"Laser Drill Hole" Comment in GIA report

[mdg228]

Hello,

I am looking into buying a 1.91 carat, I color, VS2 clairty, Very Good cut diamond. I am buying it secondhand and was wondering if $12,500 was a good price. The two things that concerns me is it has been graded as "good' symmetry and under clarity characteristics, there is a comment noting "laser drill hole." The GIA report number is 5151566795 or you can follow this link " http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=5151566795&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

Is $12,500 too much for a clarity enhanced diamond?

Thanks in advance -- I am supremely appreciative of anyone in this community who can offer their advice and expertise!

Best,
Mark

 

[kenny]

The reason I'd not buy that diamond is it scored over 2.0 on the HCA.

https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca



After you find diamonds that score under 2.0 get an Idealscope pic.

https://www.pricescope.com/tools/ideal-scope

Compare it to this chart.



Here's that diamond's inclusion plots.




I thought a laser drill hole meant the diamond was 'clarity enhanced', and that GIA does not grade those ... and I'm especially surprised that GIA gave any clarity grade to it let alone VS2.
Hope someone here can clear this up.

 

[msop04]

I thought a laser drill hole meant the diamond was 'clarity enhanced', and that GIA does not grade those ... and I'm especially surprised that GIA gave any clarity grade to it let alone VS2.
Hope someone here can clear this up.

Kenny,
I thought this was strange as well... why would GIA grade this stone at all?? Is it that they "won't" grade CE stones or they "don't like to" with some exceptions?? Also, since it was clarity enhanced, why would it receive anything except SI/I grades??

Maybe I'm confused about this.

 

[msop04]

I found this on Wikipedia... interesting.

Laser "drilling" involves using a laser to burn a hole to a colored inclusion, followed by acid washing to remove the coloring agent. The clarity grade is the grade after the treatment. The treatment is considered permanent.
GIA, as a matter of policy, does NOT grade clarity-enhanced diamonds but it will grade laser-drilled diamonds since it considers the enhancement to be permanent in nature. If you see a GIA Diamond Report with the words "clarity enhanced" or "fracture-filled," it is surely a counterfeit report.

Clarity can also be "enhanced" by filling the fracture much like a car windshield crack can be treated. Such diamonds are sometimes called "fracture filled diamonds". Reputable vendors must disclose this filling and reputable filling companies use filling agents which show a flash of color, commonly orange or pink, when viewed closely. There is a significant price discount for fracture-filled diamonds. The GIA will not grade fracture-filled diamonds, in part because the treatment is not as permanent as the diamond itself. Reputable companies often provide for repeat treatments if heat causes damage to the filling. The heat required to cause damage is that of a blowtorch used to work on settings, and it is essential to inform anyone working on a setting if the diamond is fracture-filled, so they can apply cooling agents to the diamond and use greater care while working on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_clarity

 

[kenny]

Maybe GIA will grade a diamond with a laser-drilled hole as long as it's not filled.

Just guessing ...

ETA, just saw the previous post.

 

[Alistra]

Kenny is right that GIA will grade laser drilled diamonds but not "filled" ones. They also grade HTHP diamonds because the treatment is considered permanent whereas clarity enhancement (filled stones), is not considered a permanent treatment. I have seen legitimate GIA reports for both.

 

[yssie]

I personally have no problem with it - I wouldn't give a drilled stone any more or less consideration because of the fact that it's drilled. It's permanent, and visually I'd rather have a less conspicuous white inclusion than a more obvious black one.

Interestingly, while laser drilling is "mind clean" for me, HPHT etc. is not... and those treatments are permanent too.

I wonder why?

 

[msop04]

Hello,

I am looking into buying a 1.91 carat, I color, VS2 clairty, Very Good cut diamond. I am buying it secondhand and was wondering if $12,500 was a good price. The two things that concerns me is it has been graded as "good' symmetry and under clarity characteristics, there is a comment noting "laser drill hole." The GIA report number is 5151566795 or you can follow this link " http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=5151566795&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

Is $12,500 too much for a clarity enhanced diamond?

Thanks in advance -- I am supremely appreciative of anyone in this community who can offer their advice and expertise!

Best,
Mark

I did a quick search on JA with the same specs as the stone in question (1.8-2.0 ct, I, VS2, Very Good). The least expensive stone came up for $17020.00 -- however, this stone has not been CE, so I'm sure that would take away from the value.

Personally, I would not purchase anything that was not EX cut, EX/VG polish, EX symmetry.

Is it the size of the stone that draws you to it? Sometimes people just want a bigger stone, but you'll find that most PS members will trade size for EX cut. Regarding the asking price, I would be hesitant to purchase a stone with that big of a price decrease when the only difference in it and others (that cost $17K+) is the CE.

Think about it this way... What was the clarity prior to the CE? Most likely it was graded SI2-I1, otherwise the stone would be worth more money without the enhancement. So, my opinion is no. It is not a good price. For that range, you can get this diamond: 1.81 GIA EX cut, I, SI2 for $12,900. I would rather wear this stone than a VG, CE stone ANY DAY!!

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-dia...-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-231613

And CUT is the most important C!

If you would post your budget, there are lots of ppl who would love to help you find a great diamond!

 

[SB621]

I guess I'm the opposite of Yssie. For me personally I wouldn't buy it for 12.5k let alone 6k.

Go find an I, SI2 that is eyeclean and drop down to 1.75ct. Fracture filling just looses any appeal the diamond might have to me. I would rather have a natural stone with black spots as long as they weren't obvious then one that has been filled. To each their own I guess

 

[msop04]

I guess I'm the opposite of Yssie. For me personally I wouldn't buy it for 12.5k let alone 6k.

Go find an I, SI2 that is eyeclean and drop down to 1.75ct. Fracture filling just looses any appeal the diamond might have to me. I would rather have a natural stone with black spots as long as they weren't obvious then one that has been filled. To each their own I guess

I'm with you SB621... Interesting to hear the opinions though!

 

[msop04]

OP, here is another option for $11,850! It's much cleaner than the 1.81 above...

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-dia...-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-174556

 

[mdg228]

These responses are amazing! Thank you so much! I think I will take your advice about dropping down in clarity -- but are I clarity stones ever eye clean? I'm sorry if that is an ignorant question.

 

[msop04]

These responses are amazing! Thank you so much! I think I will take your advice about dropping down in clarity -- but are I clarity stones ever eye clean? I'm sorry if that is an ignorant question.

Not ignorant at all! Most are not eye clean, but I have seen a few that had an inclusion in the "perfect spot," such that it could be covered by a prong... That would be like the Holy Grail if I could find one of those!!

 

[yssie]

I guess I'm the opposite of Yssie. For me personally I wouldn't buy it for 12.5k let alone 6k.

Go find an I, SI2 that is eyeclean and drop down to 1.75ct. Fracture filling just looses any appeal the diamond might have to me. I would rather have a natural stone with black spots as long as they weren't obvious then one that has been filled. To each their own I guess

Are we talking about the same stone? The first one can't be fracture filled - GIA wouldn't have graded it! But I can't get to links on my phone, have I missed a stone?

Fracture filling definitely isn't mind-clean for me either

 

[kenny]

I personally have no problem with it - I wouldn't give a drilled stone any more or less consideration because of the fact that it's drilled.

The reason I'd not buy a diamond with a laser-drilled hole is dark visible gunk may get into the hole, and may be annoyingly-difficult to get out.
I'd opt for a diamond that I don't have to baby, but to each their own.

 

[yssie]

I personally have no problem with it - I wouldn't give a drilled stone any more or less consideration because of the fact that it's drilled.

The reason I'd not buy a diamond with a laser-drilled hole is dark visible gunk may get into the hole, and may be annoyingly-difficult to get out.
I'd opt for a diamond that I don't have to baby, but to each their own.

I take your point.
I wonder though (this is not rhetorical) what sorts of effects due to ambient dirt can you expect when the holes are ~0.02mm in diameter? Is dirt getting into the drill holes a legitimate practical concern?

 

[kenny]

I personally have no problem with it - I wouldn't give a drilled stone any more or less consideration because of the fact that it's drilled.

The reason I'd not buy a diamond with a laser-drilled hole is dark visible gunk may get into the hole, and may be annoyingly-difficult to get out.
I'd opt for a diamond that I don't have to baby, but to each their own.

I take your point.
I wonder though (this is not rhetorical) what sorts of effects due to ambient dirt can you expect when the holes are ~0.02mm in diameter? Is dirt getting into the drill holes a legitimate practical concern?

Maybe for us guys who change our own dirty motor oil.

Everyone will make their own decision on what's a legitimate practical concern.
One way will not be chosen by everyone.

 

[msop04]

I personally have no problem with it - I wouldn't give a drilled stone any more or less consideration because of the fact that it's drilled.

The reason I'd not buy a diamond with a laser-drilled hole is dark visible gunk may get into the hole, and may be annoyingly-difficult to get out.I'd opt for a diamond that I don't have to baby, but to each their own.

I didn't even think about that possibility -- yuck!

If this were to happen, could it affect the optics?

 

[yssie]

I personally have no problem with it - I wouldn't give a drilled stone any more or less consideration because of the fact that it's drilled.

The reason I'd not buy a diamond with a laser-drilled hole is dark visible gunk may get into the hole, and may be annoyingly-difficult to get out.
I'd opt for a diamond that I don't have to baby, but to each their own.

I take your point.
I wonder though (this is not rhetorical) what sorts of effects due to ambient dirt can you expect when the holes are ~0.02mm in diameter? Is dirt getting into the drill holes a legitimate practical concern?

Maybe for us guys who change our own dirty motor oil.

Everyone will make their own decision on what's a legitimate practical concern.
One way will not be chosen by everyone.

I suspect this is the sticking point. I really doubt motor oil would be a problem though, unless you're in the habit of finely aerosolizing it

 

[SB621]

I guess I'm the opposite of Yssie. For me personally I wouldn't buy it for 12.5k let alone 6k.

Go find an I, SI2 that is eyeclean and drop down to 1.75ct. Fracture filling just looses any appeal the diamond might have to me. I would rather have a natural stone with black spots as long as they weren't obvious then one that has been filled. To each their own I guess

Are we talking about the same stone? The first one can't be fracture filled - GIA wouldn't have graded it! But I can't get to links on my phone, have I missed a stone?

Fracture filling definitely isn't mind-clean for me either

Sorry yssie- I'm trying to do too many things at once tonight. I meant fractured filled or laser drilled. Both aren't mind clean to me. Sorry for the mistake. My mind speak isn't keeping up with me today!

 

[Trasid]

My understanding is this: And I will admit it sounds a bit crazy

Laser Drilling does not have to be disclosed.

The F.T.C. does not require disclosure of laser drilling when diamonds are sold. They consider the change in clarity permanent: If you buy an enhanced diamond that was improved from SI2 to SI1, they consider it an SI1 forever.

Fracture filling must be disclosed because it is considered a temporary treatment where the lazer drilled areas are filled with a substance, that can be destroyed by heat (as in having the prongs fixed) or my using an ultrasonic clearer.

 

[kenny]

Laser Drilling does not have to be disclosed.

The F.T.C. does not require disclosure of laser drilling when diamonds are sold. ...

In this case it IS disclosed, right on the GIA report.

I have no sympathy for one who buys a diamond without examining the lab grading report closely.
Yes some diamond sellers can be smooth talkers, but never is it more important to ... trust but verify.

 

[msop04]

My understanding is this: And I will admit it sounds a bit crazy

Laser Drilling does not have to be disclosed. <------- Wow... that seems unethical!

The F.T.C. does not require disclosure of laser drilling when diamonds are sold. They consider the change in clarity permanent: If you buy an enhanced diamond that was improved from SI2 to SI1, they consider it an SI1 forever.

Fracture filling must be disclosed because it is considered a temporary treatment where the lazer drilled areas are filled with a substance, that can be destroyed by heat (as in having the prongs fixed) or my using an ultrasonic clearer.

This makes sense. It sucks (to me), but okay.

FWIW... If I ever found out that I'd paid for a diamond that had been CE and not documented (assuming the vendor knew it), I would be on fire!

Also, if this is the case (not having to disclose the info), why don't more vendors try to get top dollar by keeping the CE a secret? ***OR DO THEY???!!*** Who knows... maybe some of us have drilled diamonds and don't even know about it!! (yeah, I'm being a bit of a conspiracy theorist! )

I guess my point is... Regardless of your opinion on clarity enhancemented diamons (no matter which type of treatment), the buyer should be made aware. We deserve to know exactly what we're buying. That's just honest, ethical business to be, well... honest and ethical.

 

[msop04]

Laser Drilling does not have to be disclosed.

The F.T.C. does not require disclosure of laser drilling when diamonds are sold. ...

In this case it IS disclosed, right on the GIA report.

I have no sympathy for one who buys a diamond without examining the lab grading report closely.
Yes some diamond sellers can be smooth talkers, but never is it more important to ... trust but verify.

I'm glad for the OP (in that he knew, based on the report)... but if it doesn't HAVE to be on the GIA report, it would be more difficult for the consumer to find out -- and, really, why would they even ask if they trusted their vendor... who trusted his seller... who trusted GIA to disclose it. (you see where I'm going with this...) It starts with GIA or other grading labs. We trust the certs. Guess we need to start having stones looked at independently??

 

[delight]

Laser drilling is a permanent clarity enhancement and GIA grades it. The VS2 grade is what GIA thinks the stone is before clarity enhancement.

 

[denverappraiser]

Laser drilling is a permanent clarity enhancement and GIA grades it. The VS2 grade is what GIA thinks the stone is before clarity enhancement.

GIA grades clarity based on the condition at the time of the inspection. That is to say, the drill hole was considered in assigning the VS2 grade.

Clarity enhancement is an FTC issue and it has to do with the disclosures by a dealer. GIA is not covered by it. They're doing their best to report the facts as they see them and obviously this is a relevant one but the disclosure rules don't apply to them since they're not selling anything. They refuse to grade fracture filled stones because the treatment isn't permanent, not because they think it's evil or because of the FTC disclosure rules. The condition of the stone can easily change because of heat, acid or whatever after the inspection and since the report stays the same, this means that it would no longer be valid and there would be significant opportunity for it to be used to mislead a customer.

 

[HoratioNelson]

One other negative which hasn't been mentioned from what I can see...


This has 60% / 60% table and depth ratios. I read something on here a while back about 60/60 stones - they're not looked on favourably - see here https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond

 

[yssie]

One other negative which hasn't been mentioned from what I can see...


This has 60% / 60% table and depth ratios. I read something on here a while back about 60/60 stones - they're not looked on favourably - see here https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond

No, 60/60s often aren't looked on favourably here.
Interestingly, 90% of the posters who post about them being looked upon wih disfavour can't explain why or provide any personal rationales beyond "other PSers think that way" or "ACAs aren't cut that way".
60/60s can be nice or ugly, just like 54/61.5s. It's time we started judging RBs on their own merits and not disqualifying entire flavours to generalizations - we certainly have the knowledge and tools to do so.

In this case I don't like the proportions either- crown, pav, and table combo.