Would anyone buy I1 over SI2....

[Mara]

Now I am getting exasperated.




Of course we are not GG's. But that really has no relevance. Wholesale vs retail is a business term not limited to diamonds. As to what's correct vs incorrect in terms of legality, RUN A SEARCH and look for yourself. Don't just take our word for it.




The whole point that we are all here is to assist others. That does not include giving them incorrect information.




And you said it yourself, so many wholesale vendors that sell to the public are SKETCHY. 10 people doing it does not make it right. Why is this discussion even continuing?

 

[p5r799]

Thank you for clarifying.
Is everyone happy now? I didn't think everybody was going to be so sensitive to the words wholesale or retail. Geezeeeeee

 

[p5r799]

Any lower than SI1 is very dangerous unless you see the stone and are convinced yourself that it is beautiful and clean


Becareful, they'll jump on you.

lol

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 3:48:02 PM p5r799 wrote:
----------------

Inclusions do drive picky people like me mad. Especially when you can see it through the table or from the underneath.

Really? Do you consider VS1 and VS2 diamonds to be "of poor quality" too"? Because guess what.....on some of them, you can see the inclusions from the side. Clarity grades are not assigned by looking through the side of a diamond.

Even though the other people can't see it, wouldn't it drive you nuts knowing that you are wearing a poor quality diamond?

Oh......I see now. It's a poor quality diamond if it has ANY inclusions, even if you can't see them? Gee, than I guess an IF diamond is "poor quality", too, because IF doesn't mean a diamond is internally flawless AT ALL. It means the diamond is internally flawless *at 10x magnification*. Bump it up to 60X, and I'm sure you'll see the inclusions.

I know you're trying to help, but it really does a disservice to people to talk in absolutes this way. Not all D stones are the same. Not all VS1 stones are the same. Suggesting that any criteria is absolutely is just a poor idea, and bad information.

 

[canadiangrrl]

No darling, hold me before I go completely ballistic.

Too late.

If you are seeing vendors who sell to the public and advertise using the word "wholesale", they are lying. Lying lying lying pants on firing. Plain and fricking simple. His ethics are therefore in question and I would therefore spend my hard-earned shemoles elsewhere. It isn't a technicality, it isn't just a matter of semantics - a wholesaler cannot sell to the public. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

You cannot see the inclusions in my stone without magnification. You cannot, you cannot, you cannot. I wish someone on this forum had seen my stone in person and could attest to that fact, because I think it would prove very useful in helping consumers to see that there are nice I1's out there. Yes, they are difficult to find - but they do exist.

 

[p5r799]

Didn't you say yourself that what you said was your opinion?
Why is it wrong for the other people to do that?

 

[p5r799]

aljdewey

I'm sure I said many times that this is what I found.. learned from my experience and my personal opinion.
Which leaves it up to the people to make up their own minds.. unlike some of the folks here.
Now things are sounding little patty and highschool like.

 

[Mara]

That would be PETTY. With an e.




Is there a full moon? Has someone been spiking the eggnog?




For the last time. Opinions are good. We like opinions. Educated opinions are even better.




Absolutes are BAD. Very bad. Things like 'J is too yellow, don't buy a J' is an absolute. Things like 'I1 is going to have visible inclusions no matter what' is an absolute. If there is one thing I have learned in my last year here is that diamonds are NEVER absolute. Each one is going to be different--regardless of what the grading lab cert says.




Adding in 'in my opinion' usually can get you out of firing range. But absolutes....gotta have some hard proof.

 

[p5r799]

I forgot to add that I never made it specific about what's foggy and of a poor quality.
Didn't I just simply state that I don't believe in going below SI1? Once again, this is what I believe and learned.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 3:51:45 PM p5r799 wrote:
----------------

If you want to discuss the technicality of a 'word' wholesale vs. retail, we can do that.

Yes.....let's do that. Wholesalers sell ONLY to retailers and NEVER to end-customers. If you call a true wholesaler and tell him you want to buy something from him, he'll refuse.....and refer you to a retailers.

That's not a technicality....it's a fact. It's like pregnancy......you're either pregnant or you're not....there is NO in-between.

I don't see why it matters what the vendor call themselves as long as they provide a superior service and unbeatable price.

It matters only because it's misleading to consumers (and borders on fradulent). Consumers assume that because someone is a "wholesaler", it means they are getting a lower price, when in fact that's often not true.

So what do you call the store that sells both to a public and to the stores?

A retailer. If he sells to even ONE end-user, he is a retailer.

 

[p5r799]

Canadiang,
I thought we dropped this wholesale thing after someone clarified for all of us.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 3:59:45 PM strmrdr wrote:

Unless a vendor I trust says hey I have an eyeclean si2/si3/I1 you would like I wouldnt look below si1.
The rest of the specs would have to be in line with what I like of course but you get the idea.

The I1's I looked at in the mall stores and local b&ms were nasty.

----------------

Some of the E stones I looked at in the mall stores were nasty, too.

Making a comparison to I1 stones found at the mall and I1 stones from reputable vendors who sell well-cut stones is like comparing the local variety corner store with Wal-mart.....they aren't the same thing AT ALL.

Don't look at anything below SI1? Hogwash.....*look* at anything that would put you where you'd really like to be, and then rule out the ones that don't pass muster.

 

[p5r799]

Mara,

Thanks for the correction. I don't spell check my text before submitting because I just want to get it out there.
And you should be nicer to the newcomers.

 

[diamond dazed]

----------------

...Also, finding a good deal is important to me. That is definitely a psycological thing. When I see people who want flawless stones for their 'flawless' wives, I think that's sweet. But I also think that I like a diamond that's like me...pretty great overall, but not perfect.[/u]
----------------

Patty, I love that you said this. I'm laughing here because it' soooo true.

In fact, I don't think it's ever been a HUSBAND showing up around here to buy a "flawless stone for his flawless WIFE," it's a man buying it for his flawless girlfriend --- nobody who's made it past their first year of marriage would ever say that, unless they're either not home much, or a liar. If I asked my husband of 15 years why he doesn't buy "a flawless stone for his flawless wife?" he'd probably double over, fall to the ground, and roll around 'cause he'd be laughing so hard. And vice versa. I'm not perfect, neither is he, but we are happy together, and we have a diamond that isn't perfect -- come to think of it, the kids aren't perfect, either -- neither are our cars, our house, our friends......

I second that "finding a good deal" sentiment, as well. My DH knows -- and says -- that what I like best about the diamond isn't the size, color or clarity, it's the DEAL. He's right. After cut, that's what I like best about it.

Kris

(edited to say: oops, I think I took too long to post my reply, I thought I was going to show up right below Patty's and now it's on another page. whoops.)

 

[Mara]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 4:28:40 PM p5r799 wrote:





And you should be nicer to the newcomers.

----------------

Why?

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 4:09:29 PM Mara wrote:







CG I have missed you tremendously. Hold me.

----------------

HEY........me too.

OK.......(((((((((((GROUP HUG)))))))))))))

heheheheee

 

[p5r799]

I think some people here are bored with that wholesale topic.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 4:12:02 PM highendgems wrote:





Any lower than SI1 is very dangerous unless you see the stone and are convinced yourself that it is beautiful and clean.

----------------

Will you please stop the noise until you learn the first thing about diamonds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stones are not "dangerous"......yes, a trained set of eyes is key to buying ANY stone, not just stones lower than an SI1.

With all your expertise, perhaps you'd like to phone my appraiser who's been in the industry for more than 20 years and tell him how wrong he was about my SI2 stone?

When you can muster that you know ONE credible fact about diamonds, come back and visit.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 3:19:28 PM PrincessClyde wrote:

If you were able to get a larger diamond for the same price, would you buy an I1 clarity over an SI2 (assuming cut and color are relatively the same)? At what size difference would you buy the I1?

Also, has anyone bought an I1 stone without seeing it first (just trusting the vendor) and ended up happy?----------------

Don't know about those "wholsale sellers" and "wholesale prices at retail venues" semantic matter, but the initial Q is quite interesting. How about this suggestion:

Not all I1's look bad, but quite a few do and there are not too many ways to comunicate this remotely instead of just seing the diamond. Even those magnified pictures will only show a forest of inclusions in this case but not the sparkle that hides most of them. I would not bother with an I1 with any colored inclusions: the rest are all right with me, as long as I can hold them onder daylight on top of my palm and listen to them speak. Among the rest, if at least the table of the diamond is eye clean top-down (which a magnified picture or the GIA plot may not show), the piece could be a winner of the I1 cathegory. Sight unseen? No way!

Trading clarity for size on the boundary between eye clean and non, is not a deal that strykes my fancy. Actually, the bigger the stone gets, the greater the chance that you can easily pick those inclusions.

 

[Patty]

highendgems, you say:

Absolutley NOT. A properly graded I1 stone has VISIBLE inclusions to the human eye without magnification and does not represent value to the consumer (SI1 does). If you ever see a truly eye clean I1, then its is very likely an SI2 or SI1 but graded improperly. Any lower than SI1 is very dangerous unless you see the stone and are convinced yourself that it is beautiful and clean.

(btw, can someone show my how to reply with quoting someone?)

You say an I1 doesn't represent value to the consumer. I think an I1 can represent a LOT of value, if you value your money and don't mind seeing an inclusion. And when you say that anything lower than an SI1 is "very dangerous" I just have to laugh. It unusual for someone to sell their diamonds years down the road for a profit...for the casual buyer, diamonds are NOT a good investment for investment purposes. And unless my inclusion burns through my finger, I will not consider it dangerous.

 

[p5r799]

Mara,
No reason.
You don't have to welcome me and my opinions for me to appreciate what you guys are saying.

 

[Mara]

The only way diamonds are dangerous are if you stab yourself with the culet. Hee Hee.

Or acutally a marquis can put an eye out!

P5...I can actually be quite friendly to newcomers when desired....but speaking in 'absolutes' tends to rub me the wrong way. We have had alot of that lately. I spend enough time here to know that people who post questions usually take responses to heart...and resulting mis-information is the kiss of death.




We all point out each other wrong at times...it's the nature of the board.

 

[p5r799]

aljdewey,
Here we go again picking on the words.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 4:15:26 PM p5r799 wrote:





Thank you for clarifying.
Is everyone happy now? I didn't think everybody was going to be so sensitive to the words wholesale or retail. Geezeeeeee
----------------

PR.....it would help you to know that the comments in this thread aren't intended to be taken "personally".

Look, there is a difference between fact and opinion. Opinions are subject....no right or wrong. Facts, however, are right or wrong.

When you present "fact-based" information inaccurately, that can possibly cause harm to those who don't know.....hence, folks trying to set it straight. It's not personal against you....it's so the *facts* are accurately represented.

Opinions, however, are subjective, and therefore debatable. The danger comes when one expresses their opinion as a fact, in which case, yes, it will be debated.

 

[p5r799]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 3:19:28 PM PrincessClyde wrote:


Trading clarity for size on the boundary between eye clean and non, is not a deal that strykes my fancy. Actually, the bigger the stone gets, the greater the chance that you can easily pick those inclusions.
----------------------------------------
I agree!

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 4:34:46 PM Mara wrote:







The only way diamonds are dangerous are if you stab yourself with the culet.

----------------

Hee heee heeeeeeeeeeeeeee! FUNNY!

 

[canadiangrrl]

"Is there a full moon?"

Yes, actually. *bares teeth and howls*

Mara and Al are both correct - there are few hard and fast absolutes, and comparing a mall I1 to an AGS graded I1 is not a fair comparison.

And Mara is exceptionally nice to to newcomers. P, if you stick around, you'll note that she spends a good deal of time helping the newcomers seeking information on diamonds. Which, by the way, she's doing in this very thread. If that isn't nice, I don't know what is. But it gets more than a little exasperating when consumers continue to perpetuate false statements - even after these statements have been corrected - like there are vendors who are wholesalers, like there are no beautiful I1's. This information is actually disinformation, in that it's untrue and therefore misleading to the very newcomers she and others like her strive to help on this forum.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/9/2004 4:34:58 PM p5r799 wrote:





aljdewey,
Here we go again picking on the words.
----------------

YUP....and I'll *continue* to do so at any time I think the ways others arrange their words might lead to an inaccurate absolutes which cause others to close down their options unnecessarily. Faulty information should never be unchallenged.

And my dear, if you don't like that, I'll extend to you the same invite you extended earlier.......ignore my posts.

 

[p5r799]

P5...I can actually be quite friendly to newcomers when desired....but speaking in 'absolutes' tends to rub me the wrong way. We have had alot of that lately. I spend enough time here to know that people who post questions usually take responses to heart...and resulting mis-information is the kiss of death.

I understand your concern. But I'm one of those people who are trying to get help. And I take everybody's suggestions as a resource not as absolute anything. Not to be a pain but aren't you and your friends doing the "absolute" thing yourselves? But who cares? All's well over here.

 

[Mara]

For the last time, in big font....




The only thing that is absolute in terms of diamonds is that NOTHING IS ABSOLUTE.




By all means, help...but mis-information is the worst type of help.