When people complain asschers face up small . . .

[kenny]

I think many people assume diamonds are the same price per carat regardless of shape.

According to Bluenile's chart an asscher is 43% cheaper than a round of the same weight and specs.
http://www.bluenile.com/diamond_shape_price.jsp?tempcurr=USD&rf=pd


So, when people complain asschers face up small so they can't afford one, we should tell them the asscher they can afford will be much heavier than the round they can afford.

Tell them, Don't compare equal weight; Compare equal price.



Thanks to centralsquare for posting this chart on Hangout.

 

[MissStepcut]

True, but I would still rather get a spread-ier emerald, with those lovely step cuts, for the same price if not less.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

EVERY shape is a bargain compared to rounds these days, even the cuts that face up larger than rounds!

I always say that if spread is a concern, skip the asscher. I'm an asscher girl, so I'd take it over all other shapes any day of the week!

 

[MissStepcut]

EVERY shape is a bargain compared to rounds these days, even the cuts that face up larger than rounds!

I always say that if spread is a concern, skip the asscher. I'm an asscher girl, so I'd take it over all other shapes any day of the week!

This has been true since at least 2006! It surprises me that more savvy PSers don't indulge in fancy shapes.

 

[karpouzi]

On the other hand, a well-cut round will probably face up whiter than a fancy that would show more tint, and it will hide inclusions better than a step cut. So that has to enter the equation as well. BlueNile is comparing G VS2 diamonds but maybe a more meaningful price comparison is between e.g. an I SI1 round and a G VS2 asscher.

 

[Gypsy]

On the other hand, a well-cut round will probably face up whiter than a fancy that would show more tint, and it will hide inclusions better than a step cut. So that has to enter the equation as well. BlueNile is comparing G VS2 diamonds but maybe a more meaningful price comparison is between e.g. an I SI1 round and a G VS2 asscher.

Very true. I own an asscher. It's a lovely stone and I enjoy it very much. If something happened to it, unless Kenny lost his mind and decided to sell me his 2 carat F for a bargain basement price... I'd be more likely to go for an EC, and Oval or a OEC.

 

[missy]

EVERY shape is a bargain compared to rounds these days, even the cuts that face up larger than rounds!

I always say that if spread is a concern, skip the asscher. I'm an asscher girl, so I'd take it over all other shapes any day of the week!

This has been true since at least 2006! It surprises me that more savvy PSers don't indulge in fancy shapes.

I love fancy shapes but for my ER a round was the only choice for me...

 

[Amys Bling]

I can't believe rounds are that much more expensive!!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I have long thought there is a sort of adjustment that happens for the spread so that smaller face up size is cheaper per carat and then in the end, for the same price, you get about the same face up spread.

That said, I want to see the math. I think fancies are also less pricey using face up spread as the metric.

 

[centralsquare]

On the other hand, a well-cut round will probably face up whiter than a fancy that would show more tint, and it will hide inclusions better than a step cut. So that has to enter the equation as well. BlueNile is comparing G VS2 diamonds but maybe a more meaningful price comparison is between e.g. an I SI1 round and a G VS2 asscher.

That's a good point. Also, even though non-rounds may face up smaller than rounds at a lower price...the question is how much you may to spend to get the same mm (or similar)

 

[centralsquare]

Thanks to centralsquare for posting this chart on Hangout.