upgrade question

[strmrdr]

I think $50 is fair as long as it isnt a special charge for this case and has been collected in the past.


upgrade policy:
figure out what the average upgrade amount is, figure out the cost as a percentage of that.
lets call that it the x%

something like:

section 1: cover damages and policy

section 2:

The full purchase price of the old diamond will be applied to the purchase of a different diamond if the new diamond is x% higher in cost. If the new diamond is less than x% more then a re-certication charge will be charged which will be the actual cost of having a grading report done equivalant to the one the trade in originaly came with.

That way those that want too can pay the higher fee and do the trade in anyway and arent shut out and WF doesnt lose money.

 

[Patty]

Interesting thread.

I EXPECT a vendor to charge to set a new stone. You are upgrading your stone, yeah, but they still have to do the work to set it. There should still be a setting charge, unless you are buying a new setting from them.

As for the term "upgrade." I replaced my poorly cut J color I-1 diamond in my wedding ring with a stone that was only .02c larger. It was just one color grade higher, being an I instead of a J. It was an I-1 clarity stone, but an amazing I-1 opposed to a more typical I-1. The largest difference in the stones was the CUT. THAT was upgraded substantially.

Now, I kept my old stone, so no vendor had to decide anything about whether or not my upgrade was really an upgrade. To my mind, though, it was a BIG upgrade.

The grades that went up were color and cut. The size and clarity stayed the same.

I will always think of it as my upgrade, though, since two of the grades upped.

As for Whiteflash, yeah, I certainly understand that they need a policy in place so that they don''t lose money on upgrades and so that they don''t become a diamond trading company.

 

[Rhapsody]

I was quoted $70 to change the stone in a setting I have to another of the same size, so 50 sounds fair.


I never realised that the stones were re-certed after a trade in. I think its more than fair to either require the upgrade cost a certain dollar amount or percentage more (whatever is needed to cover the costs incurred by the company) or charge the customer the costs. I would be wary of it saying "case by case basis" just because I would want to know what the policy was and under what circumstances I would NOT be allowed a trade in.

 

[Mara]

actually having something like $ or % increase makes sense for a requirement OR paying the re-certing costs which could be a few hundred dollars i would guess makes sense. that way if you find the PERFECT stone you aren''t shut out just because it''s right under that $ or % requirement and you can just pay the re-certing costs or similar.

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 1/15/2006 5:53:32 PM
Author: Mara
actually having something like $ or % increase makes sense for a requirement OR paying the re-certing costs which could be a few hundred dollars i would guess makes sense. that way if you find the PERFECT stone you aren''t shut out just because it''s right under that $ or % requirement and you can just pay the re-certing costs or similar.

I agree.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/15/2006 2:59:02 PM
Author: JohnQuixote


... If the price difference is so small that we lose money with associated costs it’s not sound business.

Isn't "trade-in" charged for as a service to cover those costs?


'Diamond renters' sounds funny - although it is clear why for you it is not.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 1/15/2006 9:39:37 AM
Author: icekid
?????? I was just curious... I'd never heard of it spoken about before, so I asked.

And I'm sorry I don't meet your upgrade criteria, belle. I don't recall asking for your definition of 'upgrade' though

No, they don't stand to make a lot of money on me simply getting a higher color grade stone. But their policy certainly did not preclude me from doing so. I doubt that most of these companies make as much money on upgrades, compared to the original purchase. So why do they do it? To keep people buying from their company; to keep up with competitors, etc etc etc.

First, the trade-up policy:

Everyone's getting their undies in a bunch about what constitutes an upgrade, trade-up, etc. It honestly doesn't matter.

The trade-up policy when you purchased the stone said "you can tradeup your diamond and apply full original purchase price to any purchased of greater value." This applies to trading the *diamond*. So, if I bought a stone for $2,000 and I decide to trade it for one that's $2,050, that's within the bounds of the policy.

That is ALL the trade-up policy stipulates: how much you will get for your original diamond when you make another purchase of greater value. Nowhere does that policy address any other terms of sale. It doesn't promise to set a new stone at no charge. It doesn't say anything about shipping charges. It's not meant to.....the trade-up policy ONLY outlines what to expect for monetary trade on the diamond toward the new diamond.

I don't see anywhere in the thread how much the difference in the two stones is, but I'd be surprised if that didn't come into play. Rich and I bought a lawnmower and a weed-whacker this past summer; the total purchase came to just over $700, and they threw in a free brick of the oil. Nice gesture, but certainly not one I would have expected if I went in tomorrow to purchase a brick of oil for $9.95. Then, I wouldn't expect them to throw anything in, even though I'm a "repeat" customer.

"I have not heard about being charged separately to set an upgrade stone before." I've been here more than 3 years, and in that time, it's been typically that setting fees aren't usually charged when you purchase a setting from a company. I'm sure they build the cost to set the stone into the price of the setting. However, if you aren't purchasing a setting, I think most vendors do charge to set a stone.

Last thought: It sounds like you're having a really tough day, and I hope it gets better. It really seems that you are taking personally things which aren't implied. No one is trying to dictate to you what your interpretation should be; they are trying to help in sharing theirs. No one is calling you cheap or questioning your spending priorities.

It's really too bad to see how nasty your tone turned in this thread, IK. When you ask (or post) anything on a public forum, it's subject to commentary and opinion. You did ask for input, and someone tried to help with input. If you didn't think the input had relevance, fine, but it's unfortunate that you chose to be snippy about it.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 1/15/2006 2:50:36 PM
Author: icekid


In addition, I am not doing anything outside of WF's stated policy. When you purchase from WF, you are paying into their upgrade policy. All of their customers pay for the upgrade policy, whether they ever get a new diamond or not.

This may sound like semantics, but it's an important distinction.

It's a trade-UP policy, and it covers these questions: How much will I get for my original stone, and how much additional do I have to spend?

The answers are: You will get 100% of the purchase price of the diamond toward any purchase greater in value.

Truth be told, WF is one of the few vendors who hasn't (previously) placed any trade-up value restrictions or minimums on their trades.

Nowhere has it ever promised that any or every other cost associated with the trade will be waived, nor (in my humble opinion) should it.

 

[MiniMouse]

John, thank you VERY MUCH for clarifying Whiteflash''s position on the new upgrade policy. I''m sure I''m not the only one to say I had not realised the costs involved when Whiteflash trade up a diamond. It''s expensive! I totally agree that Whiteflash should not make a loss on an upgrade and for that reason you need to incorporate certain rules. Sorry for panicking a bit, but I had this awful feeling that I would no longer qualify for an upgrade from a 1.6ct to a 2ct+, merely because I could not fulfill the two criteria required - I already have a D and I know we could not afford to go higher than the VS2 that I have. It''s a relief to know that Whiteflash will be flexible and that we can look to upgrade the size in future. Thank you.

Mara makes a very good point when she says
"actually having something like $ or % increase makes sense for a requirement OR paying the re-certing costs which could be a few hundred dollars i would guess makes sense. that way if you find the PERFECT stone you aren''t shut out just because it''s right under that $ or % requirement and you can just pay the re-certing costs or similar."
It seems a good idea for Whiteflash to use their discretion when it comes to an upgrade. Giving a minimal monetary value or % is a good idea as this could incorporate the fees that Whiteflash envisage. If any other upgrades are requested that do not fall into this category, then perhaps Whiteflash can still consider the request to upgrade, but provide it ''at cost'' to the client, ie the client pays for all the fees associated with the upgrade, so Whiteflash are not out of pocket. That would seem fair and above board.

In certain cases vendors do use their discretion and throw freebies into a deal (just like Aljdeway points out with her lawnmower and weed-whacker) but I agree, it is a kind gesture and not expected. I think the $50 setting fee is very fair, although if one was paying many thousands of dollars extra for the upgrade, then I''d hope that a vendor might recognise this and perhaps throw in the basic setting fee, although I''d never assume or expect this. The minimal fee would not deter me, I personally would prefer to pay for a good vendor such as Whiteflash to do the work. If the upgrade was of very small monetary value to Whiteflash, then sure I''d gladly pay the very reasonable setting fee.

All in all I think Whiteflash have an excellent upgrade policy and very fair setting price. Thanks John for making our upgrades a possibility.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 1/15/2006 6:09:12 PM
Author: valeria101

''Diamond renters'' sounds funny.

While it does sound preposterous on the surface, it''s not really a bad thing, nor is it something vendors should discourage, per se.

Look, anyone who buys a stone with the idea of improving it in some way later is a diamond "renter"......and that''s what vendors should want us to be. It gets us tied into working with them and makes us ongoing, repeat customers (to their benefit). To our benefit, it makes diamonds more reachable.

I bought a pair of .39 studs from Whiteflash....knowing that wasn''t the size I ultimately wanted. However, they didn''t have what I wanted at the time (.5x, J SI stones). Honestly, even if they had, it would have been tough for me to lay out the entire $2k all at once. Truthfully, I''m sure that if that was the only option, I''d STILL be without earrings today. Every time I went to spend that money, I''d have to reconcile it against all the other, more PRACTICAL things that sum of money could do. It''s possible I''d NEVER have become a customer for earrings.

However, with the smaller stones, I could lay out just over half of that sum.....a sum that was manageable. And then, later, the additional amount to get there was also manageable. It was ATTRACTIVE to me that I could buy those with the notion to trade them in when they were able to secure what I really wanted. It was ATTRACTIVE to me that I could have *some* decent diamonds even though I couldn''t splash out for my "dream" diamonds. (Much like people get into the real estate market with starter homes and then move up to their dream home).

I knew the .39 stones were an interim solution for me....so I was essentially a diamond renter. That''s a HUGE selling point for vendors....you can get something to wear while you save toward the stones you really desire.

I think it''s in a vendor''s best interest to ENCOURAGE "renting". Can the system be abused? Sure.....and I''m sure the vendors don''t want someone trading up every month to get another five points. But rationally, it''s not really worth it for a customer to trade-up every month if they have to pay setting/shipping charges associated with that. As such, economics somewhat preclude abuse of the system.

Since I know the thread will be followed, I really hope that the trade-up policy doesn''t change. It was fine as written. The difficulty here was a mistaken assumption that the policy applied to anything other than the price of original purchase and price of new purchase. That misunderstanding was addressed and hopefully put to rest. No need to overwork or overlegislate something that has worked well all this time.

As is, the policy lets people choose what works for them. Improve color, improve clarity, gain diameter, or any combination thereof.....whatever you want. It just doesn''t say everything associated with it is free.....and I think it''s reasonable as written.

 

[Lynn B]

This thread is really interesting. I agree with everything Alj said.

I think a trade-up policy is a HUGE selling point for any vendor and that fact should not be minimized. Sometimes the original choice of vendor is based on that.

IMHO, the key word here is KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid!

) I would hate to see WF (or any vendor) complicate their policy by adding conditions, qualifiers, or math formulas.

With shipping and resetting fees (not to mention the time, effort and ANGST

involved), I, too, doubt that too many people will abuse the upgrade policy as it stands now.

However, if the policy must be changed, then I vote for a simple "$500 or $1,000 more..." clause. That's not too hard to accomplish in Diamond Land

, and it seems fair and reasonable for both the customer and the vendor.

 

[belle]

ditto the above agreement with everything alj said.

 

[slammie]

I don't know how I came accross this thread and I thought it was a real interesting one. Sorry to dig this up but I'm curious and probably a bit stupid in asking but if WF traded up stones are sent back to the lab and re-graded..why does the policy state that the original certificate must accompany the diamond otherwise a re-certification charge of 200 dollars will be asked for? Didn't John say the stones are recertified anyway..Are stones with relatively new certs not recertified? Just curious!

 

[lumpkin]

$50 to set a diamond is pretty reasonable, even if it''s an upgrade. They are going to get paid whether they charge you specifically for setting it or not. If they "throw it in" chances are they have charged you for it within the price of the upgrade. There''s a certain margin they have to get in order for the deal to be profitable, and they won''t be in business long if there''s no profit.

JMO.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 2/13/2006 12:25:38 AM
Author: slammie
I don't know how I came accross this thread and I thought it was a real interesting one. Sorry to dig this up but I'm curious and probably a bit stupid in asking but if WF traded up stones are sent back to the lab and re-graded..why does the policy state that the original certificate must accompany the diamond otherwise a re-certification charge of 200 dollars will be asked for? Didn't John say the stones are recertified anyway..Are stones with relatively new certs not recertified? Just curious!

Hi Slammie.

We require it for several reasons. That document is the title to the diamond and we feel it's important to have it returned.

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 1/15/2006 10:59:40 AM
Author: MiniMouse

Icekid, you are right, it appears that Whiteflash have now made a change to their upgrade policy, their website now states: Trade 'up' implies moving 'up' in at least 2 of 3 criteria: Carat weight (next size category), Color and Clarity. I hope this is only applicable to NEW customers and not existing customers who bought on the basis of their policy prior to this addition. I'd appreciate John clarifying the position. I'd also appreciate knowing what they mean by 'next size category'? Hmmmm...... at the moment I'm very disturbed by the change of policy.

The bolded text is very upsetting to me. I wouldn't accept those terms from a vendor I wanted to do business with.....if I had gotten my 1.5 ct D VS2 diamond from them, would that mean I'd have to buy a bigger D VS1 diamond? That's freaking RIDICULOUS. Someone PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong to conclude this...because this drastically changes my view of which vendors I will use in the future.

 

[mrssalvo]

FG- Wf has changed it back linky

 

[JohnQuixote]

FireGoddess, no worries.

I posted this back on page 1 when this thread was first active.

Date: 1/15/2006 2:59:02 PM
Author: JohnQuixote


Apologies for any worry. The policy clarification is a work in progress, and our web people put it up without it being final.

Here is the situation:

When we perform a trade up the returned diamond is sent back to the lab for re-grading and a new document. There are shipping and insurance costs in addition to the re-grading charge. There are also labor costs for setting the new diamond as discussed. All costs vary: For a large diamond in an intricate setting the shipping/insurance re-grading and labor is more than a small diamond in a 4 prong mounting with a reusable head.

We’ve done many trade ups with pleasure and it’s our intent to continue as before, but we may need to clarify trade up. Icekid’s is the first request we’ve had to trade for smaller size and lesser clarity. It illustrates that we have been remiss in not clarifying what trading ‘up’ means to our company: If the price difference is so small that we lose money with associated costs it’s not sound business. Even a lateral trade makes us diamond renters, not sellers. This is why other companies have a ‘minimum’ trade up ($1000 more, or a large percentage of the purchase price), or tell customers they may only trade up once, or that they must wait a year to do so.

We would prefer not to do this. We want the policy to remain as it has been but also want to prevent possible abuse of the system.

The '2 of 3 criteria' is not sound for reasons cited in this thread, and will not stand (sorry for any worry).
We considered saying ‘case by case basis,’ but that sounds ominous.

This whole situation is positive as it’s bringing out good discussion here. We’re watching the thread with interest as we deliberate how to communicate the spirit of trading ‘up’ so that it is mutually beneficial.

We like our policy as is, and did not want to require that the trade up be for a specific dollar amount increase, or 50% more (for example), or limit trade ups to one time only, or once per year. The thread helped us develop language that allows us to keep our current policy but prevents abuse.

 

[FireGoddess]

Well PHEW! Never been so glad to be out of the loop! Or loupe.

 

[JohnQuixote]

FG,

Sorry for the alarm.

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 2/13/2006 1:55:31 PM
Author: FireGoddess
Well PHEW! Never been so glad to be out of the loop! Or loupe.

That was so cute FG!!

 

[orbaya]

Date: 2/13/2006 1:49:17 PM
Author: JohnQuixote
FireGoddess, no worries.

I posted this back on page 1 when this thread was first active.

Date: 1/15/2006 2:59:02 PM
Author: JohnQuixote



Apologies for any worry. The policy clarification is a work in progress, and our web people put it up without it being final.

Here is the situation:

When we perform a trade up the returned diamond is sent back to the lab for re-grading and a new document. There are shipping and insurance costs in addition to the re-grading charge. There are also labor costs for setting the new diamond as discussed. All costs vary: For a large diamond in an intricate setting the shipping/insurance re-grading and labor is more than a small diamond in a 4 prong mounting with a reusable head.

We’ve done many trade ups with pleasure and it’s our intent to continue as before, but we may need to clarify trade up. Icekid’s is the first request we’ve had to trade for smaller size and lesser clarity. It illustrates that we have been remiss in not clarifying what trading ‘up’ means to our company: If the price difference is so small that we lose money with associated costs it’s not sound business. Even a lateral trade makes us diamond renters, not sellers. This is why other companies have a ‘minimum’ trade up ($1000 more, or a large percentage of the purchase price), or tell customers they may only trade up once, or that they must wait a year to do so.

We would prefer not to do this. We want the policy to remain as it has been but also want to prevent possible abuse of the system.

The ''2 of 3 criteria'' is not sound for reasons cited in this thread, and will not stand (sorry for any worry).
We considered saying ‘case by case basis,’ but that sounds ominous.

This whole situation is positive as it’s bringing out good discussion here. We’re watching the thread with interest as we deliberate how to communicate the spirit of trading ‘up’ so that it is mutually beneficial.

We like our policy as is, and did not want to require that the trade up be for a specific dollar amount increase, or 50% more (for example), or limit trade ups to one time only, or once per year. The thread helped us develop language that allows us to keep our current policy but prevents abuse.

I''m glad to see you clarified this! The main reason I chose WF was because of your upgrade policy. When I made my purchase, I ask for specifics....minimum amount to trade, number of upgrades allowed, is trade up time unlimited, etc. If WF changed all that less than two months after my purchase, I would have been one unhappy "diamond renter".