Whiteflash custom cut

[DiamondsAndDior]

Tree Scientist - you make some really great points! I’ve started developing specific preferences (higher crown, smaller table, fatter arrows) so I can see myself being disappointed if my custom cut ends up being on the opposite end of the spectrum or an edge case. I also want an SI stone because I love the value of SIs lol. It doesn’t bother me as long as the inclusions don’t affect the brilliance of the stone and are somewhat eye clean. Even if a VS fit nicely within my budget, I’d still rather find a nice SI. I think this makes custom cutting even riskier for me because, like you mentioned, I won’t know what type of inclusions I’ll be getting.

 

[gm89uk]

@kmoro only someone hanging out here would be bothered by the 56.4! Your diamond Looks awesome. The green red mix is a sign of good precision that your pavilion mains are tight between 40.7/40.8.

Tree Scientist - you make some really great points! I’ve started developing specific preferences (higher crown, smaller table, fatter arrows) so I can see myself being disappointed if my custom cut ends up being on the opposite end of the spectrum or an edge case. I also want an SI stone because I love the value of SIs lol. It doesn’t bother me as long as the inclusions don’t affect the brilliance of the stone and are somewhat eye clean. Even if a VS fit nicely within my budget, I’d still rather find a nice SI. I think this makes custom cutting even riskier for me because, like you mentioned, I won’t know what type of inclusions I’ll be getting.

Many of us develop these preferences arbitrarily without any real life experience to validate these preferences. We are glorifying proportions on high magnification photos and videos. These change subtle optical properties of a diamond which are impossible to pick up virtually, and difficult to pick up in real life. If anyone can tell the difference between a 55.5 table and 56.4 table in otherwise similar diamonds, I'd be astounded.

Have all the people that said they prefer fat arrows compared skinnier arrows wth far arrows in a variety of lighting environments, darker, brighter,spot lights? For the vast majority, no. The difference in optical result is not something picked up on a picture. It may be a prettier picture due to a striking high contrast picture, which has little relevance in real life performance.

 

[DiamondsAndDior]

gm89uk - I understand I’m being obsessive when it comes to cut, and I blame PS When it comes to superideals, I may not be able to pick up these minor differences since they’re cut so tightly, but I can see it being a “mind clean” thing for me. Especially if I’m custom cutting, I can see myself hoping for certain numbers and being disappointed when it doesn’t pan out, even if I would have never been able to tell the difference in real life. If I’m buying an already cut stone, at least I know exactly what I’m getting, I’ll see the stone in person before committing and so there won’t be that risk of disappointment. This is why I’ve decided not to custom cut.

 

[gm89uk]

gm89uk - I understand I’m being obsessive when it comes to cut, and I blame PS When it comes to superideals, I may not be able to pick up these minor differences since they’re cut so tightly, but I can see it being a “mind clean” thing for me. Especially if I’m custom cutting, I can see myself hoping for certain numbers and being disappointed when it doesn’t pan out, even if I would have never been able to tell the difference in real life. If I’m buying an already cut stone, at least I know exactly what I’m getting, I’ll see the stone in person before committing and so there won’t be that risk of disappointment. This is why I’ve decided not to custom cut.

Here in lies the problem, and this is not a criticism on you at all or @kmoro.

I don't know how much experience you have in diamonds but you joined in February 2019, and already read the experience, preferences of many other PSers. This is generally a learned preference from reading lots of other posters, without any real foundation to any of it. I speak from experience as I was in the same boat, I've since learnt to be more open minded. And so the cycle continues. When the culture in PS has lead to customers being disheartened at being the wrong side of 56T then the vendors have no chance of happy customers from unrealistic learned expectations and desires that probably make no difference at all.
On the flip side I commend you for acknowledging from this point, the uncertainty isn't for you, which is an essential insight for custom cut.

Saying that, II wouldn choose a 58T ACA Vs a 55T, I think there is an appreciable difference in flavour there.

Even a 35/40.8 has been cautioned on pricescope which I think it's overly conservative, brightness is only one quality, measureable by reflector images and does not reflect brilliance, sctinillation or fire.
@TreeScientist there are many conversations about tightly cut 'steep deep' superideals, with (IIRC) 35/41 with tight parameters being one of the most beautiful combinations, that has lots of brilliance. Think it was @Serg and @Karl_K. Brian Gavin commonly cuts his signature range to the upper range of crown and pavilion on purpose as that is a flavour he would like attributable to his brand.

With them being tightly cut, can't see why there is a negative connotation being assigned to that combo.

 

[Karl_K]

There isn't a person in the world who could tell a 55 table from a 56 table by eye much less a 56.x from a 56.
Lets do the math lets say a diamond is 6.5mm the difference is .065mm between 55 and 56. Office paper is nominally 0.0889mm
So the difference is about 3/4 of the thickness of a sheet of office paper.

 

[gm89uk]

 

[TreeScientist]

@TreeScientist there are many conversations about tightly cut 'steep deep' superideals, with (IIRC) 35/41 with tight parameters being one of the most beautiful combinations, that has lots of brilliance. Think it was @Serg and @Karl_K. Brian Gavin commonly cuts his signature range to the upper range of crown and pavilion on purpose as that is a flavour he would like attributable to his brand.

With them being tightly cut, can't see why there is a negative connotation being assigned to that combo.

Of course. The key words there are "tightly cut." If you look back at my post, I said "I've also seen a few stones that have borderline steep deep proportions (like 34.9/40.9 CA/PA) with quite a bit of blue and green under the table." The 34.9/40.9 combo isn't the issue. I know that BG actually prefers cutting near this border, and his cutters are pretty darn good at it too, because several of the stones I've seen within the BG Black line have these proportions but have darn-near perfect reflector images.

Rather, the slight leakage under the table that I've seen in some of the ACAs with these proportions is the issue. Take this one for example:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3974685.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/pdf/104098794010.pdf

This is not the worst I've seen by far, but it's a good example for this purpose. Definitely has a bit of leakage under the table, which would look much worse if the image had been taken with an actual ASET scope rather than an oversaturated, computer-generated ASET like WF uses for their website photos.

So this raises the question, would the average person be able to tell the difference between one of these borderline ACAs and a picture-perfect example of an H&A stone? Well, if you've followed my posts on here before, you would know that I'm one of the biggest proponents of the view that these nit-picky details do not matter in the least. If you were to show 10 PSers these two diamonds IRL:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3974685.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3892599.htm

My feeling is that 9 out of 10 would not be able to truly differentiate them based on IRL performance. Even though several people on this site would claim to be able to in a heartbeat.

So if we can agree that the nit-picky details don't matter all that much, then this raises the more important question: Why pay the premium for a SuperIdeal at all? I mean, if you're going to be paying the 25+% premium for a SuperIdeal over an unbranded diamond, then IMO, it better be as close to perfect as possible. No leakage under the table (not even a minute amount). No slightly uneven lowers. No minute amounts of obstruction. Because if the SuperIdeal proponents start to say "Well, no-one could even tell the difference in a diamond with a small amount of leakage under the table IRL." or "Honestly, slightly uneven lowers aren't going to impact overall performance" well then, I can find plenty of stones on the open market that, if the above statements are true, would be totally, completely indistinguishable from a SuperIdeal.

I'm really glad you brought this up, because honestly, I feel like one of the few who believes that this nit-picky crap, in all likelihood, isn't going to impact IRL performance to an appreciable extent.

But still, going back to the point of my original post, if I was going to pay the 25% premium for a SuperIdeal (which I would never do btw) I would want it to be perfect in every possible way. Reflector images. Performance in pictures/videos. And also IRL performance next to a very well cut non-branded diamond. If it's not perfect on paper, then I honestly don't see the point of paying the premium. Which is why I think committing to a stone before seeing photos/videos of it, as is required for the custom cutting process, is not a wise decision. But to each their own.

 

[DiamondsAndDior]

Maybe I should have clarified when I listed my preferences... these are what I would prefer if given extremes (i.e. 55T vs 59T or 36 crown vs 33 crown...I really dislike diamonds that look very flat) and I understand that super ideals are not cut to extremes which is why I said I probably would not be able to tell the difference between various flavors of super ideals in real life. BUT, if I'm paying more for a super ideal stone, I want the cut aspect to be completely mind clean. With already cut stones, if it happens to be an "edge" case, I can always look at it in person and compare to another stone that falls right in the middle. If I can confirm that I can't tell a difference, then I'd be 100% comfortable with the purchase, and it would become mind clean to me. The issue with custom cutting is the fact that I have no choice...so I'll probably end up obsessing over the exact specs.

 

[Gussie]

Custom cutting aside (no opinion there), the upgrade policy, customer service, ease of finding a top performer, and the fact that stones are in-house is well worth the premium imo.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

This is quite an interesting discussion for us to follow as we are doing more custom cutting all the time and the feedback is particularly valuable. The custom process certainly is not for every client, and we try to make sure we don’t have anything in-stock or in the pipeline that will meet the need before accepting a custom cut order. That said, the vast majority of these projects work out nicely.

For customers with strong preferences of certain specs within our published ACA specs range, custom is not a good option (for the reasons that other posters have already explained quite well). But the limited degree of uncertainty (which some people are naturally averse to) is counterbalanced by the full stored value in our lifetime trade policy. The wrinkle there is if the custom cut diamond is particularly unique in some way, such that we rarely have it in stock, then exercising the trade up effectively may itself present challenges. We do invest heavily in keeping the deepest and broadest inventory possible in order that this benefit is real.

There are many considerations that a buyer should be clear about before going this route, but in many circumstances it is a reliable way to get a diamond that checks all your boxes.

To @kmoro , I am sincerely sorry to hear that you have misgivings about the success of your project, the stresses involved, and the longer than usual timeline to completion. Rest assured that we will do something special for you for bearing with us as you have.

 

[kmoro]

I started this response last night and fell asleep before I finished. @yssie is spot on, as my comments were not directed at you or meant to make you feel your opinion wasn't valued.

That said.....

Hey @kmoro, I just wanted to be clear I wasnt picking on you earlier or suggesting you were being problematic. Sorry if that somehow got misconstrued.

Reality is I was trying to post facts for current (and future) readers so they would understand the process better.

I do wish you could pinpoint your own proportions. I asked Bryan about this before in a different thread and it was a big negative. LOL but I had to try.

In regards to your specific stone, I personally think you are being too critical. While I have seen minor differences in smaller tables and mid 56 table like yours, keep in mind that is a MAGNIFIED video performed in a lighting environment designed to maximize fire. Adjusted to real life and I seriously doubt you are going to do much but drool on yourself.

Thanks @sledge !!! Sorry - I can be overly sensitive. Your comments are always appreciated!

Thanks to everyone for your kind comments!!!

 

[sledge]

Even a 35/40.8 has been cautioned on pricescope which I think it's overly conservative, brightness is only one quality, measureable by reflector images and does not reflect brilliance, sctinillation or fire.

.....

With them being tightly cut, can't see why there is a negative connotation being assigned to that combo.

I have warned about a 35/40.8 but when shoppers are looking at GIA triple X stones with limited advanced imagery and/or videos.

The reason has to do with the tail end of your post -- precision faceting, or lack thereof. I am NOT concerned with those angles when precision faceting is at play. So no worries on super ideals.

The problem I've had is that many 35/40.8 triple X's will sometimes have ASET and/or idealscope images with leakage in the images. I find them particularly dangerous because the combo falls within ideal parameters we recommend but it seems a good majority (maybe 40-50%...I haven't kept a database) tend to have leakage issues when advanced images are available to reveal it.

 

[sledge]

On the original topic matter I am curious if there is any correlation between risk tolerance of custom diamonds and other custom projects, like a custom built home or similar.

I've built several custom built homes myself. Also bought a few that was partially started and finished the design with the builder. I enjoy the journey as much as the finished product. I've learned many times the unexpected imperfections become some of my favorite features.

Additionally you all know I did a custom setting for the (very soon to be) Mrs Sledge.

On the diamond I find myself torn as I'd probably want more involvement in the process than a vendor would like, lol. But overall I would consider it a viable option.

 

[MarionC]

May have been said already, but as gorgeous as the video is, seeing the diamond in real life, I have the feeling you are going to be wwed...and how sweet and wonderful that it was cut just for you!

 

[yssie]

Many of us develop these preferences arbitrarily without any real life experience to validate these preferences. We are glorifying proportions on high magnification photos and videos. These change subtle optical properties of a diamond which are impossible to pick up virtually, and difficult to pick up in real life. If anyone can tell the difference between a 55.5 table and 56.4 table in otherwise similar diamonds, I'd be astounded.

Have all the people that said they prefer fat arrows compared skinnier arrows with far arrows in a variety of lighting environments, darker, brighter,spot lights? For the vast majority, no. The difference in optical result is not something picked up on a picture. It may be a prettier picture due to a striking high contrast picture, which has little relevance in real life performance.

Given my druthers I'd post this at the top of the Rocky Talky landing page, bolded, in bright red.

Step #1:
Find out what your eyes like to see. Make appointments at two or three different jewellery stores. Spend time playing with differently-proportioned diamonds in various lighting types. Learn what your eyes prefer. Take notes on the proportions of the stones you like and don't like, take photos of the stones you like and don't like.

Step #2:
Come back to PS, share what you've learnt about what you like, and don't bend your preferences to anyone else's - including popular PS norm. "Fat arrows, high crowns, and tiny tables" - these, for a great many people, are learnt preferences, just as gm89uk said. They're strawberry diamonds. And a whole lot of people would prefer chocolate to strawberry - who knows what those people might discover if they give themselves the freedom to do so?

 

[DiamondsAndDior]

Yssie - I've done Step 1 and my eyes tell me that I prefer higher crowns and smaller tables and fatter arrows. I actually did not know that these are a popular norm on PS. The stones that I've played with are all GIA 3x, so I could tell a difference between different flavors of stones. Like I've said, I probably would not be able to tell the difference between different flavors of super ideals, or even between different brands of super ideals.

Regardless of my preferences, my point is that I don't think I would enjoy the uncertainty that comes with custom cutting and I value being able to see a stone in person before buying it.

 

[yssie]

So if we can agree that the nit-picky details don't matter all that much, then this raises the more important question: Why pay the premium for a SuperIdeal at all? [...] Because if the SuperIdeal proponents start to say "Well, no-one could even tell the difference in a diamond with a small amount of leakage under the table IRL." or "Honestly, slightly uneven lowers aren't going to impact overall performance" well then, I can find plenty of stones on the open market that, if the above statements are true, would be totally, completely indistinguishable from a SuperIdeal.

I'm going to have to disagree with this... But it's a complicated subject. It rather hits home for me. Explanation coming...

I'm a software engineer.
I believe in open source.
My company sells 'free software'. We have no IP - 100% of our code is open source.
Open source, meaning, free to use, free to download, free to re-sell.
My company is the most successful provider of open source based solutions in the world.

So how does any company make money selling 'free software'?
We participate in open source communities and drive direction of open source projects.
We stabilize these projects and run them through the gamut of compliance testing.
We integrate hundreds of individual open source projects that all have different agendas and leadership and that all release at varying cadences into easy-to-implement distributions with compatibility and functionality guarantees.
And we offer those distributions with long term support.

Again, the technical stuff is 'free'... What our customers pay for is our value-add.

I think for a lot of people there's more to buying a 'Superideal' than the technical stuff.
Upgrade policies.
Trade-in policies.
Buy back policies.
Ease of purchase and guarantees re. qualify of product.
Personalized, first-class service - at time of buy and forever afterward.
Knowledge that when you buy from a boutique PS vendor you're supporting an organization that believes in sharing knowledge, making information public.
Knowledge that when you buy from a boutique PS vendor you're supporting an organization that is committed to improving this industry - from both R&D and humanitarian perspectives.

You could certainly find other sources for a close match of the "technical stuff" - close enough that, as you say, nine of ten people couldn't possibly appreciate a difference. As someone who owns both 'Superideals' and "technically close enoughs"... I agree.
But without an audience willing to support the R&D to keep pushing those boundaries "Superideals" (and the "technically close enoughs" that emulate them) wouldn't exist in the first place.
And even if one can't personally see a difference between today's 'Superideal' and a close technical match... maybe tomorrow's will be revolutionary. We'll never know if we don't support those who are willing to investigate and share their discoveries with a public community.

This isn't specific to custom-cutting, of course And, to your point, I wholly agree that vendors of 'Superideals' cannot afford to fail to meet expectations in terms of their value-add. If their products aren't of superb quality per their stated criteria and guarantees, if quality of service is sub-par... well, they're not going to get far biting the hands that feed them.

 

[yssie]

Yssie - I've done Step 1 and my eyes tell me that I prefer higher crowns and smaller tables and fatter arrows. I actually did not know that these are a popular norm on PS. The stones that I've played with are all GIA 3x, so I could tell a difference between different flavors of stones. Like I've said, I probably would not be able to tell the difference between different flavors of super ideals, or even between different brands of super ideals.

Regardless of my preferences, my point is that I don't think I would enjoy the uncertainty that comes with custom cutting and I value being able to see a stone in person before buying it.

That's great to hear
I hope you find a stone that suits all your preferences quickly!

 

[kmoro]

This is quite an interesting discussion for us to follow as we are doing more custom cutting all the time and the feedback is particularly valuable. The custom process certainly is not for every client, and we try to make sure we don’t have anything in-stock or in the pipeline that will meet the need before accepting a custom cut order. That said, the vast majority of these projects work out nicely.

For customers with strong preferences of certain specs within our published ACA specs range, custom is not a good option (for the reasons that other posters have already explained quite well). But the limited degree of uncertainty (which some people are naturally averse to) is counterbalanced by the full stored value in our lifetime trade policy. The wrinkle there is if the custom cut diamond is particularly unique in some way, such that we rarely have it in stock, then exercising the trade up effectively may itself present challenges. We do invest heavily in keeping the deepest and broadest inventory possible in order that this benefit is real.

There are many considerations that a buyer should be clear about before going this route, but in many circumstances it is a reliable way to get a diamond that checks all your boxes.

To @kmoro , I am sincerely sorry to hear that you have misgivings about the success of your project, the stresses involved, and the longer than usual timeline to completion. Rest assured that we will do something special for you for bearing with us as you have.

Thanks, Bryan! I’ve been trying really hard to make it clear that this is just my personal reaction and that you all at WF have been nothing but awesome .... incredibly thoughtful, actually. Even with the wait time, I do understand that this is not unusual and these things happen. No need to do anything special!

 

[Dancing Fire]

But still, going back to the point of my original post, if I was going to pay the 25% premium for a SuperIdeal (which I would never do btw) I would want it to be perfect in every possible way.

Where did you come up with this 25% premium for super ideal cuts?. From what I can see is more like 8 - 12% premium compared to ideal cuts.

 

[DiamondsAndDior]

I totally agree that there's value in the level of customer service and policies when working with a super ideal vendor. I've worked with a vendor in the past who would take weeks to respond to me, which is incredibly stressful to deal with. I don't think this would happen with a super ideal vendor. I also agree there's value in working with vendors who carry in-house stones versus online inventory. I hate getting excited over a potential stone and then learning that it's unavailable.

To clarify... my decision to not go with custom cutting doesn't mean that I don't want a super ideal stone or to work with a super ideal vendor, I would love to go the super ideal route! If an ACA in the size and specs I want becomes available, I would order it right away and it would likely end up being "the one"

 

[sledge]

.This isn't specific to custom-cutting, of course And, to your point, I wholly agree that vendors of 'Superideals' cannot afford to fail to meet expectations in terms of their value-add. If their products aren't of superb quality per their stated criteria and guarantees, if quality of service is sub-par... well, they're not going to get far biting the hands that feed them.

IMO, this right here is the reason specific proportions arent guaranteed, whatever a person determines is perfect for them.

Let's pretend that 54-55/34.5/40.8/75-76 is your perfect proportions. If any vendor could hit that 80%+ of the time, even at the expense of additional rough then roughly 20% are disappointed.

Not to mention the additional labor and material waste costs that ultimately would lend to a higher sales price.

Ultimately it puts the vendor in a losing position to their branding, reputation, price competitiveness, etc.

Not to mention the 20% that didn't get exactly what they wanted will be loud enough to drown out the 80% happy crowd. Look at any forum and you will constantly see the negatives. Very few praises even for products people love.

Where did you come up with this 25% premium for super ideal cuts?. From what I can see is more like 8 - 12% premium compared to ideal cuts.

I was traveling to Shepphard AFB yesterday or would have responded myself. I too find this price premium to be exaggerated. Just the other day in a different thread I found a stone that was a wash in price. Trade off was an eye clean SI1 H&A vs VS1 XXX with borderline proportions and no advanced images.

In this case, the clarity lose was inconsequential as the stone was around 0.65ct but the confidence and precision faceting of the H&A provided an equal stone, at least IMO.

All with no price premium.

It depends how people view value. However, if you ignore these type of comparisons I would agree 10-15% is more accurate.

 

[mrs-b]

Hi @DiamondsAndDior -

I did a 4ct custom cut with WF. I loved the process, got exactly what I asked for, and it was a grade cleaner (VS1) than the guaranteed minimum (VS2).

I'd do it again in a heartbeat. While it wasn't my *exact* favorite stats (I like fatter arrows and WF tend not to do them as fat as I would like), a WF stone has such INCREDIBLE light performance, you'll be mesmerized by the sparkle and the blinding light return.

ETA All my large diamonds will be WF stones from this point on. I've shopped with everybody; my experience with them was the best, both in product and customer service.

 

[DiamondsAndDior]

@mrs-b thanks for sharing! Do you have a post that details your experience/process? Can you tell a difference between your ACA and a very well cut GIA 3x of a similar size?

Is the 4ct ACA the one in your avatar? Do you mind sharing what color it is? Did you share photos in a post somewhere?

Sorry for all the questions, but I’m just really, really curious about larger ACAs because I’m also looking for something in the 4.5-4.8ct range

Edit: One more question. Do you work with @Texas Leaguer or contact someone else?

 

[mrs-b]

Hi @DiamondsAndDior -

I'm not going to be a lot of help to you, I'm sorry.

I have a thread on the ring, but not the cutting process. The diamond I had cut is not the one in my avatar - that one is an F color.

This is my 4.01 I VS1 ACA:

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...-fingers-my-new-4-01-aca-in-dk-custom.243099/

My I, tho glorious, was too warm for me - tho only juuuuust. An H is fine to my eye, and I actually like the ever-so-slight warmth in an H as I feel it accentuates the H&A pattern. There should also be no side tint to an H.

From when I ordered my custom cut stone, to when it arrived, was 3 weeks, I believe. maybe 2. It was FAST. I've waited longer for 'in house' diamonds from Blue Nile!

 

[DiamondsAndDior]

That's actually really helpful! I was leaning towards something in the I range. I've looked at a couple well cut GIA I colors in larger carat sizes. Some of them looked great to me, but others I could see too much of tint face up. I read that super ideals look whiter for the same color grade. What's weird is that I do like the tiiiiniest bit of warmth in stones (versus completely colorless), but not too much, it has to be just right.

Also, your 4ct is so pretty! And I love the setting that you have it in. If you have multiple ACAs, you must really love them!

I think my plan for now is to continue monitoring GIA and ACA inventory for a couple months and see what becomes available. Hopefully I'll find my stone soon, but if I've patiently tried for a long time and it doesn't happen, I may be able to get on board with custom cutting.

 

[Wewechew]

That's actually really helpful! I was leaning towards something in the I range. I've looked at a couple well cut GIA I colors in larger carat sizes. Some of them looked great to me, but others I could see too much of tint face up. I read that super ideals look whiter for the same color grade. What's weird is that I do like the tiiiiniest bit of warmth in stones (versus completely colorless), but not too much, it has to be just right.

Also, your 4ct is so pretty! And I love the setting that you have it in. If you have multiple ACAs, you must really love them!

I think my plan for now is to continue monitoring GIA and ACA inventory for a couple months and see what becomes available. Hopefully I'll find my stone soon, but if I've patiently tried for a long time and it doesn't happen, I may be able to get on board with custom cutting.

What exactly are you looking for? I noticed WF had several over the 4ct mark in stock currently.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I'm going to have to disagree with this... But it's a complicated subject. It rather hits home for me. Explanation coming...

I'm a software engineer.
I believe in open source.
My company sells 'free software'. We have no IP - 100% of our code is open source.
Open source, meaning, free to use, free to download, free to re-sell.
My company is the most successful provider of open source based solutions in the world.

So how does any company make money selling 'free software'?
We participate in open source communities and drive direction of open source projects.
We stabilize these projects and run them through the gamut of compliance testing.
We integrate hundreds of individual open source projects that all have different agendas and leadership and that all release at varying cadences into easy-to-implement distributions with compatibility and functionality guarantees.
And we offer those distributions with long term support.

Again, the technical stuff is 'free'... What our customers pay for is our value-add.

I think for a lot of people there's more to buying a 'Superideal' than the technical stuff.
Upgrade policies.
Trade-in policies.
Buy back policies.
Ease of purchase and guarantees re. qualify of product.
Personalized, first-class service - at time of buy and forever afterward.
Knowledge that when you buy from a boutique PS vendor you're supporting an organization that believes in sharing knowledge, making information public.
Knowledge that when you buy from a boutique PS vendor you're supporting an organization that is committed to improving this industry - from both R&D and humanitarian perspectives.

You could certainly find other sources for a close match of the "technical stuff" - close enough that, as you say, nine of ten people couldn't possibly appreciate a difference. As someone who owns both 'Superideals' and "technically close enoughs"... I agree.
But without an audience willing to support the R&D to keep pushing those boundaries "Superideals" (and the "technically close enoughs" that emulate them) wouldn't exist in the first place.
And even if one can't personally see a difference between today's 'Superideal' and a close technical match... maybe tomorrow's will be revolutionary. We'll never know if we don't support those who are willing to investigate and share their discoveries with a public community.

This isn't specific to custom-cutting, of course And, to your point, I wholly agree that vendors of 'Superideals' cannot afford to fail to meet expectations in terms of their value-add. If their products aren't of superb quality per their stated criteria and guarantees, if quality of service is sub-par... well, they're not going to get far biting the hands that feed them.

@yssie ,
This is a marvelous analogy. I'm going to have to steal it, being it's open source and all.

Seriously though, it opens up (for me at least) a new way of thinking about our niche and the value proposition of those companies that are dedicated not only to the best in technical cut quality, but are committed to doing all the other things at a high level to create better experiences for consumers around their diamond and jewelry purchases.

Thank you!

 

[Gussie]

@yssie ,
This is a marvelous analogy. I'm going to have to steal it, being it's open source and all.

Seriously though, it opens up (for me at least) a new way of thinking about our niche and the value proposition of those companies that are dedicated not only to the best in technical cut quality, but are committed to doing all the other things at a high level to create better experiences for consumers around their diamond and jewelry purchases.

Thank you!

So when do we get the free open source diamonds?

 

[Dmndsr4evr11]

Thanks! I’ve been sitting here thinking ... “wait a minute ... I’m still pretty darn excited!!!!”

Got all wrapped up in this thread because I really have not been having fun, but that doesn’t mean I’m not super excited!!!!

I mean, an ACA is still an ACA!!!! Stupid 56.4 table, lol, oh no it’s the end of the world, lol

Yay!!!

ETA: Hmmmm. Well, I guess it wouldn’t hurt to share ... here’s the link:

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4096805.htm

WOW! @kmoro. Congrats! Beautiful stone! Can’t wait to see the finished product !!