My Experience and Recommendations on Round Brilliant Diamond purchase

[Gussie]

I think this is a very valid point, and a benefit that is rarely mentioned.

Also I believe age metrics play into the equation. Not always, but many times a younger buyer will have less dollars to spend and consequently spend more of their time doing things to stretch their dollars.

As we age and/or have drastic life experiences, our value system naturally evolves. We may begin to see our time as more valuable than our dollars and we begin to start viewing & executing purchase decisions differently.

Are you calling me old @sledge?

 

[sledge]

Are you calling me old @sledge?

Never. You are simply wise beyond your years!

 

[MrsBlue]

When these discussions arise, I think that one thing that is undervalued is the time involved in hunting a beautifully cut diamond. I think that it is definitely possible to find an unbranded great performing stone if you put in the time. A few years ago, when I was having a 5 stone made, I called Michelle at WF and said, "please send 5 matching 0.3 ct J VS2 ACAs to David Klass." Within a day, they were on their way, without a doubt in my mind they would be beautiful and well matched. I could have spent hours searching but super ideals and the vendors that sell them make it unbelievably easy. Too easy for my pocketbook sometimes!

100% this!!

We are buying an experience. I don't mind paying extra to have a beautiful website with tons of information to look through then have Becca take care of my purchase and upgrades.

OP looked through JA, requested certs, ordered a number of stones, then returned the ones she didn't want. This is a great way to save money and I might do the same under certain circumstances but if I'm treating myself, I want the experience to be a treat as well.

 

[Avatar345]

@Avatar345 ,

From one wordy poster to another, I salute you! And I say that for the thoughtful, balanced summation of the discussion which you took the time to prepare. Not just word count!

May I also commend you on your chart. When you said “hand” chart I was not prepared for an actual hand written chart. Haven’t seen one of those since before MS Excel v 1.0. Very impressive!

You make plenty of good observations about the impacts of different value factors as you slice and dice your way to understanding your own personal sweet spot. One factor to keep in mind is that super ideals are generally not listed on Rap – they are intentionally cut for merchants specializing in this niche and go directly into their programs. Thus they bypass (as a rule) the virtual database.

I think most people do approach diamond buying from a cost/benefit perspective, and almost everyone finds some area of compromise that they deem acceptable or even desireable (e.g. fluorescence or warm colors). And of course these opportunities exist within the superideal realm as well.

And in general the difference in price between a well cut GIA triple Ex and a branded super ideal is actually not as great as some might assume or suggest. And if you factor in elite craftsmanship, and added value such as benefits that might be better than what is available from virtual diamonds (or might be missing entirely), guaranteed availability, exclusivity, advanced diagnostics, a higher level of customer care, etc., the premium to a large extent becomes not a premium at all, but rather just a different product.

Bottom line, I fully agree with your balanced take. Not every buyer wants the same thing on a menu as diverse as gem diamonds. Education is the key to understanding any product and getting good value on the product that is right for YOU. The more you understand the full range of possibilities, the better you are able to do the slicing and dicing and deciding.

Haha thanks Texas! I appreciate the sentiment

Like you say those super ideals don't exist on RapNet at all - I *do* think of them as being part of a parallel, "higher" diamond experience in a sense. And the posters here are attesting to that themselves in terms of personal touch, time saved, etc. But I mean I truly think it goes even beyond that... in a world where there's so much confusion over lab grown 'infiltration' and what's real and what's not, I sort of view these super ideals as signed art pieces. YES there's the value of the super ideal vs a regular diamond that kicked this conversation off. YES there's the ecosystem the purchaser gets to participate in. Those already convey value.

But ten years from now, if one were to try and sell a WhiteFlash diamond (it'd be wrong to name any other company in this convo with you lol) second-hand, or to a jeweler, or to whoever else... there is no question at that point that the diamond is a natural diamond - the doubt is eliminated before it ever creeps in. There is no question that it is top of the heap in terms of cut. These are the differentiators that can have HUGE effects on associated value retention for the owner years and decades removed. Like I said, the diamonds are essentially "signed" at that point. There's another thread here about a poster and her EGL diamond studs. She's behind the 8-ball with that cert. To have a GIA would put her in a much better position (which she's doing). But if they had been ACA's? They would have already sold, long ago, and I suspect for a great deal closer to what she paid... maybe par... maybe higher! Of course... she would have just traded them in to you guys to begin with and have been on her merry way with the upgrade.

Those are the stakes involved and the benefits of that initial premium, in my mind.

My biggest regret is not being in that ecosystem, but my girlfriend laid down her (reasonable) constraints and I had to operate within that framework

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Haha thanks Texas! I appreciate the sentiment

Like you say those super ideals don't exist on RapNet at all - I *do* think of them as being part of a parallel, "higher" diamond experience in a sense. And the posters here are attesting to that themselves in terms of personal touch, time saved, etc. But I mean I truly think it goes even beyond that... in a world where there's so much confusion over lab grown 'infiltration' and what's real and what's not, I sort of view these super ideals as signed art pieces. YES there's the value of the super ideal vs a regular diamond that kicked this conversation off. YES there's the ecosystem the purchaser gets to participate in. Those already convey value.

But ten years from now, if one were to try and sell a WhiteFlash diamond (it'd be wrong to name any other company in this convo with you lol) second-hand, or to a jeweler, or to whoever else... there is no question at that point that the diamond is a natural diamond - the doubt is eliminated before it ever creeps in. There is no question that it is top of the heap in terms of cut. These are the differentiators that can have HUGE effects on associated value retention for the owner years and decades removed. Like I said, the diamonds are essentially "signed" at that point. There's another thread here about a poster and her EGL diamond studs. She's behind the 8-ball with that cert. To have a GIA would put her in a much better position (which she's doing). But if they had been ACA's? They would have already sold, long ago, and I suspect for a great deal closer to what she paid... maybe par... maybe higher! Of course... she would have just traded them in to you guys to begin with and have been on her merry way with the upgrade.

Those are the stakes involved and the benefits of that initial premium, in my mind.

My biggest regret is not being in that ecosystem, but my girlfriend laid down her (reasonable) constraints and I had to operate within that framework

I appreciate your sentiments too, and in no way am I disputing your view with what I'm about to say. I also think diamonds are little pieces of art. Tiny sculptures consisting of mirrors that play with light. The design, the precision of the execution, and the ultimate beauty combine to determine the quality of the artistry.

Now I will do what you did in an earlier post. I will play devil's advocate. The team at our company have heard me say many times that we are NOT in the luxury business. As a merchant specializing in high end diamonds, this statement is usually met with puzzlement. But a large portion of our market is young people buying engagement ring diamonds. These folks have a need and are on a mission, and often the purchase is one of the biggest they have ever made. Naturally they want their money to be well spent. They want VALUE and they are self-educating and know how to evaluate the elements that go into creating value.

That a branded diamond might have more value in the future for the reasons you site may be true. But I don't think that is a big part of the calculus for most buyers. The direct benefits do make a difference in their thought process: proven quality, deliverability, services, transparency, price competitiveness, and reputation. Return privilege is an expectation nowadays, but buyback and tradeup guarantees are definitely considered, as are the quality of interactions and communications during the shopping process (the experience).

The fact that many of these things differentiate the merchants in our niche from the broader market is not so much that we are going above and beyond. We are cutting diamonds the way they SHOULD be cut, and providing customers with the services and benefits they SHOULD be getting. The fact that it has traditionally not been that way points more to the deficits that have existed in the market than to the "luxury" of precision cutting and customer-centric policies and service.

Contrary to what is often said, we do not believe our diamonds premium priced. We know they are 'right priced'. We know our cost structure is as good as it gets for what we provide, and we know that our margins are as low as they can be to provide sustainable business. Our product does cost more -but not because it is a luxury brand. Rather, because of the various attributes of the product itself.

 

[Avatar345]

I appreciate your sentiments too, and in no way am I disputing your view with what I'm about to say. I also think diamonds are little pieces of art. Tiny sculptures consisting of mirrors that play with light. The design, the precision of the execution, and the ultimate beauty combine to determine the quality of the artistry.

Now I will do what you did in an earlier post. I will play devil's advocate. The team at our company have heard me say many times that we are NOT in the luxury business. As a merchant specializing in high end diamonds, this statement is usually met with puzzlement. But a large portion of our market is young people buying engagement ring diamonds. These folks have a need and are on a mission, and often the purchase is one of the biggest they have ever made. Naturally they want their money to be well spent. They want VALUE and they are self-educating and know how to evaluate the elements that go into creating value.

That a branded diamond might have more value in the future for the reasons you site may be true. But I don't think that is a big part of the calculus for most buyers. The direct benefits do make a difference in their thought process: proven quality, deliverability, services, transparency, price competitiveness, and reputation. Return privilege is an expectation nowadays, but buyback and tradeup guarantees are definitely considered, as are the quality of interactions and communications during the shopping process (the experience).

The fact that many of these things differentiate the merchants in our niche from the broader market is not so much that we are going above and beyond. We are cutting diamonds the way they SHOULD be cut, and providing customers with the services and benefits they SHOULD be getting. The fact that it has traditionally not been that way points more to the deficits that have existed in the market than to the "luxury" of precision cutting and customer-centric policies and service.

Contrary to what is often said, we do not believe our diamonds premium priced. We know they are 'right priced'. We know our cost structure is as good as it gets for what we provide, and we know that our margins are as low as they can be to provide sustainable business. Our product does cost more -but not because it is a luxury brand. Rather, because of the various attributes of the product itself.

Hahaha strong turnabout!

You're right.... I never would have thought that you guys considered yourself as *not* luxury vendors, especially since certainly I think a lot of your customers and would-be shoppers have that impression. (and that's a GOOD thing!) But I know what you mean - insofar as 'luxury' can be connotated with 'excess,' you feel you're simply setting a standard of value for money to where it should be, a standard the majority of the industry falls short of. Completely get and respect that.

I'd never thought much about what the super ideal buyer mix looks like, and that point you made about the younger engagement ring buyers was a great one - didn't realize that that buyer set would have been such a large component of the mix, but I guess of course it makes sense. This would maybe be more of a guess than anything on your part, but how much of your mix would you say is usually first-time and/or the younger male buyers you described vs sort of repeat/established customers you guys have existing relationships with?

 

[LLJsmom]

Just saying for myself, i think if I tried to sell my ACA to a random higher end local jeweler, I don’t think I would get THAT much more, if any, than a GIA stone. (Where I am, GIA is the norm.). But I’m fine with that. So I totally agree with @Texas Leaguer , although in theory I do agree with @Avatar345 that my Little Rock is a piece of art as well.

 

[Avatar345]

Just saying for myself, if think that if I tried to see my ACA to a higher end random local jeweler, I don’t think I would get THAT much more, if any, than a GIA stone. (Where I am, GIA is the norm.). But I’m fine with that. So I totally agree with @Texas Leaguer , although in theory I do agree with @Avatar345 that my Little Rock is a piece of art as well.

Hmm interesting, but maybe that's just because they don't know and/or know how to present it?

I have to think that if you tried to resell it on a savvy online forum/marketplace the difference would be pretty tangible in what you get

 

[LLJsmom]

Hmm interesting, but maybe that's just because they don't know and/or know how to present it?

I have to think that if you tried to resell it on a savvy online forum/marketplace the difference would be pretty tangible in what you get

One can hope. And yes it would be because they don’t know better. I once had to beg a jeweler to bring in an AGS 000 for me to look at and they initially refused to even sell an AGS stone to me. But maybe not all B&M jewelers are the same.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I'd never thought much about what the super ideal buyer mix looks like, and that point you made about the younger engagement ring buyers was a great one - didn't realize that that buyer set would have been such a large component of the mix, but I guess of course it makes sense. This would maybe be more of a guess than anything on your part, but how much of your mix would you say is usually first-time and/or the younger male buyers you described vs sort of repeat/established customers you guys have existing relationships with?

Regarding your question in (my) bold above. I won't venture a guess, but it is a significant portion for a few reasons. One, an engagement ring is often a one time purchase, and usually a younger demographic. Two, we don't do a great job of maximizing the lifetime value of our customers. That is, we don't proactively market to them. Yes, we have some very nice non-bridal jewelry and we do sell it, but we keep our focus on our core business. And yes, trade-ups are popular bringing customers back which helps keep those relationships robust. Perhaps as we continue to mature as a business, we will find it beneficial to expand our offerings and our outreach. For the foreseeable future though, I would expect you'll see us stay very focused.

 

[munchee]

I can relate about price cut on fluo. On 2020 my brother asked me to find a well cut diamond for my SIL. He and my SIL not into super ideal, as long as it appears white enough and big. So I ended up got them 2.06 G VS2 with very strong fluo for $14300!!!!! I told them if they don’t get this I’ll get it for myself. When I got it, it was a beautiful diamond!!! I tried to find another one for myself for months but can’t find it. With such purchase, almost half the price of super ideal, I don’t mind!
But, actually, if we use nearly super ideal parameters, with the arrow still looks acceptable, the price difference with a super ideal is not as significant, I’ll still choose a super ideal.

As a fact, for an example:

2.80 Carat round diamond

This 2.8 carat round diamond H color vvs2 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

That 2.8ct H VVS2 from JA, with nearly super-ideal parameter search, this diamond is $39350 with the ring, while the arrow looking somewhat not desirable to my eyes.

Meanwhile, this super ideal is 2.8 H VS1 CIH, with a Halo ring, wonderfully hand forged by Victor Canera, and only for $650 more! Does super ideals really cost that much more?In other case, with $39500 other PSer also can get wonderful 2.9ct H VS2 ACA with perfect H&A. With lets say $1500 extra for the ring, would you choose the JA stone over perfect ACA? if that JA stone was 2.8ct H VS1 and usually it’ll priced around $36k which is actually 10-15% less than CIH.




That’s why OP statement outcast super ideal got so much backlash. I think to be a wise buyer we really need to compare and see what’s in the market, which one have better value. Even if super-ideals cost 15-20% more, serial upgrader will choose super ideal because the option, like this case, with virtual vendors we need another $39k to upgrade. While selling diamond usually cost 25-30% from buying price, so 15-20% is actually low. Never say never!

PS. This is the best comparison I can get.

My point is, sometimes super-ideals have better value, depends what’s available in the market. With smaller stones the option is broader, while the bigger stone have more limited option. Its not always 3exs have better value, that’s why its important to search in every search engine and get the best value out of our money, not limiting it with certain vendor.

 

[munchee]

Another example, does Super Ideal cost that much more that it’s not worth it?

3.11ct H VS1 ACA $58355, or with wire $56604 with diameter 9.42x9.45mm


3.01ct H VS1 3ex from JA for $53740, lets say minus $1500 credit for ring $52240. And let’s ignore the possible black inclusion just assume its not there.

3.01 Carat round diamond

This 3.01 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

While its only 0.1ct difference, the diameter is 9.22x9.26mm. Which makes it 0.20mm difference, with ACA is 0.20mm bigger, the price difference of that 2 diamond above is $4364. So which one is actually cheaper?????

 

[heididdl]

mx5_dvr this is just my personal opinion, so take it for what it's worth, but I don't think you should leave the forum over the war that broke out in that "ACA vs Excellent cut" thread. Having a range and difference of opinions on a subject is a *good* thing.

So long as things don't get personal between posters on a subject, there's no reason why everyone can't respect everyone else's views

Especially since she is now an expert

 

[Polabowla]

I do want to mention that a few weeks ago there was another poster who asked about the benefits of super ideal & ultimately decided against it. And the thread got very heated as well.
I think many ppl get genuinely hurt & feel attacked .
I can't comment on the benefits of a super ideal, since I have never seen one irl & in general round diamonds are not my preference.
But it's ok if ppl decide it is not for them.

 

[winnietucker]

I do want to mention that a few weeks ago there was another poster who asked about the benefits of super ideal & ultimately decided against it. And the thread got very heated as well.
I think many ppl get genuinely hurt & feel attacked .
I can't comment on the benefits of a super ideal, since I have never seen one irl & in general round diamonds are not my preference.
But it's ok if ppl decide it is not for them.

IMHO the default answer to “is a super ideal worth the money” should always be “go see one for yourself.” There are CBIs at some jewelry stores. I saw one at a place in Seattle. I told the guy why I was there and he even brought out an E colored GIA triple ex for further comparison (the CBI was a H or I IIRC and I had a K). I’m pretty certain both companies will send you the diamonds for review too. For the record, my impression was the sales guy thought the E was the superior stone, not the CBI.

I remember feeling sad about my original diamond when I first started frequenting PS because it wasn’t a super ideal. I couldn’t shake that feeling until I saw them together. For me right now the appeal of a super ideal is the upgrade policy because I’m super indecisive. With how much I flip flop, I know I can get my money’s worth with that upgrade policy. It’s also why I’m kind of waiting for a unicorn low clarity or low color ACA to pop up in the size I want.

PS gets a bad rep for being very particular. I think there have been a number of threads about it here and on other forums. I won’t lie, there are times I think it gets a little echo chamber-y on PS. My opinion on it is that people can spout the benefits but it shouldn’t be pushy and ultimately we should be telling people they have to see it for themselves to make the decision. No “oh ya but DSS so you’re going to want to upgrade” or no confusing technical talk until someone has a chance to get eyes on a super ideal and compare for themselves. Then if the poster want to come back for more discussion, it’s fair game.

 

[simbelmyne]

I've really enjoyed reading the responses to this thread and learned a lot along the way. The exchanges in the middle between sledge and somethingnew makes me feel that this is a community where one respects another and treat others in a way that we want to be treated. This community in general is very warm, knowledgeable and embracing.

Please allow me to chime in on the super ideal discussion. For a new diamond buyer, perhaps the consideration of whether or not to pay a premium for super ideal cuts is strongly correlated with personal wants and needs: 1) is cut the primary consideration? 2) is a future upgrade possible along the way?

People come to pricescope because of the HCA tool, indicating that they are at least considering the cut factor. Many here, including myself, are willing to sacrifice all other C's for the cut. The benefits of a super ideal cut can be explained very well by various responses to this post. OP says here that cut is not a priority and shouldn't be priced with such a premium - this is just not true. Jann Paul has plenty of youtube videos showing you that a GIA XXX stone and super ideal cut stone are both GIA XXX on paper yet have very different light performances. Hence, when making a purchase decision, really ask yourself what matters - size, budget, or light performance/cut? If cut isn't number 1 on the list, feel free to max out on the aspect you prioritize, but there's no need to say that it's silly to pay that much for cut.

The benefit of choosing a super ideal cut is also its trade-in value. I doubt whether a retail customer can resell an average cut stone for half of its original price. But with super ideal cut, there's always a niche market, and this makes upgrades/resale easier. This debate is like shopping for luxury goods, a lot of brands really don't have great resale value, but you know a birkin bag will stay hermes. I personally feel lucky to have chosen an entry stone with great cut and didn't take much of a loss when upgrading.

Just my two cents as a PS newbie and not a whole lot of jewelry. I actually don't know much about diamonds except round brilliant, and I'm a pearl person.

 

[Avatar345]

Another example, does Super Ideal cost that much more that it’s not worth it?

3.11ct H VS1 ACA $58355, or with wire $56604 with diameter 9.42x9.45mm


3.01ct H VS1 3ex from JA for $53740, lets say minus $1500 credit for ring $52240. And let’s ignore the possible black inclusion just assume its not there.

3.01 Carat round diamond

This 3.01 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

While its only 0.1ct difference, the diameter is 9.22x9.26mm. Which makes it 0.20mm difference, with ACA is 0.20mm bigger, the price difference of that 2 diamond above is $4364. So which one is actually cheaper?????

Munchee I like your style (and your screen name)! The thing with that comparison is that it sets up a specific contender to do battle with the ACA. Going onto JA right now here are two other 3.00+ H VS1's that each add to the complexity of the story:

3.18 Carat round diamond

This 3.18 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

3.13 Carat round diamond

This 3.13 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

The first one is a 3.18ct H priced wayyy less at $38,180, and although it's hard to know where exactly the cut falls short without pulling the cert (too much effort atm), it certainly doesn't look like it would be horrific. In my own opinion this is probably a decently* cut stone benefiting from a substantial price reduction due to the flourescence. (Just so you know, I made a hand-drawn chart showing the discount of flourescence as well! I may post it lol )

Whereas the second diamond, priced $63,760 looks well cut no doubt (again I didn't pull the cert), but it's actually priced $5K+ MORE than the ACA! I mean, at that point, the choice is beyond obvious that you go with the ACA. But for the 'generic' diamond shopper there definitely exists a huge range in price at each "level," and that's in part because these holders of diamonds on the back end are making their own pricing decisions based on whatever factors they're considering/dealing with at the moment. That guy with the non-SI $63,760 H is either desperate or supremely confident! Whereas that guy with the $38K strong flour H is the kind of seller that lures people like myself in to see if there's value to be had there lol

I'm not making any point in particular other than whereas I can easily take the position myself that within a certain premium to a comparable stone a super ideal is a no brainer (like that 2.6 BGD that Sledge recommended to that other poster), on the flip side of things, if one finds an 'under-priced' diamond within its tier that actually is a strong performer as well... well that can be sort of exciting too!

 

[munchee]

That 3.18ct didn’t came up in my search somehow lol @avatar32 maybe its because how the filter are set? Maybe because strong fluorescent. The better price one have 3.16ct H Vs1 but I didn’t include it because the inclusion looks bad.

All in all, we have choices with all different yay and nay for everyone. That’s why its important to search from all possible resources, without dismissing any vendor! I think with such “unnecessary” purchase, thorough research need to be done for us to not feel sorry with our hard earned money. That’s why I strongly believe labeling Super Ideal only a marketing ploy and dismiss it right away isn’t the wisest.

As for a steal, I also agree with you, as I posted above, I found a good performer stone 2.06ct G VS2 with very strong fluo for almost half price of super ideal, I would jump and get it! No question! That’s why I search in every possible website to find if the super ideal I’m buying have a good value. So should anyone, unless they have unlimited money that they can just tossed away and get whatever Peasant like me, unfortunately can’t do that, to buy my ring I need to do tons and tons of research.
$40k is a lot of money like alot lot lot of money for me, I would choose a smaller diamond with big enough size with better quality like VS1/VS2 and no fluo/faint.

Btw, that 2.06ct G with very strong fluo was listed in BN too for $17kish and other sites for 16k-ish.

 

[munchee]

Munchee I like your style (and your screen name)! The thing with that comparison is that it sets up a specific contender to do battle with the ACA. Going onto JA right now here are two other 3.00+ H VS1's that each add to the complexity of the story:

Oh, about this one, there’s one that 3.16ct I thought the inclusion won’t be eyeclean enough so I didn’t include it, and the other one has similar ct and diameter with the one I listed, I somehow didn’t see it before and now I saw it #facepalm. actually it looks good, at $43k. $10k less and 0.2mm smaller, I wonder how much is 9.25mm super ideal cost. Typically 0.1mm represents 0.1ct difference in larger stone. So 0.2mm should be 0.2ct difference if one is not cut too deep and/or the other one not too shallow. But if we take a look ACA price, it really is vary, depends on when WF got the stone, for example: *price before wire



Maybe this diamonds are priced similarly because despite 0.1ct differences, they’re only 0.04mm apart. At 9.31mm and 9.35mm, maybe we have to judge the price based on the actual size too not just the carat? I don’t know... Thank God I’m over with my diamond search, it was so frustrating but I still love to learn new knowledge about this, and I just love blings too much to stay away from it. Oh, I didn’t compare these 2 price with the ones on JA because these 2diamonds are from 2019. As diamond price fluctuate, I don’t know if 2019 price is higher/lower than 2021. While the 3.1 H ACA in my previous post was from last month.


PS. This is actually my DH account back when he was searching for my ER. He loves munching

 

[John Pollard]

I think the OP's main point of contention was, when a stone is a 1.0 on the HCA, and when a stone has great scope images, and when a stone has the right proportions on paper... how much is that price premium to super ideal worth? And can it be detected visually?

This may be useful context regarding producers' cutting choices and premiums.
https://www.pricescope.com/education/diamond-cut#premium

 

[John Pollard]

... how much is that price premium to super ideal worth? And can it be detected visually?

These are both valid questions. The answer to this one depends on the person. Many times I've stood across from couples where one observer detects tint, inclusion or performance differences immediately that their partner doesn't.

Another page that may be useful: Diamond beauty and eyesight.
https://www.pricescope.com/education/diamond-cut/diamond-beauty-and-eyesight

As always, let us know your thoughts on the new education pages. We want them to reflect the PriceScope spirit.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I will have to say that the partially virtual, big companies used to have better prices. Now JA and BN are just a bit too close to Whiteflash prices for their top cut stones. So when you take into account the vastly better upgrade policy at WF, to me, it's an easy choice in most cases between those.

A statement made above about resale value is worth repeating and explaining further. People here who buy non-ideal cut stones that they cannot upgrade for whatever reason may have a difficult time getting a decent price for their diamonds. They might be lucky to get 50-60% of what they paid. BUT...in the case of ACAs and other superideals, you certainly do not sell them to a jeweler if you don't want to upgrade them. You list them here on Preloved and LoupeTroop and you can often get 80% or even higher because people here are happy to get a discount on top quality diamonds (especially ones that were not overpriced to begin with)!

 

[musicloveranthony]

Talk of resale and upgrades is something that people here might think is a selling point because a lot of people here are buying for personal wear (a luxury) but can sound like an odd or insensitive point to make to someone who is getting engaged and is just dipping their toe into the water. A diamond might be the largest purchase they've ever made and talk of upgrades and resale, when they're just excited to even be looking for a diamond, can be misinterpreted as "eventually, you'll realize your purchase wasn't good enough."

I don't think anyone wakes up with intention to cause anyone else discomfort. Sometimes we get used to the way we talk and interact with our circles and it can be surprising when someone unfamiliar hears our words differently than we intended.

 

[distracts]

I will have to say that the partially virtual, big companies used to have better prices. Now JA and BN are just a bit too close to Whiteflash prices for their top cut stones. So when you take into account the vastly better upgrade policy at WF, to me, it's an easy choice in most cases between those.

A statement made above about resale value is worth repeating and explaining further. People here who buy non-ideal cut stones that they cannot upgrade for whatever reason may have a difficult time getting a decent price for their diamonds. They might be lucky to get 50-60% of what they paid. BUT...in the case of ACAs and other superideals, you certainly do not sell them to a jeweler if you don't want to upgrade them. You list them here on Preloved and LoupeTroop and you can often get 80% or even higher because people here are happy to get a discount on top quality diamonds (especially ones that were not overpriced to begin with)!

Yeah, I have been shocked by how expensive BN and JA have gotten. For their premade jewelry like wedding bands also. Any stuff good enough to be a competitor with a superideal gets sorted into their top cut category. Looking through diamonds there on my own, it doesn't ever look to me like you can get a nice round without getting a True Hearts/Astor. With their prices currently it is a no-brainer to me to just spring for the superideal cut branded stuff with better upgrade policies, setting craftsmanship, etc if those vendors were your other option.

Talk of resale and upgrades is something that people here might think is a selling point because a lot of people here are buying for personal wear (a luxury) but can sound like an odd or insensitive point to make to someone who is getting engaged and is just dipping their toe into the water. A diamond might be the largest purchase they've ever made and talk of upgrades and resale, when they're just excited to even be looking for a diamond, can be misinterpreted as "eventually, you'll realize your purchase wasn't good enough."

This is a good point but I think whether or not people want to hear it, they should have an exit plan if they want to get rid of their expensive purchase. We see occasionally on the boards and I have seen a couple of times IRL men get rejected after waiting until post-return period to propose, or engagements break, and it just adds insult to injury in that scenario to find out you can't sell your ring for half of what you paid. We've seen people break up and then want to change the ring to something else and give it to their next fiancee or to their mother, but if they have to lose half their money, or spend double with a traditional upgrade policy, that's awful. We regularly see on here and even more often on wedding boards and reddit people who got surprise engagement rings and hate them and want to change.

Thinking about other scenarios at the beginning saves a lot of potential heartbreak later. Being realistic about these possibilities is part of what a consumer board is for, and they're things the regular jeweler usually won't talk to you about. People who want a feel-good experience without consideration of drawbacks or planning for negative potential scenarios should stick with a regular jeweler, who will give them a good emotional experience and tell them they are buying the best, highest quality thing they can afford and are getting a great deal on it, no matter what they are buying. If they want honest advice, they can come to PS.

 

[sledge]

Munchee I like your style (and your screen name)! The thing with that comparison is that it sets up a specific contender to do battle with the ACA. Going onto JA right now here are two other 3.00+ H VS1's that each add to the complexity of the story:

3.18 Carat round diamond

This 3.18 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

3.13 Carat round diamond

This 3.13 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

The first one is a 3.18ct H priced wayyy less at $38,180, and although it's hard to know where exactly the cut falls short without pulling the cert (too much effort atm), it certainly doesn't look like it would be horrific. In my own opinion this is probably a decently* cut stone benefiting from a substantial price reduction due to the flourescence. (Just so you know, I made a hand-drawn chart showing the discount of flourescence as well! I may post it lol )

Whereas the second diamond, priced $63,760 looks well cut no doubt (again I didn't pull the cert), but it's actually priced $5K+ MORE than the ACA! I mean, at that point, the choice is beyond obvious that you go with the ACA. But for the 'generic' diamond shopper there definitely exists a huge range in price at each "level," and that's in part because these holders of diamonds on the back end are making their own pricing decisions based on whatever factors they're considering/dealing with at the moment. That guy with the non-SI $63,760 H is either desperate or supremely confident! Whereas that guy with the $38K strong flour H is the kind of seller that lures people like myself in to see if there's value to be had there lol

I'm not making any point in particular other than whereas I can easily take the position myself that within a certain premium to a comparable stone a super ideal is a no brainer (like that 2.6 BGD that Sledge recommended to that other poster), on the flip side of things, if one finds an 'under-priced' diamond within its tier that actually is a strong performer as well... well that can be sort of exciting too!

More info on the two stones you referenced, the JA 3.13 and the JA 3.18.

I don't have the lab reports, but I can tell you by the looks that the 3.13 isn't an attractive stone (nor fits my idea of good proportions) and one I wouldn't spend my money on regardless if JA or whomever. Especially for $63k!

I can see why a buyer would be attracted to the 3.18. It appears to be substantially "under priced" compared to the rest of the stones. Yet I am left to think the strong fluor has to contribute to the price reduction. Maybe it's not just strong, but also hazy/milky?

In this very limited data set, it appears all the other stones available have no fluor, and range in price from $44-69k.

There's also some overlap. For instance the 3.16 with 57 table and 61.30 depth is offered by Martin, WF & B2C with 3 different prices. It's about $1k more at WF, but the beauty there is that even though a virtual stone, you'd get the advanced images & detailed SARIN report whereas you wouldn't get that with Martin. I believe B2C would do the same as WF, but you'd pay another $2k premium over them.

Just for fun, I took at peek at the GIA cert on that 3.16 stone and it has a 34c/40.6p so it would get a decent HCA score, probably around 0.7-0.9 for that shallow crown & shallow pavilion combo. Spread would be a little more generous given the proportions. It'd likely qualify as a "good enough" stone, assuming no twisted lowers, excessive brillianteering, etc.

FYI, theoretical weight is 9.38 * 9.44 * 5.76 * 0.0061 = 3.11 carats. So a little bit of something happened.

Jumping back to the JA examples. There are super ideal alternates better than the $63k option. Also a better 3x option as I pointed out above. The real variant being the STRONG fluor on the 3.18 stone.

If I remove the lowest ($38k JA stone) & highest ($69k BN stone) outlier, the trim mean price is around $49,850. That's equates roughly to a 24% market discount for strong fluor. I'm curious how that aligns with your chicken scratch fluor chart.

 

[munchee]

Talk of resale and upgrades is something that people here might think is a selling point because a lot of people here are buying for personal wear (a luxury) but can sound like an odd or insensitive point to make to someone who is getting engaged and is just dipping their toe into the water. A diamond might be the largest purchase they've ever made and talk of upgrades and resale, when they're just excited to even be looking for a diamond, can be misinterpreted as "eventually, you'll realize your purchase wasn't good enough."

I don't think anyone wakes up with intention to cause anyone else discomfort. Sometimes we get used to the way we talk and interact with our circles and it can be surprising when someone unfamiliar hears our words differently than we intended.

Its true that most people come here while they’re searching an ER. And the talk about resale and upgrades are overwhelming. Rather than “Its not good enough”, sadly, unfortunately, with diamond, “Its never big enough”. Not many people know that we can get unlimited upgrades, its OK too if they think they’ll get a new ring if she wants something bigger. But at least we’re telling them that there’s an option that you don’t need to buy 1ct now and 2ct later. Maybe mostly the one who made these suggestions mostly are women who’s been married for several years, so we know that while the ring looks big in our 20s it might not be the same when we’re in our 30s and a diamond thats big in our 30s we might not think the same when we’re 40s and so on. When I commented, I usually think about the wearer, if she wants something bigger in 10yrs, she can upgrade it.

Usually its the husband that have sentimental attachment with the ER, maybe because its a milestone, it took a lot of effort, research and money to get it. While I still think that my ER and the diamonds on it are pretty, but after a decade, I want something bigger. That doesn’t mean that my DH purchase isn’t good enough, its just never big enough.

PS. i just bought a 2.8ct and within days, I think its not big enough.

 

[musicloveranthony]

Its true that most people come here while they’re searching an ER. And the talk about resale and upgrades are overwhelming. Rather than “Its not good enough”, sadly, unfortunately, with diamond, “Its never big enough”. Not many people know that we can get unlimited upgrades, its OK too if they think they’ll get a new ring if she wants something bigger. But at least we’re telling them that there’s an option that you don’t need to buy 1ct now and 2ct later. Maybe mostly the one who made these suggestions mostly are women who’s been married for several years, so we know that while the ring looks big in our 20s it might not be the same when we’re in our 30s and a diamond thats big in our 30s we might not think the same when we’re 40s and so on. When I commented, I usually think about the wearer, if she wants something bigger in 10yrs, she can upgrade it.

Usually its the husband that have sentimental attachment with the ER, maybe because its a milestone, it took a lot of effort, research and money to get it. While I still think that my ER and the diamonds on it are pretty, but after a decade, I want something bigger. That doesn’t mean that my DH purchase isn’t good enough, its just never big enough.

I definitely get that I have a few rings I had made early in my collecting that I look at now and it isn't that they aren't good enough... It's that my tastes have changed. So, now I have an agenda to get them all melted down and remade into something I like better!

So, I definitely get that!

 

[simbelmyne]

Talk of resale and upgrades is something that people here might think is a selling point because a lot of people here are buying for personal wear (a luxury) but can sound like an odd or insensitive point to make to someone who is getting engaged and is just dipping their toe into the water. A diamond might be the largest purchase they've ever made and talk of upgrades and resale, when they're just excited to even be looking for a diamond, can be misinterpreted as "eventually, you'll realize your purchase wasn't good enough."

I don't think anyone wakes up with intention to cause anyone else discomfort. Sometimes we get used to the way we talk and interact with our circles and it can be surprising when someone unfamiliar hears our words differently than we intended.

That misinterpretation is up to the reader. I wrote my "resale value" suggestion with absolutely no intention of offense and strictly from a consumer point of view. An act of purchase is essentially an exchange of resources for an asset (I'm no economist, this is my rough understanding). A purchase decision can be entirely for personal enjoyment without any consideration of its resale value. Then, that enjoyment is priced in - you paid for the emotional investment in the jewelry piece and it belongs to you and you only. That sunk cost will not translate to its market value, and this is something that any diamond buyer should keep in mind.

I completely understand that some people treasure the diamond ring itself as a distillation of love and a symbol. That is priceless. I received a diamond ring from my mother when I graduated from college. It was her idea of supporting my decision in life no matter what happened. If I didn't get married or the man I end up marrying wouldn't buy me a ring, I'd always have the ring she gave me. I still wear it from time to time.

Do I know that she got the ring on sale? Yes.
Does my mother love me? Absolutely.
Would I resell it? No.
Does it still retain half the price she paid for it? HMMMMMMM.......

You see, I can pick these questions apart and consider them separately. I hope people won't take offense in my way of thinking.

 

[Avatar345]

More info on the two stones you referenced, the JA 3.13 and the JA 3.18.

I don't have the lab reports, but I can tell you by the looks that the 3.13 isn't an attractive stone (nor fits my idea of good proportions) and one I wouldn't spend my money on regardless if JA or whomever. Especially for $63k!

I can see why a buyer would be attracted to the 3.18. It appears to be substantially "under priced" compared to the rest of the stones. Yet I am left to think the strong fluor has to contribute to the price reduction. Maybe it's not just strong, but also hazy/milky?

In this very limited data set, it appears all the other stones available have no fluor, and range in price from $44-69k.

There's also some overlap. For instance the 3.16 with 57 table and 61.30 depth is offered by Martin, WF & B2C with 3 different prices. It's about $1k more at WF, but the beauty there is that even though a virtual stone, you'd get the advanced images & detailed SARIN report whereas you wouldn't get that with Martin. I believe B2C would do the same as WF, but you'd pay another $2k premium over them.

Just for fun, I took at peek at the GIA cert on that 3.16 stone and it has a 34c/40.6p so it would get a decent HCA score, probably around 0.7-0.9 for that shallow crown & shallow pavilion combo. Spread would be a little more generous given the proportions. It'd likely qualify as a "good enough" stone, assuming no twisted lowers, excessive brillianteering, etc.

FYI, theoretical weight is 9.38 * 9.44 * 5.76 * 0.0061 = 3.11 carats. So a little bit of something happened.

Jumping back to the JA examples. There are super ideal alternates better than the $63k option. Also a better 3x option as I pointed out above. The real variant being the STRONG fluor on the 3.18 stone.

If I remove the lowest ($38k JA stone) & highest ($69k BN stone) outlier, the trim mean price is around $49,850. That's equates roughly to a 24% market discount for strong fluor. I'm curious how that aligns with your chicken scratch fluor chart.

Welll.... I'm glad you asked...

Behold, the fluorescence discount chart!!




Ok so with that H colored discount of 24% you estimated, that's actually right in line for an H VS1, where the average discount tends to be 21%. H stones are really where the flourescence discount starts to kick in. As you go up the color and clarity scales, the discounts can approach 30% off of an *average* non-flour diamond. It's pretty substantial! Whereas at K and J it hovers around 10%, which makes sense since there's thinking that it may even be beneficial at those levels.

People who want to make the investment into colorless, flawless/near-flawless diamonds *definitely* are looking to avoid fluorescence! And... it's hard to know how much of that is the fear of the haziness, vs how much of it is just wanting the diamond to be as 'pure' as possible having already gone all that distance up the chart. And "investment grade" diamonds and all that... But 30% off at D VVS levels is no small chunk of change!

Personally I think it'd be awesome to see a pure colorless diamond glowing with a subtle blue'ish hue in the sunlight, but that's just me.

(As a note, the above is all pricing for 2.00ct stones... not sure how the discounts might vary at different carat weights)