okay...to settle the colorless vs the near colorless topic...

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 3:26:09 PM
Author: f0rbidden

Date: 3/28/2006 12:08:06 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 3/28/2006 11:31:37 AM
Author: f0rbidden

I''ve seen a few comments about how '' no one can tell the difference'' or ''people don''t ask about the color anyway'' or things like that - do we buy and wear diamonds for OTHER people? or for ourselves?

will people know I have a D color diamond - no, probably not. but i know. do they know if it''s a vvs or an si? no, again, probably not. but i know. and isn''t that what the bottom line is?

I guess I''d answer this way:

I buy diamonds for myself, and I don''t care if others would choose as I do. However, I couldn''t feel good about paying for a D stone and wearing it when I know that I could get materially the same look for a lot less money. It would be like paying $28 for a loaf of bread......even if I had the $28 to blow, the lack of value would kill my enjoyment of it.

For you, knowing that your diamond is a D satisfies your mind. It feels exclusive to you, and you are willing to pay for that exclusivity. That''s wonderful, and if that''s important to you, by all means, you should stick with a D. Others who don''t value exclusivity are less willing to pay for it.

For you, knowing you have a D makes you happy. For me, knowing I paid for a D would make me feel wasteful and overindulgent. It''s just a difference in what we place importance on.

I agree - very well said, but again, we don''t buy diamonds to please others - we buy them to please ourselves. I do choose D and as clear as I can find - at the sacrifice of size, because with cut being equal - i would choose to wear the diamond that is as close to flawless as I can find and am comfortable with, for my budget.

I know I can get a bigger diamond by sacrificing color or clarity, but I''d rather NOT have the size if that''s the sacrifice I need to make.

I know I know..personal preference! and you know what, they''re ALL beautiful in the end, because I''m a tree hugger and I don''t think nature makes things that are ugly.

I think you missed that fact that I''ve already agreed with that.....

My point was this: for *some* people (me included), buying a larger, near colorless diamond instead of a smaller, colorless diamond *IS* about pleasing ourselves and not about impressing others. Yes, yes....I know that some people are all about getting a large stone so others will oh/ah over it.... but that doesn''t mean everyone who likes a bigger stone is that way.

In the end, it''s all about what pleases the wearer.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/28/2006 4:17:05 PM
Author: fire&ice

Date: 3/28/2006 2:36:48 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 3/28/2006 5:07:49 AM
Author: valeria101


Good question... ''would you prefer to get a big gift or a small one, no questions asked''

Looks like the answer is darn obvious and has absolutely nothing to do with diamond grades

well...you hear a few near colorless owners saying....i like a little warmth color...i don''t like colorless stones,looks fake.now, when it''s FREE

all of sudden they love a D color

what i try to say is ...G-J owners buy b/c they think it''s better value for the money not b/c they don''t like colorless stones

and there''s nothing wrong with that.

No, that isn''t what many are saying.

It''s not about preference. It''s simple good economics. Would anyone prefer a monetary gift of $10,000 vs $20,000 monetary gift provided money was no object? It''s not a realistic senerio.

I''d probably still sell the D. The monetary gain is worth more to me than the color ''D''. It''s simple, pure economics. Value DOES enter into the equation. And, if I could get more money for the Tiffany & Co. ring than I would sell that & get something else w/o the ridiculous premium attached. The Tiffany name means nothing to me personally - but I''d be happy to profit off of someone who does value it.

what if they say you can''t sell it.you must wear it

would you then pick a lower color stone ?

b/c a D color might be too white for some people.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 2:36:48 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
well...you hear a few near colorless owners saying....i like a little warmth color...i don''t like colorless stones,looks fake.now, when it''s FREE

all of sudden they love a D color

what i try to say is ...G-J owners buy b/c they think it''s better value for the money not b/c they don''t like colorless stones

and there''s nothing wrong with that.

No, that isn''t what they are saying. They are saying they would choose the D color for reasons OTHER than wearing it.

That''s not the same as "everyone would choose to wear a D color if it were more affordable". Not everyone would.

Maybe it would make more sense to you this way. I like hamburgers; I don''t like caviar. I realize that caviar is ridiculously expensive, so if someone offered me a free pound of caviar or a free pound of hamburger, of course I''d take the caviar so I could sell it, buy myself a lb. of hamburger, and be ahead of the game.

BUT, when I''m paying for it, I''m eating hamburgers because I PREFER them and becuase I can afford them. I don''t secretly wish they were caviar, if only I could afford it. Nope.....I''m eating them because I PREFER hamburgers, and I''d never WANT the caviar.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 3/28/2006 6:42:04 PM
Author: aljdewey
My point was this: for *some* people (me included), buying a larger, near colorless diamond instead of a smaller, colorless diamond *IS* about pleasing ourselves and not about impressing others.

Whew! EXACTLY. I''m gettin'' dizzy from the circle-talk. Is it so hard to believe that someone might pick SIZE over COLOR to please themselves? I much prefer covering more "finger real estate" to what I perceive as fractional color differences. The proportional look of my stone on my finger is what pleases me, as well as it''s color appearance, gorgeous patterns, and mile-deep look ... NOT what other''s might think or not think about it''s size OR color OR value OR quality.

I truly "don''t get" the "mind white" or "mind clear" premium people are willing to pay to KNOW their stone is more perfect/rare/white whatever. Not saying it''s not valid or not very real to others ... or factually correct. It just never crosses my mind - I don''t judge other peoples stones by color - and it wouldn''t occur to me that other people do, if I wasn''t on a diamond forum where we talk about it.

Let''s give everyone the benefit of the doubt that they''re choosing what they''re choosing because THEY themselves like it, or it suits their particular priorities & budget.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 3/28/2006 6:52:11 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
what if they say you can''t sell it.you must wear it

would you then pick a lower color stone ?

b/c a D color might be too white for some people.

Are 2ct F color IF Royal Asschers in the running? I''LL TAKE TWO! (And I wouldn''t choose a Royal under 2cts, because of the extra facet/busyness .. unless it''s Tierhog''s 1.23 H Royal - I''ll still take that)

 

[jasontb]

I''d like to to reword the question to make sure it focuses on the crux of the question:

Imagine that diamonds were all but worthless. The ground was covered with them like dirt. People actually paid others to come haul away their diamonds because they were everywhere. But they are still a beautiful gem that people love to wear. This basically means that you can get any size diamond you want, any color diamond you want, and cut you want...for less than a can of Coke. What color diamond would you choose?

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 7:13:01 PM
Author: jasontb
I'd like to to reword the question to make sure it focuses on the crux of the question:

Imagine that diamonds were all but worthless. The ground was covered with them like dirt. People actually paid others to come haul away their diamonds because they were everywhere. But they are still a beautiful gem that people love to wear. This basically means that you can get any size diamond you want, any color diamond you want, and cut you want...for less than a can of Coke. What color diamond would you choose?

In that instance, I'd simply look on the ground until one caught my eye and select that one -- without worrying about the label.

Let's face it....the label only matters as it relates to price/value or to status/exclusivity. If all diamonds were worth about the same, and all were equally readily available, they would simply be called 'diamonds'....and that's it. No color/clarity qualifiers would be needed. Rarity (exclusivity) wouldn't come into play, nor would value.

Think back to when you were a kid, bored on a Saturday afternoon, and you spent days with friends searching for unique, cool rocks (or seashells). You were young - so value didn't matter, and you had no idea what rarity meant. You simply each picked what you liked....purely what you liked.

I might have preferred the piece of granite that had a slightly pinking cast to it....you might have preferred the piece of granite that has a greenish vein running through it. None of them are worth anything; none are 'harder to find' than any other. We just pick what we like...what appeals to us.

At that point, if someone offered me my choice - greenish or pinkish - I'd choose pink. The fact that my eyes like the pinkish rock best wouldn't change if I found out the greenish rock was worth more, but it would change my choice on the free rock deal because now one is worth more. It does't change the fact that I prefer pink rock.

I can only tell you this.......Brian at WF lined up similar diamonds (all right about 2 cts) in a tray and told me to pick the one that appealed to my eye the most. I wasn't told if they were all different colors or not. I wasn't told if all clarity grades were represented. Just pick the one my eye liked the most.

Only after I picked one did he tell me that the stones were actually E, F, G, H, I, and J....one of each.

What did I pick? The H. So I'd have to say that yes, when there is none of my money on the line and the prospect of value is removed, I stilll prefered a near-colorless stone.

 

[lindaAZ]

Do people want D colored diamonds because they are trully more beautiful or because they are rarer and therefore more valuable. (does anyone know the color distribution of diamonds ?) Are D colored diamonds really so much more beautifully that they are worth double the price (at least) of near colorless diamonds. (Perhaps a marketing person could tell us about the psychology of wanting things perceived as rare even if the desired object is really not any better...)

(I love my I colored asscher. It is graded as ideal cut by independent appraiser, it is a nice size (1.83), it is not at all "yellow" more silvery and is absolutely AWESOME in platinum. On an overcast day it is positively hypnotizing outside)

 

[sarita]

Date: 3/28/2006 7:13:01 PM
Author: jasontb
I''d like to to reword the question to make sure it focuses on the crux of the question:

Imagine that diamonds were all but worthless. The ground was covered with them like dirt. People actually paid others to come haul away their diamonds because they were everywhere. But they are still a beautiful gem that people love to wear. This basically means that you can get any size diamond you want, any color diamond you want, and cut you want...for less than a can of Coke. What color diamond would you choose?

Ok, I think this is the best way to ask. I''d probably go for a G/H or an I/J that was accurately graded (ie no yellow tint but warmer than colorless) so that it''s obviously bright but not so ice ice looking on my hand (tan/olive skin tone).

 

[aljdewey]

...

 

[squarediamondlove]

Date: 3/28/2006 7:13:01 PM
Author: jasontb
I''d like to to reword the question to make sure it focuses on the crux of the question:


Imagine that diamonds were all but worthless. The ground was covered with them like dirt. People actually paid others to come haul away their diamonds because they were everywhere. But they are still a beautiful gem that people love to wear. This basically means that you can get any size diamond you want, any color diamond you want, and cut you want...for less than a can of Coke. What color diamond would you choose?

I would pick one of each

from the whitest to the tintest.

However I don''t think that this helps narrow down the answer. I think Mara had a better scenario: option of getting an either I color Tiffany diamond or a D color Tiffany diamond for $15,000, BUT, the only factor that should be taken into consideration is its aesthetics, whether you like the "look" of the D or the I color. NOT the resale value or the market value or any other value!

 

[W2W]

I like the way dancing fire and jasontb posed the question. In response to their question, I would pick an G/h.

In response to the original question, I would take the D, sell it and get a 2ct h and a pair of studs.

 

[ForteKitty]

I''d take the D w/ med blue fluorescence. but if i had a choice of ANY diamond, it''ll have to be a bright blue diamond. hands down.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 3/28/2006 7:39:00 PM
Author: lindaAZ
Do people want D colored diamonds because they are truly more beautiful or because they are rarer and therefore more valuable. (does anyone know the color distribution of diamonds ?) Are D colored diamonds really so much more beautifully that they are worth double the price (at least) of near colorless diamonds. (Perhaps a marketing person could tell us about the psychology of wanting things perceived as rare even if the desired object is really not any better...

I would LOVE to see that. That''s an excellent point. I remember the Cabbage Patch kids phenomenon. Or Beanie Babies. When people thought they were rare -- they went batsh*t trying to get ''em. I remember seeing shopping channels selling sets of Beanie Babies for THOUSANDS of dollars!

 

[Dancing Fire]

well....i guess

except for Mara and Alj whom said they would still pick an H color,even though it is FREE!!!

the rest of us are greedy.we would pick the more expensive D color. he,he

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 3/28/2006 9:41:03 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
well....i guess

except for Mara and Alj whom said they would still pick an H color,even though it is FREE!!!

the rest of us are greedy.we would pick the more expensive D color. he,he

MMMmMmmm? Check that adding machine tape again, Dancing Fire! I don''t think that''s how the cookie crumbled.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 9:41:03 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
well....i guess

except for Mara and Alj whom said they would still pick an H color,even though it is FREE!!!

the rest of us are greedy.we would pick the more expensive D color. he,he

OH my good lord! That''s not what I said at all.

If both were free, I would pick the D......not because I actually prefer a D color, but ONLY because the D is more expensive, so I am getting *more worth* for free.

And then I''d sell the D stone, get an H, and pocket the difference.

 

[aljdewey]

Maybe a better way to get the answer you''re really looking for is this:

"You will be given a 2 ct. D-colored Tiffany ring for free. You can either keep it and wear it, or you can use it toward another stone. What would you do?"

Only those who really honestly prefer the D color will keep the stone ... because they just received what they ultimately wanted, and there is no reason to change.

All others who would opt to trade out the D for something else.....those people don''t "prefer" D stones. They would take it for the value, but they don''t covet a D stone.

I''m in the second group - wouldn''t keep the D.

 

[leeenie]

Date: 3/28/2006 9:58:15 PM
Author: aljdewey
Maybe a better way to get the answer you're really looking for is this:

'You will be given a 2 ct. D-colored Tiffany ring for free. You can either keep it and wear it, or you can use it toward another stone. What would you do?'

Only those who really honestly prefer the D color will keep the stone ... because they just received what they ultimately wanted, and there is no reason to change.

All others who would opt to trade out the D for something else.....those people don't 'prefer' D stones. They would take it for the value, but they don't covet a D stone.

I'm in the second group - wouldn't keep the D.

I think this formulation still doesn't get at the issue. We're trying to isolate someone's aesthetic preferences without regard to cost or perceived economic value.

As was pointed out before, the question should be: if you're given a 2 ct ring for free of any color grade (not fancy), and you CANNOT sell it or use it towards another stone and cash out/get a bigger diamond, which one would you get?

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:07:27 PM
Author: teagreen
I think this formulation still doesn't get at the issue. We're trying to isolate someone's aesthetic preferences without regard to cost or perceived economic value.

As was pointed out before, the question should be: if you're given a 2 ct ring for free of any color grade (not fancy), and you CANNOT sell it or use it towards another stone and cash out/get a bigger diamond, which one would you get?

Yes, that's what we are trying to do, but the example given doesn't do it.....because the notion of rarity factors as heavily as "perceived economic value". It's like "I bought a real Picasso"......notable because it's the real thing.

In your formulation, being unable to cash out/sell doesn't remove the "status", exclusivity element. Even if you cannot sell it/cash out, most people would naturally want to get the more valuable free gift. It feels like getting something more. Even if you can't cash it out, the idea that you got something "more rare" (translate to status symbol) would still hold appeal.

I feel my formulation better isolates the aesthetic preference. The theory being advanced is that everyone would want a D if they could afford it. That the only reason people choose less than a D is budget or value.

My formulation removes the economic barrier by providing access to a D to anyone. Anyone who truly wants a D can have it.....for free. And, everyone STARTS with a D, so they aren't making a choice between two stones of different values. They all start with the D in hand.

If D is really one's aesthetic PREFERENCE, he/she would keep the stone. It cost them nothing, and gave them exactly what they desired. Only folks who didn't really want a D for aesthetic reasons would consider disposing of it.

 

[leeenie]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:14:57 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 3/28/2006 10:07:27 PM
Author: teagreen
I think this formulation still doesn''t get at the issue. We''re trying to isolate someone''s aesthetic preferences without regard to cost or perceived economic value.

As was pointed out before, the question should be: if you''re given a 2 ct ring for free of any color grade (not fancy), and you CANNOT sell it or use it towards another stone and cash out/get a bigger diamond, which one would you get?

I disagree, and here''s why.....even if you cannot sell it/cash out, most people would naturally want to get the more valuable free gift. It feels like getting something more. Even if you can''t cash it out, the idea that you got something ''more rare'' (translate to status symbol) would still hold appeal.

The reason I feel as though my formulation works? The theory being advanced is that everyone would want a D if they could afford it. That the only reason people choose less than a D is budget or otherwise.

In the scenario I gave, anyone would really wanted a D could have one....by keeping the one they were given. Therefore, only those who didn''t really want a D would consider selling it or otherwise disposing of it.

True that you can''t get rid of peoples'' tendencies to want what''s more valuable even if they can''t cash it out or exchange it for a larger size. But under your formulation, people who want larger sizes for a certain amount of money or would rather have more money than spend it on a high color would still have the option to do so (though not liking it aesthetically could also make them sell it). Thus, you''re back at the heart of the question which Dancing Fire was trying to get at - do people buy lower color grades because they don''t want to spend the money, or because they actually like the way the look?

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:21:15 PM
Author: teagreen

True that you can't get rid of peoples' tendencies to want what's more valuable even if they can't cash it out or exchange it for a larger size. But under your formulation, people who want larger sizes for a certain amount of money or would rather have more money than spend it on a high color would still have the option to do so (though not liking it aesthetically could also make them sell it). Thus, you're back at the heart of the question which Dancing Fire was trying to get at - do people buy lower color grades because they don't want to spend the money, or because they actually like the way the look?

DF's hypothesis was that if money were no object, everyone would want a D. People who have the money (as you say, would rather have more money than spend it) isn't the same thing as "folks who would buy a D if they had the means to."

That's precisely why my formulation works. Because if the only reason someone didn't want a D was "I don't have the money to get a D" or "I cannot afford a D", that reason is now removed. Everyone is handed a 2-ct. D. So, in that scenario, anyone who really wants a D stone can have it. (And the 2ct. marker is meant to recognize that a majority of folks likely woudn't go over 2 ct. Yes, I know, I know.....*some* would, but many wouldn't.)

If anyone who wants a D can have it, then those who don't keep it don't really prefer a D.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:07:27 PM
Author: teagreen

Date: 3/28/2006 9:58:15 PM
Author: aljdewey
Maybe a better way to get the answer you''re really looking for is this:

''You will be given a 2 ct. D-colored Tiffany ring for free. You can either keep it and wear it, or you can use it toward another stone. What would you do?''

Only those who really honestly prefer the D color will keep the stone ... because they just received what they ultimately wanted, and there is no reason to change.

All others who would opt to trade out the D for something else.....those people don''t ''prefer'' D stones. They would take it for the value, but they don''t covet a D stone.

I''m in the second group - wouldn''t keep the D.

I think this formulation still doesn''t get at the issue. We''re trying to isolate someone''s aesthetic preferences without regard to cost or perceived economic value.

As was pointed out before, the question should be: if you''re given a 2 ct ring for free of any color grade (not fancy), and you CANNOT sell it or use it towards another stone and cash out/get a bigger diamond, which one would you get?

teagreen

you got it

i just wonder would anybody say...nope

i don''t want the D color b/c i perfer a little warmth so,i''ll take an H or I color instead of a D.

 

[leeenie]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:26:48 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 3/28/2006 10:21:15 PM
Author: teagreen

True that you can''t get rid of peoples'' tendencies to want what''s more valuable even if they can''t cash it out or exchange it for a larger size. But under your formulation, people who want larger sizes for a certain amount of money or would rather have more money than spend it on a high color would still have the option to do so (though not liking it aesthetically could also make them sell it). Thus, you''re back at the heart of the question which Dancing Fire was trying to get at - do people buy lower color grades because they don''t want to spend the money, or because they actually like the way the look?

That''s precisely why my formulation works. Because if the only reason someone didn''t want a D was ''I don''t have the money to get a D'' or ''I cannot afford a D'', that reason is now removed. Everyone is handed a 2-ct. D. So, in that scenario, anyone who really wants a D stone can have it. (And the 2ct. marker is meant to recognize that a majority of folks likely woudn''t go over 2 ct. Yes, I know, I know.....*some* would, but many wouldn''t.)

If anyone who wants a D can have it, then those who don''t keep it don''t really prefer a D.

But they now have a 2 carat D that is worth something. They can get CASH for its value, cash for the difference in value with a lower color stone, or a LARGER stone. Money is not taken out of the equation in this scenario, even if there is no initial out-of-pocket outlay.

I don''t think people who prefer lower color grades because they are of better economic value literally have no money in their bank accounts to get anything higher than what they get. It''s because they perceive a certain value in different stones and would rather trade color for either size or more money.

By disallowing resale or upgrade for another stone of the same value, you take money out of the equation - which I thought was the whole point of the initial question.

 

[Mara]

I don''t care what the scenario is, I''d probably still choose an H.

When Brian from WF lined up those 7 diamonds for me and Al... and told us to choose with our eye... I chose the 2.13 J SI (that is now JCrow''s stone) as the most beautiful to my eye.

The D was pretty obvious because it was really really really icy white and cold to my eyes, but not most appealing to me.

 

[aljdewey]

Ok, let's try it another way.

The booth at the fair is giving away one free slice of lemon pie to anyone who comes to the booth. The pie is FREE, so no one has to go without pie because they cannot afford it.

Those who don't PREFER lemon pie can exchange their dessert for any other dessert offered at the fair.

If my favorite dessert is lemon pie, do you think I'm swapping? No. If my favorite dessert is strawberry shortcake 3 booths down, do you think I'm swapping? OF COURSE.

The ONLY ones with incentive to swap are those who didn't get what they most preferred to begin with. Anyone who loves lemon pie best isn't going to swap!

Same thing.

 

[leeenie]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:34:37 PM
Author: aljdewey
Ok, let''s try it another way.

The booth at the fair is giving away one free slice of lemon pie to anyone who comes to the booth. The pie is FREE, so no one has to go without pie because they cannot afford it.

Those who don''t PREFER lemon pie can exchange their dessert for any other dessert offered at the fair.

If my favorite dessert is lemon pie, do you think I''m swapping? No. If my favorite dessert is strawberry shortcake 3 booths down, do you think I''m swapping? OF COURSE.

The ONLY ones with incentive to swap are those who didn''t get what they most preferred to begin with. Anyone who loves lemon pie best isn''t going to swap!

Same thing.

I don''t think it''s the same thing. You can resell the D diamond for CASH IN YOUR POCKET or get a LARGER lower colored diamond. There is no money in this pie scenario. Nor is there another preference in play other than taste (i.e. size).

Your pie scenario is equal to my no-resale/upgrade scenario - swap one thing for the other, all things equal except for color. Once you add the option of getting cash or a larger size, color is no longer the only thing you''re considering!!!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:33:52 PM
Author: teagreen

But they now have a 2 carat D that is worth something. They can get CASH for its value, cash for the difference in value with a lower color stone, or a LARGER stone. Money is not taken out of the equation in this scenario, even if there is no initial out-of-pocket outlay.

I don't think people who prefer lower color grades because they are of better economic value literally have no money in their bank accounts to get anything higher than what they get. It's because they perceive a certain value in different stones and would rather trade color for either size or more money.

By disallowing resale or upgrade for another stone of the same value, you take money out of the equation - which I thought was the whole point of the initial question.

The point isn't to take money out of the equation. The point is to eliminate it as a BARRIER to getting the D.

Those who want a D can have it. Money doesn't prevent them from having it. That's the entire sum point.

Regarding the rest, yes, I agree that people perceive value. But that's not what DF was suggesting. He was suggesting that if money were NO object, everyone would want a D.

Well, if you give everyone a D, money isn't the OBJECT....the OBSTACLE.....to having what they truly want.

The point isn't to remove the VALUE of money......it's to remove money as an obstacle. Everyone who wants a D can have one, and only those who don't VALUE a D will get rid of it.

EDITED TO ADD: Oh, and for your comment in pink....are you aware how much difference there is between a 1 ct. D stone and a 1 ct. H stone? THOUSANDS. I'd humbly suggest that most folks DON'T "have the money lying around and choose not to spend it." From the posts we see nearly every day here, most are stretching just to make the 1 ct H/I/J stone.....and they don't all talk about the extra thousands they have laying around that they just don't wanna spend. Absolutely the opposite.

 

[belle]

h

newspaper or magazine?




oh...sorry! wrong thread!

 

[aljdewey]

Teagreen....you''re still missing the point, but I''m not gonna give another go.

You cannot get by the "money as an obstacle" and "money as value" being different things, and I just don''t know how to make it clearer. Sorry.