Can someone tell me why this diamond is hundreds less than similar?

[MichelleCarmen]

The specs for this $1700 diamond:

Report: GIA
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 0.69
. Depth %: 62
. Table %: 55
. Crown Angle: 34.5
. Crown %: 15.5
. Pavilion Angle: 40.8
. Pavilion %: 43
. Girdle: Medium-Faceted
. Measurements: 5.66-5.69X3.52
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None


Idealscope shows the arrows are slighly off. It''s not a H&A, but is close.

Thanks for comments.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/7/2010 2:47:02 PM
Author:MC
The specs for this $1700 diamond:

Report: GIA
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 0.69
. Depth %: 62
. Table %: 55
. Crown Angle: 34.5
. Crown %: 15.5
. Pavilion Angle: 40.8
. Pavilion %: 43
. Girdle: Medium-Faceted
. Measurements: 5.66-5.69X3.52
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None


Idealscope shows the arrows are slighly off. It''s not a H&A, but is close.

Thanks for comments.

Colour and clarity please MC?

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 2/7/2010 2:49:15 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 2/7/2010 2:47:02 PM
Author:MC
The specs for this $1700 diamond:

Report: GIA
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 0.69
. Depth %: 62
. Table %: 55
. Crown Angle: 34.5
. Crown %: 15.5
. Pavilion Angle: 40.8
. Pavilion %: 43
. Girdle: Medium-Faceted
. Measurements: 5.66-5.69X3.52
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None


Idealscope shows the arrows are slighly off. It''s not a H&A, but is close.

Thanks for comments.

Colour and clarity please MC?

lol ah, oops. . .that would help. H VS2.

 

[Hest88]

What are the specs of the diamond you''re comparing this to that is hundreds more?

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 2/7/2010 2:55:43 PM
Author: Hest88
What are the specs of the diamond you're comparing this to that is hundreds more?

The comparable is $1K more. The first is from WF and the second, BN (which as known, doesn't provide as much info).

Link:

http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-or-less-ideal-cut-h-color-vs2-clarity_LD01643599?div_coll=collReport

Is it just that the BN is branded or is there something about the first diamond that I'm missing (aside from slightly lower grade symmetry)?

 

[stone-cold11]

Yap, signature ideal. It's their branded stone, suppose to be H&A. So if you compare the price with that of a H&A, should be closer.

The VG in symm will also result in a lower price.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 2/7/2010 3:02:02 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
no info?

I just posted a link. For some reason, the copy/pasting from the BN site doesn''t work.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/7/2010 3:00:42 PM
Author: MC

Date: 2/7/2010 2:55:43 PM
Author: Hest88
What are the specs of the diamond you're comparing this to that is hundreds more?

The comparable is $1K more. The first is from WF and the second, BN (which as known, doesn't provide as much info).

Link:

http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-or-less-ideal-cut-h-color-vs2-clarity_LD01643599?div_coll=collReport

Is it just that the BN is branded or is there something about the first diamond that I'm missing (aside from slightly lower grade symmetry)?

The BN diamond is considerably more expensive than the original WF stone, not sure on this one MC....I don't know if the Signature Ideal branding would command 1k more of a premium or the VG symmetry of the WF diamond would lower the price between these that much....Could be also to do with the pricing structure according to when the stones were purchased etc. Personally I would save the money and get the WF stone if you are ready to buy!

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 2/7/2010 3:12:08 PM
Author: Lorelei

The BN diamond is considerably more expensive than the original WF stone, not sure on this one MC....I don''t know if the Signature Ideal branding would command 1k more of a premium or the VG symmetry of the WF diamond would lower the price that much....Could be also to do with the pricing structure according to when the stones were purchased etc.

Thanks, Lorelei. I''m so neurotic that I''ve been sitting here F5ing the page to see your response. lol Nothing looks particularily bad about the diamond, then, I take it?

I didn''t expect to see a .69 within my budget and if I did go with that, I can''t get the bellerina (not enough funds for both!).

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/7/2010 3:17:56 PM
Author: MC

Date: 2/7/2010 3:12:08 PM
Author: Lorelei

The BN diamond is considerably more expensive than the original WF stone, not sure on this one MC....I don't know if the Signature Ideal branding would command 1k more of a premium or the VG symmetry of the WF diamond would lower the price that much....Could be also to do with the pricing structure according to when the stones were purchased etc.

Thanks, Lorelei. I'm so neurotic that I've been sitting here F5ing the page to see your response. lol Nothing looks particularily bad about the diamond, then, I take it?

I didn't expect to see a .69 within my budget and if I did go with that, I can't get the bellerina (not enough funds for both!).

Bless you!!!

I would reserve it MC if you are seriously interested. I looked it up and the report is older from 2004, possible it might be a trade in but you could ask WF if that is the case. It looks like a lovely diamond to me.

 

[denverappraiser]

1) 0.70 is an important weight/price threshold. This is the reason premium cut 0.69’s are so scarce by the way.

2) Branded ‘signature idea’ (and similar brands from other sources) tend to cost more.

I did a quick search for 0.66-0.69/G-H/VS2 round and found half a dozen stones in the same price range as your cheaper one, including selections from Blue Nile that aren't part of that category and others from Whiteflash.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver