post-purchase regret - not sure if i got a good rock. please help! much appreciated!

[netjjunk]

hi friends,

i think (relatively certain) i met the right girl and so i want to "put a ring on her". after doing lots of research, i dumped just about all my savings into a rock that i thought would reflect the many many many hours i put (as a lay-man) into choosing the right rock. however, the dealer from whom i got it did not have a working ASET scope (more accurately, it was partially working; the backlight board was spoilt - i reviewed the stone through the scope against the backlight of a diffused lamp). nonetheless, i proceeded with the purchase as it was, to me, the best out of many rocks presented by many different dealers.

i started developing post-purchase regret when i subsequently realised that there is such a thing as a HCA score that is too low (below 1); at the time, i thought it was fantastic (not to mention that the rock was full of fire). this was reinforced when i re-did the HCA score calculation using price scope's latest version of the HCA calculator, which now recommends that the rock be used for a pendant and not a ring.

i would like your objective views on my rock (based on the attached GIA cert (3Ex/NF) and HCA chart). unfortunately, i do not have H&A/ASET image to show. where i am from, such sophisticated purchasing practices are not yet the norm. i paid approximately US$11k for the rock. if the rock is bad, please be frank with me - do not sugarcoat your words - i would like to give my-soon-to-be-wife (i hope) something that she deserves.

https://imageshack.com/i/poLPNI7Vj

https://imageshack.com/i/pobWNU1Lj

please advise.

gratefully yours,
nj

p.s.: if anyone has diamcalc and can produce a render of the aset/h&a, i would be most grateful if you could send this to me privately. as mentioned, i never got to see the ASET/H&A properly so it would really be amazing to see it, even if just digitally.

 

[rockysalamander]

It is a very bright white and clean diamond. The angles suggest a diamond that will have more white light than fire. But, it would likely get a AGSL ideal or excellent, which is good.

This is similar with a great IS image for reference. https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-f-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3755478

But, for nearly the same amount, you could get a super-ideal diamond with similar specs. To me, this WF diamond is a sure thing for fire (and WF has excellent customer service and upgrade program).
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3925321.htm

If you lower the color to G, you can gain size.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3858587.htm

 

[marymm]

OP - the rock you selected is gorgeous! And scoring below 1.0 on the HCA tool is just fine; as long as the total score is below 2.0 the stone is worthy. I also put your choice through the AGA Cut Class Tool and it scored a total score of 1A, scoring 1A in all categories (except 1B in crown height). https://www.pricescope.com/tools/AGA_NAJA_Cut_Class_Grader

Personally, my vote goes to your keeping your beautiful rock - the performance will be excellent and it has a great face-up size at 7mm, and it was fairly priced. I honestly doubt, once set, there would be any noticeable difference between your rock and, say, the WF option suggested above. And, you picked out your rock, a solid find that your girl will be amazed with. The only caveat is, if you believe you or your girl would be pursuing diamond upgrades in the future (changing out the center stone for a larger stone), it may make sense to compare vendor upgrade and customer service polices.

 

[denverappraiser]

Don't overthink this. The HCA is not useful for what you're trying to do with it.

I'm curious about this non-working ASET tool at your jeweler. ASETs are a staggeringly low tech sort of device and, short of physical destruction, they're not so easy to break. This is what most of them look like (although there are several different models). Is this what your jeweler had?

 

[SimoneDi]

It is a very bright white and clean diamond. The angles suggest a diamond that will have more white light than fire. But, it would likely get a AGSL ideal or excellent, which is good.

This is similar with a great IS image for reference. https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-f-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3755478

But, for nearly the same amount, you could get a super-ideal diamond with similar specs. To me, this WF diamond is a sure thing for fire (and WF has excellent customer service and upgrade program).
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3925321.htm

If you lower the color to G, you can gain size.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3858587.htm

The James Allen selection recommended is an ACA at an amazing price!!! OP, your diamond seems pretty, however, this is a much cheaper and better alternative. For that reason, I would return it and place the JA on hold ASAP!! https://www.jamesallen.com/mobile/l...rat-f-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3755478

 

[yssie]

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-f-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3755478

The JA report is identical to those issued for WF ACAs.
Verification on the AGS site returns an "Original Replacement" for an identical stone with a new generated top-only ASET and no ACA specification: http://www.agslab.com/pdf_sync_reports/104096763004-PLDQR.PDF
This stone was certed Nov 17, 2017.

I would want to know where it is now, where it was when JA listed it, and why they listed it with the ACA report. It's obviously not "new" or it would be in WF's inventory. WF offers a 30-day return policy on ACAs - even assuming it was listed and sold on Nov 18th, one day after the report came in, that gives the buyer until Dec 18th to decide to return to WF - the easiest and most obvious way to get rid of an unwanted stone. The stone was posted to this thread today, Dec 27th. That means that a consumer divested himself of this stone through an alternate venue and it made its way through JA's photography process and onto the site in a maximum of 9 days.

Questions this raises for me:
Does the report represent the current condition of the stone?
Is there a specific reason JA listed it with a different report than what AGS verification returns?

 

[SimoneDi]

@yssie in my view, the stone was most likely traded in with JA and the replacement certificate was reissued recently. This has happened before with an ACA stone that was on consignment with GOG. Regardless, the diamond is great and better priced compared to OPs diamond. JA also has excellent return policy on diamond and settings alike.

 

[yssie]

It is certainly possible I am jumping at shadows

The timing raises eyebrows, but as long as the stone checks out how and why it came to be in the position its in is largely irrelevant; I would strongly recommend an independent appraisal of it loose just to be sure there isn't any questionable reason it's not back with WF.

 

[rockysalamander]

It is certainly possible I am jumping at shadows

The timing raises eyebrows, but as long as the stone checks out how and why it came to be in the position its in is largely irrelevant; I would strongly recommend an independent appraisal of it loose just to be sure there isn't any questionable reason it's not back with WF.

No need. Just ask JA to send you a picture of the girdle inscription (and confirm it matches the cert.). Then, you can call WF and ask that they confirm that the stone with that number is legit was was sold in the timeline suggested (i.e. sold after 11/17/2017).

 

[netjjunk]

everyone, many many thanks for taking the time to look at my rock and provide your feedback. i cannot sufficiently express how grateful i am, and how much of a resource and help pricescope and it's community has been.

after further consideration, i have decided to stick with my rock. your evaluation and comments have provided much needed relief. to be honest, i wasn't looking for comments along the lines of "omg what a fantastic deal for the money" but more "it's a decent/good rock for the price" (although i really appreciate the support you have all given in trying to find me better alternatives). as i said, i was positively certain about my purchase until just recently when i made the further discovery about HCA scores. i will be able to sleep well tonight in light of all of your kind comments, and also Mary and Neil's further point about HCA scores.

to provide some closure, i would like to provide some reasons why i am sticking with the rock:
(1) i don't live in the US. post-tax/shipping/insurance, US$9.9k translates to approximately US$10.5k. so at US$11k, i get a slightly larger rock within my personal requirements (colourless, eye-clean, triple ex, good proportions, no fluorescence).
(2) i have actually seen the rock and been charmed by it (as distinct from buying online and running the (small) risk that it doesn't work out as well as i think it should; not to mention the cost of returning the rock in the event it does not work out).
(3) the vendor from whom i got the rock is a really reputable dealer in my country (and an all-around great guy who has been absolutely helpful in the process, as distinct from some retail shops i visited). so there's that intangible goodwill there.

once again, thank u all for taking the time to help me with this. and also, for contributing to other threads which have served as a foundation for my own knowledge (i spent far more time on pricescope than actually in the shops/at the dealers looking at diamonds). i would participate more often in pricescope to try and help others (as you have helped me) but for the fact that i really am your average-joe with no right to contribute my 2cents (this is further compounded by the fact that many of the contributors here are seasoned purchasers/professionals). with some luck, this may be the only time i will have to frustrate over buying a diamond.

thank you and happy new year!

sincerely yours,
nj

 

[netjjunk]

Don't overthink this. The HCA is not useful for what you're trying to do with it.

I'm curious about this non-working ASET tool at your jeweler. ASETs are a staggeringly low tech sort of device and, short of physical destruction, they're not so easy to break. This is what most of them look like (although there are several different models). Is this what your jeweler had?

sorry I forgot to reply this message in the above - it was more like this https://ideal-scope.com/shop/?product_order=date&product_sort=asc but the backlight board wasn't working (flickered, then died; just my luck haha). and so i had to review the diamond against another light source (diffused lamp).