Of course if EVERY SHOPPER knew about Pricescope, then stores would have to train their staff better and behave more reputably.Date: 8/13/2008 7:01:07 PM
Author: John Pollard
Garry, take off that peacemaker hat. I didn''t recognize you.Date: 8/13/2008 6:29:25 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I think John and Sergey are both right.
John is in business here today
Sergey we need to find a solution faster for tomorrow.
I know John agrees with you on the under lying iceberg.
I think we''re both right too. I appreciate the iceberg warning but I''m concerned with the consumers being eaten by sharks today.
The target audience is shoppers out-and-about who are running into sellers trying to convince them that fluorescence is bad, good polish/sym means top cut in a fancy shape, D-VVS will be ''most sparkly'' and there''s swampland that comes free with every diamond purchase.
I''m interested in your statement above. Do you think there are many people who are technically savy enough to participate in Podcasts that do NOT have a computer? I''d be amazed if that was trueDate: 8/13/2008 6:13:13 PM
Author: John Pollard
No, and the intent of the Podcast is to help consumers with no access to PS. Routinely they are told ''this diamond is ideal'' - piggybacking on that term but selling, frankly, a completely fraudulent ideal.
People are getting slaughtered out there. Something I told myself I would do it always keep a foot on the consumer side of the counter (where I came from). Consumers are being duped in stores by abuse of the term ''ideal'' every day. I see it. It''s rampant, and...until some globally accepted lab/grading system/grand poo-bah comes along and everyone agrees on new standards...the AGS is doing the best job of consumer protection in a cut-quality sense, particularly with round and princess cuts. GIA does a good job of color/clarity and a lot of rounds are tops, but manufacturers are learning to cut to the steep/deep end of EX.
My rationale: If the Podcast prevents even one person from getting duped into some heart shape with G symmetry and VG polish being passed off as an ''ideal'' cut - it has served its purpose. If the Podcast gets 10 people to be aware that the term is being abused it has served its purpose 10X over. If the Podcast gets 100 people to research AGS/GIA etc...and find Pricescope it is very well worth the effort we put into it.
Date: 8/13/2008 6:47:39 PM
Author: strmrdr
Date: 8/13/2008 6:44:50 PM
Author: John Pollard
The information here says ''Ideal'' diamonds in fancy shapes can have polish & sym grades of VG, EX, ID.
That is already diluting the standard AGS set, permitting only the highest finish, but that''s not too extreme. What follows is more of a concern.
(screen shot)
AGS caused that problem by not using a trademarkable term for marketing reasons.
that is a pretty good example of having not considered the future.
Date: 8/13/2008 7:48:16 PM
Author: helios_haze
Thanks John - great work!
Just for fun, I walked into Zales yesterday ... and the relevancy of John''s work rings SO VERY TRUE.
The saleswoman wanted me to believe that G was the ABSOLUTE BEST color grade (because that was the best stone she had). I gave her a chance and said, doesn''t it start with D and she is like NO ... G is the best possible. Playing dumb, I asked how the IGL compared to GIA/AGS - I was told that IGL is BETTER ... HAHA!!
The sad thing is even SMART people get scammed/lose money. My future brother-in-law, a successful entrepreneur but too busy/uneducated in diamonds put down a large amount at a mall store for a ring that would be worth HALF, at best, by PS standards.
So we need more Sir Johns or MORE WORK by HIM
You hit the trade timeline spot-on Wink. Frank Wade pioneered a series of scientific articles that distinguished him in the trade between 1915-1930. He equated "American Cut" with Tolkowsky''s 1919 calculations and was one of the first influential people to call Tolkowsky''s measurements "ideal." In the 1930s Robert Shipley centered his GIA coursework on Tolkowsky.Date: 8/13/2008 11:57:52 PM
Author: Wink
In their defense, I believe it was WAY to late to trademark that term when AGS developed the latest iteration of their grading system. The term Ideal has been in use since the 20''s or 30''s. (I am old, but not old enough to remember when the term came into being...)
That would be hard wouldn't it?Date: 8/13/2008 9:07:12 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I'm interested in your statement above. Do you think there are many people who are technically savy enough to participate in Podcasts that do NOT have a computer? I'd be amazed if that was true
According to JCK approximately 50% of people do some research online before buying jewelry. That means the other 50% will never find PS - and it's unknown how many of those who research actually do find us. I'm in the jewelry business and I'm shocked by how many jewelers and professionals have never heard of PS. One day PS may have the street-reputation of Amazon or Yahoo, but that day is not here yet. Until then I'm inclined to follow "The Starfish Flinger" school of thought.You mentioned Googling for Ideal. Wouldn't it be reasonable to think that the same people who had a computer to Google, would also have access to Pricescope?
Agreed. It depends on how educated the viewer is. Like you, I also assess clarity & color before cut - but I’m trained as a grader.Additionally, I am not sure that you are correct that women first look at size, and then sparkle. Personally when someone shows me their new diamond I look at size, then I look for visible inclusions, and then I notice sparkle. If someone has a diamond with eye visible inclusions I don't bother to look further...I just tell them they have a nice ring and congratulate them.
Thanks for the generous comments Helios. Sadly, this is not surprising - but you''ve struck at the heart of why many of us contribute here, and in other places as we are able.Date: 8/13/2008 7:48:16 PM
Author: helios_haze
Thanks John - great work!
Just for fun, I walked into Zales yesterday ... and the relevancy of John''s work rings SO VERY TRUE.
The saleswoman wanted me to believe that G was the ABSOLUTE BEST color grade (because that was the best stone she had). I gave her a chance and said, doesn''t it start with D and she is like NO ... G is the best possible. Playing dumb, I asked how the IGL compared to GIA/AGS - I was told that IGL is BETTER ... HAHA!!
The sad thing is even SMART people get scammed/lose money. My future brother-in-law, a successful entrepreneur but too busy/uneducated in diamonds put down a large amount at a mall store for a ring that would be worth HALF, at best, by PS standards.
So we need more Sir Johns or MORE WORK by HIM
Date: 8/13/2008 11:57:52 PM
Author: Wink
Karl,
In their defense, I believe it was WAY to late to trademark that term when AGS developed the latest iteration of their grading system. The term Ideal has been in use since the 20''s or 30''s. (I am old, but not old enough to remember when the term came into being...)
Wink
Absolutely right. Pricescope comes up more and more in searches about jewelry topics. The more we (you) contribute, the more those doing research on the internet are likely to find this resource.Date: 8/13/2008 8:43:05 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Of course if EVERY SHOPPER knew about Pricescope, then stores would have to train their staff better and behave more reputably.
Sergey has a vision that many more diamonds would be sold the way watches are - by agents who are chosen by the diamantaire, in just the way that John is working (for those that do not know - John trains the staff in stores selling infinity brand diamonds).
So John is working at the coal face.
I usually avoid salespeople with prior experiance because it takes sooo loong tooo train them properly. This usually means removal of technical dribble, and replacement with confidence building but accurate information about diamonds.
And that is the issue here.
We need to make Pricescope much more useful to consumers and help take the fear out of diamond buying, add transperancy etc.
We means you (image of Uncle Sam pointing the finger at YOU).
If you are reading this, you are a peer group influencing expert.
what Sergey wants and John want are common
Customers buying diamonds confidently
in fun exciting ways that encourage collecting and pleasure
Wink,
I have not any real concern about new light standards. It is minor issue in my point of you.
I fear other challenge to diamond industry :
1) How is popular now natural fur? Please think why exactly synthetic jackets are so popular now( even in real cold counties, even for real rich persons )?
Industry until now did not recognize real challenge from synthetic . Most in industry think what enough say . Synthetic diamond is Fake diamond to stop consumer buy it.
It is very silly and dangers
(And specially for Andrew,
10 year ago one researcher came to research department one respect Lab and gave suggestion.
I have access to new synthetic diamonds, I can develop diagnostic to recognize synthetic . Are you interesting
Answer was: Do not speak about synthetic in our Lab at all. It is not allow. We do not want do any research work for synthetic because it will give respect ( world recognition ) for synthetic diamonds
Industry lost at least 7 years
And what we have now?
Industry until now did not recognize real challenge from synthetic . Most in industry think what enough say : "Synthetic diamond is Fake diamond "to stop consumer buy it. We need discuss to find good joint response. We can not hide this problem more. I hope it is clear for Labs now. Labs helped a lot to synthetic market and they do not understand what they continue help synthetic market)
John,Date: 8/13/2008 6:35:00 PM
Author: John Pollard
Strm''s post is good.
Absolutely. In fact, Google ''ideal diamond'' and read the first three pages of links. You will find literally dozens of misconceptions, conflicting statements and out-and-out falsehoods.Date: 8/13/2008 6:02:47 PM
Author: Maisie
When I looked at diamonds online the other day I saw the term ''ideal'' but when I put the numbers through the HCA it came out as a 3.6. Does this mean their ''ideal'' and the AGS term ''ideal'' are very different?
<< Re: their ''ideal'' and the AGS term ''ideal'' are very different >>
Here are some screen shots I cobbled-together. Bear in mind the misinformation is even more rampant on the street.
This seller boasts Emeralds of ''Ideal'' cut quality, but these diamonds are GIA-graded, meaning they have not passed through ANY performance assessment at the lab.
Is it same "Real Ideal" like AGS 0 round cut?
Is ASG0 Emerald has same performance like AGS0 round cut?
Date: 8/13/2008 7:01:07 PM
Author: John Pollard
Garry, take off that peacemaker hat. I didn''t recognize you.Date: 8/13/2008 6:29:25 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I think John and Sergey are both right.
John is in business here today
Sergey we need to find a solution faster for tomorrow.
I know John agrees with you on the under lying iceberg.
I think we''re both right too. I appreciate the iceberg warning but I''m concerned with the consumers being eaten by sharks today.
The target audience is shoppers out-and-about who are running into sellers trying to convince them that fluorescence is bad, good polish/sym means top cut in a fancy shape, D-VVS will be ''most sparkly'' and there''s swampland that comes free with every diamond purchase.
Date: 8/13/2008 5:34:40 PM
Author: John Pollard
Sorry Serg, but I disagree.
You are not in US malls and chain stores every day. I am.
If you were in retail stores, hearing what most consumers are told by salespeople, you would welcome information that helps them purchase better cut quality.
I understand your ''big picture'' point of view, and support it, but it does not help the ''little person'' today. Shopping now. Spending money now. Their money is better-spent on a diamond that has earned AGS0 (or many GIA EX combinations) than on the steep/deep piece of frozen spit that some toothy salesman in a mall chain store tells them is ''ideal.'' This is happening now to consumers.
Please read again:
If you have a solution to help shoppers preparing to buy terribly cut commercial goods today please let me know. If you don''t I think those steered towards the best cut grading system(s) we currently have in major markets will be thankful.Date: 8/13/2008 5:24:49 PM
Author: John Pollard
On PS this information reads like Cliff''s Notes. The target audience is the ''average'' consumer with no resource like Pricescope, and the message is that the term ''ideal'' - as employed by AGS - implies a strict benchmark, but that term has become much-abused by commercial sellers. Many shoppers are shocked to hear that ''ideal'' (not to mention color and clarity grading) is unregulated. In the past month this podcast has reached the ears of many new shoppers.
I''m not Wink but I have some thoughts on your comparison between fake vs. real, diamonds vs. fur.Date: 8/14/2008 2:26:35 AM
Author: Serg
Wink,
I have not any real concern about new light standards. It is minor issue in my point of you.
I fear other challenge to diamond industry :
1) How is popular now natural fur? Please think why exactly synthetic jackets are so popular now( even in real cold counties, even for real rich persons )?
Synthetic diamonds have not cut limitation form Labs. A soon synthetic diamonds will have better cuts than natural diamonds
Synthetic diamonds could become a soon real true hand made innovation Luxury product!
Industry until now did not recognize real challenge from synthetic . Most in industry think what enough say . Synthetic diamond is Fake diamond to stop consumer buy it.
It is very silly and dangers
(And specially for Andrew,
10 year ago one researcher came to research department one respect Lab and gave suggestion.
I have access to new synthetic diamonds, I can develop diagnostic to recognize synthetic . Are you interesting
Answer was: Do not speak about synthetic in our Lab at all. It is not allow. We do not want do any research work for synthetic because it will give respect ( world recognition ) for synthetic diamonds
Industry lost at least 7 years
And what we have now?
Industry until now did not recognize real challenge from synthetic . Most in industry think what enough say : ''Synthetic diamond is Fake diamond ''to stop consumer buy it. We need discuss to find good joint response. We can not hide this problem more. I hope it is clear for Labs now. Labs helped a lot to synthetic market and they do not understand what they continue help synthetic market)
2 )It is not possible for Luxury markets more produce and sell exactly same goods. Innovation is very important part Any modern Luxury market( art are not Luxury market, but is work for art too now)
Will consumers buy commodity to “proof LOVE” ? How are long?
Try build your business in standard modern Luxury trends. Just historical reason and DeBeers old marketing could be not enough to save diamond market like Luxury market
I can be wrong here. But what is if I am right?
Re: The market is much, much smaller.
Re: The diamond industry fought back over "blood diamond" propaganda. We still eat meat and wear diamonds.
Was it last attack? What will in next time? Promotion synthetic diamonds is more and more smarter
Re: be made in large carat weights in large quantities
I think you are taking my point to literally. The point is there are many other industries where consumers have resources that vendors can be told to ensure their customers are made aware of. As to their ownership public vs non profit, etc. I do not know but they do exist. There should be a consumer reports like guide for diamond purchases. If these tools exist for plasma TV''s and car radios, surely more expensive items like jewelry can have them.Date: 8/14/2008 10:05:39 AM
Author: purrfectpear
Write your congressman to make people aware of Pricescope
While it''s a fab resource, it IS a privately owned website. I don''t think you''ll get too far trying to legislate stores being forced to notify customers about a private website
I agree there 100% and I guess that''s the point of the thread and podcast. But whats different than super-duper is that in many cases some of these jewelers calling stones ideal are misleading since the term is used by a certain lab and for a certain cut. I guess at the end of the day does it matter what its called or what specs it has if the buyer loves the way it looks, i.e. beauty is in the eye of the beholder?Date: 8/14/2008 10:54:17 AM
Author: purrfectpear
Actually I agree with you, but for now there are no lemon laws. Even if there were, I don''t think they can legislate the word ideal. It''s no different than super-dooper, or ultimate, or any other word that has not been trademarked. For the time being I have the ideal job, in the ideal city, with the ideal house, and the ideal dog...ya know what I meanThat horse has already left the barn so to speak.
''There should be a consumer reports like guide for diamond purchases. If these tools exist for plasma TV''s and car radios, surely more expensive items like jewelry can have them.''
Sure someone could start one up. Thanks to the internet though, I rarely use consumer reports any more. I can get the same type of info for free with some deep googling (pricescope for instance). A consumer guide would only be useful to the people who sought it out. Stores do NOT provide consumer reports guides, nor can they advertise that they received a high grade from one.
Let there be no misunderstanding: Even though this patent can apply to a variety of synthetic diamond products, it is clear that the use of synthetics for jewelry purposes was foremost in the minds of those funding, developing, and filing this patent.
This patent not only tells you how to grow the mark within the material to begin with but also where to place the mark, which will provide the synthetic manufacturer with the widest range of marketing options.
“