disappointed if GOG started manufacturing CZ AVCs & Rs...

But if I am understanding you correctly (and I do apologize if I have misinterpreted your meaning, as that seems to happen frequently on this forum), it sounds like your concern is of the "mind clean" variety and that you no longer view the AV brand as being quite so pure. But, as many people have mentioned, Jon cuts the AV brand for light performance. This stone was cut to AV standards. The light performance of the stone isn't the element that was artificially enhanced. If that were the case, I might agree that it ought to be removed from the AV category. This stone was a heavily included AVR, but an AVR nonetheless. At the end of the day, Jon did CE this stone and allowed a buyer to snatch up a beautiful stone at a wonderful price, complete with a very clear I2 clarity rating on the AGS cert. It is unlikely that this buyer will reap much profit if trying to unload this stone on the secondary market simply because the certificate doesn't support the appearance. And we know that Jon didn't raise the price of this stone after it was clarity enhanced. So who cares?

Some people like plastic surgery, some people like artificially sweetened drinks, some people like clarity enhanced diamonds. And some people find all of these things to be distasteful (I love a nice, fattening, heavily sugared Coke and I am about to return a really spectacular AVC because it has a little black speck that will drive me bonkers). As long as the vendor is honest and the buyer is aware, it seems unfair to call the whole brand's reputation into question over a few enhanced stones.

I generally avoid these discussions on Pricescope, but I am the proud owner of an embarrassing number of AVCs & AVRS (largely of the smaller variety) and I have experienced nothing short of obsessive honesty and disclosure from Jon and Marie @ GOG.

All that being said, I do hope that I haven't contributed to the general ruffling of feathers that seems to be happening in this thread.

 

[TristanC]

I think GOG made a mistake by making something premium available to people who paid far less.

This may have been Jon's intent, but for items like jewelry, sometimes ownership is not meant to be inclusive of every budget.

You can't please everyone, but some business decisions offend a number of people. GOG is free to make them of course, but there is a price for that decision.

Tiffany cards and Tiffany mugs are not Tiffany rings - those are more expensive and getting even more so each day. Also, you can own Ferrari bags, cameras, wallets and phones, but if you own a Ferrari CAR, you'll own a Ferrari. Nobody fools themselves into thinking that the bag or the car are the same level of brand ownership. Same as how a Tiffany pen isn't a Tiffany solitaire.

However An AV clarity enchanced, and an AV unenhanced to the casual viewer are the same thing.

Ferrari COULD put reconditioned hyundai engines in their cars and sell them for $40,000 less as a subline, and say so on the showroom floor, but they wouldn't. For them there are lines that just aren't crossed.

Forgive my tenuous analogies.

Some of us think GOG crossed that line when you sold clarity enhanced diamonds. Hence the strong feelings in this thread. It isn't personal, it is just feedback. Glad to have Jon in the industry though - he's definitely one of the good guys.

 

[InnaR]

I might be not a veteran of this forum, but I read and post sometimes for the last three years, so I’ll allow myself to tell my story with the GOG.
I think I witnessed the birth of AVC and AVR cuts and how AVC became by far the favorite cut on this board.
I saw how many of the veterans one by one purchased it and how almost every new user that mentioned an interest in the square diamond was advised to go with the GOG and AVC.
I have to admit that I fell a victim of this movement and rushed to get one for myself. I got one in L color and felt uncomfortable to start the topic saying that it just doesn’t look what I expected it to look.
The term “cut for performance” made me think that it’s me and not the stone, that my eyes lie to me and stone is really magnificent I just cannot see it. To me it looked dull, and did not have the scintillation of the OMC and instead of reflecting the light with every little movement the facets kind of stayed in one place. To me the cut looked static and lacking the movement of the light and colors, On top of that it was not hiding color as well as the old cuts do. So I ended up returning it because of the color (it was “L”) and getting a AVC in J. Again, expecting it to blow me away with it’s performance. Well, it looked the same. Less yellow than L AVC, but still more yellow than my M OEC in a much bigger size. And definitely not performing as good as real antique OMCs and OECs that I have seen.
I have to say it that every real antique OMC that I have owned performed better than AVCs that I have owned.
So after awhile I tried to return it. Since I missed the return window period I wanted to use the buy back policy, get 80% of what I paid and move to other vendors, but was told that it doesn’t apply to the stones after a trade up.
So all I could do is trade it up again. This time I gave a try to an AVR.
Now I’m a proud owner of the .74 I SI2 AVR that I paid for $3,150.
Does it perform on par with real OECs? NO
Could I get a bigger stone much cheaper on and probably better performing on ebay? Yes and I did it many times.
But the only thing I can do right now is to keep checking GOG site in a hope to find a GIA round cut that is close in the price to my AVR so I can upgrade it for the last time, have a decent stone without knowing that I overpaid tremendously for a well advertized brand which in my eyes is not an equal in quality substitution to real antique stones.

 

[yssie]

Jon, thank you for your reply, I appreciate the responses. I think quoting and replying yet again will make things totally incomprehensible so I'll try it this way instead:

No arguement however they are generally not valued differently. An I2 is an I2 no matter which way you slice it CE or not. What I take offense is being accused of "heavily upcharging" the consumer for the AV line. Just because I take a piece of rough and end up with a .85ct instead of a 1ct does not mean I am "heavily upcharging" for the .85ct when the piece of rough cost the same. To be accused of that on a public forum paints me as someone who is out to purposely take advantage of people which I do not do nor appreciate.

That's true. I don't see CE by filling as adding value... I personally would have no problem with a stone that was drilled and bleached and I'd even pay a premium for it post-enhancement, but maybe I'm in the minority there! The difference of course being that the treatment is permanent.

We often hear that a clever cutter will find ways to preserve weight - sometimes at the risk of lowering the cut grade - because they can find a consumer to buy that weightier less well-cut stone for more. You've taken offense to the "heavily" description - but from the perspective of that consumer, or anyone who would choose the 1ct rather than the 0.85, you are indeed *heavily upcharging*, as is anyone selling stones on the upper range of that 30% EX spread! But they aren't your niche customers, and the fact of the matter is that all PSers would pick the 0.85 in a heartbeat!

Pricing comes back to the point of branding. We have nothing to compare the AV lines with so as consumers we can't know what premiums, if any, may be attached solely because they're branded stones. As I said earlier I have no issue with Brand premiums as long as they stay clear of the realms of the absurd, so I'll save "heavily upcharging" for the likes of HoF and EightStar

I don't assume for one moment that you and some of the folks here are Yssie. I greatly respect your opinion and input. I just don't appreciate blanket statements regarding lines of diamonds when there is no understanding why they cost what they do.

Thank you, I appreciate that. Everything in Gypsy's post history suggests that she understands these nuances as well as any of us can - in terms of industry mechanics and machinations we consumers are largely working from similar knowlegde and we may well have similar gaps and misunderstandings - including regarding the specifics of pricing. So if there's something we're missing please do educate us!

They will not be a regular offering. The exceptions to the rule for GOG would always be this ...

a. A recut stone whose feather is just too noticeable.
b. A mistake happened on the wheel.
c. A diamond cut from rough that was an SI2 or even I1 and the inclusion, visible to the eye prevents it from being sold.

This is good info to have.

n those rare instances when we are faced with a diamond that has eye visible inclusions and those inclusions prevent it from being sold I can do one of 2 things.

1. Let it sit and collect dust.
2. Make the inclusion invisible and see someone enjoy it at no extra cost to them.

I sincerely don't see the harm in the latter as long as there is full open disclosure.
I am open minded to hearing why people would suggest the former though.

This is the heart of it: we are not suggesting you do the former, and we fully support the latter. We are suggesting that in the future you find some alternative for these rare stones that does not involve diluting the quality of the AV brand with goods of indisputably inferior quality, because it's clear that *Some* people do consider selling CE AVs to be diluting the brand, and Some is more than none, and none is better than Some! I think the suggestions of just selling it without AV brand name or using it for a promotion are excellent - you move the stone for either the payment or the visibility, the customer is happy with an visually enhanced rock at a fantastic price, and you ensure that you're keeping the AV brands completely "safe". The downside is that that consumer won't feel good about owning a piece of the AV brand, but hey, like I said before, you want the goods, well, gotta pony up for it, that's life!


Cheers

 

[TristanC]

you want the goods, well, gotta pony up for it, that's life!


Cheers

YUP.

 

[yssie]

On another note - could I request a video comparing that CE AVR to one of similar size without enhancement? I'm going off TC's post -

August Vintage was cut for cut and performance, not for clarity.

And given that
A) Inclusions affect performance, sometimes greatly affect performance, and
B) The resin/glass that fractures are filled with does not have the optical properties of diamond - different RI, the effects of the two medium bounds... you could take an ASET photo of sculpted glass or a number of polymers that looks fantastic, it wouldn't look or perform like diamond though.

I am very curious about the visual consequences re. light return of turning a portion of a diamond into not-diamond..!

 

[zephyr]

I think GOG made a mistake by making something premium available to people who paid far less.

This may have been Jon's intent, but for items like jewelry, sometimes ownership is not meant to be inclusive of every budget.

You can't please everyone, but some business decisions offend a number of people. GOG is free to make them of course, but there is a price for that decision.

Tiffany cards and Tiffany mugs are not Tiffany rings - those are more expensive and getting even more so each day. Also, you can own Ferrari bags, cameras, wallets and phones, but if you own a Ferrari CAR, you'll own a Ferrari. Nobody fools themselves into thinking that the bag or the car are the same level of brand ownership. Same as how a Tiffany pen isn't a Tiffany solitaire.

However An AV clarity enchanced, and an AV unenhanced to the casual viewer are the same thing.

Ferrari COULD put reconditioned hyundai engines in their cars and sell them for $40,000 less as a subline, and say so on the showroom floor, but they wouldn't. For them there are lines that just aren't crossed.

Forgive my tenuous analogies.

Some of us think GOG crossed that line when you sold clarity enhanced diamonds. Hence the strong feelings in this thread. It isn't personal, it is just feedback. Glad to have Jon in the industry though - he's definitely one of the good guys.

===============================================
That is just strange. You believe that jewelry should not be for every budget? WOW. I am shocked.

You are basically saying that since you have the money and others don't, only you should be allowed to buy this diamond. Any attempt on behalf of a jeweler to make a nice stone available to be more inclusive is offensive to you because it dilutes the brand for which you paid a premium?

LOL! That is so hilarious.

 

[zephyr]

I might be not a veteran of this forum, but I read and post sometimes for the last three years, so I’ll allow myself to tell my story with the GOG.
I think I witnessed the birth of AVC and AVR cuts and how AVC became by far the favorite cut on this board.
I saw how many of the veterans one by one purchased it and how almost every new user that mentioned an interest in the square diamond was advised to go with the GOG and AVC.
I have to admit that I fell a victim of this movement and rushed to get one for myself. I got one in L color and felt uncomfortable to start the topic saying that it just doesn’t look what I expected it to look.
The term “cut for performance” made me think that it’s me and not the stone, that my eyes lie to me and stone is really magnificent I just cannot see it. To me it looked dull, and did not have the scintillation of the OMC and instead of reflecting the light with every little movement the facets kind of stayed in one place. To me the cut looked static and lacking the movement of the light and colors, On top of that it was not hiding color as well as the old cuts do. So I ended up returning it because of the color (it was “L”) and getting a AVC in J. Again, expecting it to blow me away with it’s performance. Well, it looked the same. Less yellow than L AVC, but still more yellow than my M OEC in a much bigger size. And definitely not performing as good as real antique OMCs and OECs that I have seen.
I have to say it that every real antique OMC that I have owned performed better than AVCs that I have owned.
So after awhile I tried to return it. Since I missed the return window period I wanted to use the buy back policy, get 80% of what I paid and move to other vendors, but was told that it doesn’t apply to the stones after a trade up.
So all I could do is trade it up again. This time I gave a try to an AVR.
Now I’m a proud owner of the .74 I SI2 AVR that I paid for $3,150.
Does it perform on par with real OECs? NO
Could I get a bigger stone much cheaper on and probably better performing on ebay? Yes and I did it many times.
But the only thing I can do right now is to keep checking GOG site in a hope to find a GIA round cut that is close in the price to my AVR so I can upgrade it for the last time, have a decent stone without knowing that I overpaid tremendously for a well advertized brand which in my eyes is not an equal in quality substitution to real antique stones.

http://goodoldgold.com/diamondResults.php?priceMin=3500&priceMax=4000&resultsColumns=268435471

 

[zephyr]

Now I’m a proud owner of the .74 I SI2 AVR that I paid for $3,150.
Does it perform on par with real OECs? NO
Could I get a bigger stone much cheaper on and probably better performing on ebay? Yes and I did it many times.
But the only thing I can do right now is to keep checking GOG site in a hope to find a GIA round cut that is close in the price to my AVR so I can upgrade it for the last time, have a decent stone without knowing that I overpaid tremendously for a well advertized brand which in my eyes is not an equal in quality substitution to real antique stones.

http://goodoldgold.com/diamond/9037/

This one is quite nice.

 

[Imdanny]

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously???? I find it hard to understand. The only people whose business it is whether an AV diamond is clarity enhanced or not is the current owner and any potential buyer. As long as both parties are happy, what anyone else thinks is irrelevant.

Horses for courses.... A CE AV may not be your horse for your course, but the rare one may be just what someone with a tight budget or someone who appreciates a bargain is looking for.

Jonathan makes some lemonade out of a very nice lemon and someone gets some tasty lemonade at a great price. In the meantime, you're concerned about whether every glass of lemonade you see others drinking is sweetened with sugar or artificial sweetener and whether it has any liquor in it even though you're not drinking lemonade...

liz

The consistent theme of those of you who keep posting every time someone tries to make any point along the lines of: fracture filled diamonds are substandard quality because it's a treatment that carries a risk of being reversed and/ or this is not a treatment that is/ or will be associated with a premium brand is becoming needlessly personal.

It's ironic because this isn't personal. Anyone who posted along these lines would have said the same thing, no matter who the vendor was/ or wasn't. I think these shouting (all large letters, all bold letters) and berating posts are doing a very poor job of respecting other people who have not been unclear GOG has the right to do what it wants.

 

[Laila619]

I think GOG made a mistake by making something premium available to people who paid far less.

This may have been Jon's intent, but for items like jewelry, sometimes ownership is not meant to be inclusive of every budget.

You can't please everyone, but some business decisions offend a number of people. GOG is free to make them of course, but there is a price for that decision.

Tiffany cards and Tiffany mugs are not Tiffany rings - those are more expensive and getting even more so each day. Also, you can own Ferrari bags, cameras, wallets and phones, but if you own a Ferrari CAR, you'll own a Ferrari. Nobody fools themselves into thinking that the bag or the car are the same level of brand ownership. Same as how a Tiffany pen isn't a Tiffany solitaire.

However An AV clarity enchanced, and an AV unenhanced to the casual viewer are the same thing.

Ferrari COULD put reconditioned hyundai engines in their cars and sell them for $40,000 less as a subline, and say so on the showroom floor, but they wouldn't. For them there are lines that just aren't crossed.

Forgive my tenuous analogies.

Some of us think GOG crossed that line when you sold clarity enhanced diamonds. Hence the strong feelings in this thread. It isn't personal, it is just feedback. Glad to have Jon in the industry though - he's definitely one of the good guys.

===============================================
That is just strange. You believe that jewelry should not be for every budget? WOW. I am shocked.

You are basically saying that since you have the money and others don't, only you should be allowed to buy this diamond. Any attempt on behalf of a jeweler to make a nice stone available to be more inclusive is offensive to you because it dilutes the brand for which you paid a premium?

LOL! That is so hilarious.

Pretty much. This thread is starting to have a snobby undertone. Not everyone is blessed with a healthy budget to be able to afford something as frivolous and as expensive as a diamond. I hope the person who got this AVC at a steal truly enjoys it.

 

[InnaR]

I might be not a veteran of this forum, but I read and post sometimes for the last three years, so I’ll allow myself to tell my story with the GOG.
I think I witnessed the birth of AVC and AVR cuts and how AVC became by far the favorite cut on this board.
I saw how many of the veterans one by one purchased it and how almost every new user that mentioned an interest in the square diamond was advised to go with the GOG and AVC.
I have to admit that I fell a victim of this movement and rushed to get one for myself. I got one in L color and felt uncomfortable to start the topic saying that it just doesn’t look what I expected it to look.
The term “cut for performance” made me think that it’s me and not the stone, that my eyes lie to me and stone is really magnificent I just cannot see it. To me it looked dull, and did not have the scintillation of the OMC and instead of reflecting the light with every little movement the facets kind of stayed in one place. To me the cut looked static and lacking the movement of the light and colors, On top of that it was not hiding color as well as the old cuts do. So I ended up returning it because of the color (it was “L”) and getting a AVC in J. Again, expecting it to blow me away with it’s performance. Well, it looked the same. Less yellow than L AVC, but still more yellow than my M OEC in a much bigger size. And definitely not performing as good as real antique OMCs and OECs that I have seen.
I have to say it that every real antique OMC that I have owned performed better than AVCs that I have owned.
So after awhile I tried to return it. Since I missed the return window period I wanted to use the buy back policy, get 80% of what I paid and move to other vendors, but was told that it doesn’t apply to the stones after a trade up.
So all I could do is trade it up again. This time I gave a try to an AVR.
Now I’m a proud owner of the .74 I SI2 AVR that I paid for $3,150.
Does it perform on par with real OECs? NO
Could I get a bigger stone much cheaper on and probably better performing on ebay? Yes and I did it many times.
But the only thing I can do right now is to keep checking GOG site in a hope to find a GIA round cut that is close in the price to my AVR so I can upgrade it for the last time, have a decent stone without knowing that I overpaid tremendously for a well advertized brand which in my eyes is not an equal in quality substitution to real antique stones.

http://goodoldgold.com/diamondResults.php?priceMin=3500&priceMax=4000&resultsColumns=268435471

Zephyr,
If I am not going to read you comment to my post as offensive.
The point of my post was (i admit, maybe not so related to the topic of this post) that in attempt to follow the heavy advertizement of the two brands and the vendor on this forum I ended up with the overpriced stone that i believe is inferior to authentic cut as well as overpriced comparing to the authentic cut stone with comparable specifications. That applies to both AVCs I owned and AVR.
I know that i can upgrade to a round cut stone of aproximately .7 carat and i'll do it eventually. But for that money I would much rather get on over the carat autherntic OEC from Adam in OWD, Erica or ebay. Again, because dispite all that "cut for perfection" noise around those two branded cuts, in my eyes they look lifeless compared to authentic OECs and AMCs.
Jon, I mean no harm and no offense in my comments, just providing my honest impression and opinion on the cuts.
I'm in minority here and by no means a highly respected veteran of the forum, so i beleive my comments won't steer many potential buyers from your branded cuts.

 

[zephyr]

Zephyr,
If I am not going to read you comment to my post as offensive.
The point of my post was (i admit, maybe not so related to the topic of this post) that in attempt to follow the heavy advertizement of the two brands and the vendor on this forum I ended up with the overpriced stone that i believe is inferior to authentic cut as well as overpriced comparing to the authentic cut stone with comparable specifications. That applies to both AVCs I owned and AVR.
I know that i can upgrade to a round cut stone of aproximately .7 carat and i'll do it eventually. But for that money I would much rather get on over the carat autherntic OEC from Adam in OWD, Erica or ebay. Again, because dispite all that "cut for perfection" noise around those two branded cuts, in my eyes they look lifeless compared to authentic OECs and AMCs.
Jon, I mean no harm and no offense in my comments, just providing my honest impression and opinion on the cuts.
I'm in minority here and by no means a highly respected veteran of the forum, so i beleive my comments won't steer many potential buyers from your branded cuts.[/quote]

=============
I am not in any way related to GOG and I didn't mean to offend at all. I felt that you were unhappy and tried to propose alternatives.

 

[zephyr]

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously???? I find it hard to understand. The only people whose business it is whether an AV diamond is clarity enhanced or not is the current owner and any potential buyer. As long as both parties are happy, what anyone else thinks is irrelevant.

Horses for courses.... A CE AV may not be your horse for your course, but the rare one may be just what someone with a tight budget or someone who appreciates a bargain is looking for.

Jonathan makes some lemonade out of a very nice lemon and someone gets some tasty lemonade at a great price. In the meantime, you're concerned about whether every glass of lemonade you see others drinking is sweetened with sugar or artificial sweetener and whether it has any liquor in it even though you're not drinking lemonade...

liz

The consistent theme of those of you who keep posting every time someone tries to make any point along the lines of: fracture filled diamonds are substandard quality because it's a treatment that carries a risk of being reversed and/ or this is not a treatment that is/ or will be associated with a premium brand is becoming needlessly personal.

It's ironic because this isn't personal. Anyone who posted along these lines would have said the same thing, no matter who the vendor was/ or wasn't. I think these shouting (all large letters, all bold letters) and berating posts are doing a very poor job of respecting other people who have not been unclear GOG has the right to do what it wants.

To be honest, the theme I see emerge from all the posts is this:

------

Dude, they (insert any vendor) sold a CE AVR. I want an AVR and they are the only one who sell it at a *premium*. But they sold a CE AVR, therefore, they should not charge a premium for their cut.

I'd also stay away from the word "substandard" as it begs the question, substandard for whom? If the buyer and the seller are happy, it meets both of their standards.

Live and let live. I am super happy for the person who got this stone. I wouldn't buy it personally but I most definitely will not begrudge the buyer or the seller.

 

[Imdanny]

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm talking about what would run through my mind (and possibly others') when someone mentions an A.V. diamond (unless of course the link to the listing is given, in which case it would be disclosed). Is it really that hard to understand?

Seriously???? I find it hard to understand. The only people whose business it is whether an AV diamond is clarity enhanced or not is the current owner and any potential buyer. As long as both parties are happy, what anyone else thinks is irrelevant.

Horses for courses.... A CE AV may not be your horse for your course, but the rare one may be just what someone with a tight budget or someone who appreciates a bargain is looking for.

Jonathan makes some lemonade out of a very nice lemon and someone gets some tasty lemonade at a great price. In the meantime, you're concerned about whether every glass of lemonade you see others drinking is sweetened with sugar or artificial sweetener and whether it has any liquor in it even though you're not drinking lemonade...

liz

The consistent theme of those of you who keep posting every time someone tries to make any point along the lines of: fracture filled diamonds are substandard quality because it's a treatment that carries a risk of being reversed and/ or this is not a treatment that is/ or will be associated with a premium brand is becoming needlessly personal.

It's ironic because this isn't personal. Anyone who posted along these lines would have said the same thing, no matter who the vendor was/ or wasn't. I think these shouting (all large letters, all bold letters) and berating posts are doing a very poor job of respecting other people who have not been unclear GOG has the right to do what it wants.

To be honest, the theme I see emerge from all the posts is this:

------

Dude, they (insert any vendor) sold a CE AVR. I want an AVR and they are the only one who sell it at a *premium*. But they sold a CE AVR, therefore, they should not charge a premium for their cut.

I'd also stay away from the word "substandard" as it begs the question, substandard for whom? If the buyer and the seller are happy, it meets both of their standards.

Live and let live. I am super happy for the person who got this stone. I wouldn't buy it personally but I most definitely will not begrudge the buyer or the seller.

What I said was:

"fracture filled diamonds are substandard quality because it's a treatment that carries a risk of being reversed and/ or this is not a treatment that is/ or will be associated with a premium brand"

That's my opinion. For someone who has a "live and let live" philosophy, you seem to be having a hard time accepting that some people have opinions that don't agree with yours.

 

[zephyr]

What I said was:

"fracture filled diamonds are substandard quality because it's a treatment that carries a risk of being reversed and/ or this is not a treatment that is/ or will be associated with a premium brand"

That's my opinion. For someone who has a "live and let live" philosophy, you seem to be having a hard time accepting that some people have opinions that don't agree with yours.[/quote]

==========
I see your point re fracture filled being substandard in your opinion. You should not buy one for sure.

 

[kindred]

I can't really quote everything here, but I'll just say that yes, it is positively a mind clean issue for me. [1] Branding deals heavily with perception. People who seem to have taken this personally and seem intent on believing that I am telling GOG what they can and can't do are absolutely wrong. I am just stating my opinion about it. There have been many previous threads asking if Tiffany was hurting their brand, and I don't remember them getting so personal.

Where were all of you "live and let live" folks on every other thread about clarity enhanced diamonds? Do a search and you will find many threads with people asking about them and every single follow up post saying that fracture filled diamonds are not worth purchasing. GOG already sells diamonds in every budget. They don't need to sell fracture filled diamonds in order to offer lower priced diamonds. I wonder what the folks who say that August Vintage branding is just about cut would say if GOG started selling CZ AVs. To my mind, fracture filled diamonds are the only diamonds that pretend to be something they're not. CZs (pretending to be diamonds) would be the next step down that path.


ETA: [1] There is also the secondary market issue (a potential buyer needing to check if the AV they are thinking of buying is fracture filled) that Imdanny mentioned above.