Isn''t a good deal

[davidlni]

Hi,

Like most people here I am new for diamond and wanna get an engagement soon...
I found one on bluenile.com, I would like to see what u guys think...

Carat weight: 0.60

Cut: Ideal

Color: F

Clarity: VS1

Depth %: 61.9%

Table %: 56%

Symmetry: Very good

Polish: Very good

Girdle: Medium to slightly thick

Culet: None

Fluorescence: Strong blue

Measurements: 5.41x5.48x3.37 mm

Price: $2172

I also think about getting this diamond mounted on Scott Kay three stones setting design...
Any suggestion is welcomed...dimaond/Scott Kay setting...

Have a good one

David

 

[Mara]

Hi David..can you get a Sarin from BN....ask for crown and pavilion angles. That will tell you more and allow others to comment on a better picture. The stone looks good from the numbers you posted, but you need more info to make an educated decision. I personally think the price is a little high, but if you are looking at F VS..maybe that is the best that they can do. Have you considered dropping the color/clarity a bit to something like G SI to get more carat weight and still have a great cut and much sparkle? Not sure what your priorities are but G is still very white and SI as long as it's eye clean is a great bargain.

Get the Sarin results and then post them!




Which Scott Kay setting? Do the other 2 stones come with the ring?




Good luck!

 

[canadiangrrl]

Ditto Daph-I mean Mara. From the information you've provided, that stone looks like it could be quite nice. You need the crown and pavilion angles to get a more complete picture, though. And while I am an advocate of stones in the D-E-F range (personal preference) I would definitely consider dropping the clarity to SI1 or SI2. In doing so, you can potentially save yourself some coin, or up your carat weight within that price range. VS1 is overkill, in my opinion, particularly in an RB of that size.

If you are able to post a pic of the Scott Kay setting (or a link) you are sure to get some feedback.

 

[leeann212]

I think bluenile.com is a reputable retailer with competitive prices on their loose diamonds but they over charge on the settings. I would stay away from diamonds that have any flouresence especially strong blue. An H or I color diamond with SI1 to SI2 clarity would get you a bigger diamond for your money and would look equally as nice. Cut is far more important than color and clarity if you want to maximize what you get for your money.

My fiance bought me an 1.4 I color SI2 that sparkled just as much as a comparable diamond that was F color for about 40% less.

Good Luck!

 

[Mara]

I disagree on staying away from any diamonds with fluor.




Strong blue in lower colors (DEF) can sometimes cause a milky appearance in the stone, but those are very far and few between. Fluor will come in very helpful with GHIJK etc diamonds because they may help the stones look whiter. Especially for something like an I or J colored stone, med or strong blue would make the stone look MUCH whiter.




So Strong Blue in an F may not be as desirable, I would check into the milky appearance....but for someone who is considering a higher color grade in order to stay on budget and get a bigger stone, fluor can be a great way to go.

 

[leeann212]

I was told that Flourescence lowers the value of a diamond regardless of its affect on color.

 

[Mara]

What exactly quantifies the 'value of a diamond'....?




Value in a monetary sense?




Value in an emotional sense?




Value in a 'meeting my needs' sense?

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 12/10/2003 1:18:30 PM leeann212 wrote:





I was told that Flourescence lowers the value of a diamond regardless of its affect on color.
----------------

Who told you that?

 

[Mara]

To be really specific, diamonds with strong or med blue fluor ARE usually priced cheaper than a comparable stone without fluor depending on the color grade. But to clarify the value of a diamond is where the difference is made.




If you are talking value in a monetary sense, yes the stone may be cheaper to buy. But from a REAL value perspective, it would be possibly be more valuable to someone to get fluor with lower color, and a bigger stone. That is what I would do. That's more valuable than the 'resale value' of the stone to me.




So yes a stone may be cheaper with fluor. However that doesn't mean that it's not a good deal, in fact it's a BETTER deal and would be more VALUABLE to someone on a budget. If you are planning to re-sell the stone later, or purchase for investment purposes, chances are it won't be as valuable to you to do this from a re-sale perspective LATER. However, I wouldn't think too many investment type stones would be I/J color and needing fluor. And as we all know, re-sale of a stone is a moot point, you never get remotely close to what you paid anyway.




Textbook knowledge agrees...sale value decreases with fluor. But to a consumer that's good news!

Also Leann...your I colored stone probably could have benefitted quite a great deal from fluor, med or strong. F&I has a med or strong blue fluor stone...can't recall which and she notes that she isn't sure she'd like it without the fluor...because it looks whiter. Food for thought.

 

[Giangi]

On I or lower colored stones, fluorescence actually commands a little premium, both in request and price.
That said, I would go with an H color SI stone in order to get a bigger ct weight. F/VS 1 is overkill in my opinion too. You can get a much bigger stone if you drop color and clarity by a few grades. You could be able to get a really nice 70-75pts stone!

Also, on an F color, I don't recomend strong blue fluorescence. If we are talking about D-E-F color diamonds, I wouldn't go on anything higher than medium blue.

 

[fire&ice]

Ahh - to weigh in on Bl. Fluor. *I* would not buy a stone that *didn't* have bl. fluor.

My "I" colored stone faces up significantly whiter w/ the med/strong blue fluor. (Mara, the cert said medium blue - my jeweler thought it was closer to strong blue - so I'm covering the bases)

The reason that some bl. fluor stones trade for less is sheer ignorance & prejudice. For many years these "blue-white" (strong blue fluor) stones were desireable & commanded quite a premium. What was actually being sold were the higher color stones (H/I/J) stones as "blue-white" colorless (DEF) stones. Retailers were regulated to ban the term "blue white". Then, the pendulum swung the other way out of the favor of fluor. Blue Fluor is just something that the jeweler have to "explain" to consumers - like they are making excuses for it. So, hence, why some shy away.

Interesting, GIA did a study on Blue Fluor & it was the prefered stone over a stone that did not have it.

If I recall correctly, many diamond dealers on this forum personally *own* diamonds w/ much fluor.

As far as value, Mara is dead on. You pay for an I color stone but get a stone that faces up H color or better.

Some bl. fluor stones will exhibit a milky affect in sunlight. Though it happens, it's rare & usually in stone that are Very Strong Blue.

 

[DEVO]

You can get better... just not at bluenile.

I found a stone that is an H&A cut with same colour, clarity, and caret (.65) for $400 more.

So based on that info alone... I know you can do better with a non-H&A search for the same price.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Blue flour can actually add marvelous flashes of blue light and sparkle. For a while, in the early 1970's (??), "blue diamonds" were highly sought after.

As to pricing. Higher color diamonds, D/E/F, can take a price hit due to the presence of blue flour. Sooo this F with strong blue might actually be priced a bit lower than a comparable F without blue flour. As Giangi mentioned, Blue Flour actually adds a premium to pricing in lower, especially I and J color diamonds.

Mara was correct too. Sometimes blue flour will cause a colorless diamond to take on a milky appearance in brite, direct sunlight. That is something that needs to be checked on a case by case basis.

As also stated before, you can maximize your budget with a larger diamond by dropping the level of color and clarity. The performance and color appearance is directly affected by how well a diamond is cut. A well cut H color diamond will have much the same visual appearance of most so-so cut F color diamonds. Clarity comes at a premium as well. Why pay for something you can't see with the naked eye? There are many great, 100% eye clean SI diamonds that will expand your budget to include larger carat weights.

You definitely need to get the Sarin info from BN and post the crown and pavillion angles for more informed opinions on this diamond.

 

[DEVO]

why bother getting a sarin report from bluenile when a search done here can get you better?

for example

not h&a but close to it.

 

[davidlni]

Thanks for all u guys have commented...I just got the Sarin data of the diamond...I think it will be more accurate at what we have concerned...

0.6 carat
diameter: 5.45mm
diam dev 1.2%
total dept 3.34mm 61.3%
crown: angle 34.8 o
height 15.3% (0.84mm)
pavil: angle 40.4 o
depth 42.9%
table avg size 56.1%
culet 1.3 %
girdle: avg. 1.2% thin
min/max 0.7% thin 1.4% medium
star/upper 50.6% : 49.4 %
cut grade 0

that's all i have, thank you for all u guys help...

David

 

[pqcollectibles]

Great HCA score! 0.6 TIC. Excellent Fire, Excellent Light Return, Excellent Scintillation, Very Good Spread! WOW!

I only have 2 concerns. The diameter. The diamond might appear slightly out of round, might not. And, the stong blue flour in a F color diamond. I'm not a blue flour phobe so don't take that the wrong way. As stated before, blue flour might or might not make the diamond appear milky in direct sunlight.

By the numbers, this diamond should be a great performer. The rest comes down to your eye. What will you see and does the diamond speak to you.

Blue Nile is a very reputable Vendor with a liberal 30 day return policy. They have good feedback here on the Forum.

 

[davidlni]

It's my previous posted diamond, and now, I found another one which is more expensive though, but higher quality. I wanna see what u guys think of that one. I appreciate ur time.

(1)
Carat weight: 0.60
Cut: GIA Ideal
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth %: 61.9%
Table %: 56%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Very good
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Strong blue
Measurements: 5.41x5.48x3.37 mm

(Sarin data)
diameter: 5.45mm
diam dev 1.2%
total dept 3.34mm 61.3%
crown: angle 34.8 o
height 15.3% (0.84mm)
pavil: angle 40.4 o
depth 42.9%
table avg size 56.1%
culet 1.3 %
girdle: avg. 1.2% thin
min/max 0.7% thin 1.4% medium
star/upper 50.6% : 49.4 %
cut grade 0

Price: $2172

(2)
Carat weight: 0.66
Cut: GIA Ideal
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth %: 60.8%
Table %: 56%
Symmetry: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Facet
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.65x5.67x3.44 mm
Crown

(Sarin data: I heard from online jewelry it is provided by previous owner)
brh11-21a AGS ct 0 (what is it ??)
diameter: 5.65mm (5.64-5.66)
depth 3.46mm 61.2%
crown: 33.9' 14.9%
pavil: 40.9' 43.2%
table avg size 3.14 56%
culet 0.8 % very small
girdle: 0.7thin - 1.4medium 1.1%

Price: $30XX

 

[canadiangrrl]

If prie is a concern, I'd stick with #1. I doubt you'll notice much difference between #1 and #2. I'd still advise you to drop the clarity to at least VS2 (if not SI1/2) in order to a) save yourself some $ or b) up the size. Eyeclean is eyeclean - to the naked eye it doesn't matter if it's clean VS1 or a clean SI1.

 

[Jennifer5973]

These guys have given you excellent advice on going with a clean SI stone to get more bang for your buck. Cut is very important and if you want to achieve larger than .6 ct, you can with a beautiful SI1 or 2, G, H, I, and a good cut to maximize the is a good thing most of the time. The diamonds i get the most compliments on are my G's with light to med flourescence...people are always saying (literally) "gee, that thing really sparkles..."

I'm just a diamond nut, not an expert (in diamonds, anyway

) but this advice is right on the money IMHO. Good luck.