H&A marketing? Dave Atlas - HELP!

[biscuit]

Hello All!

I'm been doing a little more research around here and other diamond sites, and I've got another question. In the H&A section of the pricescope tutorial it states, "H&A have become very popular in the USA...partly because they are seen as a safe way of buying an ideal cut diamond." But on the same page it goes on to say, "not all H&A are ideal cuts." It also states that, "buying an H&A diamond is an EMOTIONAL decision that mainly has appeal only to a couple getting engaged." Starting to smell like a marketing ploy to me...

If you go to the 'price stats' section of pricescope, it shows Dave Atlas's AGA charts with the addition of a section for H&A cuts. But when one takes the link to Dave's page his chart lacks this additional H&A section, displaying 1A as the most ideal cut. I'm wondering if the H&A category has been added to the cut charts on pricescope because it is a superior cut to a 1A, or because H&A's demand a higher price due to good marketing. Again, the pricescope tutorial..."The marketing money spent on establishing the various brands of H&A's have added value (or put bluntly, have 'added to the cost')...but the premium you pay now could be of no value ."

I currently live outside of the US, and don't have a single place to sit down and view all sorts of cuts grades alongside all of the branded and unbranded "super cuts" ...unfortunately I can't tell with my eyes if there is a vast difference between a 1A and a H&A. But when I look at the math, and look at the above honest statements, it seems to me that the premium paid for a H&A is not due the superiority of the cut alone.

SO, my question...are ALL H&A's superior cuts to the 1A? Isn't it quite possible to get a 1A cut that looks superior (and therefore is superior)to an H&A?

DAVE ATLAS - why have you not included H&A as a separate category in your charts on your website?

Thanks a ton, guys!

 

[pricescope]

Good question Biscuit.


----------------
If you go to the 'price stats' section of pricescope, it shows Dave Atlas's AGA charts with the addition of a section for H&A cuts. But when one takes the link to Dave's page his chart lacks this additional H&A section, displaying 1A as the most ideal cut. I'm wondering if the H&A category has been added to the cut charts on pricescope because it is a superior cut to a 1A, or because H&A's demand a higher price due to good marketing.
---------------


I added H&A group myself for the stats because H&A lovers wanted to separate these diamonds from all others and also because H&A diamonds are priced higher on the market.


----------------
Again, the pricescope tutorial..."The marketing money spent on establishing the various brands of H&A's have added value (or put bluntly, have 'added to the cost')...but the premium you pay now could be of no value ."
---------------


This is Garry's opinion that has certain merit.

However, there are many other things in diamonds that would cause the price increase. E.g. one would never see inclusions in VS and higher clarity diamonds without a loupe yet these stones cost much, much more. Same with good or excellent polish...

To cut a diamond to a perfect H&A symmetry requires high precision and craftsmanship. And some people see the difference and are willing to pay premium for this. It's a personal choice.


----------------
I currently live outside of the US, and don't have a single place to sit down and view all sorts of cuts grades alongside all of the branded and unbranded "super cuts" ...unfortunately I can't tell with my eyes if there is a vast difference between a 1A and a H&A. But when I look at the math, and look at the above honest statements, it seems to me that the premium paid for a H&A is not due the superiority of the cut alone.
---------------


Interestingly, this also depends on the country and culture. Japanese are the only who use to grade H&A diamonds and many diamonds sold in Japan are H&A.


----------------
SO, my question...are ALL H&A's superior cuts to the 1A? Isn't it quite possible to get a 1A cut that looks superior (and therefore is superior)to an H&A?
---------------


I guess if you have an 1A diamond, H&A symmetry would be a plus. However, if it is steep/deep diamond that leaks a lot of light then H&A symmetry won't help.

You have to look and compare to make your own decision

I hope Oldminer will share his thoughts too.

 

[biscuit]

Leonid -

Thanks for your advice and encouragement...I gotta chew on this one some more.

Talk to you soon!

 

[biscuit]

Hello again!

Starting to get a little cynical out here...maybe I'm learning too much? This quote was taken from Drostes.com :

"It is important to know that one will normally pay higher prices for hearts and arrows diamonds than those typically charged on AGS 0 ideal cut diamonds which do not display the pattern. This is because extra time was devoted to a special cutting process that ensures the integrity of the hearts and arrows pattern. It is virtually impossible to distinguish the subtle differences in appearance between diamonds that have AGS 0 ideal cut and those that have hearts and arrows cut under normal viewing conditions. The pattern can only be seen using the Firescope or Di-Star scope."

I'm wondering why anyone would pay a premium for a H&A diamond over a 1A, other than for emotional reasons, when under "normal viewing conditions" the subtle differences are VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE to distinguish!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!


In fact, when considering how each of these grading systems arose it's all starting to make sense. Tolkowski wrote his thesis based on maximizing brilliance, fire, scintillation...the things that MATTER. And as technology improved, the American Ideal was established creating a range for maximizing these aspects of a diamond. Then in the 80's, H&A is discovered how? NOT by noticing that certain ideals look more stunning to the naked eye, but IN A LAB UNDER A MICROSCOPE!! I realize that how a rock looks under a microscope matters to some people (obviously...people keep buying rocks of higher quiality than VS, right?) but it seems to me that the H&A "phenomenon" is one of those things that can be put in the category of "things important for some people to know about their diamond that they'll never observe with their naked eye." Kind of like VVS1 or VVS2 or Fl etc. If that's the case, that's fine with me...but to be honest it seems as though H&A are being marketed *very* intelligently.

--------
To cut a diamond to a perfect H&A symmetry requires high precision and craftsmanship. And some people see the difference and are willing to pay premium for this.
--------

I think I know why some people "see" a difference...psychological conditioning.

I'm not trying to garner the hatred of the online diamond establishment...nor do I long to be a whistle blower in life. I actually would LOVE to have someone convince me why an H&A is a better cut than an AGS ideal both in theory and to the naked eye, because I want the most beautiful diamond for my bride to be! But it seems to me that the best bang for the buck is an AGS 0 or perhaps AGS 000 that IS NOT an H&A.

For my bride-to-be's sake, PLEASE convince me why I'm wrong. Honestly.

Thanks again all!

 

[Serg]

Hi Biscuit,

RE: "H&A marketing?
But it seems to me that the best bang for the buck is an AGS 0 or perhaps AGS 000 that IS NOT an H&A. "


Why do you think what AGS 000, D color,…,DIAMOND, is not marketing too ?

 

[pricescope]

Good point, Serg.

 

[biscuit]

Hi again!

--------
Why do you think what AGS 000, D color,…,DIAMOND, is not marketing too ?
--------

GREAT point Serg! I probably should have been more specific in what seems like the best bang for the buck...

As far as color, which you mention, I doubt there'd be any point to a rock whiter than F...and my personal preference would put it no lower than an H.

As far as clarity, I'd buy a rock no better than a VS1 and no lower than an eye clean SI1 that has no feathers and no dark inclusions.

As far as AGS 000, I'm guessing the last two 0's are the still lingering affects of good marketing. The more I wander around the Pricescope forum, the more I see experts saying that symmetry and polish can range from ideal to VG and have little/no affect on the diamond. So I should revise the above statement and say an AGS 0 (or AGA 1A) would probably be the best cut for the buck (that is not a supercut or branded).

As far as cut proportions, one theoretically should be aiming for the proportions that maximize brilliance and fire...as displayed by the chart within the tutorial. There is an inverse relationship between cross angle and pavillion angle...SO even though there is a "range" of acceptable cuts within the AGA and AGS standards, you would maximize light return by keeping Pav. Angle high and crown angle low, or Pav Angle low and Crown angle high (within the specified 1A range, of course).

UILTIMATELY, I realize that the entire diamond trade is flourishing due to good marketing, and that due to cartels and monopolies there is a false supply shortage. ALSO, beauty is often cuturally rooted which is true in this case. I guess all I've been trying to do here is look at the best "bang for the buck" according to typical NAmerican standards for diamond beauty and according to scientific calculations for light return. I guess at the very least, I've been trying to deconstruct the myth that H&A diamonds are somehow more asthetically pleasing than non H&A ideals...OR try to encourage those out there to show me why I might be way off

Serge and Leonid, thanks for the conversation! I find it interesting that more gemmologists out there aren't chiming in...I think they would if I was WAY off base. Just a thought...

Thanks again all!

 

[Serg]

Good luck, Biscuit