IMO - Cut is the LEAST important thing...

[Jim-Schultz]

Hey folks. I know I'm not a regular poster around here, but I figured it was high time I added my two cents to this forum. To that end I've decided to start with this simple idea - Cut is probably the LEAST important thing to consider when buying a diamond. I would expect that many of the regulars around here would find that statement ridiculous, almost antithetical to the spirit of diamond education. I think it's true.

Break a diamond down to the most basic four C's - Cut, Color, Clarity and Carat weight. Just about every man and woman over the age of twenty could identify "The Four C's" by name if you asked them, even if they haven't yet purchased or received a diamond. For that reason the two questions just about every new bride will want to know are:

1- Wow, how big is that?!?
2 - It's so beautiful - what is the quality?

It's also no coincidence that those are the two questions just about every one of her friends and family are going to want to know as well. For that reason I feel the answer to the first question is what is most important. Carat is definitely more important than cut. Size doesn't matter - Yeah, right. If your fiancé is lucky enough to own a .45ct D-IF super-ideal with the rain sensitive table wipers, it doesn't mean for one second that every girl walking around with a the .90ct 60/60 G-SI2 isn't going to look, compliment, then mentally thank her husband for buying a bigger diamond. Carat is king, period. Yes - there are many women who think larger diamonds are gaudy. Then, of course, there are the other 99% of the female population. Which one is your girlfriend? On a scale of one to four, carat weight is a by far "numero uno" in my book.

So, if carat is most important and cut is least important (IMO, of course), what's next? Well, color of course! This one is obvious. If your diamond is yellow, EVERYONE will notice. If your diamond is slightly included, NO ONE will notice. My wife would like a "D" colored "I1" long before she would want a "J" color "VS1". "J" is still a white diamond, but if my budget allowed me to buy a higher color I wouldn't think twice about it. Should you buy a crappy SI2 or an I1 diamond? Probably not, especially if the diamond is for an engagement. But should you buy the largest diamond in the highest color with the lowest acceptable clarity - you bet. Best decision you'll ever make. In the number two slot is color.

That puts clarity third, huh. I'm not a big clarity guy myself. If I look at a diamond for more than five seconds with a loupe and can't see anything, I'm happy. If I look at the diamond and see an inclusion in less than five seconds, but the inclusion is on the side and it isn't black - that's fine too. I've just got one pet peeve - no carbon! I'll take feathers, wisps, pinpoints, naturals, white crystals etc - just don't show me diamonds with pepper! Find a diamond that's eye-clean (or reasonably close with nothing in the middle) and move on. Third place of importance - clarity.

So in last place is "cut". When I say cut I mean proportions, of course. Depth, table, polish, symmetry, etc. What should you look for in cut? It's easy - the nicest cut you can find WITHOUT sacrificing the other three more important factors (carat, color and clarity). The market is saturated with really nice cut diamonds at great prices. Avoid diminishing return. That means don't pay 20% more for .2% more light return. No one will know the difference. Half the difference that even YOU see is the difference you WANT to see. There is no visual difference between a 56% table and 58% table. There is no difference between a 40.8 pavillion and a 41.0 pavillion. There is no difference between EX/EX/EX/VG and VG/VG/VG/VG. There is no difference between VH/VH/VH and H/H/H. There is no difference between "almost" H&A and "real" H&A. Well, that's not all true - there certainly are differences, however minor they may be. But are those the differences that she is going to care about? Is the pride you feel in buying the "best" cut diamond on the planet going to make up for the fact you traded down on every other factor to get there? Seriously, folks. Think about it.

For those of you that are biting at the bit and ready to prove me wrong with anecdotal evidence, let me make this comment. This post is an exaggeration to get your attention. Cut is important - it's just NOT the most important thing. It's something that should be considered when making a balanced purchase decision.

Try this experiment:

Put a 1.00ct next to a 1.25ct. Do you see the difference? Yes, it's obvious.
Put a "D" color diamond next to a "J". Do you see the difference? Yes, it's fairly obvious.
Put an SI1 next to an I1. Do you see the difference? Yes, when you look closer.
Put a super duper ideal next to a GIA 60/57 VG/VG. Do you see the difference? Maybe - if you really, really try.

Last point. This post was intended to provoke thought - give a counter opinion to the overwhelming "Cut is Everything" mantra that permeates most threads. It isn't meant to start an argument. I respect the quality in workmanship reflected in the finest cut diamonds as much as the next guy. In fact, I respect it even more than the next guy - this is my business! I understand the "quality has value" mindset that usually ends up equating fine diamonds to fine cars, wine and women. I love all those things myself. I do, however, think this place is out of hand. I truly, personally, honestly feel that there is a lot of questionable advice served up around here. But since I haven't been saying anything I've got no right to complain. Well, until now.

Here's to a strong season for the pricescope vendors and great diamonds for the pricescope buyers.

 

[Mexi]

In my opinion, the other C is the most important thing - COST. Cost will be the deciding factor on the other C's.

Unlimited budgets get you anything you want. Those shopping with a budget always have to sacrifice something.

 

[Caratz]

Heh heh. Great post! A week or two ago, someone here (I already forgot who) got an amazing 3ct diamond that was exceptionally well cut. The thing that got me was that many of the ladies here on pricescope were commenting on the enormous size of the stone, rather than the beauty of the cut (which was spectacular, by the way). I thought to myself, without commenting, that in the end it all comes down to size -- provided, of course, that the diamond is not glaringly ugly.

Having said that, my own thought process is this:

What is my budget?
What is my minimum in terms of size?
What factors can I see/not see? (that puts me in VS2/SI range)
How can I say I got "one of the the best" (which, for me, means putting a priority on the remaining factors, color and cut)?
How can I cut corners -- to increase size -- without sacrificing the thought that I got "the best" (which, for me, means looking into a non-branded stone with excellent fire, or a stone where one of the arrows is bent or one of the hearts skewed)?

For me, the best stone is therefore the largest D-E-F SI1 with an HCA below 2 that is discounted because it is not a "true H&A". But hey, that's just me!

 

[mdx]

Hi Jim

Hi

Weight and size are not necessarily the same thing

Look at these two stones selected from actual diamonds on Rapnet

Both are 1 carat but the 2nd stone is beautifully proportioned and VISUALLY considerably larger when mounted

1.00 G SI1 2052 -64% EGL 77.2 55 XTK N F F N 5.72-5.66X4.39


1.00 G VS2 5360 -20% AGS 60 57 TN-M N X X N 6.50*6.54*3.95

The Brilliance and of a diamond is determined by the proportions, not the weight or the color or the clarity

 

[Roxy]

WOW, I just got back from business travel and boy did this catch my eye! I'm one of those that believes that cut's important, but I also think that carat weight is right up there as well. I love your line "carat is king" - AMEN (as long as the stone has a decent cut).

I agree that there might not be a big difference between some of the examples you've mentioned, but there IS a big difference between your examples and most of the poorly (or even "fairly") cut diamonds that many jewelers are trying to sell to us consumers. And there aren't many things uglier than a huge, "dead", diamond.

I thought that was the main point that this site was trying to get across to folks - "don't buy a big dead diamond just for the sake of having something large on your finger", but it's easy to get caught up in the numbers (I know that I sure have). Hopefully your post will help us all to step back a bit. Thanks for starting such a provocative thread ...

Roxy

 

[stephcola]

Great post Jim!




After reading pricescope for a few months and successfully purchasing a 3.01 ct. diamond with the gracious help of many pricescope participants...I would like to say Bravo. You had the guts to say what alot of posters fear saying. Diamond size is important to most women. I know there is a huge movement towards superideal/H & A, etc cuts and I applaud this - if you can afford it. I knew I wanted a 3 ct.and while I would not get frozen spit ( a popular phrase on this site) I was looking for a great cut, a color no more than (H) and a totally eyeclean SI1. I had a budget of around $23K and was told it would be very difficult , although not impossible to find. While everyone was touting H & A, etc and let me say I would have really loved one.... - I would not go down in carat weight. Actually, I would have liked to go bigger I just couldn't handle an (I). I did manage to find an ideal cut, (H)G/VG, GIA stone that rated 1.2 FIC - so it wasn't a dud .




As I said in an earlier post this evening, Mara has done alot of polls on this subject. Most women would like bigger rings either now or later for an upgrage. Most have learned that they would now go to a lower color G/H and an SI quality to achieve this. Perfection is certainly something to aspire to. I wanted the biggest and best my money could buy. More importantly, I wanted something that would make me smile every time I looked at it!
Cheers!!!

 

[valeria101]

/blockquote>

Of course cut is not the most important thing, if any of those is at all. But it is the only "NO EXCUSE" think. If people cut diamonds, why should they cut them badly? After all the pain the world put into making color, clarity and carat better than nature intended, why the trully simple industry mission of getting the darn things cut into prisms be neglected? There is no excuse for a poor cut: clarity, color, carat and cost, all birth marks of the diamond itself should not have to suffer because of sloppy cut. Of course buyers should not have to trade off any of the other CCCCs for Cut, so, cut is the least important, as you say.


Analyzing you analysis: C'mon... It does sound right that the trade between a J and a D should be harsh, and the trade between a VS and I clarity should, and the trade-off between something far from the legendary 1ct (0.6) and something close (0.9) is hard to promote infront of the Jonesses. But the tradeoff between a nice 60 X 60, Vg, VG and a premium cut? It may be not 2% extra brilliance, but the two seem closer than a J and a D: there is no perceived 'flaw' with the first and only a rare distinguishing quality in the second (the other pairts of examples compare something visually flawed with something vissually acceptable, the paair of cuts should be the same, by mother logic).


And size... oh, well, if you look from 10 ct down, of course there is no excuse for a smaller size. But most buyers don't get there at all, but rather look up and aspire to a 1ct from nil in any quality. In this regard, the PS crown sits in a lofty position. And still, more 1ct diamonds are sold here than 3ct and I have yet to hear of a 5ct or so 'negotiated' via PS (help here! I'm new). Did you see all those posts debating what the size of the diamond should be given the buyer's social circle, for example? Well, given that social acceptance is among your arguments, it may make sense to seek them out.


Unfortunately, neither C is placed on a trully continous scale: there are no-go areas, there are 'bliss' spots and there always is a limit on each. And I am afraid that this thread will go through each of those to infinity!

And, since you seem to be in the business, I can't help but cite a honorable PS poster, also in the trade, saying that (paraphrase) "you should not bring customers in your financial world. Give them what they wnat and they'll et you were you want." So? Tastes should not be a matter of debate at all.


Do you want to help? Help customers make a choice by showing what the gain and loss is among their options and showing them as any diamonds as needed for them to learn. Do you think any customer would ever pay the premium for a H&A if you demonstrated them the 'invisible' improvement this cut brings? Try!

 

[diamondsman]

All I have to say to jim is

,
I totally agree with you, I also noticed many times on these threads, the pointing out of how cut is the most important thing when purchasing a diamond,and even criticizing stones that are not ideal makes.
Th bottom line is that when a women wears that diamond on her finger ,no one will ask her if it is an ideal make ,the most common question would be what size is it.

 

[Jennifer5973]

Wow, what a great post! After discovering Pricescope, I became obsessed with the cut on my existing diamonds--dimaonds I had always loved; diamonds that had always sparkled and gotten lots of compliments.

In fact, I panicked and posted "Fisheye or a broken heart" in dimand hangout because all of a sudden, I was worried my engagement diamond was a piece of junk--a fish-eye... This worried me (for a brief period of insanity) to the point I actually considered hurting my husband's feelings and trying to push for a replacement stone. Not the best diamond in the world, I was thrilled when I got it almost 10 years ago as we both struggled through school...he has indicated to replace it would upset him.

In my humble, un-expert opinion, I agree--Cut is important, but I know when I go for my three stone ring (planned for my 10 yr anniversary in 2 years) I will seek a larger stone, with eye-clean properties (likely VS2 or SI1, nothing in the table--and like you said--no carbon), a white stone (F or G), and a cut that enhances the diamond--no shallowness or wasted depth. My jeweler once told me people know two things about a dimaond right away--its size and if it is a yellow....he said the naked eye can spot yellow a mile away. That being said, I've seen I1,2, and 3 stones that i wouldn't go near...but I would want the 3 ct clean SI1 over the ict VS1... It really pays to find the good SI1.

Another thing people seem to freak out about is flourescence. Several of my diamonds have a little bit of flourescence and they sparkle like crazy in all kinds of light... IMO, this may be another area of unnecessary obsession...?

 

[dimonbob]

Jim - If you don't think cut matters...would you give your wife a 2ct D-VS1 round diamond with a 56% depth, a 68% table, an extremely thick girdle and a large culet?

If you would not than cut does count! If you would than you have just spent a lot on money on a fairly large, white, clean and ugly diamond!

Actually what counts the most for most people buying the diamond is COST. Next is size and "sparkle" to use a customer term. You have to count your money then see how much of everything, including cut, that you can get for your money.

There are a lot of people here on Pricescope that want the maximum brilliance and fire they can get out of a diamond. Once they have seen and read about the super ideal cut with "true" hearts and arrows, that is usually what they want. Does one of these super ideal cut cost a lot more than a 60/60? A little but not much if they buy on the internet. If they get one of the two other brands that are found only in jewelry stores...they will pay through the nose. Do they want one of the H&A knock off's? Not if they can have the real thing.
Have a nice day.

 

[nightswimming]

Jim ,that was right on. You have made some more customers Im sure for being so honest. Yeah, from what I see, cut does matter, if it makes an ugly dull ring. But if it shines like "frozen spit", is eyeclean, and colorless, then why not? Obviosly there are limits - but 90% of the people on earth know squat about depth% and girdle and crown height - they just know a beautiful stone when they see one! "sure honey, its big and shiney and white and all, but couldnt you have splurged a bit on a better AGS class for pavillion angle?"

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Its a great point of view Jim.
And at present you are right.

But the reason you are right is not that cut is not important.
It is that it is the least well defined.

And hardest to communicate.

What grade is the easiest to define, and the least subjective?
Carat weight

Next?
Low clarity
Then low color

Fact - most D IF diamonds have lousy cut - because the selling feature is the rarity.

Answer - once there is a really simple and truly effective cut grade system - cut will have a greater value.

Well cut diamonds will go up in value over night.
Badly cut and middle of the road (80%) stones will loose ground.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Cut is the Cinderalla of the 4C's
You can see just how badly this is true from this chart that idnicates the difference in comparitive prices for each of the C's.

Remeber that double the Carat weight increases cost by almost 4 times.

The green are my quality recomendations.
The green cut hangs out over the end a bit because the super ideal is kinda off the scale

The values are comparitive guides only and not referring to any particular stone.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 12/6/2003 1:03:41 AM Cut Nut wrote:

You can see just how badly this is true from this chart that idnicates the difference in comparitive prices for each of the C's.----------------

These are per carat numbers right? Is this scheme posted anywhere so I can cite it (for non-commercial purposes)?

Thanks!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I printed out your post and read it deeply Jim.

There is nothing I disagree with in your words.
In fact I am not a believer in H&A's grade symmetry - it can even make bigger diamonds look like they have too few facets. But if there is no more cost - then why not buy the best cut you can?
So then why not have cutters producing 28 crown and 41.5 degree pavilions - much bigger yield on about 20% of rough - and much bigger looking diamonds for the carat weight and money.

But consider that a guy or a couple in the purchase process will always trade off value judgements.

When the 2 D SI1 stones look like the difference between these 2 - at what point would the price difference need to be to reach the median point where 1/2 bought the good one and half bought the dull one?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Hi V,

They are comparitve prices.
Call them %'s if you wish - but not real dollars for any actual stone.

Any one may use it for the purpose intended (education) with acknowledgement

 

[pqcollectibles]

At first I thought this post was a joke. But then I read the whole thing and saw the signature.

Ditto's Val! Mr. DCD looks down from his 10 carat pedestal and cast aspersions at posters who take time to help people find the best diamond possible within their price point. He's been so helpful to buyers in the past. He's posted sooo many opinions and shared sooo much knowledge to assist people along the way here on the Forum.

Those comments on Cut sound very much like a Maul store jeweler peddling his wares to unsuspecting, no nothing buyers. Size! Size! Size! "Tell me more about the Cut." "It's round!"

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 12/6/2003 1:38:18 AM pqcollectibles wrote:

Mr. DCD looks down from his 10 carat pedestal ...----------------

I have no idea if this is the case, however. But, this brings to mind the decisions about cut made for the largest, most famous diamonds out there. Not that a egg-size object should be cut in the same way as a grain-size thing: but, actually, at elast one of the historic diamonds was seriously sliced & downsized to obtain better light return. So? If size gets toooo big,

cut matters again even to her British Majesty

.

Does this ALWAYS happen among the big ones? No: there still are rose and table and weird cuts among these world class gems and no sign of their owners wanting them recut for better light. In the same class, symmetry and model often outweighted light return as measures of cut quality. I know that the Eight Star company had a 10ct recut for promotion, but I doubt they would soon have the opportunity to specialize in cutting 10 cts and above.

Bottom line? Among five C choices, the choosing is eternal! To each his own, and the trade should provide for each too. One should not have to ask the seller what to buy, but this is an imperfect world in which PS carries a desirable service. I love this thread though, even if it may not end soon with a conclusion!

 

[canadiangrrl]

Hey folks. I know I'm not a regular poster around here, but I figured it was high time I added my two cents to this forum. To that end I've decided to start with this simple idea - Cut is probably the LEAST important thing to consider when buying a diamond. I would expect that many of the regulars around here would find that statement ridiculous, almost antithetical to the spirit of diamond education. I think it's true.

Break a diamond down to the most basic four C's - Cut, Color, Clarity and Carat weight. Just about every man and woman over the age of twenty could identify "The Four C's" by name if you asked them, even if they haven't yet purchased or received a diamond. For that reason the two questions just about every new bride will want to know are:

1- Wow, how big is that?!?
2 - It's so beautiful - what is the quality?

It's also no coincidence that those are the two questions just about every one of her friends and family are going to want to know as well. For that reason I feel the answer to the first question is what is most important. Carat is definitely more important than cut. Size doesn't matter - Yeah, right. If your fiancé is lucky enough to own a .45ct D-IF super-ideal with the rain sensitive table wipers, it doesn't mean for one second that every girl walking around with a the .90ct 60/60 G-SI2 isn't going to look, compliment, then mentally thank her husband for buying a bigger diamond. Carat is king, period. Yes - there are many women who think larger diamonds are gaudy. Then, of course, there are the other 99% of the female population. Which one is your girlfriend? On a scale of one to four, carat weight is a by far "numero uno" in my book.

>>> Size is relative. A few generalizations - Americans like size - in cars, food portions, diamonds, you name it. Canadians (and Europeans, for that matter) as a rule drive smaller cars, eat less, and wear smaller stones - irrespective of social status or economic class. We have less of an obsession with conspicuous consumption - and less disposable income, as a rule.

I might get pilloried for saying this, but where I'm from, large diamonds are tres gauche, and that's the God's honest truth. I don't have girlfriends who want or wear anything above the 1.50 mark, and even that's pushing it. I would never wear a three carat diamond, or even a two carat diamond, even if I could afford it. So for me, Carat isn't the most important C. I might be in the minority in the US - but not in Canada - and I'd bet my paycheque on it.

Having said that, I agree that I would prefer my 1.18 F I1 well-cut-non-supercallafragilistic diamond to a .60 D IF it-slices!-it dices!-it juliennes!

So, if carat is most important and cut is least important (IMO, of course), what's next? Well, color of course! This one is obvious. If your diamond is yellow, EVERYONE will notice. If your diamond is slightly included, NO ONE will notice. My wife would like a "D" colored "I1" long before she would want a "J" color "VS1". "J" is still a white diamond, but if my budget allowed me to buy a higher color I wouldn't think twice about it. Should you buy a crappy SI2 or an I1 diamond? Probably not, especially if the diamond is for an engagement. But should you buy the largest diamond in the highest color with the lowest acceptable clarity - you bet. Best decision you'll ever make. In the number two slot is color.

>>>> Couldn't agree with you more on this. I check out the "Recently Purchased" section at Blue Nile on a regular basis. I am stunned by the overbuying on clarity versus colour. I don't understand why someone would seek out a J VVS1 RB - eyeclean is eyeclean, whether it's an SI2 or an IF, and a J can look yellow.

That puts clarity third, huh. I'm not a big clarity guy myself. If I look at a diamond for more than five seconds with a loupe and can't see anything, I'm happy. If I look at the diamond and see an inclusion in less than five seconds, but the inclusion is on the side and it isn't black - that's fine too. I've just got one pet peeve - no carbon! I'll take feathers, wisps, pinpoints, naturals, white crystals etc - just don't show me diamonds with pepper! Find a diamond that's eye-clean (or reasonably close with nothing in the middle) and move on. Third place of importance - clarity.

>>>> Totally agree. My stone is an I1 (but you knew that already)

I would wager that some people are horrified by that designation and have visions of a brutally included piece of junk, a la Ebay. Although I haven't seen hundreds of stones in person, I've never seen an SI1 RB around the one carat mark that wasn't clean to the naked eye.

So in last place is "cut". When I say cut I mean proportions, of course. Depth, table, polish, symmetry, etc. What should you look for in cut? It's easy - the nicest cut you can find WITHOUT sacrificing the other three more important factors (carat, color and clarity). The market is saturated with really nice cut diamonds at great prices. Avoid diminishing return. That means don't pay 20% more for .2% more light return. No one will know the difference. Half the difference that even YOU see is the difference you WANT to see. There is no visual difference between a 56% table and 58% table. There is no difference between a 40.8 pavillion and a 41.0 pavillion. There is no difference between EX/EX/EX/VG and VG/VG/VG/VG. There is no difference between VH/VH/VH and H/H/H. There is no difference between "almost" H&A and "real" H&A. Well, that's not all true - there certainly are differences, however minor they may be. But are those the differences that she is going to care about? Is the pride you feel in buying the "best" cut diamond on the planet going to make up for the fact you traded down on every other factor to get there? Seriously, folks. Think about it.

For those of you that are biting at the bit and ready to prove me wrong with anecdotal evidence, let me make this comment. This post is an exaggeration to get your attention. Cut is important - it's just NOT the most important thing. It's something that should be considered when making a balanced purchase decision.

>>>> I find the whole H&A argument to be tedious at times. Is it a true H&A? Who knows - who cares? My stone has beautiful arrows - I don't know if it has hearts, because I asked you guys to mount it before we received delivery. And I couldn't care less if it had hearts, or if the one in the six-thirty position was a tad smaller than the rest, or even if it had grinning Scooby Doo heads when viewed face down, because I can't see them, and they don't actually *do* anything.

Branded or un-branded, H&A is a brand unto itself, and it's marketing. Yes - it represents excellent symmetry. Yes - it can designate a well cut stone. But it's still marketing, and very good marketing at that.

People who come here generally fear getting rooked. To them, that means buying crap. H&A is viewed as the way around this - a safety net for the consumer, particularly when they can't "see" the stone.

Try this experiment:

Put a 1.00ct next to a 1.25ct. Do you see the difference? Yes, it's obvious.
Put a "D" color diamond next to a "J". Do you see the difference? Yes, it's fairly obvious.
Put an SI1 next to an I1. Do you see the difference? Yes, when you look closer.
Put a super duper ideal next to a GIA 60/57 VG/VG. Do you see the difference? Maybe - if you really, really try.

Last point. This post was intended to provoke thought - give a counter opinion to the overwhelming "Cut is Everything" mantra that permeates most threads. It isn't meant to start an argument. I respect the quality in workmanship reflected in the finest cut diamonds as much as the next guy. In fact, I respect it even more than the next guy - this is my business! I understand the "quality has value" mindset that usually ends up equating fine diamonds to fine cars, wine and women. I love all those things myself. I do, however, think this place is out of hand. I truly, personally, honestly feel that there is a lot of questionable advice served up around here. But since I haven't been saying anything I've got no right to complain. Well, until now.

>>> Jim, here's the problem as I see it. Consumers are not being presented with enough options. The average Joes & Joannes seeking an e-ring in North American take the following route...they go to (fill in the name of a B&M vendor) and ask to see some stones. They are shown diamonds with 67% depth percentages, and 65% tables. Diamonds with visible chips, diamonds with no life. For most consumers, this is it. This fulfills their expectation of what a diamond should look like, and what it should cost, because they get few other options. They buy, and maybe at some point, they discover that they could've purchased a nicer stone for their $$. And maybe they don't - good for them.

Some of these consumers ask said vendor if they've got any better stones. They're shown some branded octagonal/extra faceted cut, which carries a substantial premium versus the crappy stone they've just seen. They're told a bunch of whoobledygoo about how extra facets automatically equate extra light return, how hearts and arrows are so romantic and show her how much you care, how these stones are mined by polar bears on ice floes in the wilds of Temiskaming and cut by Russian monks in caves, whatever.

Some of these consumers brave the wilds of Tiffany. Nice stones, nice price.

And that's it - that's what they get. Either an overpriced piece of crap, or an overpriced ideal. No middle ground whatsoever. I've never had a B&M vendor show me a nice 60/60. They've never whipped out a suitable non-ideal. It's either the dregs, or topline.

There was a guy here who bought a stone recently from Jonathan. He ended up purchasing a non-ideal, after viewing it side by side with Jonathan's H&A stones. Why? Because he banged out the carat weight vis-a-vis his budget, and because it was a really decent stone. Kudos to GOG for giving the consumer that choice.

If the $1999 one carat special is for you, then Godspeed. And if you feel you need an ideal, that's cool, too. But there's a market there for a middle ground - but your average B&M vendor isn't addressing it.

Some of those consumers who start out in the mall end up here. So what do we tell them when they look for advice? We share the experience of our own eyes. We try to help them avoid getting screwed. If we're misguided at times, you're probably right. So pipe up and share your experience. Our hearts are in the right place (deep within our chests, and not a merely reflection of the arrangements of the fac- oh, forget it.)

Here's to a strong season for the pricescope vendors and great diamonds for the pricescope buyers.

>>>> Hear, hear.

 

[valeria101]

lockquote>
You have touched a sensible issue...My impression is that the issue here is not really 'Cut', but as CutNut remainded, "sparkle". Between the two is alot of commercial struggle and the effort to persuade people to replace their lack of hands-on experince with a wide range of diamonds with either numbers (as in Sarin), tests done by others (as in Brilliancescope) or themselves (those viewers), and, least but not last Brand names guaranteeing some aspect of cut quality (H&A for that matter).


MARA? Should we have a poll about which of these methods is the better guarantee of cut quality for us the buyers? It's not too tactfull a move, but I agree with the proverbial curious cat here...


Theoretically, all these increase sales either via price premiums or volume increase of both. Which works better and faster and for whom in the production chain... this is a different matter altogether.

 

[canadiangrrl]

Valeria, what's your doctorate in??! I know you have one, dammit, you write/talk like my sister!

You're far too smart for me to understand.

I have a 1.03 E VS1 60/60 that was left to me by my Nana. Just dug it out to compare it to my e-ring stone. It was cut in the early seventies, when apparently diamonds were cut kinda spready...it's a nice, white stone, and there's nothing inherently wrong with it - but my e-ring stone, cut within 'ideal' tolerances (except for the extremely thin part on the girdle) is sparklier and has more life. Would it be worth spending, say, 20% more? I dunno. Not a cop-out answer - I really don't know. I guess it depends on whether or not you can truly afford it.

Which brings us to...Cost. In a previous post, Mexi brought up the issue of Cost - the fifth C, and I'm going to address something that bothers me here sometimes. We seem to get a lot of college students/recent grads looking to purchase e-rings. They have definitive budget parameters. An extra $200 spent for them means a few more months of Ramen noodles. I've been there, done that - I was engaged and married for the first time at the age of twenty-one, while still in school.

The debt load that some of these kids must carry has to be staggering. Again - been there, done that - put my ex through grad school. And my advice here is - buy what you can truly afford. That means paying cash. Or knowing with absolute certainty that you can pay it off within, say, six months, on a credit card that charges you less than 10% interest. Don't get so caught up in the specs and the hype that you burden yourself with the albatross of consumer debt. It's just a diamond, after all. Can't drink it, eat it, or live in it.

And it's not a good way to begin married life. If it's truly *love*, she'll understand why she got a smaller stone, or no stone at all, and if she doesn't, ditch the wench.

 

[strmrdr]

I respectfully disagree.
It is just as important as the other c's but I don’t see the c's the way the diamond industry would like me too.

Lets go over my diamond buying check list:
If the color right ie non-yellow: I or better most diamonds being pushed on consumers will pass this.

Is it eye clean: not all are but its is easy to find. si1 or vs2 anything higher is throwing money away.

cut: will it sparkle and will it look great under most if not all light conditions. From the mall store diamonds Iv seen this is the hardest to find.

So what do we have so far non-yellow, eye clean , looks great under different light conditions.

Now I look for size and the most important question of all can I afford it?
So bottom line the non-yellow, eye clean , looks great under different light conditions in the largest size that fits my budget.
Cut is hard to explain so it isn’t pushed in the b&m world so the cutters keep on churning out thousands and thousands of crappy cut diamonds.
The average person that has a diamond will have a crappy cut stone that doesn’t mean we have too.

imho its time that we the consumers take control of the diamond market instead of having crap stuffed down our throats by the diamond cartels.
Its going to happen but the industry is going to really feel the pain.
They will have to wake up and realize that they are there to serve us we aren’t going to serve them.
If they dont they will go the way of the doodoo bird the anti-diamond backlash has started allready.

The vendors that come here and day in and day out help out are at the forefront of the coming revolution in the diamond industry.
They know they have to serve the customer and not treat them as just another consumer.

 

[joeq]

A diamond is an expensive bauble with no practical use whatsoever. Any perceived "value" is purely psychological and cultural.




A diamond is just "C6": carbon atoms in an octahedral crystalline structure. It is formed in nature by the high pressures and temperatures under the earth's crust. The crystal is far from 'pure', with plenty of nitrogen and other impurities. It is very hard but also fragile. It is also very common --- not even considered a precious stone. Any preceived 'rarity' is artificially promulgated by Debeers's advertising and control over supply. "Diamonds are forever" is an outright lie and a marketing ploy. Although diamond crystal IS the most stable form of carbon crystalline structure, after a few hundred or thousand years it will eventually crumble to dust.




In fact, the fanaticism about diamonds is a very recent phenomenon, brought about by ingenuous marketing by Debeers. The notions of "Diamonds are a girl's best friend" and diamond engagement rings are new to the last century. A couple hundred years ago people knew about diamonds and could really have cared less about them.




So what is "important" about a diamond? The answer to that question is mostly cultural, and again, mostly due to the images and marketing of Debeers. Most women want to feel "loved" and "special". They want to experience the romance that they think other women feel. They don't want to feel that they are treated worse than other women. They want to show that they are "successful" in their lives, where for many women this means "wealthy" or "having a powerful husband".




Some women would be happier if their man said they paid $20,000 rather than $10,000 for the exact same ring. Why? Their primary happiness comes from the feeling that their ring is expensive and that they are special enough that the man is sacrificing that much for them. (Although it is totally illogical to me. "I just threw away all my money on a worthless shiny bauble. Would you forever tie your financial future to me?"

)




I think that which aspects women find the most important depends primarily on their peer group. In some circles, size is everything and anything less that 3 carats looks like skimping. (Ever go to the opera?) For people who grew up learning to be modest and demure, they would be too embarassed to wear anything larger than a carat. I think in this online community, the cut is considered the most important criteria, with people drooling over hearts and arrows, idealscope images, and fussing over crown/pavilion angles. This was influenced by people like Garry Holloway and technologies like the Sarin, HCA, computer models, cut studies, etc.




In other groups, the criteria are totally different. For example, in Japan most people choose D-IF's H&A 0.25ct round brillants. And they like to buy only from Tiffanys. Can they visually tell the difference between IF and VVS1? Absolutely not. Does it matter? Not in the slightest because the point is NOT how the stone looks. This is from the culture that gives $100 melons as gifts, because everyone *knows* that they cost $100 so it has more meaning.




That all being said, I *do* think that in American society today, assuming an "acceptable" level of color, clarity, and cut, SIZE is by far the most important. Why? Because it is the most obvious to everyone! Notice I did not say "carat weight", although there is an obvious correlation between size and weight. Engaged/married women will notice their girlfriend's and other women's rings, and they want to feel good that their diamond is as-big-as/bigger-than others. Peer pressure for women is amazing.




How about the others? Color? The image of Debeers diamonds is white. Women just don't want it to look noticeably 'yellow'. What letter grade is that? Depends on the cut and the color accuity of the person looking. I would guess for most (non-diamondphile) women, somewhere around "H" for a poorly-cut stone and "K" for a perfectly-cut 8* or similar. Clarity? The Debeers image is flawlessly clean. But if she (and her friends) don't notice it in everyday life, she won't care about it. She will be keeping this stone for years and years though, so she (and even worse, her *friends*) will eventually notice an I-1. So I think a minimum of SI-2, eye-clean. Some personality types will have hangups about these two factors, even to the point they would sacrifice the holy grail "size". Such people will be perfectionist types without many friends.

What about cut??! As long as it looks like a diamond, she won't care. The amount of sparkle will vary MUCH more due to external light conditions than in will due to cut. (Witness: almost everything looks good under mall jeweler's lighting.) The angle of the light source, how you look at it, even the reflection of the viewers head (!) make a huge difference. And she'll be moving around and won't really notice the difference.




Caveat: This is coming from someone who just bought a 2.04 carat J-SI2 H&A. I graduated from MIT and working on my PhD now, so the scientific aspect of cut appeals to me, and my girlfriend said the most important criteria are "size, size, and size"

.

 

[Mara]

Go away for a few hours to see a depressing movie and come back to this! Wow! I didn't read all the posts because I'm too darn tired. But I get the jist. Definitely thought provoking.

IMO size is very important. I am definitely the carat weight advocate as we all know. But at what expense? In my opinion, carat weight is not the end all to be all, *gasp* yes I said it! String me up by my thumbs! I think that when all is said and done, there is the right combination of variables of the 4 or 5 C's that end up pleasing a customer. The weight of each of those variables is different for each person, but what we DO know is that people are looking for a sparkly diamond. That equals some element of CUT....as long as the diamond has reasonable color and clarity. Even an M color stone, with I1 clarity, when well-cut would sparkle like the dickens.




If you are talking Joe consumer....the priorities would probably be something like carat weight, cost, color, clarity, cut. But who really knows what Joe consumer buys. Is there any definitive market research on this? Until then it's all just speculation.




If you are talking the type of person who comes to Pscope and educates themselves...the priorities drastically shift. There have been plenty of people on here have said that they came in looking for the biggest stone and then later ended up with a nice blend of carat weight and cut...with of course the other 2 c's in what would be considered 'middle ground' by most of us. What is the most important is that the customer is happy with what they bought AND that they feel empowered by their purchase. Regardless of what CUT really means in visual reality -- ignorance is bliss. Buy blind and you feel happy with what you have (e.g. 1c for $999 at the Diamond Exchange in Timbuktu). But start that research and education and suddenly, cut becomes really important--sometimes more important than carat weight. Knowledge is power? Power to make you insane, yes.

That said, my priorities would probably be something like cut, carat weight, cost, color, clarity. As long as it's well-cut, not yellow, its eye-clean, its in the budget or around it, and its darn huge..I am more than happy. Would I sacrifice some carat weight to get a better cut. Yes. But I'd probably just bump up my budget first.

Valeria...I agree with CG ...you are far too intelligent for me to follow right about now at 1am PST...let me know what poll you want me to create in layman's terms and it's done.

 

[phoenixgirl]

"I understand the 'quality has value' mindset that usually ends up equating fine diamonds to fine cars, wine and women. I love all those things myself."

I'm hoping this isn't what you meant, but are you throwing "fine women" in with other valued commodities such as cars? I hope you'll rephrase that sentence because it offends me as is.

You have every right to express your opinions, and this may be an acceptable way of refering to women in many circles, especially those dominated by rich men (I'm not taking a shot at you here; I'm imagining that I might very well think this way if I were a rich man). Granted, we are at a forum for discussing engagement rings, which are traditionally given from the man to a woman with no tradition regarding a gift in return. However, if I am reading this sentence correctly, then I will no longer view Dirt Cheap Diamonds as a vendor to consider for future purchases or to recommend to others.

And please, if that's what you meant, leave it as is. Don't give us a lame apology like Trent Lott did when he got caught saying what he really thought about desegregation. Everyone offends someone, so the least we can do is be honest. But maybe it was a misunderstanding, I don't know. Sorry to get this thread so off track . . . I just wanted to express my dissent. Maybe it's that my father is a professor of business ethics, I don't know.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

joeq
for an educated person you have believed a lot of old journo anti De Beers dribble.

If you think diamonds are not rare then study geology and go find some.

Diamonds are rare, and it is only that they cost heaps that so much effort goes into prospecting for them.

BTW what does C6 mean?

 

[Colored Gemstone Nut]

Nice to see you posting here Jim...Hopefully you might stick around longer...

I can honestly say before I came to this forum I really did not put any emphasis on cut...Carat weight was King in my mind too.Color and clarity...Didn't have a clue what these terms meant either??

I beg to differ that people will not notice much of a difference in cut vs. carat weight...There are all kinds of places a cutter can hide that weight to achieve the desired weight which will bring a premium...




A well proportioned diamond will maximize visual appeal and size all rolled into one....




I have also experienced different women's viewpoints in particular that Regina works with...They all ask where I bought her diamond and what makes it sparkle so much??? Regina's co-worker was remarking that her diamond is bigger but doesn't look anything like Regina's.. Her diamond is a 1/2 carat bigger...Do I notice a size difference...Yes, It is slight not to mention her stone is deep...The difference which is noticed right away is how sparkly the diamond is..The size between the 2 is not even brought into question...




Carat Weight is the most emphasized "C" but I believe cut is what makes a diamond really perform.




The more these fine ideals are seen on the market the more they will have an impact on consumer demand...People see more of an impact of cut with their eye's vs. carat weight in their heads....




Out of all the people who have seen Regina's diamond, a very small percentage ask how big it is..They are in awe at how it sparkles....

 

[elmo]

Jim, somewhere there is an eightstar with your name on it, and you just don't realize it.

I think the truth lies somewhere between Jim's and Dimonbob's posts.

The ultimate super ideal marketing pitch and hocus-pocus hardware is directed at the insecurities of buyers. You're spending all that $$$ for a little rock, so it had better be the very best one possible, and since "cut is king"....

But Jim fails to mention what other folks here have pointed out, that "well made" (not necessarily "super ideal") translates to more size and more "sparkle".

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 12/6/2003 3:50:22 AM joeq wrote:


For people who grew up learning to be modest and demure, they would be too embarassed to wear anything larger than a carat.
----------------

I'm not picking on you per say Joe, BUT - this notion is really getting under my skin. I grew up learning modesty & every proper manner under the sun. YET, I proudly sport a 3c diamond. I buy it because *I* think it is beautiful. I think of it as a mini piece of art. I brings *me* pleasure.

The logic that someone buys a large diamond to impress others or they must be obstenatious is flawed.

 

[pricescope]

Well done Jim for finally letting it out.

As you see nobody lynch you so far

I also enjoy all the posts here because there is no single solution for the subject – it is the matter of taste, culture, priorities, etc.

I especially enjoy Canadiangrl post. Small addition to it: many Asian people are buying H&A and H&A is a big thing in Japan. Why? Because it is in their culture to appreciate perfection over the size.

I also realize that on Pricescope people talk more about cut but this is understandable because cut is very complicated and often misinterpreted issue than any other Cs.

I only disagree, with your example, Jim, becuse it is not fair.

----------------
Put a 1.00ct next to a 1.25ct. Do you see the difference? Yes, it's obvious.
Put a "D" color diamond next to a "J". Do you see the difference? Yes, it's fairly obvious.
Put an SI1 next to an I1. Do you see the difference? Yes, when you look closer.
Put a super duper ideal next to a GIA 60/57 VG/VG. Do you see the difference? Maybe - if you really, really try.
----------------

Price difference between 1.0ct and 1.25 ct will be more than 25%, probably about 35% because 1.0ct sold at deeper discount from Rap than 1.25ct because of availability.

Price difference between D and J is about 80% - yes you’ll see the difference when compare them side by side but not in everyday life perhaps? Is it worth 80% price difference?

Price difference between SI1 and I1 is about 60%.

Price difference between non-branded AGS0 or Ex/Ex H&A and GIA VG/VG is less than 10%.

Now if you’ll take F and G the difference will be about 10%. Will you see a difference in everyday life?

If you want to get 50% price difference between two diamonds because of the cut... I cannot even imagine such badly cut diamonds.

On another hand, 1.00 ct deep cut with thick girdle can cost more and look smaller than 0.95ct ideal cut.