What is an appropriate discount for a fancy cut diamond with a smaller spread?

[Curious G]

I was just curious as to what kind of discounts are typically given to fancy cut diamonds that are cut deep or thick and that face up smaller than average for their carat weight?

For example, assuming that cut is the only variable, would a 2 carat diamond that has a similar spread to one of 1.75 carats be priced closer to similar 1.75 carat diamonds or to 2 carat diamonds?

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI Curious,
Great question!
like so many other things about diamonds pricing- there is no simple answer.

When I''m looking at fancy shapes- considering purchase I take many factors into account.
First aspect to consider on a deeper than average stone which still might be worth consideration: does the added weight hurt the diamond''s appearance in other areas besides spread?
For example, there are cases of stones which are cut too deep that show a very prominent dark area in the center. Clearly those should be avoided unless one likes a dark center in their diamond.
There are also deeper cut stones that have no unpleasant visual effects, aside form the perceived size.
I would expect a more aggressive price on such stones, generally. Which would possibly make them good values for purchase

What shape are we talking about?

Are we considering a high color clarity stone, or a more commercial one?

 

[Karl_K]

one thing to be careful of is that depth does not indicate spread in fancy cuts like it does in rounds.
It is possible for a 75% depth fancy to have better spread than a 65% depth fancy of the same general type.
Then with any diamond type a stone with better spread that loses performance in everyday conditions is no bargain.
It is not uncommon for a diamond with more spread to be much less pretty hence less valuable.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 10/15/2009 11:59:44 AM
Author: Karl_K
one thing to be careful of is that depth does not indicate spread in fancy cuts like it does in rounds.
It is possible for a 75% depth fancy to have better spread than a 65% depth fancy of the same general type.
Then with any diamond type a stone with better spread that loses performance in everyday conditions is no bargain.
It is not uncommon for a diamond with more spread to be much less pretty hence less valuable.

Absolutely and this is something that many assume that depth applies to fancies in relation to spread as it does with rounds and this is not the case.

 

[Curious G]

Hello David,

Thanks for your response. As for a specific shape, color and clarity, I was wondering about a radiant cut of higher color and clarity. For argument''s sake, let''s assume that it is free of any unpleasant visual effects resulting from its increased weight.

Would this result in a standard % discount being given or would it mean that the stone would be priced closer to stones of similar spread and of smaller weight (i.e. as per example above, priced closer to stones of 1.75 carats)?

 

[Rockdiamond]

You''re welcome Curious!
Karl had a good point about spread and diameter not necessarily following as logical a path as it might on a round diamond.
If you''d like to post the measurements, I''d be interested to see what we''re talking about.

I have always been more interested in how the diamond actually looks...
ie- I consider 75% to be at the deeper end of Radiant cuts that I will consider for purchase.
If I love the face up on a 75% depth radiant, I will consider it for purchase.
As this relates to your question: If the diamond was very attractive, yet looked a bit small for it''s weight, I would probably expect to pay anywhere from 10-20% less than a "spready" stone.
I don''t agree with Karl that spready stones are less likely to be pretty. Nor would I say it''s necessarily true for slightly deeper stones.
Sometimes a stone has "perfect" depth and table, yet does not appeal to my eye.
It''s a case by case thing.

 

[Curious G]

Hello Karl and Lorelei,

Thank you both for your replies. Yes, I agree with you both about how depth is not always indirectly related to spread. I remember seeing some very interesting images that Gary had posted pertaining to this subject with regards to princess cuts.

David and Lorelei, you were both kind enough to have already commented on my diamond in a previous post, for which I thank you. You had helped put my mind at ease regarding my stone being small for its size but still being able to be visually appealing. It had got me thinking, however, if there was a typical discount given for this type of situation, which prompted this post.

Here are my specs again for those that are curious:

Shape: Cut-Cornered Brilliant
Measurements: 6.51 x 6.38 x 4.61
Weight: 1.74 carat
Depth: 72.3%
Table: 63%
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick
Culet: None
Polish & Symmetry: Good
Clarity: SI1 (Eye-clean)
Color: D
Fluorescence: Medium Blue

As you can see, it faces up more like a 1.5 carat stone. In my opinion, however, its light performance was significantly better than other stones I saw. I have just ordered an ASET scope and will see if it will confirm what I see with my naked eye.