What is this diamond worth?

[mitsitsad]

Hello all,

First time poster long time reader so be easy one me

I'm looking at the following diamond
EGL USA

Weight 3.15 CT
Shape ROUND BRILLIANT
Color I
Clarity I1
Measurements 9.65 x 9.55 x 5.64 mm
Depth 58.7%
Table 61%
Crown 12.4%
Pavilion 42.9%
Crown Angle 32.9°
Pavilion Angle 40.8°
Girdle THIN TO MEDIUM FACETED
Polish VERY GOOD
Symmetry GOOD
Fluorescence FAINT
Culet NONE
Cut Grade N/A

The only thing that has me unsure is the 'N/A' for the cut - from my research and all that should be my first priority when buying a diamond. The seller is asking around $10k for this stone in a platinum setting - I'm interested in the stone only - what would be a fair price for this diamond? I'm having a hard time finding comparable diamonds on the internet

Any help would be appreciated - originally I was looking for Round H Si2 or better, but this stone has a size advantage over the other stones I was looking at in this price range. Thanks

 

[denverappraiser]

Perhaps there's more that you don't understand, especially clarity and color. EGL/I-1/I covers a lot of ground and before you get into what something is 'worth' you need to fully understand what it is.

 

[mitsitsad]

Perhaps there's more that you don't understand, especially clarity and color. EGL/I-1/I covers a lot of ground and before you get into what something is 'worth' you need to fully understand what it is.

covers a lot of ground? please explain - I feel like I have a decent amount of knowledge from all of my research, and would be happy with this diamond based on the 50+ diamonds I have seen

 

[minmin001]

that sounds like a ugly diamond. yes I know it's a 3+ct but I'd rather have a 1ct gia or ags SI1 or better than what you just posted. it's going to have lots of inclusions in it and doesn't even have a cut grade... I'd for sure STAY AWAY FROM IT

 

[mitsitsad]

here is a picture - let me know what you think. I appreciate the quick
responses

 

[0-0-0]

My honest opinion: extremely ugly

 

[mitsitsad]

My honest opinion: extremely ugly

Can you back your opinion with reasoning? I'd like to learn why people think this is ugly

 

[suchende]

The "grit" is going to be quite obvious. I'd downgrade in size a bit to get at least less obvious inclusions.

 

[0-0-0]

1. Inclusions are extremely visible
2. Stone looks cloudy/milky
3. Stone is visibly not round
4. Visible leakage under the table
5. Lack of optical symmetry

 

[mitsitsad]

So what would everyone here think this diamond is worth?

 

[kenny]

Value depends on what it is.
We don't know what it is because EGL grading is all over the place.
You can't trust the clarity and color grades from EGL.
They lie.
Vendors charge less for them because they know the grades are lies.
Shocking but true.

Take it out of the setting and send it to GIA or AGS.
Then you will know what it is and can venture a guess on value.

If I was offered it as is I'd offer $2,000 but only after a professional independent appraiser whom I select (who does NOT sell diamonds) tells me it's a real diamond.
That's how much I do not trust EGL.

 

[denverappraiser]

I'm a little nicer than Kenny. EGL's grading scale does not match GIA's. I might mean I, but it might also mean J or K or worse. I-1 might mean I-1, but it might mean I-2, etc. They are simply not convertable.

You'll notice in the database here that there's an EGL/3.01/I1/I for just over $3k being offered by several dealers. Is it a bargain? That's the same question you're asking. My guess is not, but I've never seen the stone and we just don't know. Is that evidence that YOUR'S isn't a bargain? Again, no. We just don't have the relevant information.

Search 'EGL' in this forum and you'll find quite a bit of discussion on this topic.

 

[mitsitsad]

That's how much I do not trust EGL.

This seems to always be all over the place though - a jeweler I worked closely with over the past couple of months and he got me about 10 diamonds to view - everything from gia to ags to igi to egl usa - after looking at all of them we both agreed that the best looking stones were the egl usa ones - so after that i felt like some of these ratings are all over the place regardless of certification

i just want the diamond thats best for me (and her) - if that is a stone considered to be 'ugly' by standards, but looks good in a new setting, then I could live with that...I am just one to never want to get a bad deal, so I'm hoping to find more data on the actual value of the stone

 

[0-0-0]

I suggest working with another jeweler if the stone in the picture is the best your current jeweler can offer.

 

[CaprineSun]

i just want the diamond thats best for me (and her) - if that is a stone considered to be 'ugly' by standards, but looks good in a new setting, then I could live with that...I am just one to never want to get a bad deal, so I'm hoping to find more data on the actual value of the stone

Has she seen the stone? Would she be okay with having a diamond on her finger with those speckles of inclusions all over?
Personally, whether I knew much about diamonds or not & whether or not I had diamond standards, I would NOT want a stone looking like that on my finger.

The photo may be highlighting them more than they appear in real life at a distance, so if she is okay with having that stone on her finger forever, then go for it. As long as she is happy.

Just make sure to get it appraised FIRST to be sure that it's worth 10K.

 

[denverappraiser]

That's how much I do not trust EGL.

This seems to always be all over the place though - a jeweler I worked closely with over the past couple of months and he got me about 10 diamonds to view - everything from gia to ags to igi to egl usa - after looking at all of them we both agreed that the best looking stones were the egl usa ones - so after that i felt like some of these ratings are all over the place regardless of certification

i just want the diamond thats best for me (and her) - if that is a stone considered to be 'ugly' by standards, but looks good in a new setting, then I could live with that...I am just one to never want to get a bad deal, so I'm hoping to find more data on the actual value of the stone

It's not the lab that makes a beautiful diamond beautiful and if' you've got a jeweler you trust helping you navigate the minefield I would stick with them. Buy what you love but don't be led down the path of thinking that it's a great bargain because some lab called it a particular grade. Put another way, I've got no problem with buying I-2/K's if that's what you want but don't be thinking that it's an I-1/H and therefore a bargain.

I DO have a recommendation. Make as a requirement that it be graded and appraised by an expert of YOUR choosing as a term of the sale. To quote Ronald Regan, trust but verify.

 

[Pecel]

1. Inclusions are extremely visible
2. Stone looks cloudy/milky
3. Stone is visibly not round
4. Visible leakage under the table
5. Lack of optical symmetry

Hi,

why is there visible leakage under the table? The pav angle is 40.8, so it probably shouldn't have leakage problem...

 

[AussieUser]

Worth = 2k lol
No offence this diamond has sooooo many speckles/inclusions you may aswell call it a peice of dirt with diamonds in it..

But hey if you are really happy about this diamond and like size over sparkle and beauty then go ahead and buy it. I gaurantee that 99.9% of people here prob wouldnt buy it(i have to include the odd one or 2 people).

Listen to people here with their recommendations, they do know what they are talking about.

 

[maplefemme]

Has she seen this diamond? Is she ok with such visible inclusions?
I personally wouldn't wear or purchase this stone for any price, no matter what setting it was in. But that's my taste, maybe she wouldn't mind and she'd love it.
If she hasn't seen it and you aren't sure about her preferances on visible inclusions, I'd make sure the vendor has a good return and/or exchange policy.

 

[tyty333]

Is that picture how it looks in real life? I know its hard to get good pics of diamonds some time. This diamond seems really
dark with lots of inclusions.

 

[CushionCutie]

Is it me or does the diamond look a little oval/lopsided? Maybe it's the angle the picture was taken?

 

[Dancing Fire]

My honest opinion: extremely ugly

why are we being so honest today?..

 

[Dancing Fire]

1. Inclusions are extremely visible
2. Stone looks cloudy/milky
3. Stone is visibly not round
4. Visible leakage under the table
5. Lack of optical symmetry

Hi,

why is there visible leakage under the table? The pav angle is 40.8, so it probably shouldn't have leakage problem...

it ain't good news when the table % is > the depth %... this is a pancake stone..

 

[denverappraiser]

1. Inclusions are extremely visible
2. Stone looks cloudy/milky
3. Stone is visibly not round
4. Visible leakage under the table
5. Lack of optical symmetry

OK, now I'm going to defend the jeweler here.

Cloudy/milky. That's probaly the photograph. It might be, but often that's just a matter of the lighting.
Out of round. Same as above. The stone is tilted in the photo. EGL is pretty good about getting the dimensions and this one is 9.65x9.55. That's not perfectly round but it's within the tollerances for GIA-excellent for example. This may be what the 'good' symmetry is about but it's not obvious from the photo.
Leakage. Again, maybe this is the case but what you're seeing has more to do with the lighting in the picture than the optics of the stone. As pointed out above, this is actually an area where this stone would be expected to be pretty good.
Optical symmetry. One more for problems with the photo. There may be an OS issue, in fact there probably is, but it's not evidenced by this photo.

Defense off.

I don't care for this whole EGL game that jewelers play and there's ALWAYS something about the stones that caused them to be presented with EGL branding. Sometimes there's a lot and sometimes there's just a little. That's part of the problem. Since there's no way to tell the difference by looking at the report, what exactly IS gained by looking at the report?

 

[mitsitsad]

all,

here is the link to the stone listing - more pictures can be found here

http://www.idonowidont.com/diamonds/stunning-3-carat-diamond-and-platinum-ring

thanks for all the advice thus far

 

[Christina...]

First, you need to decide your budget, which undoubted you have already done, then you need to decide which of the 4 C's are most important to you. As I'm sure that you know by now, your probably going to have to give up something, size, clarity, color to keep cost in check.

I think it's important to mention that when buying a diamond there is a balance that needs to be maintained. It appears that you have decided that the only important characteristic of the diamond is it's size and unfortunately that just isn't the case. You could definitely give up some carat weight and up your cut and color grades, and purchase a beautiful SI2 and stay within budget.

The people here are amazing at finding stones with all the qualities that you are looking for well within your budget. If you would like some of us to show you some examples, I'm sure that we would all be more than happy to find some for you, and give you an idea of a stone with real value looks like.

 

[denverappraiser]

all,

here is the link to the stone listing - more pictures can be found here

http://www.idonowidont.com/diamonds/stunning-3-carat-diamond-and-platinum-ring

thanks for all the advice thus far

FWIW I'm not a big fan of that site.

My problem is with their 'guarantee' and the return policy. They're among the most limiting in the industry.

http://www.idonowidont.com/terms-conditions

You are buying blind and you have no recourse if you're dissatisfied other than a partial credit that must be spent within 30 days at the same site (among other restrictions). They describe this loudly and frequently as 'total protection' and 'the most trusted online marketplace'. Really?

 

[CaprineSun]

all,

here is the link to the stone listing - more pictures can be found here

http://www.idonowidont.com/diamonds/stunning-3-carat-diamond-and-platinum-ring

thanks for all the advice thus far

FWIW I'm not a big fan of that site.

My problem is with their 'guarantee' and the return policy. They're among the most limiting in the industry.

http://www.idonowidont.com/terms-conditions

You are buying blind and you have no recourse if you're dissatisfied other than a partial credit that must be spent within 30 days at the same site (among other restrictions). They describe this loudly and frequently as 'total protection' and 'the most trusted online marketplace'. Really?

I just read it and OMG!!!

 

[0-0-0]

1. Inclusions are extremely visible
2. Stone looks cloudy/milky
3. Stone is visibly not round
4. Visible leakage under the table
5. Lack of optical symmetry

OK, now I'm going to defend the jeweler here.

Cloudy/milky. That's probaly the photograph. It might be, but often that's just a matter of the lighting.
Out of round. Same as above. The stone is tilted in the photo. EGL is pretty good about getting the dimensions and this one is 9.65x9.55. That's not perfectly round but it's within the tollerances for GIA-excellent for example. This may be what the 'good' symmetry is about but it's not obvious from the photo.
Leakage. Again, maybe this is the case but what you're seeing has more to do with the lighting in the picture than the optics of the stone. As pointed out above, this is actually an area where this stone would be expected to be pretty good.
Optical symmetry. One more for problems with the photo. There may be an OS issue, in fact there probably is, but it's not evidenced by this photo.

Defense off.

I don't care for this whole EGL game that jewelers play and there's ALWAYS something about the stones that caused them to be presented with EGL branding. Sometimes there's a lot and sometimes there's just a little. That's part of the problem. Since there's no way to tell the difference by looking at the report, what exactly IS gained by looking at the report?

I seriously doubt it's the photography in this case. Lighting looks neutral, not overly bright or dim. Each prong is visible and largely in focus, as well as the center of diamond, suggesting minimum tilt. The dimensions may be within GIA excellent, but I have yet to see any well cut stones with a 0.1 mm range in diameter. I certainly respect your experience, but I think we can agree that the jeweler in question is most likely not doing mitsitsad any favors by portraying this stone as one of the best ones available.

 

[0-0-0]

1. Inclusions are extremely visible
2. Stone looks cloudy/milky
3. Stone is visibly not round
4. Visible leakage under the table
5. Lack of optical symmetry

Hi,

why is there visible leakage under the table? The pav angle is 40.8, so it probably shouldn't have leakage problem...

it ain't good news when the table % is > the depth %... this is a pancake stone..

+1 pancake and keep in mind that it's only an average of all the angles around the stone. The average is more meaningless when the stone is less symmetrical.