The terms ''Ideal'' and ''AGS Ideal''

[mrssalvo]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:11:01 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 9/18/2006 9:05:48 PM

Author: Mara


DS...what are you basing your AGS ideal criteria on from that screenshot? The AGS at the end of the stone descriptor?


WhiteFlash lists the report name next to the information on the diamond...so if it''s AGS graded it says AGS and if it''s GIA it says GIA on the end. If you would scroll through the pages, you would see that. It also just says ''Round Ideal Cut'' not AGS Ideal Cut.


Please clarify what your confusion is.

Mara, the screen shot says Ideal Cut AGS, and several of the stones I clicked on were clearly not AGS ideal cut, unless excellent polish and symmetry can be ideal????

this is similar to the point I was trying to make earlier in this thread. WF isn''t saying AGS ideal..they are saying it''s ideal cut describing the shape of the stone and then the AGS or GIA is the lab grading, but my point earlier was it''s still confusing and could imply to a not so educated or informed buyer the the stone received the AGSideal grade.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well why are they even called Ideal Cut if they are AGS1? That certainly is not a deliberate attempt to deceive, but I think it''s a heck of a lot more likely to make someone think they are getting an AGS ideal cut stone when the stone would not grade as AGS0.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Just curious, how far down the scale can we legitimately call a stone ideal? Seriously. AGS1, 2, or what?

 

[Mara]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:17:28 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Well why are they even called Ideal Cut if they are AGS1? That certainly is not a deliberate attempt to deceive, but I think it''s a heck of a lot more likely to make someone think they are getting an AGS ideal cut stone when the stone would not grade as AGS0.

I disagree. I think it''s pretty clear to me. It''s a Round Ideal Cut. Non-related to AGS. Just because something is called IDEAL to me does not mean it''s AGS IDEAL or AGS 0000000 or whatever. I honestly don''t know why anyone would make that base assumption that a round ideal cut MUST MEAN it''s AGS0. And quite frankly, if they did, then that''s their bad. It doesn''t take much to click on the cert to find out that''s not the case. I would imagine that WF doesn''t have that many random maul shoppers happening onto their site and just clicking to buy a stone based on the tagline given to a descriptor on a website. They probably attract people who tend to ask questions and become educated on what to look for and what they are buying. So I don''t think that many would just ''assume'' they are getting an AGS0 when you can easily click to see that''s not the case.

 

[Carlotta]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:15:23 PM
Author: mrssalvo

Date: 9/18/2006 9:11:01 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 9/18/2006 9:05:48 PM

Author: Mara


DS...what are you basing your AGS ideal criteria on from that screenshot? The AGS at the end of the stone descriptor?


WhiteFlash lists the report name next to the information on the diamond...so if it''s AGS graded it says AGS and if it''s GIA it says GIA on the end. If you would scroll through the pages, you would see that. It also just says ''Round Ideal Cut'' not AGS Ideal Cut.


Please clarify what your confusion is.

Mara, the screen shot says Ideal Cut AGS, and several of the stones I clicked on were clearly not AGS ideal cut, unless excellent polish and symmetry can be ideal????

this is similar to the point I was trying to make earlier in this thread. WF isn''t saying AGS ideal..they are saying it''s ideal cut describing the shape of the stone and then the AGS or GIA is the lab grading, but my point earlier was it''s still confusing and could imply to a not so educated or informed buyer the the stone received the AGSideal grade.

I totally agree, Mrs. Salvo...........it is confusing....a newbie might confuse "ideal cut AGS" with "AGS ideal"......

 

[RockDoc]

I think many are confusing AGS IDEAL CUT/ Ideal and the AGS 0 Cut Grade.

These are two separate terminologies.

The AGS Ideal Cut or someone saying Ideal cut about their stones, is referring to a set of proportions that fall within either AGS''s Ideal Cut proportions or variances of the Tolkowsky set of proportions.

This is for ROUND diamonds.
__________________________________

The new AGS Cut grade system which now includes Light Performance added to the previous proportions ( which in the new system are a tad broader ) is representative of not only the proportions, but the polish and symmetry as well.

AGS has taken a step forward to also add the Ideal "tag" for Princess cuts and soon for Emerald rectangles as well as square emerald cut. They have created guidelines for these shapes.

__________________________________

I think this may be rather similar to the misunderstanding of the Triple 0 claim of stones, which is technically incorrect, even though it is used by many sellers. Each zero in the old system refered to clarity, color and cut.

_________________________________

When Jon, WF or someone else refers to a stone as an Ideal Cut stone, I believe that refers to proportions only. When they say it is a CUT GRADE of AGS 0 that would indicate that the stone has been graded using the PGS or has a new AGS DCD grading report showing the light performance grading.

__________________________________

GIA Ideal Cut I would assume refers to just the traditional proportion gradings although probably many time stones that fit in the old AGS Ideal parameters would be used.

GIA EX CUT grade would refer to the cut grade on a GIA report. Those with the Facetware software may estimate GIA EX cut grade. But the software is limited, and probably this claim should be supported by a new type GIA report.

_____________________________________

Rockdoc

 

[Carlotta]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:22:52 PM
Author: RockDoc
I think many are confusing AGS IDEAL CUT/ Ideal and the AGS 0 Cut Grade.

These are two separate terminologies.

The AGS Ideal Cut or someone saying Ideal cut about their stones, is referring to a set of proportions that fall within either AGS''s Ideal Cut proportions or variances of the Tolkowsky set of proportions.

This is for ROUND diamonds.
__________________________________

The new AGS Cut grade system which now includes Light Performance added to the previous proportions ( which in the new system are a tad broader ) is representative of not only the proportions, but the polish and symmetry as well.

AGS has taken a step forward to also add the Ideal ''tag'' for Princess cuts and soon for Emerald rectangles as well as square emerald cut. They have created guidelines for these shapes.

__________________________________

I think this may be rather similar to the misunderstanding of the Triple 0 claim of stones, which is technically incorrect, even though it is used by many sellers. Each zero in the old system refered to clarity, color and cut.

_________________________________

When Jon, WF or someone else refers to a stone as an Ideal Cut stone, I believe that refers to proportions only. When they say it is a CUT GRADE of AGS 0 that would indicate that the stone has been graded using the PGS or has a new AGS DCD grading report showing the light performance grading.

__________________________________

GIA Ideal Cut I would assume refers to just the traditional proportion gradings although probably many time stones that fit in the old AGS Ideal parameters would be used.

GIA EX CUT grade would refer to the cut grade on a GIA report. Those with the Facetware software may estimate GIA EX cut grade. But the software is limited, and probably this claim should be supported by a new type GIA report.

_____________________________________

Rockdoc

Since you don''t seem absolutely "sure" what is meant, how is a newbie consumer supposed to figure it all out???

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:22:27 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 9/18/2006 9:17:28 PM

Author: diamondseeker2006

Well why are they even called Ideal Cut if they are AGS1? That certainly is not a deliberate attempt to deceive, but I think it''s a heck of a lot more likely to make someone think they are getting an AGS ideal cut stone when the stone would not grade as AGS0.

I disagree. I think it''s pretty clear to me. It''s a Round Ideal Cut. Non-related to AGS. Just because something is called IDEAL to me does not mean it''s AGS IDEAL or AGS 0000000 or whatever. I honestly don''t know why anyone would make that base assumption that a round ideal cut MUST MEAN it''s AGS0. And quite frankly, if they did, then that''s their bad. It doesn''t take much to click on the cert to find out that''s not the case. I would imagine that WF doesn''t have that many random maul shoppers happening onto their site and just clicking to buy a stone based on the tagline given to a descriptor on a website. They probably attract people who tend to ask questions and become educated on what to look for and what they are buying. So I don''t think that many would just ''assume'' they are getting an AGS0 when you can easily click to see that''s not the case.

again, my point from earlier on the use of the word IDEAL. and I agree completely most WF shoppers are smart enough to click on the link and read the cert. same as most GOG shoppers should be smart enough to click on the link and understand the word estimate and also be able see the actual cert and which lab graded it.

 

[belle]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:11:01 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 9/18/2006 9:05:48 PM
Author: Mara

DS...what are you basing your AGS ideal criteria on from that screenshot? The AGS at the end of the stone descriptor?

WhiteFlash lists the report name next to the information on the diamond...so if it''s AGS graded it says AGS and if it''s GIA it says GIA on the end. If you would scroll through the pages, you would see that. It also just says ''Round Ideal Cut'' not AGS Ideal Cut.

Please clarify what your confusion is.

Mara, the screen shot says Ideal Cut AGS, and several of the stones I clicked on were clearly not AGS ideal cut, unless excellent polish and symmetry can be ideal????

i thought this was all put to rest and we had moved on to beer and beautiful women.

ds, in your example, the diamonds *are* ''ideal'' cut (generic term) graded by ags. hence, the ''ideal cut ags'' decriptor at the end. the same for the gia graded stones. they are ''ideal cut (graded by) gia''. there is no statement about a cut grade.
the difference between this descriptor and what jonathan is using is the word *GRADE* on the gog site, stones are listed as ''ags gut grade: ideal'' when they do not have a GRADING report from ags. you can''t have a cut grade without an actual grading report.
for the record i am happy that jonathan has at least added the word ''estimate'' where it can be clearly seen. it would be even better if there were no reference whatsoever to ''ags cut grade''. but, i understand he has a product to sell and he needs to make the diamonds more marketable, so that probably won''t change.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Mara, newbies are told to look for ideal cut with AGS0 certs, and they certainly might be confused by the two types of AGS reports. So seeing Ideal Cut AGS, and even looking at a report that says Excellent wouldn''t be clear to the average person that it is not the "better" AGS report. I am only mentioning this because Jonathan was berated extremely for listing an estimated AGS cut grade which MIGHT be confusing to newbies (yet was perfectly clear to me, like this is to you), so I just think all vendors need to know when their presentation is not perfectly clear.

 

[Mara]

i agree mrs salvo...for me frankly this whole discussion is just a waste of everyone's time. it's so amazing it's on page 9. scary really.

as long as you can click on the cert to see it isn't what you thought it was then round ideal or ideal or whatever, those terms have been used, incorrectly or correctly for years. there is a ton of confusion around it and there has been since day one. like tolowsky ideal..i don't disagree. but what's the point? what is really going to change?

lots of air is being expended here in discussing something that seems obvious to me, and i am confused as to the intended course of action.

i saw an awesome quote the other day and it's totally appropriate here:

'the time for action is past, now is the time for bickering!'

hahahaha. really.

 

[belle]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:30:13 PM
Author: Mara

''the time for action is past, now is the time for bickering!''

lol....

or we could just start serving some pie!


lemon pie of course.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:26:33 PM
Author: Carlotta
Since you don''t seem absolutely ''sure'' what is meant, how is a newbie consumer supposed to figure it all out???

Now that was pretty funny, Carlotta!

 

[Mara]

but belle, is it a safeway SELECT lemon pie? how is it labeled on the box? that's super important.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:34:56 PM
Author: belle

Date: 9/18/2006 9:30:13 PM
Author: Mara

''the time for action is past, now is the time for bickering!''

lol....

or we could just start serving some pie!


lemon pie of course.

Can we slightly alter that to key lime? Yuuuummmmm!

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:26:33 PM
Author: Carlotta

Date: 9/18/2006 9:22:52 PM
Author: RockDoc
I think many are confusing AGS IDEAL CUT/ Ideal and the AGS 0 Cut Grade.

These are two separate terminologies.

The AGS Ideal Cut or someone saying Ideal cut about their stones, is referring to a set of proportions that fall within either AGS''s Ideal Cut proportions or variances of the Tolkowsky set of proportions.

This is for ROUND diamonds.
__________________________________

The new AGS Cut grade system which now includes Light Performance added to the previous proportions ( which in the new system are a tad broader ) is representative of not only the proportions, but the polish and symmetry as well.

AGS has taken a step forward to also add the Ideal ''tag'' for Princess cuts and soon for Emerald rectangles as well as square emerald cut. They have created guidelines for these shapes.

__________________________________

I think this may be rather similar to the misunderstanding of the Triple 0 claim of stones, which is technically incorrect, even though it is used by many sellers. Each zero in the old system refered to clarity, color and cut.

_________________________________

When Jon, WF or someone else refers to a stone as an Ideal Cut stone, I believe that refers to proportions only. When they say it is a CUT GRADE of AGS 0 that would indicate that the stone has been graded using the PGS or has a new AGS DCD grading report showing the light performance grading.

__________________________________

GIA Ideal Cut I would assume refers to just the traditional proportion gradings although probably many time stones that fit in the old AGS Ideal parameters would be used.

GIA EX CUT grade would refer to the cut grade on a GIA report. Those with the Facetware software may estimate GIA EX cut grade. But the software is limited, and probably this claim should be supported by a new type GIA report.

_____________________________________

Rockdoc

Since you don''t seem absolutely ''sure'' what is meant, how is a newbie consumer supposed to figure it all out???

Carlotta

I am sure what the terminology means however, Im not sure that some of the others do.

Lemon pie? What''s wrong with Key Lime Pie? or Banana Cream Pie ?

Rockdoc

 

[diamondseeker2006]

RockDoc..I said Key Lime, too! So we can eat our pie together!

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:42:13 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
RockDoc..I said Key Lime, too! So we can eat our pie together!

Yeah, both writing it at the same time.


BUT then we''ll have more problems. Changing the shape to pear shape !!! then we''ll have to define Ideal Pear Shape!

(just kidding)


But Banana Cream pies are great for doing the old Soupy Sales stuff.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:22:52 PM
Author: RockDoc

GIA EX CUT grade would refer to the cut grade on a GIA report. Those with the Facetware software may estimate GIA EX cut grade. But the software is limited, and probably this claim should be supported by a new type GIA report, printed on softer paper

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Lots of retailers and etailers have their own "ideal cut" standard.
It is a generic term these days (and sergey is right - it is a bad generic term) but we can not easily escape it.

If WF were describing diamonds as AGS ideal and GIA Excellent that were not those stones then I would also be very unhappy with them.

But Diamond Seeker they are using a generic term combined with a descriptor for report flavour.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond_search.asp?track=dss&filter_id=0 Blue nile do it - and their best of the best is Signature branded - WF make it very clear their best of best is ACA, HoF do their thing with only AGS0 etc etc.
But many companies make their own internal rules and standards.
Is that bad?
i dont know? - it would depend on which day you asked me. i thnk?
is it a fact of life? - you bet!

But you, DS, you seem to be a bit stuck on this issue?
You have become the ideal super sleuth

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:22:27 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 9/18/2006 9:17:28 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Well why are they even called Ideal Cut if they are AGS1? That certainly is not a deliberate attempt to deceive, but I think it''s a heck of a lot more likely to make someone think they are getting an AGS ideal cut stone when the stone would not grade as AGS0.

I disagree. I think it''s pretty clear to me. It''s a Round Ideal Cut. Non-related to AGS. Just because something is called IDEAL to me does not mean it''s AGS IDEAL or AGS 0000000 or whatever. I honestly don''t know why anyone would make that base assumption that a round ideal cut MUST MEAN it''s AGS0. And quite frankly, if they did, then that''s their bad. It doesn''t take much to click on the cert to find out that''s not the case. I would imagine that WF doesn''t have that many random maul shoppers happening onto their site and just clicking to buy a stone based on the tagline given to a descriptor on a website. They probably attract people who tend to ask questions and become educated on what to look for and what they are buying. So I don''t think that many would just ''assume'' they are getting an AGS0 when you can easily click to see that''s not the case.

Mara, I admire the college try, but she doesn''t understand what it means for a word to have a generic meaning. Until she gets that, it''s a waste of time to explain it.

In fact, I think I even pointed out that they are using the phrase "Round Ideal Cut" to describe the SHAPE OF THE STONE, not to represent the cut. I think RockDoc may have tried to explain it too?

Anyway, kudos for trying.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 9/18/2006 10:38:08 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Lots of retailers and etailers have their own 'ideal cut' standard.
It is a generic term these days (and sergey is right - it is a bad generic term) but we can not easily escape it.

If WF were describing diamonds as AGS ideal and GIA Excellent that were not those stones then I would also be very unhappy with them.

But Diamond Seeker they are using a generic term combined with a descriptor for report flavour.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond_search.asp?track=dss&filter_id=0 Blue nile do it - and their best of the best is Signature branded - WF make it very clear their best of best is ACA, HoF do their thing with only AGS0 etc etc.
But many companies make their own internal rules and standards.
Is that bad?
i dont know? - it would depend on which day you asked me. i thnk?
is it a fact of life? - you bet!

But you, DS, you seem to be a bit stuck on this issue?
You have become the ideal super sleuth

No, not stuck on it at all, Garry.

Just pointing out that other vendors have less than perfectly clear terminology on their sites. Seems like for quite a few pages Jonathan got a lot of heat, and I just think to be fair, other vendors practices should be examined equally as closely. It was stated repeatedly that while knowledgeable people might understand Jonathan's wording on his site, newbie's might not which meant it needed to be changed, and I simply pointed out that I felt WF has potentially misleading wording on their site as well. If you count the posts discussing the GOG site versus mine on the WF site, I think you'll find that I wasn't the only one stuck on the subject.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 9/18/2006 11:39:05 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 9/18/2006 9:22:27 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 9/18/2006 9:17:28 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Well why are they even called Ideal Cut if they are AGS1? That certainly is not a deliberate attempt to deceive, but I think it''s a heck of a lot more likely to make someone think they are getting an AGS ideal cut stone when the stone would not grade as AGS0.

I disagree. I think it''s pretty clear to me. It''s a Round Ideal Cut. Non-related to AGS. Just because something is called IDEAL to me does not mean it''s AGS IDEAL or AGS 0000000 or whatever. I honestly don''t know why anyone would make that base assumption that a round ideal cut MUST MEAN it''s AGS0. And quite frankly, if they did, then that''s their bad. It doesn''t take much to click on the cert to find out that''s not the case. I would imagine that WF doesn''t have that many random maul shoppers happening onto their site and just clicking to buy a stone based on the tagline given to a descriptor on a website. They probably attract people who tend to ask questions and become educated on what to look for and what they are buying. So I don''t think that many would just ''assume'' they are getting an AGS0 when you can easily click to see that''s not the case.

Mara, I admire the college try, but she doesn''t understand what it means for a word to have a generic meaning. Until she gets that, it''s a waste of time to explain it.

In fact, I think I even pointed out that they are using the phrase ''Round Ideal Cut'' to describe the SHAPE OF THE STONE, not to represent the cut. I think RockDoc may have tried to explain it too?

Anyway, kudos for trying.

Alj, since when is "round ideal cut" a shape of a stone? I thought "round brilliant cut" was the proper name of round diamonds?

 

[Small]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:27:39 PM
Author: belle

Date: 9/18/2006 9:11:01 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 9/18/2006 9:05:48 PM
Author: Mara

DS...what are you basing your AGS ideal criteria on from that screenshot? The AGS at the end of the stone descriptor?

WhiteFlash lists the report name next to the information on the diamond...so if it''s AGS graded it says AGS and if it''s GIA it says GIA on the end. If you would scroll through the pages, you would see that. It also just says ''Round Ideal Cut'' not AGS Ideal Cut.

Please clarify what your confusion is.

Mara, the screen shot says Ideal Cut AGS, and several of the stones I clicked on were clearly not AGS ideal cut, unless excellent polish and symmetry can be ideal????

i thought this was all put to rest and we had moved on to beer and beautiful women.

ds, in your example, the diamonds *are* ''ideal'' cut (generic term) graded by ags. hence, the ''ideal cut ags'' decriptor at the end. the same for the gia graded stones. they are ''ideal cut (graded by) gia''. there is no statement about a cut grade.
the difference between this descriptor and what jonathan is using is the word *GRADE* on the gog site, stones are listed as ''ags gut grade: ideal'' when they do not have a GRADING report from ags. you can''t have a cut grade without an actual grading report.
for the record i am happy that jonathan has at least added the word ''estimate'' where it can be clearly seen. it would be even better if there were no reference whatsoever to ''ags cut grade''. but, i understand he has a product to sell and he needs to make the diamonds more marketable, so that probably won''t change.

Alj just said it in her last post as well.
It should just be an agreement to disagree. Give it a rest already. What WF has on their site is different from what GOG has on theirs because they actually list only ONE lab that has graded and GOG lists two grades but now one is ''estimated''. What can''t you understand about it DS...I''m not an advocate of either WF or GOG and can see it plain as day

 

[Kaleigh]

I don't think it's right to estimate what a stone will get by a lab the vendor hasn't sent the stone to. I know the vendor has an intelligent guess as to what that stone will get, but unless it's documented by the lab AGS, seems like a stretch to me. Not sure what the legal terms are, this may have been visited earlier. If so I apologize. I haven't read the whole thread. If you have a stone you're selling and it's GIA excellent proport it as such without estimating what AGS would give it. Too me it's very clear. But when I buy I want the facts, not what is estimated to be such and such. There lies the problem I have with this. Guess we can all decide to disagree, but that wouldn't help the problem at hand.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 9/18/2006 11:53:02 PM
Author: Small

What can''t you understand about it DS...I''m not an advocate of either WF or GOG and can see it plain as day

Small.....thank you.

I sense that the inherent problem here has more to do with DS''s desire to turn this into a WF vs. GOG thing....and that''s not it at all. Never was. Gee, look at the language...."berated Jonathan"? Yep - we berated him to death! We said what fine goods he sells, and what a great reputation he has, and how he really feels his customers'' uncertainty and goes out of his way to provide information that will ease that fear. Yep....we bashed the daylights outta him, didn''t we??

I can''t see one person who''s said Jonathan''s intentions are bad....and more than that, we''ve all said we KNOW he''s trying to help people! Yeah, aren''t we TERRIBLE for suggesting that Jonathan is trying to HELP his consumers? Further, he was lauded for making the change to "estimate", which resolved the ambiguity part. Whether or not his use of the PGS software is a licensed one is a question for AGS, and Jonathan has done just that....taken it to AGS. I think he''s done all the right things here. How AWFUL of me to say!

But some insist on making it a GOG vs. WF thing (as usual) instead of speaking to the topic.

Nonetheless, thanks for you contributions in the thread - I really appreciate them, Small.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 9/18/2006 9:38:18 PM
Author: Mara
but belle, is it a safeway SELECT lemon pie? how is it labeled on the box? that''s super important.

Hey, I have a problem with the whole PIE thing, because Boston Cream Pie isn''t actually a PIE. It''s CAKE with custard and chocolate.

How can they call it pie, then? If it''s doesn''t say Select on the box, how can it be Pie?

 

[Small]

Date: 9/19/2006 12:49:23 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 9/18/2006 11:53:02 PM
Author: Small

What can''t you understand about it DS...I''m not an advocate of either WF or GOG and can see it plain as day

Small.....thank you.

I sense that the inherent problem here has more to do with DS''s desire to turn this into a WF vs. GOG thing....and that''s not it at all. Never was. Gee, look at the language....''berated Jonathan''? Yep - we berated him to death! We said what fine goods he sells, and what a great reputation he has, and how he really feels his customers'' uncertainty and goes out of his way to provide information that will ease that fear. Yep....we bashed the daylights outta him, didn''t we??

I can''t see one person who''s said Jonathan''s intentions are bad....and more than that, we''ve all said we KNOW he''s trying to help people! Yeah, aren''t we TERRIBLE for suggesting that Jonathan is trying to HELP his consumers? Further, he was lauded for making the change to ''estimate'', which resolved the ambiguity part. Whether or not his use of the PGS software is a licensed one is a question for AGS, and Jonathan has done just that....taken it to AGS. I think he''s done all the right things here. How AWFUL of me to say!

But some insist on making it a GOG vs. WF thing (as usual) instead of speaking to the topic.

Nonetheless, thanks for you contributions in the thread - I really appreciate them, Small.

Your welcome

That''s exactly what I read into being...a WF vs GOG (LOL that''s why I added my 2c about buying my ring from Wink and having no affiliation/love/hate to either vendor) and it''s like that in several threads...and I agree nobody was attacking. He asked for your opinion way back in the beginning, and I thought you gave a diplomatic answer to what he was asking...nothing more. Again...I normally don''t get involved in these types of threads becuase let''s face it I''m a novice compared to most however I thought your posts were dead on and I commend you for your honesty and very well written analysis of the topic at hand

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 9/18/2006 11:44:33 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
No, not stuck on it at all, Garry.

Just pointing out that other vendors have less than perfectly clear terminology on their sites. Seems like for quite a few pages Jonathan got a lot of heat, and I just think to be fair, other vendors practices should be examined equally as closely. It was stated repeatedly that while knowledgeable people might understand Jonathan's wording on his site, newbie's might not which meant it needed to be changed, and I simply pointed out that I felt WF has potentially misleading wording on their site as well. If you count the posts discussing the GOG site versus mine on the WF site, I think you'll find that I wasn't the only one stuck on the subject.

GOG's information was plainly wrong and plainly misleading DS.
There was a direct indication that AGS had given a grade.
GIA sell software and seem to encourage individuals to replicate their grades. I have only a little problem in Jonathon estimating a gIA grade when asked to do so by an interested consumer.
He can also do the same thing, but he should qualify that he can estimate a stones light performance with AGS's PGS software - but he does not appear to me to have prior learning recognition for the polish requirements of estimating the AGS CUT GRADE (as disticnt from their light preformance grade).

All other vendors can call any diamond ideal cut. Many do with scant regard for any form of definition or repeatability. If you want to cast your net wider I am sure you can find such people.

It is the end of thread for me.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 9/19/2006 12:58:27 AM
Author: Small

Your welcome

That''s exactly what I read into being...a WF vs GOG (LOL that''s why I added my 2c about buying my ring from Wink and having no affiliation/love/hate to either vendor) and it''s like that in several threads...and I agree nobody was attacking. He asked for your opinion way back in the beginning, and I thought you gave a diplomatic answer to what he was asking...nothing more. Again...I normally don''t get involved in these types of threads becuase let''s face it I''m a novice compared to most however I thought your posts were dead on and I commend you for your honesty and very well written analysis of the topic at hand

Hey, novices are always welcome here! Pull up a chair and have some pie with us (or some non-pie)!

Lemon is the preferred flavor around these parts, but if you ask the waitress nicely, she really serves key lime too.