Larger white diamond, or much smaller Pink?

[kenny]

This poll is for an engagement ring.
Let's assume the guy does not discuss this with his gal.
She has never discussed anything about what she'd like, so it will be a complete surprise.

For around $10,000 you can get a well cut GIA G VS2 white diamond.
For the same price you can get a fairly decent natural GIA Fancy Intense Pink 0.20 ct diamond.
Neither are the best possible examples.
You could find stones that are more and less expensive but these are pretty good for their categories.

I realize for $10K, if you changed the specs you might find anything from 0.7 ct to 2 ct white, and variation is also possible with the pink.
I also realize you could get a larger yellow or a smaller blue - let's just focus on this white and this pink for this poll.

Please set aside which YOU would personally prefer to be surprised with when your fiance proposes to you.
(I think awareness of FCDs in PS is much higher than in the general public)
Please guess what most women would prefer, the 0.20 Fancy Intense Pink or the 1-ct G VS2 white diamond.

 

[junebug17]

I went with the one carat - I just think that most women would prefer a more traditional ring, and larger stone.

 

[lovemybling]

I have to agree with June I think "MOST" women would want a traditional BIGGER stone. Being a PINK girl myself I love the idea of a pink center stone but I don't think I would be happy with a .20 stone.

But it is an intersting question.... I can not wait to see what others have to say.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Definitely the one carat for an ering. Size trumps color on this one!

 

[Christina...]

I voted for the 1 ct white. I agree that the average woman would prefer a more traditional engagement ring.

 

[yssie]

For an Ering - 1ct white, without hesitation

 

[steelmagnolia]

Definitely the larger white. Also, for a lot of women I know, the pink wouldn't be quite pink enough, and that would be a factor as well.

 

[kenny]

Definitely the larger white. Also, for a lot of women I know, the pink wouldn't be quite pink enough, and that would be a factor as well.

Yeah a Vivid would be a more-saturated pink but for $10K the weight would probably drop down below 0.20 ct.
A good Fancy Intense Pink can be quite pink and IMHO is a nice trade off between price and color saturation.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks, Kenny. I thought the replies would go in this direction.

 

[mrssalvo]

1 carat white, no question...

 

[jstarfireb]

Yup, the 1ct white diamond beyond a shadow of a doubt. It would be my personal choice as well as what I believe most women would choose.

 

[Echidna]

I would choose the 1ct white simply because it's a stone I can wear with anything. It probably sounds silly, but I wear a lot of red as well as pink and while I'd love a intense purple-pink RHR, I'd choose an e-ring that went with all my outfits

 

[Eilonwy]

Sorry - but I would be absolutely devastated to receive a .20 pink over a 1ct white!! Especially if there has been no discussion beforehand I wouldn't be picking a fancy colour. Unless I assume she has indicated a preference for fancy colour? Even so, people's tastes change over time and even if she wanted a pink now she might feel very differently in future. And then there is the whole outfit-matching thing. If I had been given a coloured stone it would bother me every time I wore something that "didn't go". But that's just me.

If it's going to be a surprise (and has to be a surprise) I'd definitely be going for the safest option... white

 

[Echidna]

I would choose the 1ct white simply because it's a stone I can wear with anything. It probably sounds silly, but I wear a lot of red as well as pink and while I'd love a intense purple-pink RHR, I'd choose an e-ring that went with all my outfits

Sorry Kenny, I didn't read your post carefully enough. I believe most women would prefer a larger, colourless stone due to its classic nature, versatility, and possibly the brag factor.

 

[rainydaze]

while the idea of a pink diamond is kinda neat, i had to vote for the larger colorless diamond, hands down. i even ran this by my DH and he interrupted me to say 'does she even like pink diamonds?' (going along with the scenario).

 

[Frenchcut]

I voted for the white 1 carat...I don't like pink

Joke aside 0.2 ct would look too small for an engagement ring as far as I'm concerned, especially if a much larger 1 carat is possible with the same budget!

 

[marcy]

Larger white diamond. I love pink but would refer to keep colored stones as a RHR.

 

[rainydaze]

you know, after posting here i got to thinking and was reminded that gals on PS are here because we are really into diamonds and most of us want something very specific for the budget - be it size, color, clarity, style (rb, cushion, antique, asscher, etc.) and so on. we have scoured all options and information to the point of insanity (some of us anyway... myself included!) so we are pretty darned sure of what we would, and would not, like. 'out there' however, there are many women who don't put much thought or care into jewelry or diamonds and are as pleased as pie to get whatever their SO chooses for them. in that case, i can see how getting a .2ct pink would be exceptional, blow her socks off, and easily perceived as being way more 'special' to the lucky lady than a traditional engagement diamond. i can appreciate the subtlety of it too, and how that makes it even more special to the couple.

 

[Black Jade]

Unlike many posters, I've got no problem with the size of the pink (.25 would be slightly better but .20 can look nice in the right design), but I'd prefer a white diamond for an engagement ring.
I love pink but it doesn't go with everything and in my circles, is likely to be mistaken for a pink tourmaline or pink sapphire or something.
I wouldn't say that 'everyone' would prefer the white, and there are women who would like the pink better, I'm sure (and I know there are circle where it would be recognized and appreciated), but I think this is the kind of thing that is better not sprung on someone as a surprise. The results are likely to be unhappy (expensively unhappy).

 

[junebug17]

Rainydaze, I see what you're saying, and you make a good point - there are women out there who don't care about jewelry at all and would be happy with whatever they're given - but a pink diamond is just different from what a lot of women are familiar with in terms of an ering. She could love it, or it could go over like a lead balloon. A guy is taking a very expensive chance. I still think it's best to err on the side of caution and go with something more traditional. But, if a guy knows for a fact that his SO would be happy with a small pink diamond ering, that's a different story and by all means he should go for it.

 

[cokitty]

I would go with the white diamond for sure. 1- I dont like pink for everyday and IMO your engagement ring should be something you would wear everyday. I think you would have to talk to your girl seriously and have her see things in person before going with pink. 2- Pink is pink it is a highly personal thing and many women like things to match so you might have an issue there. Personally I might want to own a light pink diamond (not for an engagement ring) but the deeper hues dont hold any appeal for me. Even a small hint of orange and again I am out...there are just too many ways a pink ring could go very wrong.

 

[justginger]

I love FCDs, but for an engagement ring, I am still a traditionalist. I would pick the 1ct white stone - and then ask for the pink as an anniversary present.

 

[HopeDream]

A white diamond is far and away the safest choice for an engagement ring. Even if both stones were .20 ct, I think most women would still pick the colorless stone

Pink diamonds are fun for accent peices or mother's rings, but for something as meaningfull as an engagement ring I think a white diamond is a classic that the majority of women would expect. Like others have mentioned, a clear diamond is an easy wardrobe staple that goes with everything.

When I think of a pink diamond engagement ring I think there's a certain type of woman who would request such a ring - someone like Elle from Legally Blonde. Kind of like how few women pick colored wedding dresses.

 

[Imdanny]

Wow. 52-0. I've never seen such a lopsided internet poll. Full disclosure, one of those votes was mine. My grandmother wanted "a one carat diamond" her whole life, until she bought herself one. Previously, she had bought a 5/8. My grandparents got married with simple gold rings. I think this is why I believe that most women would choose a 1 carat white diamond. Maybe we sometimes forget it on PS, but for many women having a 1 carat diamond means a lot.

 

[kenny]

Wow. 52-0. I've never seen such a lopsided internet poll. Full disclosure, one of those votes was mine. My grandmother wanted "a one carat diamond" her whole life, until she bought herself one. Previously, she had bought a 5/8. My grandparents got married with simple gold rings. I think this is why I believe that most women would choose a 1 carat white diamond. Maybe we sometimes forget it on PS, but for many women having a 1 carat diamond means a lot.

So what happened after she bought herself one?
She didn't like it?
Returned it?

 

[motownmama]

I ct - yes. Perhaps tiny pink diamonds in the setting or wedding band.

 

[Black Jade]

Just want to repeat because there are few like me on Pricescope, but a lot like me in real life--I'm from that generation before the marketing to whom 'one carat' doesn't mean anything special. We got engaged/married during the last huge climb in diamond prices, worse than now, in the late seventies/early eighties when a 1 carat D flawless cost $60,000 (that would be equivalent to about $180,000 current dollars) and no one knew prices would ever go down. Our grandmothers and mothers often had larger stones than we did (both of mine had larger than mine) but we didn't even wish for that and thought that .25, .33 was a nice-sized stone and that a .50 was a huge rock. People were quite content with .10, .15 as solitaire stones (and I do have to say, although we didn't know about cut quality then, many of these very small solitaires really sparkled. People often bought D or E VVS in the very small sizes and I don't know if that makes more of a difference when the cut quality is not scientific, but it was actually WAY more common to have a very sparkly stone than it is nowadays). The representatives of this generation on Pricescope are not typical as they tend to be on here because they have upgraded at least once, but I know plenty of women in their 50's and 60's who still proudly wear their original .10-.40 stones set high in yellow gold and it has never crossed their mind to upgrade or change them. (they often add an anniversary ring and that is all). NONE of them would be interested in a pink diamond. They wouldn't want it even if it were one carat and the white diamond was a quarter carat.
For better of for worse, here in the U.S. an engagement ring is a white (colorless) diamond in 99.9% of people's minds and no matter how expensive or fabulous they don't want anything else--with the exception of blue sapphires, which are also recognized as being wedding jewelry. there is a tiny minority of women who would accept an engagement ring which was not either diamond or sapphire, but I think it is still even tinier than the minority in artsy/advanced circles who reject diamonds and traditional wedding things (sometimes for blood diamond reasons and sometimes for others. Although a surprising amount of the ones who reject diamonds will get cubic zirconia or moissanite or white sapphire or something white). Some women will now accept yellow diamonds, also. But pink is not on the radar, Jennifer Lopez notwithstanding.
If you check over in 'colored stones' you see beaufitul non-traditional engagement rings (which you won't see in real life)--and the women who own them either resenting or being proud of the fact that no one ever recognizes that they are wearing an engagement ring that is colored--depending on their personality. However the bulk of the colored stones section is right hand rings or some other form of jewelry on people who have white diamond engagement rings--which are not all one carat or larger, trust me.
Diamonds for engagements rings is not an old tradition (though it is actually somewhat older than 1949 and the diamonds are forever advertising campaign, just think of all the edwardian and art deco diamond engagement rings out there if you dont' believe me).
However it is a very thoroughly entrenched tradition in the United States at this point.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Tagging on to what BlackJade said, I agree that most women in the US desire a white diamond for an engagement ring. I would love to be wealthy enough to have a pink diamond, but it certainly would not be my engagement ring.

And truthfully, if my husband said he wanted to spend $50,000 on jewelry for me , it absolutely would never, ever occur to me to spend the whole amount on a half carat pink diamond! I'd probably use $10,000 to upgrade my current stone in color only, and then use the rest for an eternity ring, a sapphire ring, and a Van Craeynest ring with an AVC in it.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Getting a .20 pink diamond eng ring would traumatize me.

I cannot imagine a single woman being please with that over a 1 ct (as the poll results have shown).

 

[TristanC]

Haha, I think full disclosure is on the cards. I believe I am the one that 'inspired' this poll It is pretty evident when you look at the other thread of mine.

For the record, I voted for the 1ct as well in the spirit of the poll. Most women would overwhelmingly want a 1 ct stone.

Even if the poll were changed to 0.75ct white or 0.5ct pink, I believe it would still be overwhelmingly weighing in on the side of the 0.75ct white. maybe 90% to 10% or less in favor of pink.

I won't go further here, since a lot of thoughts were shared in the other thread, but I will say @Hopedream that nobody requested a pink, it is simply a different expression of individuality. And no, my SO is nothing like Elle in Legally Blonde. Obviously there was no intended malice in your post, since this was purely a hypothetical discussion.