tiffany SI1 quality

[ling0882434]

went to tiffany today and was told they start to carry SI1 now. i was also told they cut and grade their own stone and their SI is always eye clean. i wonder if anyone bought SI from them and how is the quality? thanks advance

 

[Imdanny]

I don't have an SI1 from Tiffany, but I'm surprised they're doing this. I already think (and I am the first to defend that company) that their prices for diamonds in solitaire studs, in earrings, and in pendants is outrageous. It's not the clarity they need to lower; it's the price.

1) Does this mean their melee is going to have SI1 in it? Now we have to wonder.

For a company that claims to be a world class jeweler, this is a very strange move. I can't imagine Tiffany's direct competitors doing this.

I feel that they should have left it at VS2, especially see my point at 1). Their RB prices are already impossible to defend. WHEN they come with a setting, it's debatable, but a lot of their products that are, for instance, 4 prong earrings, the prices are just ridiculous (and that's at VS2).

Not happy with Tiffany about this.

 

[arjunajane]

I''m pretty sure they''ve been doing so for years..?

 

[musey]

I think there have been a few threads on this relatively recently. The reaction is quite split.

If their SI stones are always eye-clean, then I don't see the problem. The value in Tiffany's (generally speaking) is that one can, in theory, walk in with no diamond/jewelry education and walk out with a beautiful piece. A sort of quality assurance attached to the brand. People can argue whether or not that quality is actually assured, but my point is that that is one of the main ideas behind their marketing scheme. So if they are 'assuring' that their SI stones are always eye-clean, then they're upholding their end of the 'quality guarantee' bargain, at least in that particular instance.

There are MANY SI1 owners on PS who are extremely happy with their stones. For some people, eye-clean is all that matters. The more elusive 'mind-clean' is a must for others.

 

[Imdanny]

Date: 4/12/2009 1:42:49 AM
Author: arjunajane
I''m pretty sure they''ve been doing so for years..?

I read about six months ago that they were going to introduce it. That was just a post I read. I don''t even remember who wrote it, so take that for what it''s worth.

 

[Imdanny]

Date: 4/12/2009 2:06:56 AM
Author: musey
I think there have been a few threads on this relatively recently. The reaction is quite split.

It always seems to be with Tiffany, no? My personal opinion is against this, unless they reveal that they are using SI1 in melee, if they are (and in that case, I'm not a fan of them doing it). That's now in question, since as you said, they operate as kind of a "quality assurance" program AND they have advertised that they don't go below VS2.

That's my opinion, anyway. And I've defended Tiffany every chance I get. And I'm buying a Tiffany ring. I trust when they say they have their own alloy for gold, that they do. I trust that when they say they use more silver than copper as an alloy, I believe it.

But if I were buying a Legacy, I wouldn't want the melee to be SI1. They say they compete with Cartier, and the rest? This isn't a way to show it in my opinion. And what else is their reason? So that more people can enjoy Tiffany diamonds? More people could enjoy buying diamonds from Tiffany, if their diamond prices were more in line with what we see from Whiteflash. It makes you wonder what Tiffany pays wholesale and just how much profit they are making on some of their diamond jewelry.

Are SI1 diamonds listed on the website? I think I'll go look.

 

[Imdanny]

No luck. Just a bunch of babbling about "the best there is". Maybe someone else can find something.

 

[ling0882434]

they still dont carry much SI1, i am thinking of asking the SA to transfer some to the store to look at, but b4 that, just want to do some research on my own to see if it''s worth looking into. SA did mention their SI quality is better than other reports coz they eliminate stones w/ certain inclusions.

 

[DiamondFlame]

I could be wrong but it seems Tiffany''s recent marketing initiatives seem to suggest it is trying to reach value-conscious segments of the market i.e. savvy custiomers who wd be happy with eyeclean stones carrying the Tiffany brand name. Hv you seen their recent bezel designs? Hardly original but the more modern designs target the active single woman with a healthy disposable income.

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 4/12/2009 1:42:49 AM
Author: arjunajane
I''m pretty sure they''ve been doing so for years..?

Ditto, I saw a thread on this a year ago?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 4/12/2009 10:17:19 PM
Author: Skippy123

Date: 4/12/2009 1:42:49 AM
Author: arjunajane
I''m pretty sure they''ve been doing so for years..?

Ditto, I saw a thread on this a year ago?

This is what I found.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/tiffany-sells-si1-diamonds.84150/

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/tiffany-sells-si1.92786/


Most recent thread. This discusses an Ering with SI1 being offered, due to the economy.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/tiffanys-offer-si1-for-e-ring.107407/

 

[Imdanny]

I liked Goddess' "prestige-o-meter" comment in the 3rd thread. It's all relative. A 3mm platinum Tiffany Lucida band is $1,025 and Cartier's 2.5mm platinum band is $2,000. I guess that Tiffany and Cartier have the relative "prestige" to match those prices. You can read posts all day long about how Tiffany is expensive or over-priced, but the Lucida band's design is patented, and they are kind of "giving it away" compared to what Cartier is charging for their basic platinum band. We could compare the 2mm platinum Lucida band at $800. For that you can get a 2.5mm 18kt gold band from Cartier. So Tiffany might be a bargain hunter's paradise for some items, although I suspect that this isn't the case for many or most items.

As for SI diamonds from Tiffanys, I think, and I could be wrong, but I think they're going to be SI diamonds with a premium. It's not that it's bad that they are SI or that Tiffany is selling SI, to me, it's that I wouldn't want to pay a premium for a RB diamond. So if the idea is to make a "Tiffany diamond" more affordable, I'm not on board with that. Since now they're giving specifications on the website in pull-down menus, you can look at how the price rises and falls with weight or tcw for some of the pieces. Imho, some of those prices are unacceptable. I would not pay them. If the prices for these particular pieces aren't price gouging, I don't see how. So I have mixed feelings about the company.

I'd like to buy my mother the Paloma Picasso green chrysoprase earrings in silver, but they're $900. I can't see that the gems and silver are worth anything close to that, even after mark-up for being a patented designer piece and having the price doubled as wholesale prior to retail distribution. I think she would like them. I can't find anything else like them. But the price is unacceptable.

So I guess what I am saying is if a Tiffany diamond is SI STILL check out the price vis a vis SI RB's you can buy from WF and other pricescope vendors.