Need help from the experts - Is it worth $7400

[showat8]

Hello diamond experts! I appreciate your input!

I've gained extensive knowledge from reading Rocky Talk & tutorials the past month and as I become closer to the big purchase I realize how much more there is to learn about the cut of diamonds and that I need expert opinion. Attached is the Idealscope image of a diamond that I am considering (trouble attaching another image). Below are the specifics of the stone:

Diameter Avg: 7.52 (min-max: 7.48 - 7.55)
Diameter deviation: 0.9%
Total Depth: 4.55 mm 60.5%
Table Size: 4.36 mm 57.9% Symmetry 1
Crown Angle: 33.9 (33.8 - 34.0)
Crown Height: 1.06 mm 14.1%
Pavillion Angle: 41.1 (40.9 - 41.2)
Pavillion Depth: 3.27 mm 43.5%
Culet Size: .02 mm .3
Girdle Min: 1.1% Thin
Girdle Max: 2.1% Sl. Thick
Star/Upper Ratio: 51:49
Lower Girdle Halves: 80% (based on GIA rounded measurements)

Please send any insights, opinions and advice in regards to this Round Brilliant, which is graded by GIA as an Excellent Cut, Color Grade J, Clarity Grade Excellent, and 1.56 carat; Polish and Symmetry are Very good, no Fluorescence.

Also, is $7400 a good deal for this diamond? Its a bit above my budget - any other options out there?

Thank you very much for any information.

Rockford

 

[Regular Guy]

It''s probably a pretty good value, if you''re looking for some savings and such. The HCA is a bit over 2, which you''d otherwise not love, and the idealscope, while red, shows some off symmetry, I think (others are better reading the IS than me), but the cost basis, and overall non-light leakage make this probably an attractive option, especially in a larger, over 7 mm size.

 

[belle]

as rg mentioned, this is an attractive option based on size and price. the symmetry is actually pretty good and there is no light leakage, which is just a bonus. you are getting alot of diamond at a good price.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Clarity is not graded as excellent. Should be VS, SI, or I, etc. with a number after it.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/10/2006 11:28:21 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Clarity is not graded as excellent. Should be VS, SI, or I, etc. with a number after it.

I was just going to post this. What is it? Is it eye clean?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 10/10/2006 11:28:21 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Clarity is not graded as excellent. Should be VS, SI, or I, etc. with a number after it.

Considering that clarity is not mentioned, may I ask RG and Belle how they managed to comment on the pricing of this stone?

Seriously.

 

[Regular Guy]

Paul and Rockford...

1) As mentioned above, I too had intended to note to the writer about this oddity in his comments, but had neglected to...
2) Having done a search by cut search, including broadly options ranging from VS1 - SI2, the comparative VS1 or 2s....

2a) were VS1s or VS2s...

pause, redo search on the big quick search

3) I withdraw my earlier comment, until specs are determined on clarity
4) I apologize to the writer, and thank Paul...as he is clearly interested in my maintaining my good reputation, rather than saying...you silly fool, can''t you see for SI 2s and even SI1s, the good value may not pertain after all.

5) Please do review what that darn certificate does specify on clarity. If it''s eye clean, in substance that may not matter to you, which is reasonable. But, from the point of view of valuation....eye cleans SI1s can be had for less, and would encourage you to shop further, if yours is that.

 

[belle]

Date: 10/10/2006 11:45:29 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 10/10/2006 11:28:21 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Clarity is not graded as excellent. Should be VS, SI, or I, etc. with a number after it.

Considering that clarity is not mentioned, may I ask RG and Belle how they managed to comment on the pricing of this stone?

Seriously.

of course you may paul

since obviously this is a wf diamond (if it''s not and this image was stolen, that''s another story!) i was working on the premise that wf only sells diamonds with si2 clarity or better. a 1.5ct gia graded j/si for $7400 is a good deal. if the clarity happens to be better than si, it''s an even better deal.

seriously.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Thank you for the correction, Ira.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 10/10/2006 12:16:34 PM
Author: belle

Date: 10/10/2006 11:45:29 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 10/10/2006 11:28:21 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Clarity is not graded as excellent. Should be VS, SI, or I, etc. with a number after it.

Considering that clarity is not mentioned, may I ask RG and Belle how they managed to comment on the pricing of this stone?

Seriously.

of course you may paul

since obviously this is a wf diamond (if it''s not and this image was stolen, that''s another story!) i was working on the premise that wf only sells diamonds with si2 clarity or better. a 1.5ct gia graded j/si for $7400 is a good deal. if the clarity happens to be better than si, it''s an even better deal.

seriously.

I am sorry, belle, but this is very disturbing for me.

A 1.5 Ct GIA graded J/SI for 7400 is not necessarily a good deal. Ira has confirmed this in his reply.

What is more, you have based your advice on guesswork, without even mentioning to what extent this is guesswork.

You have over 7,000 posts here, and fellow-consumers are trusting your advice. With this stature comes a great responsibility. Clear errors as the one above cannot only destroy your own stature, but also that of the whole community. I am sorry for sounding so harsh, but this is a definite no-no in my book.

Live long,

 

[Regular Guy]

Paul, laying your argument even in part on my analysis can be an iffy proposal.

I had not made the observation Belle did about WF being the source, but, having done so, moving from imputed to actual assessment, based on a valuation of the vendor, and experience with same, is not unreasonable.

I would want to see more comparables to make a judgement...going either way. Many of us do shoot from the hip (read my original comments above as proof), and I would hope readers might keep our pay scale in mind Consequently, footnoting our comments may be left undone, and...having reviewed this broadly now, I would rather supports Belle''s guess as genuine, even though it would not now be my own....which I regard as my fault, and not hers. Also, and after all...I did drag this item up for a first response, which always can cause trouble for people to confirm, vs. dis-confirm.

This is not to say I would not like you to call me on the carpet anytime, Paul. That someone reads and reviews what I might think about something here is always appreciated.

Also, actually, someone taking an objectionable stance is frequently valued, too.

Actually, just so we''re clear, how about a food fight right here and now.

 

[Mara]

Well considering that the OP put the GIA report # in his image name, anyone could just go to GIA report check and look it up. Which I did, after Paul's slightly cranky response to Belle.

Report Check for GIA Report Number: 15311181
Report Type: GIA Diamond Grading Report
Date of Issue: September 18, 2006
Round Brilliant
Measurements: 7.49 - 7.55 x 4.55 mm
Carat Weight: 1.56
Color Grade: J
Clarity Grade: SI1
Cut Grade: Excellent
Proportions:
Depth: 60.5 %
Table: 58 %
Crown Angle: 34°
Crown Height: 14 %
Pavilion Angle: 41.2°
Pavilion Depth: 43.5 %
Star length: 50 %
Lower Half: 80 %
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: None
Comments: Pinpoints are not shown.

The stone is a J SI1. And Belle is correct in noting that WF does not sell below SI2 stones, even in virtual selections.

As for considering that the stone is from WF, I looked at this thread last nite and my initial thought was 'that is a WF idealscope image'. So it's not just Belle who would have assumed (correctly I imagine) that this is a WF stone, and would be at least an SI.

Anyway back to the original poster, $7400 for a virtual 1.5c+ J SI1 GIA graded eye-clean stone is a pretty good deal, also considering that there are not that many stones like that out there right now (my PS search brings up one 1.50 J SI1 AGS graded stone for $7415), so if one can find one they feel comfortable with and shows good light return for $7400, that sounds like the price is not out of line for what the stone is, just from a humble consumer.

 

[Ellen]

*wearing rain slicker in case of food fight*

 

[belle]

Date: 10/10/2006 12:40:14 PM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 10/10/2006 12:16:34 PM
Author: belle

Date: 10/10/2006 11:45:29 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 10/10/2006 11:28:21 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Clarity is not graded as excellent. Should be VS, SI, or I, etc. with a number after it.

Considering that clarity is not mentioned, may I ask RG and Belle how they managed to comment on the pricing of this stone?

Seriously.

of course you may paul

since obviously this is a wf diamond (if it''s not and this image was stolen, that''s another story!) i was working on the premise that wf only sells diamonds with si2 clarity or better. a 1.5ct gia graded j/si for $7400 is a good deal. if the clarity happens to be better than si, it''s an even better deal.

seriously.

I am sorry, belle, but this is very disturbing for me.

A 1.5 Ct GIA graded J/SI for 7400 is not necessarily a good deal. Ira has confirmed this in his reply.

What is more, you have based your advice on guesswork, without even mentioning to what extent this is guesswork.

You have over 7,000 posts here, and fellow-consumers are trusting your advice. With this stature comes a great responsibility. Clear errors as the one above cannot only destroy your own stature, but also that of the whole community. I am sorry for sounding so harsh, but this is a definite no-no in my book.

Live long,

paul, i am sorry that this is disturbing you.

truly.
i did a search for similar stones and found the prices to all be within a few hundred dollars. perhaps i should not have made the assumption on clarity (thank you for pointing that out) but i personally felt it was a good deal considering the information that was available, including the fact that there was an ideal scope image that looked good. the clarity wasn''t a deciding factor for me at that point because i know wf does not sell diamonds below si2 in clarity and i still felt that with all of the information that was there, it was a good deal. i was offering my opinion as someone who has been on a personal search for the same size diamond and am quite aware of the pricing of available stones. i''m sorry that you felt disturbed by my opinion here. i know you want the best for our community, just as i do. i have looked at many diamonds (and have obviously talked alot about them!

) and sometimes i don''t fully explain every detail of my decisions. unfortunately today that lead to my post being ''disturbing''

i hope i have better communicated now why i felt the price was fair on this diamond. thank you for keeping me up to snuff.

i will try and be more detailed in the future.

 

[Regular Guy]

Interesting how our search practices are being laundered here.

Mara, you noted:

Date: 10/10/2006 1:22:03 PM
Author: Mara

Anyway back to the original poster, $7400 for a virtual 1.5c+ J SI1 GIA graded eye-clean stone is a pretty good deal, also considering that there are not that many stones like that out there right now (my PS search brings up one 1.50 J SI1 AGS graded stone for $7415), so if one can find one they feel comfortable with and shows good light return for $7400, that sounds like the price is not out of line for what the stone is, just from a humble consumer.

Taking the big quick search db to task, there's over 150 options, ranging from $6K to $9500 (eta constraining to GIA & AGS), when constraining for a) 1.5 - 1.59, b) J and c) SI1. But, yes, with those constraints...and adding in only AGS0, you'll primarily get the one you mentioned, Mara. This one. Jewelry Zone isn't mentioned much here...it was not obvious to me that the cert was posted, and so if not a current AGS specimen, it may not be worth pursuing...or if it is, it may be worth pursuing indeed.

So, per the original posters query: "any other options out there?"...well, perhaps.

 

[showat8]

Thank you all for your comments and I apologize on leaving out the clarity - SI 1 and Cut is listed as excellent. I appreciate the input.

 

[showat8]

To answer your question, yes it was eye clean with a clarity of SI 1. Thank you for any and all input.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 10/10/2006 2:12:05 PM
Author: belle
paul, i am sorry that this is disturbing you.

truly.
i did a search for similar stones and found the prices to all be within a few hundred dollars. perhaps i should not have made the assumption on clarity (thank you for pointing that out) but i personally felt it was a good deal considering the information that was available, including the fact that there was an ideal scope image that looked good. the clarity wasn''t a deciding factor for me at that point because i know wf does not sell diamonds below si2 in clarity and i still felt that with all of the information that was there, it was a good deal. i was offering my opinion as someone who has been on a personal search for the same size diamond and am quite aware of the pricing of available stones. i''m sorry that you felt disturbed by my opinion here. i know you want the best for our community, just as i do. i have looked at many diamonds (and have obviously talked alot about them!

) and sometimes i don''t fully explain every detail of my decisions. unfortunately today that lead to my post being ''disturbing''

i hope i have better communicated now why i felt the price was fair on this diamond. thank you for keeping me up to snuff.

i will try and be more detailed in the future.

Hey belle,

One day after, I realise that, because English is only my third language, I may not fully understand the extent and the harshness of some of my words. I am sorry if this was the case.

On another note, my colleague told me the other day that I only do this to persons that I love and respect. Apparently, it is my stupid way of showing this.

Live long,

 

[belle]

i love you too paul