ACA, Blue Nile Signature, etc.

[diamondseeker2006]

"The problem I see here is some vendor teach their customers that their way of doing business is the only right way. At the same time, there is nothing wrong with a businesses offering diamonds with 30 day unconditional money-back guarantee, when you can check it with whoever you want to - independent appraiser or another jeweler."

Hmm, actually no vendor has ever suggested that to me. I just like being able to ask questions about a stone''s inclusions, compare sizes, etc. before going to the trouble and expense of having it sent to me. So I decided to only look at in-house diamonds. But others obviously do not share that preference since Blue Nile does very big business! But I prefer JA over BN because the prices are better. That''s great to know JA can pull stones from inventory to look at immediately.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Kathleen, you are able to tell if a diamond is newline by looking at the idealscope picture. If it is pretty much solid red, with no white, then it is newline. If it has little diamond shaped white spots and white spots on the edges, it is the classic cut. There have been many debates on here about the merits of this. Honestly, I knew I''d love the classic cut because you can see hearts and arrows stones at some jewlery stores and I did. But I did not want to go to the trouble of having a newline stone sent to me to look at. I knew the classic cut was gorgeous, so I felt that I would be safe with that choice.

 

[pricescope]

I have no information on Blue Nile. Obviously, Blue Nile list many stones form different suppliers. What''s wrong with that?

Date: 10/27/2006 9:13:50 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Personally, I would stick with WF or Good Old Gold because they have the stones in-house. Blue Nile has a virtual inventory. I just don''t like that. I like seeing all the information provided by GOG and WF. So if it were me, I''d stick with them. But to answer your question, no, an ACA is not ''better'' than an equivalent cut stone from another vendor. You want a stone that has AGS0 cert of GIA excellent with AGS0 light performance. I have the utmost confidence in the stones at GOG and WF.

You''re of course entitled to your opinion but it doesn''t mean that there is something wrong with their business model or diamonds they sell. You have 30 day period to check the stone with an independent expert and reliable public company to back up the guarantee...

They have gemologists on staff and also can call suppliers to verify some specifics about the stones of your interests (e.g. clarity).

I just don''t think it is fair to put them down. Consumer should be able to call different vendors and decide for themselves what company offers the best service for them.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 10/28/2006 7:29:50 PM
Author: Pricescope
I have no information on Blue Nile. Obviously, Blue Nile list many stones form different suppliers. What's wrong with that?


You're of course entitled to your opinion but it doesn't mean that there is something wrong with their business model or diamonds they sell. You have 30 day period to check the stone with an independent expert and reliable public company to back up the guarantee...

They have gemologists on staff and also can call suppliers to verify some specifics about the stones of your interests (e.g. clarity).

I just don't think it is fair to put them down. Consumer should be able to call different vendors and decide for themselves what company offers the best service for them.

Nothing is wrong with it whatsoever!

As I just explained, I was telling Kathleen that I preferred vendors who could look at the stone, compare it's performance to other stones, check the color, etc. It's just my preference and she can certainly choose Blue Nile or any vendor she prefers. I did find they were higher priced when I was searching extensively for earring stones, though, so that is a pretty concrete reason for me to prefer other vendors even if all their stones were in-house. Really, all this started because someone said that BN signature stones were in-house and I thought they were not. I did try to find out so I could make a correction to my statement if it was incorrect.

(ETA: when I originally did a search above with her preferences of D-F, VS, 2.3-2.6, I came up with one stone from GOG and one from James Allen. Those were the ones I looked at.)

 

[Carlotta]

Date: 10/28/2006 7:11:18 PM
Author: Pricescope

Date: 10/28/2006 6:23:19 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

I did not ask the vendor to identify the stone he found, but I have emailed him to ask. But it obviously may be next week before I get a reply to that email since it is Saturday evening. But I am positive from what he told me that he really did check and was able to locate the exact diamond at the supplier. James Allen is the same way. His photographed diamonds are not in-house either.

DS, I''m afraid this information is incorrect.

1. JA owns over 3,000 diamonds that listed as ''in-house''
2. These diamonds reside in the company safe.
3. They are available for overnight shipping
4. Listings are synchronized with availability (i.e. when a stone is sold or sent on memo it is removed from JA site the same moment and from PS ''in-house'' listings next day)
5. JA in-house diamonds are listed with crown and pavilion angles, scanned grading report and magnified photograph

This qualify them as ''in-house'' diamonds.

The problem I see here is some vendors teach their customers that their way of doing business is the only right way. At the same time, there is nothing wrong with a businesses offering diamonds with 30 day unconditional money-back guarantee, when you can check it with whoever you want to - independent appraiser or another jeweler.

Interesting information......in topic 51949. Aljdewey had stated (10/1 that to her knowledge, JA had no diamonds in house....so I guess it''s a matter of terminology???

 

[pricescope]

Date: 10/28/2006 7:15:59 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

I''m sorry, PS. Apparently I was told incorrect information. Many vendors do have scanned grading reports without owning the diamonds, so that doesn''t always tell us for sure if a vendor really has the stone. What about Blue Nile?

It happens... I just think we should be careful not to post incorrect information here especially when your posts can affect other people buying decisions and image of other companies.

It might be a good idea to use first-hand information from the companies in questions and not to rely on hearsay from their competitors.

Besides, we obviously would not include listings into "in-house" search without double checking it with a vendor to make sure the listings meet certain criteria (outlined above).

It is true that JA get pictures and scanned certificates from other suppliers as well. However, these diamonds are not listed as in-house on Pricescope.

 

[pricescope]

Date: 10/28/2006 7:51:47 PM
Author: Carlotta
Interesting information......in topic 51949. Aljdewey had stated (10/1 that to her knowledge, JA had no diamonds in house....so I guess it's a matter of terminology???

There is no problem with terminology. Aljdewey has been mistaken too. We answered about JA in-house listings in this thread (back in August).

Also, Carlotta, Alj posted:

I must have missed something?? When did J/A begin carrying diamonds "inhouse"?
And by inhouse, I mean 'it's at their premises, not down the street at a supplier'. If this is so, can anyone provide information on how many diamonds they have on premises?

Does it sound like "statement" about her "knowledge"? It was a question, which JA may choose to answer or ignore. As long as they are not a public company it's their right.

As for Pricescope listing "in-house" db from a vendor we use our criteria listed above.

 

[Carlotta]

Thanks for the clarification....and I DEFINITELY agree with your recommendation to go directly to the vendor with questions......I would hate to see someone make a decision about a vendor/product/service based on a consumer''s opinion alone (regardless of how long that consumer has been involved in the forum/interested in diamonds ,etc.). It is each one''s responsibility to do his/her own "homework" before paying for a product or service. One example relates to something like return or trade-up policy. Such things change slightly from time to time. I would recommend getting such information in writing from the vendor in question (each time of purchase) ....

 

[Beacon]

Someone on this thread said Blue Nile was more money than other vendors. I have particularly found this not to be true in searches I have done for the past few months. Maybe this comment came from before BN lowered their prices, which I believe they did earlier this year.

 

[pricescope]

On a side note, JA is not just one-man show anymore but a growing company. They are trying new ideas and implement new technologies. It is beneficial for consumers since it diminishes hassle with diamond’s availability and offers more information on each stone. Ultimately, those who will satisfy consumers better will benefit.

Let’s look at it in historical perspective. Before we had a search for “in-house” diamonds on Pricescope, we had a generic search and the “search by cut”. Diamonds for the “search by cut” required to have extra information about cut such as crown and pavilion angles. They did not require to be owned by the company. At certain time we had two or more companies listed the same diamonds in that category.

Because of that extra information, consumers preferred to “search by cut” first. Later we added “in-house” search because unlike most virtual listings, many diamonds can be available (“in-house”) and have scanned certs, pics, etc but not necessary have crown and pavilion angles listed online.

What is important for consumers, vendors and Pricescope and what makes “in-house” listing really different from traditional “virtual” is that the listed diamonds have many times more chance to be physically available because if they were sold, or “on-hold”, or “on memo”, they got turned off the same moment.

In comparison, some virtual listings on diamond trading networks can be sold or on memo. That creates problems for both vendors and consumers.

Blue Nile has had a system of daily update of their listings and availability of scanned certificates for quite a while already.

As time will go, more wholesalers will adopt new technologies and “virtual” diamonds will probably have more information available online and listings will be more synchronized with factual availability of the stones. At that time, difference between “virtual” and “in-house” listings will be negligible and we won’t have to separate them from each other at all. “In-house” search can become obsolete and more diamonds will be included into “search by cut”. We cannot hold to what was used to be 5 years ago forever.

One can argue about semantics or that some consumers may want their vendor to personally look at the diamonds. On another hand, if a vendor can switch to the owner of a stone who can eyeball it for you and then you can check it with independent appraiser, there is nothing wrong with such business.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 10/28/2006 8:11:52 PM
Author: Beacon
Someone on this thread said Blue Nile was more money than other vendors. I have particularly found this not to be true in searches I have done for the past few months. Maybe this comment came from before BN lowered their prices, which I believe they did earlier this year.

Beacon, I am sure there must be variations in our experiences depending on the stones we were looking at.

Here are a couple that I was looking at for my earring stones (and Kathleen, sorry that your thread has gone off topic, but I don''t want anyone to think that my reasoning was not valid).

http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?__fun_frm=i&pid=LD00333943&filter_id=0 .71 H VS2 AGS0 $3100

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-129075.htm .718 H VS2 AGS0 $2985.