Is this a good deal?

[DanieBurger]

Cut: Round H&A
Clarity: VS2
Color: F
Weight: 1.17 carats
Table % 55.1 Grade: 1A
Crown Angle 35.2 Grade: 2A
Crown Height % 14.4 Grade: 1A
Pavilion Depth % 43 Grade: 1A
Girdle Thickness Very thin to Thin Grade: 1B
Total Depth % 61.2 Grade: 1A
Polish / Symmetry Good Grade: 2A
Final Grade: 1B AMERICAN IDEAL CUT

For $6400

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Hi Dana,

At first sight, it seems a great deal. But then come the questions:

- Who says that the stone is H&A? You are definitely not paying the price for it. Also, the combination of H&A, with only Good on polish and symmetry is not common.

- The combination of 55% table, with only 14.4 crown height and a slightly steep crown of 35.2° seems weird. Are you sure of the correctness of these figures?

- If you have crown angle, why don't you have the very important pavilion angle?

- The combination of crown height 14.4 %, pavilion depth 43% and total depth 61.2% should not result in a 'very thin to thin girdle'. Once again, I doubt the correctness of the figures.

Frankly, if all these figures are indeed like this, I seriously doubt not only about the stone, but also about the sincerity of the vendor.

Please check more in detail,

 

[DanieBurger]

okay, I was looking at the wrong thing. We bought this on eBay last night and I was looking at what the lister wrote about the diamond, not what the IGI report said. Here is what the IGI report said:

Dimensions: 6.88-6.79 X 4.9
Depth: 61.2%
Crown Angles: 35.2 (15.4%)
Pavillion: 40.9 (43%)
Table: 3.77mm (55.1%)
Cutlet: 1.7% very small
Girdle: 1.1%

Cost us $6400
Replacement cost: $14,750 (written on IGI certification report)

It says it is an AGS 0. But I don't know that much about dimensions and things like that. Any help would be great!
Thanks!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

If you do not like the stone, when it arrives, I hope that you can return it.

If you think that you got yourself an ideal-cut stone, that is definitely incorrect. There is however a slight possibility that you paid a reasonable price, but that remains to be seen.

Live long,

 

[quaeritur]

Paul - in what sense are you referring to "ideal-cut" here? This stone, if the IGI numbers are correct and correspond to the diamond, does fall within AGS0 parameters, if I'm not mistaken. It scores a 2.3 on the HCA, and while I think it's a bit of a "steep-and-deep" combo and might leak light under the table, it might still be a decent stone, right?

 

[DanieBurger]

What is the HCA?

 

[Todd07]

See the cut adviser link at the top of every PS page. I think it's mentioned in the tutorial as well

 

[DanieBurger]

I did it using only percentages and not degrees. It scored a 1.3, there's only one way to find out....when I get it, I'll see if I love it I will try to upload the pictures.

 

[quaeritur]

Angles are more accurate -but there's always some room for error because the machines that measure the diamond are not perfectly accurate. Let your eyes be the judge, and yes, please do post pics!

 

[DanieBurger]

here is one picture head on I'll upload a side view too

 

[DanieBurger]

side view of my diamond

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

I am so adamantly against this stone, because it is a classic example of mis-representation. The numbers indeed do not look that bad, but all the other information makes you doubt about the correctness of those numbers. Also, all the other info makes it clear that those nice numbers are just good averages, and that closer examination will show that this stone is cut below even average standards.

Okay, the average measurements would fall into AGS-ideal-proportions. But polish and symmetry are only good, according to IGI, so at best, this is an AGS-3, definitely not 0. Thus misrepresentation of AGS-0

If it would have H&A, polish and symmetry would be better too. Thus misrepresentation of H&A.

The IGI report has a value indicated. This shows that it is not an IGI-grading report, but an IGI-appraisal. It is not accidental that such a stone does not have a proper GIA or AGS-grading report, even not a proper IGI-grading report. This brings along serious doubts about the correctness of the colour- and clarity-grades.

Finally, when the pictures are shown, I see some very non-conformistic cutting. I see very small stars, and long upper halves. In the pavilion, I see very short lower halves. The table size is very difficult to estimate, but it has the looks of a table of 63%, although it is much smaller.

For me, this stone is misrepresented from beginning to end. It may look nice, the price might not be exaggerated, but the seller is a fraud. I generally do not get so excited, but such events just make me angry. Sorry for that.

Live long,

 

[valeria101]

The side view seems to show a thick girdle - so if I see that right, the 1.1% number is the average of a wavy girdle.

That "Harts and Arrows" name demands a bit of proof since it is supposed to justify a premium. It is not possible to see harts and arrows in those pics.


Some GIA or AGS pieces with some better account of ideal cut and Harts and Arrows come close.

The closest in grades, size and price seems to be one (1.103 cts F SI1) listed by GoodOldGold and one AGS0 E SI1 listed by Dirtcheap Diamodnds as far as I can tell. Both show on the Pricescope search engine (THIS one).

There are two 1.2carat pieces GIA H/VS1 (LINK) and AGS H/VS2 LINK) that show a very convincing arrows pattern and appear to have better finish (=polish and symmetry grades on cert). Both at WF and neither a branded "A Cut Above".

Not that the pictures and specs of your diamond look bad at all.

This is not a bargain compared to similar diamonds graded by other labs than GIA or AGS... Did you want a H&A, AGS0 in the first place?

 

[fire&ice]

Can you show a copy of the cert?

 

[Superidealist]

Paul-Antwerp wrote:
If it would have H&A, polish and symmetry would be better too. Thus misrepresentation of H&A.

I'm not convinced this is true. From what I've seen, Japan's CGL hearts and arrows standards make no mention of polish or meet point symmetry. It may, however, be that when meet point symmetry is so far off the CGL standards are impossible to achieve.

 

[DanieBurger]

If you want another opinion on the cut grade of this diamond. I use the figures from the sarin report on the Gem appraiser site http://www.gemappraisers.com . I find that he is more accurate that the Hollaway cut adviser. The gem appraiser takes in more important information and his final figures on depth match the sarin report.

That is what is written on the listing

 

[denverappraiser]

Dana,

Are you confident that the report, the sarin and the stone all match?

The description in your first posting does not match the information on the Sarin (girdle & crown height) and the item in the photo does not have a v-thin to thin girdle.

I have to side with Paul, this doesn't look right. Do you have a return period by which you have to decide to keep it or return it?

Neil Beaty, GG ISA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[wonka27]

Not to be critical, but it would not suprise me one bit if the pictures posted are not of the actual stone. If they were pulled off the ebay auction, many times those people use the same pictures for all their products.

You know how it goes with some ebay vendors...

 

[DanieBurger]

She uses different pictures for each auction...I've seen her other auctions for diamonds. Her feedback is awesome - over 975 postives..... The reason for the discrepancy between my first post and the sarin report is the IGI appraisal and the sarin report are only different in dimensions

 

[Todd07]

Positive feedback from your ave ebay customer says the seller is prompt and basically honest. After you spend time on PS, you become a more discerning customer.

IMHO, take it to an independent appraiser.

 

[denverappraiser]

Dana,

Assuming that the information quoted from the IGI cert is correct AND
assuming that the Sarin data supplied is correct and for the applicable stone AND
assuming the stone in the photograph is the one you recieved and it is the one described in the above two reports AND
assuming the stone displays h&a in the same way that Paul uses that term AND
assuming you are not sufficiently concerned about any of the above to pay for an independent examination,

then it appears that you got a fine stone for a reasonable price.

We have a bunch of cynics here. Many are unwilling to make those assumptions.

Neil Beaty, GG ISA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[quaeritur]

Well, when you put it that way, Neil... it does seem like an awful lot of assumptions, doesn't it?

From those pics -and my very very VERY inexperienced opinion compared to Paul and Neil!- I agree that at the very least the girdle doesn't seem to match the Sarin info. I'd urge you to have the stone independently appraised, because I'm somewhat sceptical that it will match the cert/Sarin info...