IMO - Cut is the LEAST important thing...
- Thread starter Jim-Schultz
- Start date
- Status
Everyone on this board knows that I don't buy into the hype of super duper louper ideals. PLLLEEEAASSEE - you simply can not see the difference between good & excellent polish. But, they have their supporters & people who want to buy on paper. I have agreed w/ diamondbob before in that it *does* go to issue of care that was paid to the diamond by the cutter. But, visual difference - come on.
That said, the "art" of a diamond is in it's "cutting". It is a human factor. I appreciate a stone with a good make. It does sparkle more. Now, how far that "art" translates into visual with the human eye? That to me is the debate. Also, it goes to personal preference.
People on this board tout the importance of cut because it is so often overlooked by consumers. IMHO, cut can add the most to a diamond's appearance (to an extent) and often has the least amount effect on cost (not refering to super duper loupers). Also, as a vetern diamond buyer (Jim you were probably in diapers when we purchased our first stone) cut was *not* a focus back in the early 80's. We were introduced to Lazare Kaplan stones. And they blew away all the crap we were looking at. Cut became a focus of ours. My little screamer (nicknamed Rudolf by my friends) can still be seen across the room.
It kind of cracks me up with all this mumbo jumbo about crown/pavillion chat. BUT - these people are buying sight unseen. All this infor can & does make the process easier. I have been told by one internet vendor that the well cut stones are the one's that are rarely returned.
Finally, I did enjoy your post Jim. It was sane. But, to what extent does your post ring true?Certainly, you can not be saying that a d/if stone w/ with a poor make and a 68% depth is desireable over a G/SI stone of good make with a depth of 60. If your issue is to carat weight being the most important C, then think about which stone will appear significantly larger given a static carat weight.
That said, the "art" of a diamond is in it's "cutting". It is a human factor. I appreciate a stone with a good make. It does sparkle more. Now, how far that "art" translates into visual with the human eye? That to me is the debate. Also, it goes to personal preference.
People on this board tout the importance of cut because it is so often overlooked by consumers. IMHO, cut can add the most to a diamond's appearance (to an extent) and often has the least amount effect on cost (not refering to super duper loupers). Also, as a vetern diamond buyer (Jim you were probably in diapers when we purchased our first stone) cut was *not* a focus back in the early 80's. We were introduced to Lazare Kaplan stones. And they blew away all the crap we were looking at. Cut became a focus of ours. My little screamer (nicknamed Rudolf by my friends) can still be seen across the room.
It kind of cracks me up with all this mumbo jumbo about crown/pavillion chat. BUT - these people are buying sight unseen. All this infor can & does make the process easier. I have been told by one internet vendor that the well cut stones are the one's that are rarely returned.
Finally, I did enjoy your post Jim. It was sane. But, to what extent does your post ring true?Certainly, you can not be saying that a d/if stone w/ with a poor make and a 68% depth is desireable over a G/SI stone of good make with a depth of 60. If your issue is to carat weight being the most important C, then think about which stone will appear significantly larger given a static carat weight.
aljdewey
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2002
- Messages
- 9,170
Ok....I've remained out of the fray on this one for a while, but it's time to get in the water, so to speak.
There are several Cs relating to a diamond....in no particular order: cut, color, clarity, carat weight, cost. Which one of these do most consumers understand most? Cost, closely followed (at least in premise) by carat weight. Which do they least understand? Cut. I think, Jim, that's why it gets talked about more here. It's tough to see someone trying to make a decision without ALL pieces of the puzzle.
Moving on. Leonid and I just had a fairly lengthy conversation about this one. I think that everyone wants to get the biggest diamond (carat) they can afford (cost) without sacrificing visual performance (color, clarity, cut). On those last three, most people feel pretty comfortable knowing how much color they can trade off (I can go down to H color, for example) or clarity (I can go down to SI2 as long as it's eyeclean). What they don't yet have is knowing how much they can trade off on make.
Here on PS, the AGS 0 make is discussed to death. There has been little comparison, though, to identify which makes offer some savings without huge visual sacrifice. More discussion in this area would be welcome!
Cut is important because it affects the other elemnts.......color, clarity, and carat weight. A better cut can mask color and allow a buyer to drop down another color to maximize budget (which I nearly did - looked at a beatiful I diamond of exceptional make). It can mask clarity (the sparkle and life masks readily seeing an inclusion.) Cut even affects "size"......not all 1 carat diamond are made equal. Some have a diameter of 6.5, some 6.25, some 6.10!
People want "carat" weight because they're taught that equals size! Hogwash. If my friend's .93 diamond (6.24mm) and your friend's 1 ct (6.24mm) are compared, NEITHER is bigger. One is heavier, but neither is "bigger". They are dimensionally the same size, and THAT's what matters to most women. How BIG does it LOOK on the finger....not how much does it weigh. But because most people don't understand the distinction, they can only go with what they know....that carat is size.
I've seen people wearing huge diamonds that don't have any life....to me, that's pointless.
When I started looking recently, I started with H, SI1 .95-.96 parameters. As you can imagine, selection there is slim to none. I started massaging those factors (just over a ct but down to an I), etc. In the end, I choose between two diamonds H diamonds....1.15 (si1) and 1.24 (si2). I nearly bought the 1.15. But, the 1.24 was an eyeclean SI2 and was several hundred dollars less expensive. I could get more size without sacrificing ANYTHING.....so it made sense. If, however, the 1.24 had been the more expensive diamond, I'd have stayed with the BEAUTIFUL 1.15. Size is great, but not when it comes at the expense of things that put one below his/her comfort level.
In color, there are multiple steps along the way between D and P.
In clarity, there are multiple steps along the way between IF and I3.
In cut, I'm sure there are many steps between superideal proportions and a RB diamond with a 68% depth!
More education in the last element would help people better assess their comfort level with cut and perhaps have more choice. Instead of all or nothing, there would more options on cut, and I think you'd see everyone be more "moderated" about cut. Does that make sense?
What's important to everyone is to understand all the elements enough to find the blend of elements that are right for them.
There are several Cs relating to a diamond....in no particular order: cut, color, clarity, carat weight, cost. Which one of these do most consumers understand most? Cost, closely followed (at least in premise) by carat weight. Which do they least understand? Cut. I think, Jim, that's why it gets talked about more here. It's tough to see someone trying to make a decision without ALL pieces of the puzzle.
Moving on. Leonid and I just had a fairly lengthy conversation about this one. I think that everyone wants to get the biggest diamond (carat) they can afford (cost) without sacrificing visual performance (color, clarity, cut). On those last three, most people feel pretty comfortable knowing how much color they can trade off (I can go down to H color, for example) or clarity (I can go down to SI2 as long as it's eyeclean). What they don't yet have is knowing how much they can trade off on make.
Here on PS, the AGS 0 make is discussed to death. There has been little comparison, though, to identify which makes offer some savings without huge visual sacrifice. More discussion in this area would be welcome!
Cut is important because it affects the other elemnts.......color, clarity, and carat weight. A better cut can mask color and allow a buyer to drop down another color to maximize budget (which I nearly did - looked at a beatiful I diamond of exceptional make). It can mask clarity (the sparkle and life masks readily seeing an inclusion.) Cut even affects "size"......not all 1 carat diamond are made equal. Some have a diameter of 6.5, some 6.25, some 6.10!
People want "carat" weight because they're taught that equals size! Hogwash. If my friend's .93 diamond (6.24mm) and your friend's 1 ct (6.24mm) are compared, NEITHER is bigger. One is heavier, but neither is "bigger". They are dimensionally the same size, and THAT's what matters to most women. How BIG does it LOOK on the finger....not how much does it weigh. But because most people don't understand the distinction, they can only go with what they know....that carat is size.
I've seen people wearing huge diamonds that don't have any life....to me, that's pointless.
When I started looking recently, I started with H, SI1 .95-.96 parameters. As you can imagine, selection there is slim to none. I started massaging those factors (just over a ct but down to an I), etc. In the end, I choose between two diamonds H diamonds....1.15 (si1) and 1.24 (si2). I nearly bought the 1.15. But, the 1.24 was an eyeclean SI2 and was several hundred dollars less expensive. I could get more size without sacrificing ANYTHING.....so it made sense. If, however, the 1.24 had been the more expensive diamond, I'd have stayed with the BEAUTIFUL 1.15. Size is great, but not when it comes at the expense of things that put one below his/her comfort level.
In color, there are multiple steps along the way between D and P.
In clarity, there are multiple steps along the way between IF and I3.
In cut, I'm sure there are many steps between superideal proportions and a RB diamond with a 68% depth!
More education in the last element would help people better assess their comfort level with cut and perhaps have more choice. Instead of all or nothing, there would more options on cut, and I think you'd see everyone be more "moderated" about cut. Does that make sense?
What's important to everyone is to understand all the elements enough to find the blend of elements that are right for them.
canadiangrrl
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2003
- Messages
- 787
Phoenixgirl, I see your point, but lumping Jim's seemingly off-the-cuff analogy in with the views of that hateful troglodyte Trent Lott is pretty extreme. Careful how you play that race card. Plus, Jim's better looking than Trent.
F&I, my comments weren't intended to disparage anyone who likes big stones. My cultural preference for smaller rocks is rooted in my British heritage - my parents are English. I've read more than one post on this forum from a UK'er which indicated that big diamonds are verboten in their circle. No matter how much money you have, overt displays of wealth are viewed as being ostentatious. Bragging about one's accomplishments is soundly discouraged. Think "ruefully self-deprecating."
Driving a sensible Range Rover whilst wearing your serviceable Burberry trench is perfectly acceptable - flashing the bling bling is not. This is a fairly common attitude among middle to upper class Brits, and it has carried over here in Canada.
F&I, my comments weren't intended to disparage anyone who likes big stones. My cultural preference for smaller rocks is rooted in my British heritage - my parents are English. I've read more than one post on this forum from a UK'er which indicated that big diamonds are verboten in their circle. No matter how much money you have, overt displays of wealth are viewed as being ostentatious. Bragging about one's accomplishments is soundly discouraged. Think "ruefully self-deprecating."
Driving a sensible Range Rover whilst wearing your serviceable Burberry trench is perfectly acceptable - flashing the bling bling is not. This is a fairly common attitude among middle to upper class Brits, and it has carried over here in Canada.
The key is "right for them". And, I don't think that can be quantified with numbers. I think it can only be evaluated by seeing the stones. That is why I believe many over buy on cut on the internet. BUT - most of the stones *are* of better makes & apples to apples are less expensive than a B&M store in most instances. So, why not?
That said, I may have a stone with 66% depth. I don't have the specs in front of me. I do know my table is around 51-52%. I love it - it's an older cut. It has a certain look. I equate it more to a mature women. It has a certain warmth & depth - but not bubbly & sparklely.
In the end, doesn't it all go back to one's eyes. The only concrete C is cost. Well, maybe not even that as that can vary from vendor to vendor.
I didn't take offense to your comments. Your preference is just that. It just burns me when someone in a vieled passive agressive way insinuates that big=poor quality & that one only buys a big rock to impress others. As Al said, *I* am the one that is impresses.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
- Messages
- 15,808
Thanks for the quotation hint!
I am puzzled myself about this "diamond rarity" contest: I have yet to see a study comparing grade by grade colored stones and diamonds. The total amount of diamond rough sold for jewelry applications is five times the amount of rubies and three times the amount of sapphires used in jewelry. So, there is some truth to that claim, but relative to other precious stones, not absolutely. This does not make either kind non-rare. Diamonds are just about many enough for a "diamond industry" to exist: there is no "ruby industry" and, hopefully, there will never be one. Whatever... How much can one digress?
I would agree with Joeq in quite a few points, if he would not dismiss girls' diamond kowledge
OH, and isn't C6 the space group of GRAPHITE (diamondis Fd3m) ???
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2001
- Messages
- 6,340
OMG... I log in... type out a 1/2 hour response with graphics then get a message that what I'm doing is an illegal action! 
At my next convenience I have a very interesting follow up to this based on our most popular consumer responses.
Rhino
At my next convenience I have a very interesting follow up to this based on our most popular consumer responses.
Rhino
aljdewey
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2002
- Messages
- 9,170
Jonathan....that happens to me more times that I can tell you.....largely because I'm long winded and sometimes in the middle of other things.
Hint: I've learned to copy what I've written *before* hit the submit key.....that way if the system has logged me out, I can log back in, choose "reply" and then just paste what I had typed.
glitterata
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2002
- Messages
- 4,335
Right on, Al J! That's EXACTLY the point.
We need to determine the point of diminishing returns in cut, so people can decide what they want to pay for. Just as some people think VVS is a waste because VS (or truly eye-clean SI) looks the same, while other people like the feeling they get from knowing their stone is close to flawless, some people will decide an excellent cut with a crooked heart--or even a very good cut--looks just like a super-duper ideal to their eyes, for less money. Ohters will want the super-duper anyway. The question really is, at what point do you stop being able to distinguish the fine points of the cut?
We need to determine the point of diminishing returns in cut, so people can decide what they want to pay for. Just as some people think VVS is a waste because VS (or truly eye-clean SI) looks the same, while other people like the feeling they get from knowing their stone is close to flawless, some people will decide an excellent cut with a crooked heart--or even a very good cut--looks just like a super-duper ideal to their eyes, for less money. Ohters will want the super-duper anyway. The question really is, at what point do you stop being able to distinguish the fine points of the cut?
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2001
- Messages
- 6,340
Arghh...
Here goes again.
Hi Jim,
Good to cya here again stirring the pot. muahahaha
First ... I completely understand where you are coming from. We don't strong arm people into anything. We teach, they make the decision. I'd like to share with everyone what our most popular consumer responses are when they are walking into their purchasing decision with all the facts.
When clients come to us via the web or in our store we emphasize a few things. We will not push anything onto them. We'll teach them all they need to know to make an educated decision but they are the ones who will decide what it is they will or will not purchase. These opinions which I am about to share come from one who owns a bricks and mortar store in biz for over 2 decades and has done countless presentations, face to face, with regular (awesome) people throughout this fine country, many of whom have also come from pricescope as well.
Carat Weight:
When we're doing our presentation on cut I like to show our clients a typical commonly cut diamond next to one of our supercalifragilistic
Most popular consumer response on Carat Weight:
When they see how comparable in size the .8x-.9xct H&A is next to the 1ct diamond of comparable value, THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of people choose the diamond of less weight. Why? The reasons are very simple. The super ideal looks as large but with one major exception ... IT IS WAY MORE BEAUTIFUL. Every single person sees the difference for themself.
Color:
While I agree that color is an important aspect, IMO it still takes a back seat to cut and there are a few reasons why I say this.
When clients come to our store and we are discussing the issue of color I show them 2 points of contrast in our presentation.
One is that of cut quality vs cut quality and the other is that of color vs color in diamonds of like cut quality.
Most popular consumer response on Color:
Most consumers do not get to make this kind of comparison in most jewelry stores. When John Q. Public gets to make that comparison, every single person agrees that it is easier to see the difference between cut qualities than color differences. Most people do not realize the impact that cut has upon the face up appearance of the diamond. If you knew the amount of people who came to our store who were dead set on looking at D-G colors and left purchasing a larger I, J and even K colors you wouldn't believe it. I'm not saying people do not see the difference from a D-F vs an I-J but when they truly get to make the comparison for themselves... most people think the greatest contrast lies in the color differences, when in fact the BIGGEST DIFFERENCES MOST PEOPLE OBSERVE IN DIAMONDS ARE THAT OF CUT. Seriously... if you take 2 diamonds of equal cut quality, put them side by side and one is an F and the other is an I, in the face up position it's not so easy to distinguish the color difference because you are being blinded by the insance brilliance of both!
Make the same comparison in diamonds of common cut quality and it is much easier to distinguish the color differences especially when brilliance/fire/scintillation are not emphasized as greatly as they were in the super ideal stones. So in my personal experiences, when people are allowed to make and see these comparisons for themselves our experience has shown us that cut still takes first place... even over color.
Clarity:
I agree with everything you've said about clarity hands down. I will purchase SI1's and also SI2's as long as they face up nice and the inclusions are easily masked.
However when you consider the many elements that can mask inclusions we'd be foolish to dismiss the impact that cut has on masking inclusions! I have a 2.16ct /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]lace>E SI2/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]lace> in our inventory that is absolutely stunning and totally eye clean! To me stones like this are a bonus!
Most popular consumer response on Clarity:
Let's think about the person going for the higher more rare clarities for a moment. When you conside most consumers are more educated on the issues of clarity/color ... when a person comes to us with a limited education and is asking for a rare clarity... what in essence are they asking for? The most beautiful diamond he can afford is what he's asking for! What most jewelers or retailers don't understand however is that the beauty of the diamond does not lie within it's clarity. Where does it lie? You guessed it. It lies within the optical quality of the diamond.
The person seeking to get a rare clarity and compromises on the most important aspect contributing to the beauty of the diamond is defeating the purpose in which he is seeking an IF in the first place.
My purchasing decisions each day involve what people think is most important to them, not necessarily what I think is most important. If consumer demand was for diamonds with 60% tables and 57% depths that's what I'd be purchasing. Concensus says otherwise and I have to say from personal experience I do not disagree.
The most important point I'd like to emphasize however that of John Q. Public. If we fail to put ourselves in the other man's shoes then we've missed the boat completely. Many of the fine readers of pricescope are out shopping and the comparison's they are making are generally between the 2 diamonds depicted below with one exception. They are being charged = or considerably more money for the diamond on the left ... clarity/color/carat being equal.
/idealbb/files/lscompare3.jpg
If you put yourself into the shoes of John Q. Public, both diamonds are 1ct G VS2 and the diamond on the left is $8600 and the diamond on the right is $6500 you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the best value for your dollar. My experience also shows that if you have 2 stones priced comparably and the lower cut quality is priced a few % (even up to 10% or more) less, most consumers will still choose for the superior cut quality even if they don't see the differences because now they understand value. The oldest diamonds on my website prove this point beyond a shadow of a doubt. Same reason a person gets a VS1 over an SI1. He cannot see the differences with his eyes but now he has been educated to diamond value and knows the value of a VS1 over an SI1 even if he can't see the difference with his eyes. If I or most people can justify the value and it's not insanely more we'll go for it as long as we're not raped in the process. What we are discussing here though is something people can see, not clarity or some colors where they can't see the difference.
When a person is able to see and make the comparison for themselves our experience shows they will always pick cut quality over carat weight, clarity and color.
This is my experiences with John Q. Public in face to face presentations of all of these factors of cut vs carat weight, cut vs color and cut vs clarity in most circumstances.
Peace,
Rhino
/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]> /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>
aljdewey
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2002
- Messages
- 9,170
I recently spoke with Brian about the exact same thing, Rhino. I can't speak for him (nor would I), but the content of our discussions followed EXACTLY what you are saying here.
Brian told me that one of his favorite things to do when someone comes in to their location is to put out a bunch of diamonds and ask the consumer to select the ones that most visually appealing to them. He doesn't tell them what color/clarity any of them are....just pick what their eye responds to most.
His findings.....people actually end up selecting the lower color (H,I,J) and lower clarity diamond of superior cut quality. They are completely surprised when this happens because they walked in the door with preconceived notions that "nothing less than a G will do" or "MUST be at LEAST vs1 clarity".
Superior "cut" DOES mask color; it DOES mask inclusions. It does affect the other elements.
Having said that.....again, as far as most of us know about cut, comparatively speaking........putting it in car-speak: we know what is a BMW/Lexus/Mercedes (whatever), and we know what is a Chevy Chevette (no offense to those who like them). What we aren't as skilled at? Knowing which Toyota is materially the same as the more expensive Lexus and represents the better value.....Knowing which stone gives us all the same visual elements of a well-cut without paying the "brand" premium. Knowing which stones are not "the best" cut, but are "sufficiently well cut" to allow us to maximize our budget without visual sacrifice.
Brian told me that one of his favorite things to do when someone comes in to their location is to put out a bunch of diamonds and ask the consumer to select the ones that most visually appealing to them. He doesn't tell them what color/clarity any of them are....just pick what their eye responds to most.
His findings.....people actually end up selecting the lower color (H,I,J) and lower clarity diamond of superior cut quality. They are completely surprised when this happens because they walked in the door with preconceived notions that "nothing less than a G will do" or "MUST be at LEAST vs1 clarity".
Superior "cut" DOES mask color; it DOES mask inclusions. It does affect the other elements.
Having said that.....again, as far as most of us know about cut, comparatively speaking........putting it in car-speak: we know what is a BMW/Lexus/Mercedes (whatever), and we know what is a Chevy Chevette (no offense to those who like them). What we aren't as skilled at? Knowing which Toyota is materially the same as the more expensive Lexus and represents the better value.....Knowing which stone gives us all the same visual elements of a well-cut without paying the "brand" premium. Knowing which stones are not "the best" cut, but are "sufficiently well cut" to allow us to maximize our budget without visual sacrifice.
Mara
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2002
- Messages
- 31,003
On the matter of preconceived notions, I don't know how many people come in here looking for D VVS or similar thinking that is going to get them the most sparkly stone. That has to be one of the most popular myths on the forums...of course not everyone finds the forum and can get the scoop on the real deal (which is IMO that the 'blend' that others mentioned is what will set your diamond off). Instead they go to the maul and get the 'most diamond for your money' spiel from a trustworthy salesperson which just means 'we'll sell you a J SI2 1c for $8000'.
Somewhat related is I don't understand why anyone just goes to the store, any store, and expects a SALES person to assist them in selecting something that suits the customer's best interest. Chances are this person may be working on commission, so you are going to walk into a store, drop $5k or $10k and merrily take their word on what they are giving you? Knowing what I know now it's unconceivable, but obviously we were all there at some point in time. 99.9% not any longer, but at one time. What makes that so acceptable to us? It's not as though this is a simple scarf for the girlfriend purchase....what gives?? This is so curious to me.
Somewhat related is I don't understand why anyone just goes to the store, any store, and expects a SALES person to assist them in selecting something that suits the customer's best interest. Chances are this person may be working on commission, so you are going to walk into a store, drop $5k or $10k and merrily take their word on what they are giving you? Knowing what I know now it's unconceivable, but obviously we were all there at some point in time. 99.9% not any longer, but at one time. What makes that so acceptable to us? It's not as though this is a simple scarf for the girlfriend purchase....what gives?? This is so curious to me.
This is an intersting thread... i'm with Jim at DCD on this one, it has been my thinking all along. From my reading of his post he is not saying cut is NOT important, he is saying it is the LEAST of the 4 Cs.
for me, Cost is the most.. stay in budget, end of story. I had to make a budget, since right now I live with parents, my expenses are much smaller, I can wait and spend what I want, to get what I want... but more and more research can make the price go up and up... So I picked a budget(range) and stuck to it. (I'm $60 below it! or within 1%)
Carats is important If you have a goal, meet it, sacrifice other things if necessary. I was willing to go to a .921 H&A only b.c it was visually similar to a 1ct. There is some leeway, but don't show up with a .33 if she is wanting a 1ct.
Color if visable=bad. Don't go with anything that faces up dirty.
Clarity No one wants something that you can see the flaws in while looking on your hand.
Now we're downto cut. It is the least important, but still important. Once the reset is settled on see what you can afford. Realty is... you need the minimums of the above 4 met before you should think about cut. I don't mean get the largest piece of glass you see, just that the others are more noticeable if they are COMPLETELY WRONG.
Everything here is a compromise.. I doubt most us are really that well off that we could buy D IF Superduper Ideal in a supersized stone.
CanadianGirl mentioned my stone that I got from GOG. It wasn't a superideal, but still a very good performer after all the testing (and looking)was done, and for the price I have a stone that is much bigger than I could afford if it were a superideal, yet under normal conditions sparkles almost as good(as they say "Close enough for Government work")
for me, Cost is the most.. stay in budget, end of story. I had to make a budget, since right now I live with parents, my expenses are much smaller, I can wait and spend what I want, to get what I want... but more and more research can make the price go up and up... So I picked a budget(range) and stuck to it. (I'm $60 below it! or within 1%)
Carats is important If you have a goal, meet it, sacrifice other things if necessary. I was willing to go to a .921 H&A only b.c it was visually similar to a 1ct. There is some leeway, but don't show up with a .33 if she is wanting a 1ct.
Color if visable=bad. Don't go with anything that faces up dirty.
Clarity No one wants something that you can see the flaws in while looking on your hand.
Now we're downto cut. It is the least important, but still important. Once the reset is settled on see what you can afford. Realty is... you need the minimums of the above 4 met before you should think about cut. I don't mean get the largest piece of glass you see, just that the others are more noticeable if they are COMPLETELY WRONG.
Everything here is a compromise.. I doubt most us are really that well off that we could buy D IF Superduper Ideal in a supersized stone.
CanadianGirl mentioned my stone that I got from GOG. It wasn't a superideal, but still a very good performer after all the testing (and looking)was done, and for the price I have a stone that is much bigger than I could afford if it were a superideal, yet under normal conditions sparkles almost as good(as they say "Close enough for Government work")
someguy
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2003
- Messages
- 52
aljdewey - I think that you nailed the problem pretty well. When a super ideal cut diamond is put next to a normal diamond, one that you could get in the mall, there is no doubt that we'd all go for the ideal cut diamond. Now, let put this ideal diamond next to a good cut diamond. We'll probably still see a difference, but not as much. If we keep doing this with better and better diamonds, at what point will we stop noticing any visual difference in how pretty or sparkly a diamond is? Is it between a super ideal and very good cut? Super ideal vs excellent... vs ideal? I think that most people won't want to pay for something that they can't see. It's like getting an SI1 over an IF. Without seing the stones in person, it is very hard to determine where to draw the line.
flyingharp
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2003
- Messages
- 51
Would folk agree that while Cost, Carat, Colour and Clarity are tangible characteristics - easily measured, Cut is an, as yet, ill-defined quality that only those educated few appreciate.
A loose analogy - perhaps appreciating cut is akin to appreciating the nuances of English Literature, whereas basic grammar can get you understood in most places. Would one say understanding Shakespeare is not as important as being able to communicate with someone halfway round the world? Perhaps. But fact is, understanding Shakespeare might well enhance your communication.
Cut, IMHO, underpins the 4Cs. It may not be THE most important factor, but knowing and appreciating it certainly gets you the BEST bang for your buck.
Of course there will be compromises - so perhaps the question should be "What would be the FIRST C you would compromise on?"
A loose analogy - perhaps appreciating cut is akin to appreciating the nuances of English Literature, whereas basic grammar can get you understood in most places. Would one say understanding Shakespeare is not as important as being able to communicate with someone halfway round the world? Perhaps. But fact is, understanding Shakespeare might well enhance your communication.
Cut, IMHO, underpins the 4Cs. It may not be THE most important factor, but knowing and appreciating it certainly gets you the BEST bang for your buck.
Of course there will be compromises - so perhaps the question should be "What would be the FIRST C you would compromise on?"
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2001
- Messages
- 6,340
Howdy Chris,
Actually the 2nd most prominent feature about your stone (after it's size for the $$$) is it's cut quality. While not an H&A, your diamond (like Mara's) has incredible reflective/refractive properties and I offered it to you at a price that would be hard to turn down.
Faced with the same decision and under similar circumstances there are many people who would choose as you have *including my own wife*. However, if that stone cost you 1-1.5k more (it's regular selling price) your decision may have been different. It depends on the diamond, the deal offered and the comparison being made.
Bottom line. It's best for people to see and make an educated decision which is best for them. When one has seen their options who can criticize them for the educated decision they've made? What one likes is not necessarily what the other will like. What is sad is most people do not get to make those comparisons. When we make purchases and encourage any particular stone be it H&A or not there will always be a redeeming factor with regards to the diamonds optical quality and your diamond Chris was no exception.
Peace,
Rhino
Actually the 2nd most prominent feature about your stone (after it's size for the $$$) is it's cut quality. While not an H&A, your diamond (like Mara's) has incredible reflective/refractive properties and I offered it to you at a price that would be hard to turn down.
Bottom line. It's best for people to see and make an educated decision which is best for them. When one has seen their options who can criticize them for the educated decision they've made? What one likes is not necessarily what the other will like. What is sad is most people do not get to make those comparisons. When we make purchases and encourage any particular stone be it H&A or not there will always be a redeeming factor with regards to the diamonds optical quality and your diamond Chris was no exception.
Peace,
Rhino
Jim-Schultz
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2003
- Messages
- 13
Hello again!
When I wrote the post last night I figured it would either get a ton of response or virtually no response at all. I'm glad to have seen so many contrasting thoughts on the subject. I'm tempted to respond specifically to many of the comments, but in the spirit of keeping this post provocative rather than argumentative I think I'll stick to just a general follow-up.
I purposefully took an extreme position, just to make a point. I never said buy a poorly cut diamond - actually I said the opposite. Cut is a HUGE factor, but so is carat, color and clarity. It's all just a balancing act. Use moderation in whatever you do, including the consideration of a diamond.
The one post I guess I have to answer, however, is phoenixgirl. To suggest I view women as a commodity is mistaken. The phrase "wine and women" sounded good together when I typed it, and even now sounds like a fine combination. Well, make that "woman" - I am a married man, you know. You were right about one thing however - I am extremely rich. That fact is reaffirmed every time I gaze into the eyes of my ten day old daughter, my two year old son, my six year old daughter, and most especially my extremely "fine" wife.
When I wrote the post last night I figured it would either get a ton of response or virtually no response at all. I'm glad to have seen so many contrasting thoughts on the subject. I'm tempted to respond specifically to many of the comments, but in the spirit of keeping this post provocative rather than argumentative I think I'll stick to just a general follow-up.
I purposefully took an extreme position, just to make a point. I never said buy a poorly cut diamond - actually I said the opposite. Cut is a HUGE factor, but so is carat, color and clarity. It's all just a balancing act. Use moderation in whatever you do, including the consideration of a diamond.
The one post I guess I have to answer, however, is phoenixgirl. To suggest I view women as a commodity is mistaken. The phrase "wine and women" sounded good together when I typed it, and even now sounds like a fine combination. Well, make that "woman" - I am a married man, you know. You were right about one thing however - I am extremely rich. That fact is reaffirmed every time I gaze into the eyes of my ten day old daughter, my two year old son, my six year old daughter, and most especially my extremely "fine" wife.
Rhino,
I do appreciate the proportions of my stone and the price that it came in at. Its a beautiful stone
to clarify, I was merely stating that of the parts in the decision (which is very subjective) cut is something generally thought of after the others are defined within a specified range. For example: I wasn't going to get an I2 or an IF for that matter I wasn't going to get a .33 or a 3.
I do have a very well cut diamond, but it is not H&A and by AGS standards non ideal. What I was trying to point out, though not very well, is that fixating on getting a superideal isn't the be all and end all. There are plenty of beautiful diamonds out there that aren't superideal. If money were no object I would be getting a large H&A, but money is almost always a factor, and there are some great choices out there that aren't perfectly symetrical.
I do appreciate the proportions of my stone and the price that it came in at. Its a beautiful stone
to clarify, I was merely stating that of the parts in the decision (which is very subjective) cut is something generally thought of after the others are defined within a specified range. For example: I wasn't going to get an I2 or an IF for that matter I wasn't going to get a .33 or a 3.
I do have a very well cut diamond, but it is not H&A and by AGS standards non ideal. What I was trying to point out, though not very well, is that fixating on getting a superideal isn't the be all and end all. There are plenty of beautiful diamonds out there that aren't superideal. If money were no object I would be getting a large H&A, but money is almost always a factor, and there are some great choices out there that aren't perfectly symetrical.
joeq
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2003
- Messages
- 42
Hi Garry,
Normally I would defer to your experience and judgement, but just think about the raw data...
How many carats of diamond rough are extracted from the earth per year? You know better than I do, but it is on the order of hundred million carats. The Canadian Diavik mine alone has projected annual production of 7 million carats per year. India alone IMPORTS 70 million carats of rough per year for cutting purposes.
HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of carats of new diamond rough extracted EVERY YEAR. Thousands of diamond mines all around the world, each with projected capacities in the tens or hundreds of millions of carats. Now tell me again how diamonds are not rare?!? Sure, some of the rough is not gem quality, some is lost in cutting, some is hoarded by Debeers to control supply, and of course they only work this hard to extract all this diamond rough because it is worth so much...
I will stand by my statement that when you consider the supply, diamonds are not a rare material. The perceived rarity is due to the incredible demand. Saying diamonds are rare is almost like saying crude oil is rare. But at least crude oil is consumable and has more practical uses...
PS. I got confused about the crystal structure of diamond, diamond is Fd3m (face-centered cubic), while graphite is C6 (C-centered hexgonal). It's been 8 years since I took my last materials science class./idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif A crystal that is sort of a 'hybrid' of these two are the Fm3m (body-centered cubic) C60 molecules known as "buckyballs", which have been all over the scientific news and have very interesting practical uses for nanotechnology, etc. due to their incredible strength and unique electromagnetic properties.
To F&I: I was speculating on what I believe to be the 'typical' person, who doesn't buy a diamond just to look at but to wear and show off to others. I think you would agree that you are not the 'typical' person (which I mean as the highest compliment!) Most people get their stones in mall jewelry stores, most women don't even wear their diamond often after marriage. How many people even have the interest to search online about diamonds? 1%? And how many women would wear diamonds today if it weren't for Debeers and other marketing campaigns? Of course there would be some, but it wouldn't be anything like the present. Look at the 18th and 19th centuries, diamonds existed but how many women wore them?
Agreed! In the end I always say, most women want a "pretty" sizable stone. And, that is why I have put cut on the top of the list for the very reason you are stating. And, I am a firm believer that a stone with a good make can mask many flaws.
The issue is when does the "art" (cutting) of the stone start to weigh in on all aspects of the other "c's"? I'll bite that I may certainly choose the .90 well cut stone over the average 1c stone. But, I'm not sure I'd choose the .8 over the 1c. I *know* I would not choose anything smaller than that *PROVIDED* that the larger stone isn't a dog - again where is that line? Rhino, you hand select your stones. To me, that says something entirely different than *just* selecting super duper louper ideals. I don't think a stone has to have ex/ex to be a visual stunner.
Everyone is agreeing that one would rather have the smaller nicely cut stone than some big poorly cut honker. Well, maybe not everyone. That 3c for 8-9k sold that very show. The size was all that mattered to the person. BUT.......
herein lies the bug a boo. All day long, I'd take the bet that given the same carat weight (give or take .10)& static specs, the prettier (better cut) stone would probably be picked. But, I doubt that someone would pick the 1A smaller stone ex/ex than the 1b larger stone with vg/g. provided that nothing is too off on the cut with either.
Well, I still think the most important "C" is cleanliness. Even the Super Super duper louper is going to look flat with some hand lotion, etc on the stone.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2001
- Messages
- 6,340
LOL... we're on the same page F&I and Chris!
In my mind, to say "cut matters least" as Jim does is an extreme statement. I get to see and analyze alot of diamonds and one of the most prominent distinguishing factors between the most beautiful diamonds I've ever seen in my life has not been those of the rarest clarity/color combos but those that are polished to the finest cut specs and variances. I just LOVE putting a K color H&A next to a G color non ideal pooper and demonstrating this before the eyes of a laymen.
Peace,
Rhino
In my mind, to say "cut matters least" as Jim does is an extreme statement. I get to see and analyze alot of diamonds and one of the most prominent distinguishing factors between the most beautiful diamonds I've ever seen in my life has not been those of the rarest clarity/color combos but those that are polished to the finest cut specs and variances. I just LOVE putting a K color H&A next to a G color non ideal pooper and demonstrating this before the eyes of a laymen.
Peace,
Rhino
Hest88
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,357
Gosh, this thread is too huge for me to make any meaningful comments, so I'm not going to bother making any point by point responses anywhere. I appreciate Jim's post, though it's a bit over the top for me.
I guess it got everyone's attention, though.
I think when we look at cut, Flyingharp's book analogy is a good one. Is Danielle Steele more important because she is more popular with consumers than Shakespeare? Our job is to educate consumers so that if they need summer beach reading they can still turn to Danielle Steele but we expect them to do so consciously--not thinking that that type of book is their only choice.
Many consumers put "cut" last for the same reason they knee-jerk think that Tiffany means "best." They've been told that D, IF means "perfect" and they don't quite understand how that really translates in real life terms. We're here to teach them that, by golly, cut has a greater impact on sparkle and beauty than color and clarity--like teaching them that a blonde, big-busted, pouty woman may at first glance be considered a perfect woman, but bringing in more complex factors can create a more deeply appealing kind of perfection.
Oh, and this is the opposite sort of simplification from the "cut is everything" sentiment:
------------------------------
In fact, the fanaticism about diamonds is a very recent phenomenon, brought about by ingenuous marketing by Debeers.
-------------------------------
That is patently untrue. People flooded South Africa the way they flooded California in 1849--because they thought that they could find and sell something already held precious by their fellow human beings. The *popular* fanaticism in all strata of society about diamonds may be recent, but the diamond have held an incomparable fascination for human beings since the dawn of history. The Greeks and Romans wrote about diamonds as the most precious of stones, and the Indians held them in mystical regard. They were the jewels of kings and emperors, and eyes for the gods. Modern mining has made them widely available, but it is an extenuation of an ancient relationship between man and gem, not a scheme sprung wholesale out of some marketer's head.
I think when we look at cut, Flyingharp's book analogy is a good one. Is Danielle Steele more important because she is more popular with consumers than Shakespeare? Our job is to educate consumers so that if they need summer beach reading they can still turn to Danielle Steele but we expect them to do so consciously--not thinking that that type of book is their only choice.
Many consumers put "cut" last for the same reason they knee-jerk think that Tiffany means "best." They've been told that D, IF means "perfect" and they don't quite understand how that really translates in real life terms. We're here to teach them that, by golly, cut has a greater impact on sparkle and beauty than color and clarity--like teaching them that a blonde, big-busted, pouty woman may at first glance be considered a perfect woman, but bringing in more complex factors can create a more deeply appealing kind of perfection.
Oh, and this is the opposite sort of simplification from the "cut is everything" sentiment:
------------------------------
In fact, the fanaticism about diamonds is a very recent phenomenon, brought about by ingenuous marketing by Debeers.
-------------------------------
That is patently untrue. People flooded South Africa the way they flooded California in 1849--because they thought that they could find and sell something already held precious by their fellow human beings. The *popular* fanaticism in all strata of society about diamonds may be recent, but the diamond have held an incomparable fascination for human beings since the dawn of history. The Greeks and Romans wrote about diamonds as the most precious of stones, and the Indians held them in mystical regard. They were the jewels of kings and emperors, and eyes for the gods. Modern mining has made them widely available, but it is an extenuation of an ancient relationship between man and gem, not a scheme sprung wholesale out of some marketer's head.
magna2
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 319
A great thread. Definitely thought provoking. It all comes down to personal preferences and what that specific buyer puts as his/her priorities.
But most important while a non-educated buyer might harp on carat weight as his/her most important factor, it must be noted that carat weight does not equate to girth size. So while one diamond may be of a certain carat weigh and if poorly cut will most likely be smaller than a well cut diamond of less carat weight.
But most important while a non-educated buyer might harp on carat weight as his/her most important factor, it must be noted that carat weight does not equate to girth size. So while one diamond may be of a certain carat weigh and if poorly cut will most likely be smaller than a well cut diamond of less carat weight.
joeq
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2003
- Messages
- 42
I was referring to the popular notion. Of course they were held in high regard, as were rubies and sapphire and gold and other shiny things. But why do 99.9% of Americans give diamonds as engagement rings rather than rubies, emeralds, pearls, or anything else? Why do they feel the need to drop two months salary on it? Marketing! If you believe there is something intrinsic in diamonds that make them better for engagements than other gems (diamonds are "forever", diamonds are clear symbolizing the purity of love, diamonds are the hardness gem symbolizing the permanent union, blah blah blah) then you, just like almost everyone, have been brainwashed by the marketing. Why not be unique and give something else like a ruby (red for love), a birthstone, a locket (you unlock/complete me), a tattoo (forever part of you)?! (Don't answer that, it's rhetorical
Of course, a diamond forum is exactly the *wrong* place to make this kind of argument
Sorry my words are so harsh but I feel the need to stand up for every guy ever suckered into feeling they had to drop huge coin on garbage in ripoff mall jewelers
diamond dazed
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2003
- Messages
- 94
----------------
On 12/7/2003 1:48:26 AM joeq wrote:
----------------
In fact, the fanaticism about diamonds is a very recent phenomenon, brought about by ingenuous marketing by Debeers.Sorry my words are so harsh but I feel the need to stand up for every guy ever suckered into feeling they had to drop huge coin on garbage in ripoff mall jewelers.
----------------
Do audio-philes drop big wads of cash on speakers that perform 10% better just because somebody marketed them to them? What about car enthusiasts? Or sports enthusiasts? Have *you* ever spent more on something just because it's a little bit better or faster? I'd be willing to bet that you have, it's human nature to seek out the best, and sometimes that best is only a fraction of a percent better than average, but if the person is "in" to that sort of thing, that little bit is worth the price paid to experience it or own it.
As a kid I used to crack rocks open with a hammer to see the sparkly stuff inside --- no body was marketing driveway rocks to me back then, yet I did it. I would also knock on the guy down the street's door and ask to see his polished rocks -- he had one of those cool tumblers that could take a drab, normal looking rock and bring out amazingly beautiful colors. To me a diamond isn't a marketing gimic -- it's the shiniest, glitteriest, sparkliest rock that I've ever seen, or ever will see. In my eyes, the light from a diamond is alive, every other stone is dead.
However, I drive a Chrysler mini-van, and am perfectly happy with how fast it accelerates, I would never pay $20K more to get a mile down the interstate 3 seconds faster. I have Bose speakers, and their sound is perfect to my ears. My computer is two years old and it's plenty fast for me.....when it comes to these things -- good is good enough. But when it comes to the rock I wear on my hand, good's not good enough -- I want the best. And that doesn't have a thing to do with DeBeer's.
I hope before you decide to offer your future wife a tatoo, or a locket, you will find out how important rocks are to her -- they might be more important to her than they are to you.
Kris
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2000
- Messages
- 6,697
What a great set of posts.
Which factor is most important of the 4 C's has always intrigued me. Each C takes precendence over the others in extreme cases and moves in importance against the others as the 4 components vary. Every one of them can be either most or least important, but it depends on the individual make-up of the stone.
As examples, when comparing diamond for purchase:
Stones in the G/H, VS2/SI1 AGS 1 range usually have carat weight as the determining factor.
Stones of the same diameter/weight, VS2/SI1, AGS 1 range have color as the determinging factor.
Stones of G/H, AGS 1, same diameter /weight have clarity as the determinging factor.
I think most all of you will see the point being made above and can expand upon it for nearly any set of circumstances.
There are dozens of scenarios possible.
HOWEVER, when one seeks the "ultimate" fine diamond and has a BUDGET, one must rely on their own set of value judgments to get what they can afford as "THE BEST". This simple economic fact, not a component of the four C's, leads this process in making an intelligent selection. Very few folks really want the very finest of diamonds, but most Internet shoppers want a very good one. There is a very distinct difference psychologically between the finest and the very good, while physically, there are only extremely small differences. Most of us would not notice these tiny differences, but they are important to that customer. If they can afford their preferences, then the issue of ULTIMATE quality prevails over all logic or common sense.
Jim Schultz's obeservations are very true for many people. A very good diamond is much like a very fine one. BUT, it is not the same for someone who knows or someone who really cares. These small differences, such as those Rhino or Garry Holloway can demonstrate, give buyers valid yet subtle choices. These choices may seem petty to those who have more budget issues, or who simply want larger diamonds, but these same issues are not small ones for those who are seeking some perceived ultimate PERFECTION.
So, in the end, I see the points being made on both sides of the issue. It is the personality and budget of the buyer which dictates the importance of certain aspects. This is why we can generalize, but we cannot be right about this for every client. Each has their own special idea of what suits them the best, and we must keep that human perspective about how to assist people in making their decision on what to buy.
I believe in giving people the facts and let them make an informed choice. We have come a long way in this regard and more data will be given to future consumers as it becomes available. You canstill buy a diamond because you like it. You don't have to seek the finest if you don't want to. As ong as the deal is fair and you understand the fine points of the deal, you can enjoy the pruchase. For thos who love technicality and details, there are plenty to absorb and calculate. Either way, diamonds remain interesting beautiful and a welcome gift...
Which factor is most important of the 4 C's has always intrigued me. Each C takes precendence over the others in extreme cases and moves in importance against the others as the 4 components vary. Every one of them can be either most or least important, but it depends on the individual make-up of the stone.
As examples, when comparing diamond for purchase:
Stones in the G/H, VS2/SI1 AGS 1 range usually have carat weight as the determining factor.
Stones of the same diameter/weight, VS2/SI1, AGS 1 range have color as the determinging factor.
Stones of G/H, AGS 1, same diameter /weight have clarity as the determinging factor.
I think most all of you will see the point being made above and can expand upon it for nearly any set of circumstances.
There are dozens of scenarios possible.
HOWEVER, when one seeks the "ultimate" fine diamond and has a BUDGET, one must rely on their own set of value judgments to get what they can afford as "THE BEST". This simple economic fact, not a component of the four C's, leads this process in making an intelligent selection. Very few folks really want the very finest of diamonds, but most Internet shoppers want a very good one. There is a very distinct difference psychologically between the finest and the very good, while physically, there are only extremely small differences. Most of us would not notice these tiny differences, but they are important to that customer. If they can afford their preferences, then the issue of ULTIMATE quality prevails over all logic or common sense.
Jim Schultz's obeservations are very true for many people. A very good diamond is much like a very fine one. BUT, it is not the same for someone who knows or someone who really cares. These small differences, such as those Rhino or Garry Holloway can demonstrate, give buyers valid yet subtle choices. These choices may seem petty to those who have more budget issues, or who simply want larger diamonds, but these same issues are not small ones for those who are seeking some perceived ultimate PERFECTION.
So, in the end, I see the points being made on both sides of the issue. It is the personality and budget of the buyer which dictates the importance of certain aspects. This is why we can generalize, but we cannot be right about this for every client. Each has their own special idea of what suits them the best, and we must keep that human perspective about how to assist people in making their decision on what to buy.
I believe in giving people the facts and let them make an informed choice. We have come a long way in this regard and more data will be given to future consumers as it becomes available. You canstill buy a diamond because you like it. You don't have to seek the finest if you don't want to. As ong as the deal is fair and you understand the fine points of the deal, you can enjoy the pruchase. For thos who love technicality and details, there are plenty to absorb and calculate. Either way, diamonds remain interesting beautiful and a welcome gift...
canadiangrrl
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2003
- Messages
- 787
Joeq, I disagree that the only C that gets left up to the guy is Cost. There are plenty of guys that choose an engagement ring for their significant other without having the slightest inclination as to what the wearer would prefer in terms of shape, size, colour of metal, etc. I would hazard a guess that in North America, the majority of engagement rings are still purchased without detailed input from the distaff side of things. It's still the traditional way of shopping for a ring and becoming engaged - it might not be customary on these boards, but we represent but a tiny microcosm of the diamond buying public.
In our case, *I* was the one who took the lead, in terms of deciding our parameters - including the fifth C - Cost - because my fiance has a tendancy to spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave, and I can stretch a dollar until it screams.
And ultimately, it's *our* money.
Having said that, he did have some preferences that I kept in mind. To wit - he doesn't particularly like fancy shapes. In fact, he can't stand any of them - and I love the EC almost as much as the RB, and I really, really like the Regent. But I kept his preference in mind, because this is, after all, a ring that celebrates *our* engagement - and I ended up with a lovely RB solitaire that pleases us both immensely.
In our case, *I* was the one who took the lead, in terms of deciding our parameters - including the fifth C - Cost - because my fiance has a tendancy to spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave, and I can stretch a dollar until it screams.
Having said that, he did have some preferences that I kept in mind. To wit - he doesn't particularly like fancy shapes. In fact, he can't stand any of them - and I love the EC almost as much as the RB, and I really, really like the Regent. But I kept his preference in mind, because this is, after all, a ring that celebrates *our* engagement - and I ended up with a lovely RB solitaire that pleases us both immensely.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
- Messages
- 15,808
----------------
But why do 99.9% of Americans give diamonds as engagement rings rather than rubies, emeralds, pearls, or anything else? Why do they feel the need to drop two months salary on it? Marketing! Sorry my words are so harsh but I feel the need to stand up for every guy ever suckered into feeling they had to drop huge coin on garbage in ripoff mall jewelers.
----------------
WHOA! Would you consider "fashion" instead of "marketing ploy"? Most honestly, the price of other colored gems is not all that much lower than diamonds - so if you are after a once-in-a-lifetime piece of jewelry, any of the gems that you mention above (surely those are the materials that first come to ming to anyone as "gems" not some obscure mineral)is going to draw as much money as a diamond from your more practical uses. So why is it wrong to follow the fashion or cultural trend during a rite of passage? And really, Price Scope exists to make people get nice diamonds if they so wish. Is there any merchandise promotion that never fooled anyone? How many things are bought in the US without being marketed?
Do you think people need to be duped into buying expensive jewelry once in their life? Diamonds are neither mass-marketed nor sold in poor countries (thing somewhat below OECD income, not South Saharan Africa): not that no one would afford any diamonds there, but because marketers know they can't induce people to really sacrifice their financial security for a bauble. C'mon, US is no such place. Too bad you feal bad about having bought a nice rock. Enjoy?!
- Status
Celebrating Mothers And Mentors This Mother's Day
Celebrating Mothers And Mentors This Mother's Day - 05/05
Did You Miss the April 2024 Jewels of the Weeks?
Did You Miss the April 2024 Jewels of the Weeks? - 04/26
300x240.png)