Is the internet, and cut grading the enemy of creativity in cutting?

[Karl_K]

David,
What you don't see is that JIT manufacturing/processing and sales is unavoidable in the diamond industry.
Almost every other industry has moved that way over a decade ago.
There is no way to survive using the old model.
The internet had helped make it more efficient but it was well on the way before internet shopping took off.
Consumers are 2-3 steps away from the manufacturer in everything we buy these days.

Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

 

[Serg]

Date: 1/19/2010 12:42:55 AM
Author: Karl_K
David,

What you don't see is that JIT manufacturing/processing and sales is unavoidable in the diamond industry.

Almost every other industry has moved that way over a decade ago.

There is no way to survive using the old model.

The internet had helped make it more efficient but it was well on the way before internet shopping took off.

Consumers are 2-3 steps away from the manufacturer in everything we buy these days.


Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

Karl,

re:Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

How many Jewellers do you know who Mainly buy polish diamonds in the end net15?
Most known for me Jewellers buy 40-90% polish diamonds directly from manufactures. and a lot of Brands have direct contracts with manufactures or even owner manufactures

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 1/18/2010 10:17:53 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

I hope I was not whining about anything- rather pointing out how this amazing informational exchange called the internet has changed things in ways we might not have anticipated- as it regards to diamonds.

Absolutely there''s still junk cut, but I''m sure you''ll agree that if we were to compare the ''average make'' from 1980 to todays, the improvement would be marked.

Wink, you and I could look at this from the two different sides with a similar perspective.

I started in 1976.

When smaller tables first starting showing up more in the ''80''s I thought they were pretty, but I liked a slightly spreadier stone then and I do now.

Of course now, the internet has made 59% too large a table for most cutters.....so I rarely get to see the fine makes I like best.


I love the internet as much as anyone- maybe too much.

Never meant to complain about the medium, just note it''s effects.

larger table is not necessary spreadier, simple junior school level math can prove that.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 1/19/2010 12:42:55 AM
Author: Karl_K
David,

What you don''t see is that JIT manufacturing/processing and sales is unavoidable in the diamond industry.

Almost every other industry has moved that way over a decade ago.

There is no way to survive using the old model.

The internet had helped make it more efficient but it was well on the way before internet shopping took off.

Consumers are 2-3 steps away from the manufacturer in everything we buy these days.


Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

Karl- the diamond business has some unique aspect that resist comparisons to other business models.
There are some very powerful cutters with huge amounts of capitol.
There''s a book called the "Red Book" which lists all the jewelers in the US, and has credit ratings for many.
If a "1" or "2" rated jeweler called up any of the major cutting houses, and offered to buy 10 one carat stones, they would easily get 30 days to pay. In fact on major purchases terms up to 90 or even 120 days are also still common for actual buyers.
My point is that such purchases make little sense for most retail brick and mortar jewelers today compared to 10 years ago. However such buyers still exist, though they are fewer and further between today.

 

[Serg]

Date: 1/19/2010 10:28:20 AM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 1/19/2010 12:42:55 AM

Author: Karl_K

David,


What you don''t see is that JIT manufacturing/processing and sales is unavoidable in the diamond industry.


Almost every other industry has moved that way over a decade ago.


There is no way to survive using the old model.


The internet had helped make it more efficient but it was well on the way before internet shopping took off.


Consumers are 2-3 steps away from the manufacturer in everything we buy these days.



Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

Karl- the diamond business has some unique aspect that resist comparisons to other business models.

There are some very powerful cutters with huge amounts of capitol.

There''s a book called the ''Red Book'' which lists all the jewelers in the US, and has credit ratings for many.

If a ''1'' or ''2'' rated jeweler called up any of the major cutting houses, and offered to buy 10 one carat stones, they would easily get 30 days to pay. In fact on major purchases terms up to 90 or even 120 days are also still common for actual buyers.

My point is that such purchases make little sense for most retail brick and mortar jewelers today compared to 10 years ago. However such buyers still exist, though they are fewer and further between today.

2-4 weeks to pay after delivery is very typical for B2B( at least in EU)
I do not see here any problems. For computers, furniture I usually pay in 2 weeks, for Swiss watches 10-30 days( depends from Brand)
It is very useful because I have many 1-2 weeks trips and Brands do not like send invoices by email

90-120 days consignation could be wrong Business model, but 10-30 days is very practical and useful

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 1/18/2010 10:32:21 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 1/18/2010 10:17:53 PM

Author: Rockdiamond


I hope I was not whining about anything- rather pointing out how this amazing informational exchange called the internet has changed things in ways we might not have anticipated- as it regards to diamonds.

Absolutely there''s still junk cut, but I''m sure you''ll agree that if we were to compare the ''average make'' from 1980 to todays, the improvement would be marked.

Wink, you and I could look at this from the two different sides with a similar perspective.

I started in 1976.

When smaller tables first starting showing up more in the ''80''s I thought they were pretty, but I liked a slightly spreadier stone then and I do now.

Of course now, the internet has made 59% too large a table for most cutters.....so I rarely get to see the fine makes I like best.


I love the internet as much as anyone- maybe too much.

Never meant to complain about the medium, just note it''s effects.

Rock,


No personal disparagement meant, and I hope none taken.


I would take you to task however for calling tables larger than 59% fine makes, most are not, in my opinion. (I realize that some combinations with larger tables do make the grade, but most lack the dispersion that I prefer in my diamonds, and most do not make the coveted AGS 0 cut grade.)


You can have your spread, but for me, give me sparkle or give me....


Oh wait, that was for the revolution, it is late and I grow confused...


Going to bed now.


Wink

HI Wink! NO offense taken whatsoever.
I know we agree on a lot of things, but this part , on which we disagree, is at the heart of this discussion.

In the 1980''s, as Lazaare Kaplan was forging ahead with the "Ideal" cut ( and the resultant smaller tables) many of the finest made carat plus sized goods came from Russia.
Many of these stones were cut to 60/60 ( with great care taken for Girdle, PA/CA/LGF) and were considered the finest makes of their time- they were gorgeous then, and they''d still be amazing if we could find one.

Before AGS revised their system in 2006, 60% table was excluded.
Today both GIA and AGS include 60% tables in their top grades.
It would be accurate for one to state a preference for one or the other- however if we consider the parameters used by GIA, and AGS, it''s not accurate to say diamonds with 60% tables are ( by virtue of that fact) not as well cut as any other diamond.

Part of what struck me about this story was how the internet has propagated the myth that a 60% table is somehow lesser cut than a 57% table ( all other things being equal)

 

[bgray]

I dont think so: Diamond cutting in my opinion isnt really very creative. Meaning, there are limitations to creativity if the ultimate goal is (theoretically) to produce a high performing stone. Okay so techniques, facet patterns and so forth are a creative endeavor but --for example--once Karl K developed his Octavia cut parameters and it is being cut, its no longer creative--it is producing the product of his creativity and ingenuity. I dont want the person cutting Karl K's Octavia to be creative! I want them to cut it the way he designed it!

Its not like a painting or a piece of clothing that doesnt really have to conform at all. It might not get purchased but its doesnt have to conform-it can be hideous, uncomfortable and unwearable. I think the internet is both good and bad like so many other things. I think the knowledge acquired via the internet has probably forced more vendors to procure and/or offer better quality goods. That is a good thing. The internet has been frustrating to some vendors who were often used to having the trust and gravitas of a family doctor--now more feet are being held to the fire so to speak. Knowledge is power.

 

[Rockdiamond]

bgray- the entire concept of "performance" regarding how a diamond treats the light requires us to accept a bunch of principles which were designed for the internet.
The internet makes it necessary to quantify things. In this case, artificially.

Therefore what one considers a "high performing" stone is subjective.
Not all people will see it the same way. The term "performance" itself, when used to describe a diamond, was contrived to fit into internet sales models.
A "culture" has developed that claims to be able to say that some stones considered "best cut" by GIA and AGS are in fact not as well cut as GIA or AGS would have us believe- largely based on an artificial parameter called "performance"

 

[oldminer]

There is a whole combination of things which dictate if a 60/60 diamond is as good as, not as good as, or better than a 57/61. It is a sad oversimplification to say that any stone with a 60% table is always inferior to a stone with a 57% table because you canot judge the entire success or overall quality of the cut of a diamond by one parameter. However, many sellers of diamonds do make such representations to their customers who have little to guide them in what is truthful or not. That''s why we stick with Pricescope as it is making a difference. There are plenty of swindled Tolkowsky variants floating around which barely meet the standards, yet get an excellent grade. Conversely, there could be many AGS1 and AGS2 diamonds which woud be visually superior that no one wants to cut and no one looks to purchase. As an industry we just don''t have all our standards in proper order yet.

However, it is totally correct to make categories of cut quality just like it is accepted to make categories of color and clarity grades. The standards are totally arbitrary, but must make sense and must be able to be taught and explained. We have yet to arrive at a time when the entire business accepts any one set of cut grade standards, but it is apparent that is the direction we are headed in. These standards will not apply to fancy colored diamonds becuase there are valid reasons that they will not work properly, but for the vast majority of near colorless stones, standards will work and become the norm. Prices tend to follow standards which are accepted and make good sense. At the crossovre points, the gray areas between one grade and the next there always will be a stone which got a bit lucky or got a bit jinxed by its unfortunate position compared to the proverbial line in the sand of grading. However, the smart consumer may often take advantage of borderline stones and get a better stone for a better price. Delaers will get just as many lucky calls and unfortunate ones, too. No one will be hurt by grading once it is accepted by the entire market.

For now, we see diffreent camps arguing about where to make the categories or not to have them at all. In the end, the lines will be drawn and the traditionalists will need to make the best of the accepted standards.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 1/19/2010 3:05:41 PM
Author: oldminer
There is a whole combination of things which dictate if a 60/60 diamond is as good as, not as good as, or better than a 57/61. It is a sad oversimplification to say that any stone with a 60% table is always inferior to a stone with a 57% table because you canot judge the entire success or overall quality of the cut of a diamond by one parameter. However, many sellers of diamonds do make such representations to their customers who have little to guide them in what is truthful or not. That's why we stick with Pricescope as it is making a difference. There are plenty of swindled Tolkowsky variants floating around which barely meet the standards, yet get an excellent grade. Conversely, there could be many AGS1 and AGS2 diamonds which woud be visually superior that no one wants to cut and no one looks to purchase. As an industry we just don't have all our standards in proper order yet.


However, it is totally correct to make categories of cut quality just like it is accepted to make categories of color and clarity grades. The standards are totally arbitrary, but must make sense and must be able to be taught and explained. We have yet to arrive at a time when the entire business accepts any one set of cut grade standards, but it is apparent that is the direction we are headed in. These standards will not apply to fancy colored diamonds becuase there are valid reasons that they will not work properly, but for the vast majority of near colorless stones, standards will work and become the norm. Prices tend to follow standards which are accepted and make good sense. At the crossovre points, the gray areas between one grade and the next there always will be a stone which got a bit lucky or got a bit jinxed by its unfortunate position compared to the proverbial line in the sand of grading. However, the smart consumer may often take advantage of borderline stones and get a better stone for a better price. Delaers will get just as many lucky calls and unfortunate ones, too. No one will be hurt by grading once it is accepted by the entire market.


For now, we see diffreent camps arguing about where to make the categories or not to have them at all. In the end, the lines will be drawn and the traditionalists will need to make the best of the accepted standards.

I agree with much if what you wrote Dave- but the part in bold is where we disagree. If you look at AGS, and GIA's cut grades, they are purposefully wide to allow for taste.
I do not believe they will narrow them. I don't believe a consensus will ever be reached on this allowing a "finite" best cut.
Without question, specialty cuts- and "super ideal" cuts will find an audience due to the internet.
One bright spot in all this for an individualist is that the internet will also allow for a broader platform for counter viewpoints to be heard.

 

[bgray]

I guess I see what you mean regarding marketing and branding and thus defining quality and standards. Perhaps your actual thread title is slightly off mark or unclear-at least to me. As I see it its not the enemy of creativity in cutting--it might be a heavy handed influencer over the consumer.............

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 1/19/2010 1:50:53 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Before AGS revised their system in 2006, 60% table was excluded.

Today both GIA and AGS include 60% tables in their top grades.

It would be accurate for one to state a preference for one or the other- however if we consider the parameters used by GIA, and AGS, it''s not accurate to say diamonds with 60% tables are ( by virtue of that fact) not as well cut as any other diamond.

Part of what struck me about this story was how the internet has propagated the myth that a 60% table is somehow lesser cut than a 57% table ( all other things being equal)

I trimmed down a lot of the text in order to quote the part that I wanted to address here because otherwise it seemed like a lot to quote... That said, years prior to AGS implementing their initial ideal cut rating system, I shared conversations with Garry Wright and Brian Gavin about the inaccuracy of the 60/60 ideal cut mythology pertaining to how people were running around referring to diamonds as "60/60 ideal cuts" without giving any thought as to the crown angle or pavilion angle measurements - and I mention this because I see it happening within this (very interesting) thread... One can not address the matter of total depth or table diameter and say "I prefer this or that" without further defining "with this crown or pavilion angle" in order to make such claims valid.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/19/2010 10:28:20 AM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 1/19/2010 12:42:55 AM

Author: Karl_K

David,


What you don''t see is that JIT manufacturing/processing and sales is unavoidable in the diamond industry.


Almost every other industry has moved that way over a decade ago.


There is no way to survive using the old model.


The internet had helped make it more efficient but it was well on the way before internet shopping took off.


Consumers are 2-3 steps away from the manufacturer in everything we buy these days.



Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

Karl- the diamond business has some unique aspect that resist comparisons to other business models.

There are some very powerful cutters with huge amounts of capitol.

There''s a book called the ''Red Book'' which lists all the jewelers in the US, and has credit ratings for many.

If a ''1'' or ''2'' rated jeweler called up any of the major cutting houses, and offered to buy 10 one carat stones, they would easily get 30 days to pay. In fact on major purchases terms up to 90 or even 120 days are also still common for actual buyers.

My point is that such purchases make little sense for most retail brick and mortar jewelers today compared to 10 years ago. However such buyers still exist, though they are fewer and further between today.

Like every other industry they are asking why should I let you use my capital for free.
That is why memo is doomed.
net15-net30 is the best that can be expected long term with a discount for cash in advance.

 

[Karl_K]

re 60% tables.

Ok David enough is enough.
I will give you the numbers to cut them to AGS0/giaEX specs, I will even help you find a cutter for them.
You pay to have 10 1ct diamonds cut then stop crying because no one is cutting them.
If you think they are that much better it is time to put your money in the ring.
Otherwise why should people spend their money cutting them if your not willing to spend yours?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 1/19/2010 4:46:17 PM
Author: Todd Gray

Date: 1/19/2010 1:50:53 PM

Author: Rockdiamond

Before AGS revised their system in 2006, 60% table was excluded.


Today both GIA and AGS include 60% tables in their top grades.


It would be accurate for one to state a preference for one or the other- however if we consider the parameters used by GIA, and AGS, it''s not accurate to say diamonds with 60% tables are ( by virtue of that fact) not as well cut as any other diamond.


Part of what struck me about this story was how the internet has propagated the myth that a 60% table is somehow lesser cut than a 57% table ( all other things being equal)

I trimmed down a lot of the text in order to quote the part that I wanted to address here because otherwise it seemed like a lot to quote... That said, years prior to AGS implementing their initial ideal cut rating system, I shared conversations with Garry Wright and Brian Gavin about the inaccuracy of the 60/60 ideal cut mythology pertaining to how people were running around referring to diamonds as ''60/60 ideal cuts'' without giving any thought as to the crown angle or pavilion angle measurements - and I mention this because I see it happening within this (very interesting) thread... One can not address the matter of total depth or table diameter and say ''I prefer this or that'' without further defining ''with this crown or pavilion angle'' in order to make such claims valid.

That is unless one can look at stones and determine if they are well cut without need to know their exact measurements.
Todd- are you suggesting that prior to sarin machines people could not determine what a well cut diamond was? Are you saying there were no well cut diamonds when "60/60" was something knowledgeable diamond traders looked for?
Taking that a step further- can you ( or anyone else) tell if a diamond is well cut by looking at it?

Taken a step further again- if we need a machine to tell us a diamond is well cut, what does that suggest?
No need to draw comparisons to clarity- where one needs to use a loupe ( machine of sorts) to determine a VVs from a VS ( for example)
Clarity, though still subjective to some extent, is far less subjective than cut.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 1/19/2010 5:08:26 PM
Author: Karl_K

Date: 1/19/2010 10:28:20 AM

Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 1/19/2010 12:42:55 AM


Author: Karl_K


David,



What you don''t see is that JIT manufacturing/processing and sales is unavoidable in the diamond industry.



Almost every other industry has moved that way over a decade ago.



There is no way to survive using the old model.



The internet had helped make it more efficient but it was well on the way before internet shopping took off.



Consumers are 2-3 steps away from the manufacturer in everything we buy these days.




Long supply chains and terms over net30 are dead and even net15 is hard to get out in the rest of the business world.

Karl- the diamond business has some unique aspect that resist comparisons to other business models.


There are some very powerful cutters with huge amounts of capitol.


There''s a book called the ''Red Book'' which lists all the jewelers in the US, and has credit ratings for many.


If a ''1'' or ''2'' rated jeweler called up any of the major cutting houses, and offered to buy 10 one carat stones, they would easily get 30 days to pay. In fact on major purchases terms up to 90 or even 120 days are also still common for actual buyers.


My point is that such purchases make little sense for most retail brick and mortar jewelers today compared to 10 years ago. However such buyers still exist, though they are fewer and further between today.

Like every other industry they are asking why should I let you use my capital for free.

That is why memo is doomed.

net15-net30 is the best that can be expected long term with a discount for cash in advance.

Tell that to the cutters from Israel who were here yesterday. They were very happy to give us 90 days to pay for any goods we might have selected- or allow us to take some stones on memo...although nothing they had "floated my boat" so we did not select any.

Karl- memo, and "terms" ( allowing jewelers to pay over time for diamonds they purchase), are two parts of the industry that are far less prominent as compared to 10 years ago.
I have pointed out that this is in large part due to increased internet diamond sales - yet both terms and consignment still exist.
Although they''ve been flogged- and their numbers and strength decimated, retail jewelers still exist- and if they are still viable, there are plenty of cutters willing to extend terms and memo.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 1/19/2010 5:13:25 PM
Author: Karl_K
re 60% tables.


Ok David enough is enough.

I will give you the numbers to cut them to AGS0/giaEX specs, I will even help you find a cutter for them.

You pay to have 10 1ct diamonds cut then stop crying because no one is cutting them.

If you think they are that much better it is time to put your money in the ring.

Otherwise why should people spend their money cutting them if your not willing to spend yours?

Thankfully we have plenty of cutters who are very happy to cut us Triple EX stones- they do it all day long. In fact, I''ve had many conversations on this very subject with some of the best cutters in NY- who happen to agree with me about slightly larger tables. If my goal was to cut some 60/60''s, I could do it.
That taking such action makes no business sense whatsoever goes to exactly my point of this thread in the first place.

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 1/19/2010 5:41:06 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 1/19/2010 4:46:17 PM

Author: Todd Gray

Date: 1/19/2010 1:50:53 PM


Author: Rockdiamond

Before AGS revised their system in 2006, 60% table was excluded.

Today both GIA and AGS include 60% tables in their top grades.

It would be accurate for one to state a preference for one or the other- however if we consider the parameters used by GIA, and AGS, it''s not accurate to say diamonds with 60% tables are ( by virtue of that fact) not as well cut as any other diamond.

Part of what struck me about this story was how the internet has propagated the myth that a 60% table is somehow lesser cut than a 57% table ( all other things being equal)

I trimmed down a lot of the text in order to quote the part that I wanted to address here because otherwise it seemed like a lot to quote... That said, years prior to AGS implementing their initial ideal cut rating system, I shared conversations with Garry Wright and Brian Gavin about the inaccuracy of the 60/60 ideal cut mythology pertaining to how people were running around referring to diamonds as ''60/60 ideal cuts'' without giving any thought as to the crown angle or pavilion angle measurements - and I mention this because I see it happening within this (very interesting) thread... One can not address the matter of total depth or table diameter and say ''I prefer this or that'' without further defining ''with this crown or pavilion angle'' in order to make such claims valid.

That is unless one can look at stones and determine if they are well cut without need to know their exact measurements.

Todd- are you suggesting that prior to sarin machines people could not determine what a well cut diamond was? Are you saying there were no well cut diamonds when ''60/60'' was something knowledgeable diamond traders looked for?

Taking that a step further- can you ( or anyone else) tell if a diamond is well cut by looking at it?

Taken a step further again- if we need a machine to tell us a diamond is well cut, what does that suggest?

No need to draw comparisons to clarity- where one needs to use a loupe ( machine of sorts) to determine a VVs from a VS ( for example)

Clarity, though still subjective to some extent, is far less subjective than cut.

READ what I wrote: people were running around referring to diamonds as ''60/60 ideal cuts'' without giving any thought as to the crown angle or pavilion angle measurements.

It is erroneous to assume that a diamond is well cut simply because it has a 60/60 table/depth when the reality is that that combination can result in a diamond with an overall proportions rating of AGS-2 Very Good all the way down to AGS-10 Very Poor depending on what the crown angle and pavilion angle measurements actually are.

Can I determine whether a diamond is well cut or not by looking at it? Why yes, in fact I can visually estimate crown and pavilion angle rather accurately as can many of us who have been in the trade for some time and who had to make such judgments well before the introduction of Sarin / OGI / Helium machines - which is why David, I don''t challenge your preference to judge diamonds visually as opposed to by the numbers because I know you have the ability to make that assessment based on your experience and preferences - just as you know I do

So for clarification, I''m NOT saying that it isn''t possible to produce very pretty diamonds with a 60/60 combination of total depth and table diameter, what I am saying is that it is irresponsible to run around saying "60/60" especially here on a forum which is read by public consumers who may lack the experience to complete the equation which MUST include a reference to a specific range of preferred Crown Angle and Pavilion Angle in order to be a complete and responsible statement.

You in fact elude to the premise of what I''m stating when you say "Many of these stones were cut to 60/60 ( with great care taken for Girdle, PA/CA/LGF) and were considered the finest makes of their time - they were gorgeous then, and they''d still be amazing if we could find one."

So I know that you also realize that the premise of the "60/60 ideal cut" is only valid if "great care" is paid to the combination of crown and pavilion angles... For instance, I doubt that you would refer to a 60/60/36.0/41.4 with a slightly thick to thick girdle as a "60/60 ideal" however a consumer quickly reading the reference to the possibility of 60/60 being a formidable option to the modern zero ideal cut diamond might make that mistake if not aware that the other sections of the diamond play a critical part in the visual performance of a diamond

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/19/2010 5:56:17 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 1/19/2010 5:13:25 PM

Author: Karl_K

re 60% tables.



Ok David enough is enough.


I will give you the numbers to cut them to AGS0/giaEX specs, I will even help you find a cutter for them.


You pay to have 10 1ct diamonds cut then stop crying because no one is cutting them.


If you think they are that much better it is time to put your money in the ring.


Otherwise why should people spend their money cutting them if your not willing to spend yours?

Thankfully we have plenty of cutters who are very happy to cut us Triple EX stones- they do it all day long. In fact, I''ve had many conversations on this very subject with some of the best cutters in NY- who happen to agree with me about slightly larger tables. If my goal was to cut some 60/60''s, I could do it.

That taking such action makes no business sense whatsoever goes to exactly my point of this thread in the first place.

I see so your not willing to put your money where your mouth is and would rather cry about all the mean people not loving 60/60s rather than adding well cut ones to the market to give consumers a choice.
You have said many times you can not get the kind of 60/60s you love, so have some cut and put up :}

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 1/19/2010 5:49:47 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Tell that to the cutters from Israel who were here yesterday. They were very happy to give us 90 days to pay for any goods we might have selected- or allow us to take some stones on memo...although nothing they had 'floated my boat' so we did not select any.


Karl- memo, and 'terms' ( allowing jewelers to pay over time for diamonds they purchase), are two parts of the industry that are far less prominent as compared to 10 years ago.

I have pointed out that this is in large part due to increased internet diamond sales - yet both terms and consignment still exist.

Although they've been flogged- and their numbers and strength decimated, retail jewelers still exist- and if they are still viable, there are plenty of cutters willing to extend terms and memo.

Thanks for agreeing with my point.
We agree that memo is going away and terms are getting tighter.
That will continue.
You blame the internet, while I say it is business in general and the the way the capital heavy markets will work in the future.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Todd- I know we agree on a lot of things- and I have tremendous respect for you.
The differences we are discussing are illuminating- I hope that's what people take away from this.
Personally, I believe it's irresponsible to use terms like "performance", "leakage" and "light return" to describe what is clearly personal preference.

By the way, in my circles, "60/60" and "Ideal" are terms that describe two separate and distinct type of stones.
For consumers, the the term "Ideal" has been prostituted so much that it has almost no meaning.
So many companies are using the term in ways you and I both agree are inaccurate, and designed to mislead consumers.

I've never heard anyone try to sell diamonds to a consumer by calling them "60/60"

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 1/19/2010 6:16:01 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Todd- I know we agree on a lot of things- and I have tremendous respect for you.

The differences we are discussing are illuminating- I hope that''s what people take away from this.

Personally, I believe it''s irresponsible to use terms like ''performance'', ''leakage'' and ''light return'' to describe what is clearly personal preference.

By the way, in my circles, ''60/60'' and ''Ideal'' are terms that describe two separate and distinct type of stones.

For consumers, the the term ''Ideal'' has been prostituted so much that it has almost no meaning.

So many companies are using the term in ways you and I both agree are inaccurate, and designed to mislead consumers.

I''ve never heard anyone try to sell diamonds to a consumer by calling them ''60/60''

I think it is a difference in markets, brick and mortar establishments sell visually where online we tend to sell based on information and develop sites built around our personal preferences. Terms like performance, leakage and light return are something discussed on "the ideal cut playground" and a few high end brick and mortar stores which I''ve visited, but they are terms which I rarely hear outside the realm of ideal cut diamonds because introducing such terms to a non-super ideal scenario would be catastrophic in terms of selling diamonds of good to very good make. And with that statement, I''m not sure whether I am proving your point or mine.

Nobody believes that, right?

Sadly I have heard retail jewelry store staff make reference to the 60/60 ideal cut, I think it is a result of overhearing the term referenced by their diamond buyer or supplier...

Yes David, I usually do enjoy our banter because while we serve different sectors of the market, we both realize that there is validity in both our viewpoints and our differences of opinion. I have often stated both here on the forum and within the context of our own web site that there are beautiful options to be found outside the realm of the super ideal cut diamond, my point of contention is based on vague reference to what those proportions may be and the possibility of such statements misleading the public. I know that you realize that, but sometimes we have to "talk" at more length in written form on the forum to prevent such confusion and I think people might misinterpret that for ''friction'' when in fact it''s merely chatter between the minds.

It''s no secret that I focus on super ideal cut diamonds because it saves a lot of time and money in terms of our selection process, unlike yourself I''m not sitting in the midst of the diamond district so I rely on a system of "buying by the numbers" to increase the odds of success when considering diamonds for inventory... Likewise many of our clients on the internet are likely to rely on a similar system or advice based on such a system... Your focus is primarily on fancy colored diamonds which are not cut by the numbers because they are cut for intensity of color - which is often going to dictate value more than clarity in that market - and thus terms like performance, leakage and light return are truly not applicable to your market, which is again most focused on intensity of color. Different planets my friend... But I''m afraid that without that disclaimer, perhaps made in almost every thread that you post, your educated observations are apt to be misinterpreted in a forum where most of the people are discussing diamonds which are in the colorless, near colorless and faint yellow ranges.

I bet you thought using that fancy colored diamond in your avatar was going to clue us in or something

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 1/19/2010 6:16:01 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
ive never heard anyone try to sell diamonds to a consumer by calling them ''60/60''

it happened to me !!

a dealer sold me a 60/60 stone (about 9 yrs ago) at the time he said..." a 60/60 is the best cut in the world", then one day i compared to a smaller table ideal cut

i notice a world of difference b/t the two stones.

my 60/60 stone was one of those no crown height,flat top POS,so then i had Wink recut the stone through Infinity and now i love my wife''s ring.

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 1/19/2010 6:16:01 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Todd- I know we agree on a lot of things- and I have tremendous respect for you.
The differences we are discussing are illuminating- I hope that''s what people take away from this.
Personally, I believe it''s irresponsible to use terms like ''performance'', ''leakage'' and ''light return'' to describe what is clearly personal preference.

By the way, in my circles, ''60/60'' and ''Ideal'' are terms that describe two separate and distinct type of stones.
For consumers, the the term ''Ideal'' has been prostituted so much that it has almost no meaning.
So many companies are using the term in ways you and I both agree are inaccurate, and designed to mislead consumers.

I''ve never heard anyone try to sell diamonds to a consumer by calling them ''60/60''

Oh we get it, we get it. You spew it ad nauseum.

You would prefer "personal preference" terms like super duper, trust me, skinny but beautiful, flawed but a stunner, dropdead gorgeous (without any lab report), large looking, I think the color grading is off, dreamy shape, and last but certainly not least, long tall sally. ROFLMAO

Yes indeedy, those are terms a consumer should respond to. Heaven forbid anyone irresponsibly use quantifiable terms like leakage or light return.

In your world it''s all your preference and lipstick on that piggy. Must we really revisit this same 60/60 topic monthly from you? As has been pointed out before, it''s starting to look a LOT like self promotion in pseudo wolf''s clothing tarted up as "education".

 

[spoogenet]

I''m new here and clearly not an expert in diamonds. I agree there are many similarities among industries and the effects of not only the internet itself, but also e-commerce.

Under the scope of cutting as an art form, I believe the internet serves multiple purposes. First, and foremost, it helps educate the public on the professional opinion and general agreement of what "good" and "excellent" and "poor" mean while providing help in understanding the difference among them. Professional opinion is paramount to the consumer as complexity and parametric interdependency increase.

Second, this new knowledge puts pressure on the cutting artists to hone their skills and produce "higher grade" cuts. The more people know about painting, the less likely they are to pay top dollar for a third-grader''s crayon art (unless it''s their own third grader, naturally).

Third, the ubiquity of the ''net provides a larger venue for the creative artists. How many B&M jewelers can turn a profit selling dolphin shaped diamonds? I don''t know, but I''d guess it''s a pretty small contingent. The internet provides this venue for the niche market to thrive.

The natural caveat to this is that the consumer learns just enough to be dangerous and it puts blinders on them, shifting the market focus toward buying what we''re *told* is good without evaluating it for ourselves. This gives rise to branded cuts and increases their market value, while reducing the non-branded cut value in the market. This also allows room for thrifty shoppers to find good value in the market.

b

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 1/19/2010 6:46:35 PM
Author: Todd Gray

Date: 1/19/2010 6:16:01 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Todd- I know we agree on a lot of things- and I have tremendous respect for you.

The differences we are discussing are illuminating- I hope that's what people take away from this.

Personally, I believe it's irresponsible to use terms like 'performance', 'leakage' and 'light return' to describe what is clearly personal preference.

By the way, in my circles, '60/60' and 'Ideal' are terms that describe two separate and distinct type of stones.

For consumers, the the term 'Ideal' has been prostituted so much that it has almost no meaning.

So many companies are using the term in ways you and I both agree are inaccurate, and designed to mislead consumers.

I've never heard anyone try to sell diamonds to a consumer by calling them '60/60'

I think it is a difference in markets, brick and mortar establishments sell visually where online we tend to sell based on information and develop sites built around our personal preferences. Terms like performance, leakage and light return are something discussed on 'the ideal cut playground' and a few high end brick and mortar stores which I've visited, but they are terms which I rarely hear outside the realm of ideal cut diamonds because introducing such terms to a non-super ideal scenario would be catastrophic in terms of selling diamonds of good to very good make. And with that statement, I'm not sure whether I am proving your point or mine.

Nobody believes that, right?

Sadly I have heard retail jewelry store staff make reference to the 60/60 ideal cut, I think it is a result of overhearing the term referenced by their diamond buyer or supplier...

Yes David, I usually do enjoy our banter because while we serve different sectors of the market, we both realize that there is validity in both our viewpoints and our differences of opinion. I have often stated both here on the forum and within the context of our own web site that there are beautiful options to be found outside the realm of the super ideal cut diamond, my point of contention is based on vague reference to what those proportions may be and the possibility of such statements misleading the public. I know that you realize that, but sometimes we have to 'talk' at more length in written form on the forum to prevent such confusion and I think people might misinterpret that for 'friction' when in fact it's merely chatter between the minds.

It's no secret that I focus on super ideal cut diamonds because it saves a lot of time and money in terms of our selection process, unlike yourself I'm not sitting in the midst of the diamond district so I rely on a system of 'buying by the numbers' to increase the odds of success when considering diamonds for inventory... Likewise many of our clients on the internet are likely to rely on a similar system or advice based on such a system... Your focus is primarily on fancy colored diamonds which are not cut by the numbers because they are cut for intensity of color - which is often going to dictate value more than clarity in that market - and thus terms like performance, leakage and light return are truly not applicable to your market, which is again most focused on intensity of color. Different planets my friend... But I'm afraid that without that disclaimer, perhaps made in almost every thread that you post, your educated observations are apt to be misinterpreted in a forum where most of the people are discussing diamonds which are in the colorless, near colorless and faint yellow ranges.

I bet you thought using that fancy colored diamond in your avatar was going to clue us in or something

Funny Todd I bet if you weren't in the trade your tone would be quite a bit different.
Not too many 60/60 fancy color diamonds either, not too many rounds and the ones that are there are tend to be cut deeper for greater saturation of color.
So why if RD is in the other sector and doesn't actually specialize in selling colorless rounds are these threads still popping up instigated by him every week or so?

This thread is another joke and probably about the 15 - 20th thread I've seen RD use to self promote himself, get backlinks to his site and call anything to do with diamond education other people's opinions.

Are these threads useful for other professionals in the business?
Do consumers gain anything from these threads except confusion?
I wonder why RD is still given the respect of a reply?

The whole premise of this thread is a joke. Precision cutting and being able to effectively reproduce desired specs and designs has done nothing but promote creativity not demote it. Advances in cutting technology allow new designs and reproduceability in brands that were previously impossible, the labour and time costs of cutting have come down, further promoting new innovation in diamond design and bringing new products to the market. Shrinking margins on diamonds that can be sold by any vendor over the internet has increased the drive for new signature lines as dealers realize they need to differentiate themselves (example GOG signature lines) in order to boost sales and maintain market share.

I highly doubt RD's posting style would be nearly as effective for him if those in the trade didn't bother to respond to him anymore.

 

[Serg]

Date: 1/20/2010 1:08:13 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 1/19/2010 6:46:35 PM

Author: Todd Gray

Date: 1/19/2010 6:16:01 PM

Author: Rockdiamond

Todd- I know we agree on a lot of things- and I have tremendous respect for you.


The differences we are discussing are illuminating- I hope that's what people take away from this.


Personally, I believe it's irresponsible to use terms like 'performance', 'leakage' and 'light return' to describe what is clearly personal preference.


By the way, in my circles, '60/60' and 'Ideal' are terms that describe two separate and distinct type of stones.


For consumers, the the term 'Ideal' has been prostituted so much that it has almost no meaning.


So many companies are using the term in ways you and I both agree are inaccurate, and designed to mislead consumers.


I've never heard anyone try to sell diamonds to a consumer by calling them '60/60'

I think it is a difference in markets, brick and mortar establishments sell visually where online we tend to sell based on information and develop sites built around our personal preferences. Terms like performance, leakage and light return are something discussed on 'the ideal cut playground' and a few high end brick and mortar stores which I've visited, but they are terms which I rarely hear outside the realm of ideal cut diamonds because introducing such terms to a non-super ideal scenario would be catastrophic in terms of selling diamonds of good to very good make. And with that statement, I'm not sure whether I am proving your point or mine.


Nobody believes that, right?

Sadly I have heard retail jewelry store staff make reference to the 60/60 ideal cut, I think it is a result of overhearing the term referenced by their diamond buyer or supplier...


Yes David, I usually do enjoy our banter because while we serve different sectors of the market, we both realize that there is validity in both our viewpoints and our differences of opinion. I have often stated both here on the forum and within the context of our own web site that there are beautiful options to be found outside the realm of the super ideal cut diamond, my point of contention is based on vague reference to what those proportions may be and the possibility of such statements misleading the public. I know that you realize that, but sometimes we have to 'talk' at more length in written form on the forum to prevent such confusion and I think people might misinterpret that for 'friction' when in fact it's merely chatter between the minds.


It's no secret that I focus on super ideal cut diamonds because it saves a lot of time and money in terms of our selection process, unlike yourself I'm not sitting in the midst of the diamond district so I rely on a system of 'buying by the numbers' to increase the odds of success when considering diamonds for inventory... Likewise many of our clients on the internet are likely to rely on a similar system or advice based on such a system... Your focus is primarily on fancy colored diamonds which are not cut by the numbers because they are cut for intensity of color - which is often going to dictate value more than clarity in that market - and thus terms like performance, leakage and light return are truly not applicable to your market, which is again most focused on intensity of color. Different planets my friend... But I'm afraid that without that disclaimer, perhaps made in almost every thread that you post, your educated observations are apt to be misinterpreted in a forum where most of the people are discussing diamonds which are in the colorless, near colorless and faint yellow ranges.


I bet you thought using that fancy colored diamond in your avatar was going to clue us in or something

Funny Todd I bet if you weren't in the trade your tone would be quite a bit different.

Not too many 60/60 fancy color diamonds either, not too many rounds and the ones that are there are tend to be cut deeper for greater saturation of color.

So why if RD is in the other sector and doesn't actually specialize in selling colorless rounds are these threads still popping up instigated by him every week or so?


This thread is another joke and probably about the 15 - 20th thread I've seen RD use to self promote himself, get backlinks to his site and call anything to do with diamond education other people's opinions.


Are these threads useful for other professionals in the business?

Do consumers gain anything from these threads except confusion?

I wonder why RD is still given the respect of a reply?


The whole premise of this thread is a joke. Precision cutting and being able to effectively reproduce desired specs and designs has done nothing but promote creativity not demote it. Advances in cutting technology allow new designs and reproduceability in brands that were previously impossible, the labour and time costs of cutting have come down, further promoting new innovation in diamond design and bringing new products to the market. Shrinking margins on diamonds that can be sold by any vendor over the internet has increased the drive for new signature lines as dealers realize they need to differentiate themselves (example GOG signature lines) in order to boost sales and maintain market share.


I highly doubt RD's posting style would be nearly as effective for him if those in the trade didn't bother to respond to him anymore.

CCL,

Re: Are these threads useful for other professionals in the business?
Do consumers gain anything from these threads except confusion?
I wonder why RD is still given the respect of a reply?

The whole premise of this thread is a joke. Precision cutting and being able to effectively reproduce desired specs and designs has done nothing but promote creativity not demote it. Advances in cutting technology allow new designs and reproduceability in brands that were previously impossible, the labour and time costs of cutting have come down, further promoting new innovation in diamond design and bringing new products to the market. Shrinking margins on diamonds that can be sold by any vendor over the internet has increased the drive for new signature lines as dealers realize they need to differentiate themselves (example GOG signature lines) in order to boost sales and maintain market share.


---------


Lets discuss about socks . New materials and advance knitting technology allow new design and amassing quality , features for new socks that were previously impossible, the labour and time costs of knitting have come down dramatically( unfortunately we cannot say same for price Brand socks), further promoting new innovation in socks design and bringing new products to the market.
I you different types socks and different Brands for different proposition ( one for business, other for hiking . its are quite different). I like high quality and features of modern socks
But sometimes I prefer use in Home the handmade socks what has worse quality of material, what is not so symmetrical,..


It is shame what most modern high quality socks have not even 10% of charm as handmade socks .


To save diamonds industry we need find way to combine Charm, history, uniqueness from one side and high performance , innovation from other side in ONE diamond.

I think It is main reason why RD is still given the respect by professionals on PS.

 

[risingsun]

Serg~there are any number of vendors who specialize in handmade socks. We refer people who are looking for handmade socks to these vendors and others find these vendors on their own. These vendors do not dismiss modern technology, argue with consumers, accuse people of attacking them, and start numerous threads that have the ability to confuse newcomers seeking top tier RB socks. These vendors do what they do best and are well respected by PSers. Their work speaks for itself. This is the issue that many of us have with RD. If he would provide education about his area of expertise [colored diamonds...err...socks], I believe he would be perceived in a more positive light. As Karl said, if he wants to sell well cut 60/60 socks, no one is stopping him. I think that we are looking for RD to do more than talk about what he believes and do something about it. If not, how many threads must he start, which say the same thing? Now my feet are cold and I'm going to get my socks!!

 

[Todd Gray]

Why do I choose to respond? Oh man, I think that if I were a fish, I''d be dumb enough to take the bait

 

[Serg]

Date: 1/20/2010 12:54:51 PM
Author: risingsun
Serg~there are any number of vendors who specialize in handmade socks. We refer people who are looking for handmade socks to these vendors and others find these vendors on their own. These vendors do not dismiss modern technology, argue with consumers, accuse people of attacking them, and start numerous threads that have the ability to confuse newcomers seeking top tier RB socks. These vendors do what they do best and are well respected by PSers. Their work speaks for itself. This is the issue that many of us have with RD. If he would provide education about his area of expertise [colored diamonds...err...socks], I believe he would be perceived in a more positive light. As Karl said, if he wants to sell well cut 60/60 socks, no one is stopping him. I think that we are looking for RD to do more than talk about what he believes and do something about it. If not, how many threads must he start, which say the same thing? Now my feet are cold and I''m going to get my socks!!

Marian,

Each problem has at least two sides.

How could you promote handmade socks in internet for HighTech Fans?
Just try do it and you will better understand other side of problem.

If we want find good solution we need consider problem from different sides. I do not like RD discussion style too as you, but he has valid point.
If we just ignore his point of view we lost opportunity find health solution for diamond industry .
I sure what Superideal diamonds breaks balance in diamond industry, improves comoditization and erodes very important for diamond industry pillars .