Help a budget buyer !!!!

[fire&ice]

Mara, ideally AGA would need the pav/crown #'s; but, I maintain that given stones w/in 1a-2b table/depth %'s that I could make a decision with my eyes. Certain combos are more desirable. When you get into a stone like yours is when the crown & pav. #'s are paramount.

Clearly, one would weed out certain depths & tables. Then, proceed with the viewing from there.

Also, HCA has tightened up a tab. But, when one entered in a table % of 58.9 vs 59% the difference in HCA score was about 1 HCA point. I can not defend that a table difference of 1/10th could make a stone go from an HCA of 1.8 to one of 2.8.

 

[Mara]

F&I...what about plugging in a stone with essentially the same parameters and then modifying the pavilion angle say .2 or .3? There is a HUGE difference in the HCA score returned. I have seen this recently when playing around with some stones found on other websites and posted about it recently but got no responses on how the pav angle makes such a huge difference with .2 or .3.

For example a stone with a 41.2 pav angle and other desirable specs on table, depth etc. may return an HCA 2.8, and then you change that pav angle to 41.1 and it returns a 2.3. Change that again to 41 and it returns a 2. Change it to 40.9 and it returns a 1.6. Change it to 40.8 and it returns a 1.2.

I have seen this happen. In a case such as this, the stone had excellent looking table and depth numbers...don't recall off the top of my head but it was definitely with the AGS 0 range. Something like a 56% table and a 61% depth. Looks innocuous right? But that pav angle was making huge differences in the HCA scoring. My question at the time which was overlooked (since the thread was not about that particular issue but rather a hijacked thread!) was along the lines of, how is that possible AND is the difference visual? So would I see a difference in that stone with the 41.2 pav angle and the stone that scores under 2.0 with a 40.9? That's only a hair's difference, is it that different? But then again--Garry fine tunes the HCA all the time and it's his baby. Seems like those calcs and changes are in there for a reason, pav angle must be very important.

Hence--from what I have seen on the HCA and from stones I plug in, I maintain that I feel table and depth are not enough if you don't have the crown pav angles, according to the HCA.

In real life, not sure...but then again, why would the HCA make such huge swings on a few tenths of an angle? It must be correlated to some real life research?

 

[fire&ice]

Mara, I'm not negating your research. Only that - ummmm....do you really think that the eye can see a dif. between 1.4 & 2.3? Or, better yet, what an eye may *see* to be more attractive.

Again, the degrees about the table is relevant. 58.9 vs. 59 & a dif of a whole 1 point on HCA - doesn't sound reasonable.

I'm on board w/ the pav/angle as important info. But, not the end all of end all data...like the table 58.9 vs 59.

All that said, I suppose I am a "very good" buyer in general. Occassionally, I will buy the best (in reviews); but, most of the time the very good (at the right price) is good enough for me.

 

[Mara]

F&I...no worries..just different camps of thought. While I am not a BEST buyer 'just becase'...I'm all about best deal and quality for the $$. However, in this case..where the pav angles seem soooo crucial, I just wonder (as my original Q in another thread asked) what the deal is with the HCA and small minute angle differences or similar knocking the score all over.

In real life..I DO think there is a difference between a stone that scores 1.4 on the HCA and 2.5 or similar. I say that because while my stone is beautiful and I adore it, the pictures of some of the ACA's and similar that I see online photograph much more beautifully than my stone EVER could seem to. I am sure that beauty translates well into real life..and would knock my white brilliant stone out of the water in the mix of fire, scint, brilliance. The HOF stone I saw in the store was amazing, knockout beauty...I bet it would score great on HCA. Compare that to my 2.8 HCA scoring stone..and yes I think you will see a difference, my eye would anyway and this is the same eye that cannot really discern color changes between E and G and G and I easily at all.

Of course yes it depends on the eye and if you are buying offline or online. Different priorites and variables...seeing a VG stone in person and thinking its amazing and it fits in your price range for a larger size is excellent. So its not about buying the BEST just because its labeled the best (e.g. ideal), but for my I'd want the #'s to back it up..the reports and the pictures. Then for my eyes to confirm it in real life. But YES I am a budding CUT NUT and I freely admit it. My next stone purchase WILL be an ACA.

 

[fire&ice]

Mara, I simply don't think you can see jpegs of diamonds online & compare in "real life" senarios. For example, a fashion shot is going to be a heck of a lot better looking than a normal photo (and I'm not talking about touch up - I'm talking proper lighting - proper camera, etc.) Also, did you view the HOF in all lighting. I did. Yeah, they are nice; but, in "normal" lighting they are just a well cut stone.

Also, I do not think that a stone with the same parameters at table % 58.9 (1.8 HCA) & a table at 59% (at HCA 2.5) will have much of a difference *at all*. That 1/10 cut off is arbitrary & not based on real life.

 

[chat_hard]

Hello Everyone,
I seem to like these two diamonds..... wanted to know your opinion about them before I ask the vendors to send it to the appraiser.. actually I would like to select between them and send out just one

Stone #1
========
Price 2700
Carat Weight 0.82
Color I
Clarity SI1
Laboratory AGS
Cut
Table 56.1
Depth 61.7
Crown 34.2 degrees
Pavilion 40.8 degrees
Culet 0.7%
Polish Ideal
Symmetry Ideal
Girdle Faceted 1.0% to 2.0%
H&A YES
Fluroscence Negligible
Measurements 6.00-6.03 x 3.71
Sarin Report YES
HCA Score 1.1

Stone #2
========
Price 3092
Carat Weight 0.838
Color G
Clarity SI1
Laboratory
Cut
Table 56
Depth 61.7
Crown 34.1
Pavilion 41
Culet None
Polish Ideal
Symmetry Ideal
Girdle Faceted 1.2% to 2.0%
H&A Yes
Fluroscence None
Measurements 6.04-6.07x3.74mm
Sarin Report Yes
HCA Score 1.5

 

[aljdewey]

Chat: Between the two, I'd select #2. Both score well on the HCA and appear to be beautiful diamonds.

Why #2? The $400 difference is neglible when considering that you can move up two grades on color (which puts you at the top of the near-colorless range) and a very slight increase in dimensions.

 

[Mara]

I personally like the second one better...because if you have a choice I'd suggest a color better than 'I'. I like the combo of G SI1 --its slightly bigger, and the HCA score is still very excellent. But both stones look good from their posted #'s. Best of luck!

 

[fire&ice]

Well, our votes cancels each others out Al. I'd vote #1. In a well cut stone this size, the color perception will be very minimal, if any, once set. I agree that $400.00 in minimal on a stone in the 10K range. But #2 is approx 15% higher.

Plus, the numbers are a tad better on #1.

At the end of the day, both look nice.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 7/30/2003 12:51:22 PM fire&ice wrote:

Well, our votes cancels each others out Al. I'd vote #1. In a well cut stone this size, the color perception will be very minimal, if any, once set. I agree that $400.00 in minimal on a stone in the 10K range. But #2 is approx 15% higher.

Plus, the numbers are a tad better on #1.

At the end of the day, both look nice.----------------

HA.....F&I, you kill me.

You're such a hoot! You spend the better part of this thread debating with Mara that you don't think there's a perceptible "eye" difference between stones with 1.8 and 2.5 HCAs, and in the next breath, you comment about stone #1, "Plus, the numbers of #1 are a tad better."

I like your style.

Of the two differences (G vs. I and 1.1 vs. 1.5), I think the one is more likely to see the color difference than the .4 HCA difference......if either is even visible at all.

Lastly, while it's true that many people cannot see the diff between G & I, others who are color sensitive may very well see the "body" color in an I stone.

While I'm all for making a smart purchase and being somewhat frugal, this purchase is a bit more important than standard purchases. I think the difference is worth the two-grade improvement in color, but that's just me.

 

[chat_hard]

I tend to like #1 better myself... and this is not just because of the $400 difference.. it's just that when I spoke with the tow vendors, #1 seemed more helpful...again, looks like the "human" factor still counts event though we are trying to buy off the net and move away from the traditional "family jewler"... anyways wanted to know if the price is right or do I have some leeway in bargaining ?

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 7/30/2003 1

4

1 PM chat_hard wrote:

I tend to like #1 better myself... and this is not just because of the $400 difference.. it's just that when I spoke with the tow vendors, #1 seemed more helpful...again, looks like the "human" factor still counts event though we are trying to buy off the net and move away from the traditional "family jewler"... anyways wanted to know if the price is right or do I have some leeway in bargaining ?

----------------

Of course, it's just as important to select a vendor that you feel will be most responsive to your needs. If you feel that is #1, then have at it!

Good luck!

 

[Mara]

Chat..since you viewed both stones, was a color difference visible to you? It may be hard to remember since it sounds like both stones were from different vendors. Some people's eyes are more sensitive than others. I have seen I's that face up very white. But then again I still like the G...my stone is a G too and its super white!

I still like 2nd choice...but as you mention the human factor may still weigh in for you. Do you feel comfortable working with the 2nd vendor on a setting and lifetime warranties etc..or was vendor #1 more appealing on future communications.

Oh and BTW I think the prices are great. Esp for brick and mortar!

 

[chat_hard]

I think you misunderstood me Mara

Both of these stones are listings from vendors off this website. I have spoken with them on the phone to get more details

Sorry about the mix up

 

[Mara]

Ahhhh. Well since you have not seen either stone, I would highly recommend the G over the I..and make sure that the SI is REALLY eye-clean. Your eye may be more sensitive to color since you havent seen the stones, and you don't want to get the I and then realize that you don't like it. Online purchases are different from offline in that you have to make some assumptions on the stones, err on the side of caution IMO.

Did you get closeups of the stones and/or inclusion plot maps etc. Did you confirm the Hearts and Arrows? Anyone can say that a stone is Hearts and Arrows (even list it on the cert)--unless they have the images to back it up then it's not really confirmed.

 

[MichaelF]

Chat,

Comfort with your merchant is a huge issue, or at least it was for me... That's why I ended up at White Flash. They were the only vendor who asked the name of my g/f... I don't know why but once they did that they got me bragging and it all became about her... A couple of things to consider... You may find a vendor that makes you more comfortable, that's okay and definately keep that in your list of things to consider. With lifetime trade-up programs and a wedding band (eternity) hopefulling in my future I wanted to feel comfortable that they would be there in the future... A couple of things to consider...

1. Where are the inclusions on either stone, can you get the plot? In my case I was able to secure both
photographs and plots. I posted them here and folks gave me things to consider. For example,
my inclusion was near the girdle and so it was suggested I not use a tension setting...
2. Is the inclusion "eye clean" on one stone versus the other?
3. Does the inclusion run deap or is it on the surface?
4. What type of inclusion is it?
5. Talk about non diamond issues that affect cost: shipping, settings, etc.

As far as negotiating cost goes, give it a try. What's the worst they can say? "No", and you pay the same amount you'd pay if you failed to ask. If they should say "Yes" you get a bit of a deal... Just ask politely, be professional, and don't argue... Remember folks online are less expensive, but I think their margins are tighter... My appraiser was amazed at the prices I paid and commented on how much they were making. They even showed me the wholesale price tables...

Michael


----------------
On 7/30/2003 1

4

1 PM chat_hard wrote:

I tend to like #1 better myself... and this is not just because of the $400 difference.. it's just that when I spoke with the tow vendors, #1 seemed more helpful...again, looks like the "human" factor still counts event though we are trying to buy off the net and move away from the traditional "family jewler"... anyways wanted to know if the price is right or do I have some leeway in bargaining ?

----------------

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
You're such a hoot! You spend the better part of this thread debating with Mara that you don't think there's a perceptible "eye" difference between stones with 1.8 and 2.5 HCAs, and in the next breath, you comment about stone #1, "Plus, the numbers of #1 are a tad better."

----------------

I honestly believe that the perception of color in a .83 stone in a G vs I will be minimal, if any, face up. Both of these stones have very good makes which could mask body color. Hence, my reason for choosing the 15% cost savings. I just threw in the last as gravy & food for foder for others. I *really* don't think you will see a difference.

That said, I would seriously consider splurging for the G. BUT....that $400.00 could buy and extra nice setting for someone on a budget. Even though $400.00 is not a lot in the big picture scheme of things, it's still 15%. And, I just love to play that devils advocate.

If it was me, I'd pick the G. But, after reading that Chad's experience was better with the I stone - seals the deal for me.

Of course, another one of my mantra's, Can you see both & compare? Where is pqcollectibles when you need her?

BTW, I think .82/.83 is a nice size & a solid buy before the leap to 1c. Good luck with whatever you choose!

 

[aljdewey]

-------------------------------

That said, I would seriously consider splurging for the G. BUT....that $400.00 could buy and extra nice setting for someone on a budget. Even though $400.00 is not a lot in the big picture scheme of things, it's still 15%. And, I just love to play that devils advocate.

----------------

Yes, you certainly do! And I agree that the extra $400 would help in budget. As I read his initial criteria....." $3200 - $3400 for the rock....white......exceptional cut....It should be the biggest darned rock that this much money can buy.", I thought the G stone better fit his stated parameters. I do agree, though, that the subsequent information about comfort level with the vendor would lean in favor of the I stone.

And for semantics' sake: Yes, it is 15%. But I'd care more about "it's 15% of WHAT?" If I were comparing a $200 setting versus a $230 setting, the $230 setting would be 15% more, too, but would I sacrifice a desired setting over $30.....after all, that's a 15%!!!!! jump. A little perspective goes a long way. (spoken from the other devil's advocate of the group....there sure are a LOT of us, aren't there?)

 

[Mara]

*white flag*

Yes if the setting was part of that budget, I'd do the 'I' and get something really cool for the setting. But all towards the rock? G all the way!

Splurge a little, $400 over a few decades is a drop in a big big big bucket!

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/30/2003 5

3:29 PM aljdewey wrote:

-------------------------------






And for semantics' sake: Yes, it is 15%. But I'd care more about "it's 15% of WHAT?" If I were comparing a $200 setting versus a $230 setting, the $230 setting would be 15% more, too, but would I sacrifice a desired setting over $30.....after all, that's a 15%!!!!! jump. A little perspective goes a long way. (spoken from the other devil's advocate of the group....there sure are a LOT of us, aren't there?)

----------------

But, to someone that 30.00 extra dollars may *indeed* be more than they can spend. Semantics, perhaps - but more relativity.

Some may think $10.00 is a bunch of money. For others the threshold may be 100.00, 1k, 10k, 100k, 1 mil. etc.

This is the reason I try to put it in perspective of %.

 

[trichrome]

I have just read this thread in part.

I would just like to say that the HCA or any other tool will NEVER permit
you to select a diamond between 2 or 3.

Whatever your HCA score is, to compare diamonds, you have to look
at them in person and choose the one which most appeals to you. That's
it. An HCA of 2.0 or 4.0 doesnt mean anything to me. By the way, do
you know that 98% of the people in the industry dont know a thing about
the HCA? I have nothing against cut freaks like Cut Nut but it's just to
put everything into perspective. As I said before, choosing the right setting
for your stone and for your lady is far more important than the HCA score.

Trichrome.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 7/31/2003 8:11

3 AM fire&ice wrote:

But, to someone that 30.00 extra dollars may *indeed* be more than they can spend. Semantics, perhaps - but more relativity.

Some may think $10.00 is a bunch of money. For others the threshold may be 100.00, 1k, 10k, 100k, 1 mil. etc.

This is the reason I try to put it in perspective of %.

----------------

F&I.....again, completely agree. Some people's budget not flex for that, but my response on this was to Chat Hard......who said his budget for the rock alone was $3200-$3400.

Given that the two stones in question were (approx) $2700 and $3100, I took it as a given that the $400 difference was comfortably in his budget, and in that instance, I still maintain that the $400 difference is neglible in deference to moving up two color grades.

 

[Mara]

If someone can afford to be spending $3k on a stone, then the $400 extra can be reasonably amortized over a long period of time, for a long-term purchase. If you can't afford to spend an extra $400 and it makes or breaks how you live, pay your rent or eat etc...then you shouldn't even be spending the original amount on a luxury item purchase in the first place, in my opinion.

Similar to the article in the wedding area of the site here, if you put $6k on a credit card and are still paying it off slowly 5 years later (with tons of interest), then that $6k was way out of your means in the first place and unless it was used for something like a life-saving surgery, was probably a non-necessary purchase (yes I even mean a wedding).

 

[Smooth]

----------------
On 7/31/2003 12

6

5 PM Mara wrote:

If someone can afford to be spending $3k on a stone, then the $400 extra can be reasonably amortized over a long period of time, for a long-term purchase. If you can't afford to spend an extra $400 and it makes or breaks how you live, pay your rent or eat etc...then you shouldn't even be spending the original amount on a luxury item purchase in the first place, in my opinion.

----------------

I agree to some extent, but that is a slippery slope. You start out with a budget of $3000, then you decide it's "reasonable" to bump it to $3400. Well, then there is a stone you really, really like and it's $3750. If you can afford $3400 for a purchase like this, you can afford $3750, right? Well, now we're already 25% above the original budget... and this can keep going ad infinitum.

At some point, you have to set a hard ceiling, IMO, and force yourself to stick to it. Otherwise, you can keep convincing yourself to spend just a little bit more because there will always be a marginal improvement to be had. When you're looking at diamonds (or any large purchase), $400 seems minimal but I think people can get caught up in "the chase" and forget that $400 is, in fact, a fair amount of money. Yes, a diamond is a long-term purchase, but I have a decent TV and a nice recliner which were each less than $400, and I intend for those to last a long time as well. Although their lifespan is probably shortened by overuse each Sunday during football season!

 

[Mara]

Of course yes there needs to be a stopping point. I guess in my mind its similar to what we did with my e-ring. To get diamonds halfway around was $1400. To get them all the way around it was $2k. At first my fiance was thinking of just halfway because all the way around seemed extravagant. Then he decided he liked all the way around (my choice anyway!) because of the small price difference and the end result would be infinitely better looking and make both of us much happier.

So given that you have a reasonable ceiling of movement, and don't go completely overboard, if you have a healthy budget to begin with, chances are that is a little variable if you find something that really touches upon what you want.

Starting with a $3k budget and moving to $6k unless you are paying cash and it doesn't affect your lifestyle isn't smart (and may not be smart anyway, who knows!), but going $400 or $500 over IMO is just part of the game. Usually people start out with a budget and then don't realize what little that gets them or what they thought they can get is nowhere near what they end up seeing. Thats when things start to change, concessions are made, and the budget begins to slip. Happens to the best of us!

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 7/31/2003 12:44:21 PM Smooth wrote:

I agree to some extent, but that is a slippery slope. You start out with a budget of $3000, then you decide it's "reasonable" to bump it to $3400. Well, then there is a stone you really, really like and it's $3750. If you can afford $3400 for a purchase like this, you can afford $3750, right? Well, now we're already 25% above the original budget... and this can keep going ad infinitum.

At some point, you have to set a hard ceiling, IMO, and force yourself to stick to it. Otherwise, you can keep convincing yourself to spend just a little bit more because there will always be a marginal improvement to be had. When you're looking at diamonds (or any large purchase), $400 seems minimal but I think people can get caught up in "the chase" and forget that $400 is, in fact, a fair amount of money. Yes, a diamond is a long-term purchase, but I have a decent TV and a nice recliner which were each less than $400, and I intend for those to last a long time as well. Although their lifespan is probably shortened by overuse each Sunday during football season!

----------------

Agree, Smooth.....in fact, so much so that I expect all men will get on board and set a hard ceiling for the next CAR they want to purchase, too. And that means the budget has to include all the little extras that go along with the car (the running boards, the 12 CD-changer, the massive mag wheels, and every other little thing one wants on a car).

Ha.....as if. It's funny how movable that "ceiling" is when it's a male toy instead.

LOLOL

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/31/2003 12:49

1 PM Mara wrote:



----------------

That can be quite true. Imagine the embarrassment when my to be went into *the* family jeweler looking at 1c rings. They asked his budget & he *proudly* proclaimed $1,000.00. Poor thing, he had no clue. That is why he went so crazy with the amount he gave me for my Anniversary rock. He wanted that base covered. No pricescope back then. This time he was just gun shy.

BUT.......think about how much that $400.00 will be if someone uses a credit card & takes years to pay it. One can not assume one's ability to pay.

We girls assume these guys have the money. They may. They may not. I'm not talking about Chat. I'm relating in general.

I still maintain, though, that the only way Chat can make an informed decision is to see both colors.

 

[Mara]

----------------
On 7/31/2003 1

1:38 PM fire&ice wrote:

BUT.......think about how much that $400.00 will be if someone uses a credit card & takes years to pay it. One can not assume one's ability to pay.


----------------

Exactly my point. If you put that $400 on a credit card and know that it will take you years to pay it, you should not do it. You probably shouldn't even be spending the $3k you DO have entirely on a luxury purchase like a diamond. Hence--if someone IS able to spend $3k on a stone and feel free and clear, another $400 with the knowledge that they can pay it off should be nothing.

In the end, we don't know...none of us..we only have what people post to go on. So when someone posts two stones, $400 difference, I assume they are in enough control of their finances so that the $400 would not make them destitute for the next few years. I hope anyway!

 

[Smooth]

----------------
On 7/31/2003 12:50:51 PM aljdewey wrote:

Agree, Smooth.....in fact, so much so that I expect all men will get on board and set a hard ceiling for the next CAR they want to purchase, too. And that means the budget has to include all the little extras that go along with the car (the running boards, the 12 CD-changer, the massive mag wheels, and every other little thing one wants on a car).

Ha.....as if. It's funny how movable that "ceiling" is when it's a male toy instead.

LOLOL

----------------

Hey, that's different! Mag wheels affect the performance of the car!

In all seriousness, I do set a budget ceiling when car shopping. And I buy used cars to avoid paying for depreciation. It's difficult to suppress my testosterone-induced urges to run out and buy a Porsche, but somehow I manage.

I'd say I'm very "practical" person (well, "cheap" is such an ugly word)...

We're going to London this winter partly because we stick to our budgets (and we got a great deal on tickets).

Of course, I am an accountant... budgets and savings are in my blood!

 

[fire&ice]

----------------

----------------

One would think; but, not everyone is as sensible as we are.

You have to have a family member or friend who lives wayyyyyyyy beyond their means - and subsequently don't have two nickels to rub together. Believe me, $400.00 to *me* (who can afford it) is more money than *they* (who can't afford it) think it is.

Besides

except for the specs on paper, *few* will be able to tell a difference face up in this size stone (both with good makes)between I & G.