Difference between Brian Gavin diamond and Whiteflash.

[TreeScientist]

Oh jeebus, look at the inconsistencies between the Vs at 8 o'clock vs the ones at 7 and 10 o'clock. How could such utter rubbish make it past their "proprietary and patented" cut standards?!? This should be relegated to the trash heap IMO.

https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/...-ags-c-104105166004#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/0/

 

[diamondseeker2006]

THIS 100%!!!!

Sounds like sour grapes to me - which is no surprise and understandable. Their split was acrimonious, so I wouldn't expect them to take each other's wares. I'll bet WF doesn't take BGD's stones either.

Their choice and fair enough.

In addition, I think Whiteflash is far more successful. Lies are a huge turn off for me.

 

[TreeScientist]

Lies are a huge turn off for me.

Exactly. I have no problem with them not taking another vendor's stones. Most vendors don't, so nothing surprising there. If they had just said "Sorry, we typically don't accept outside stones for trade-ins" then that's their right. But making up some B.S. about the cut being inferior on the stone in question just because they have an ongoing feud with the other vendor is dishonest and cringeworthy.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Exactly. I have no problem with them not taking another vendor's stones. Most vendors don't, so nothing surprising there. If they had just said "Sorry, we typically don't accept outside stones for trade-ins" then that's their right. But making up some B.S. about the cut being inferior on the stone in question just because they have an ongoing feud with the other vendor is dishonest and cringeworthy.

EXACTLY!

 

[marymm]

OP, reading through your post, it doesn't seem that BGD ever said your ACA is inferior. They told you it didn't meet their trade-in requirements, and after you pressed them for more information, they sent you the photos and detailed explanation why that ACA did not fit their brand and would have to be recut. They also offered you a complimentary full analysis and a prepaid shipping label.

I don't know how useful to OP it is for PSers to find and post about currently-listed BGD stones ... this thread is about an ACA owned by OP which she wanted to trade-in to BGD. As it isn't a BGD diamond, a trade-in would be at BGD's discretion. They told OP several times they did not want the stone and that the stone did not meet their brand requirements. Once someone tells you they aren't interested in your stone, even if somehow you convince them to take another look, you still won't get a competitive offer.

Branded super-ideal diamonds aren't interchangeable, and vendors give full trade-in credit only to their own stones. An ACA is different from a BGD and a CBI and a Victor Canera etc. - trying to trade-in an ACA to a super-ideal vendor other than ACA will never give you full value of what you paid, and each of those vendors produce diamonds with slightly different parameters such that an ACA will not truly fit their model. It doesn't make the ACA inferior, just non-conforming to the other super-ideal vendor's brand parameters.

It seems to me both parties could have handled the matter better.

 

[msop04]

OP, reading through your post, it doesn't seem that BGD ever said your ACA is inferior. They told you it didn't meet their trade-in requirements, and after you pressed them for more information, they sent you the photos and detailed explanation why that ACA did not fit their brand and would have to be recut.

It seems the only criteria this stone doesn't meet is that it didn't come from BG. And that is 100% fair, however he should just say so.

And BG did imply that the ACA stone was inferior when he mentioned inconsistencies in the hearts images. A simple, "I'm sorry... we cannot accept outside diamonds" would have sufficed. Enough of this pettiness.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I am not sure the branded super ideal stones are that much different from each other. If you look at inventory you will often see very similar specs and images. If there are small nuances they would be slight in overall appearance in my opinion. It just doesn’t make financial sense in my opinion to take the others stones in trade because they are not going to rebrand them with their name and resell them. Their strict adherence to their own brand would prohibit that I would think. Aside from financial I think it probably boils down to a matter of principle. I do agree though that BDG should have just said no we can’t help you with that and move on. It makes me happy that here on PS the vendors are considerate of one another and at the end of the day, realize that they are all trying to sell top of line cut stones to make people happy and not trying to cut one another’s throats. Anything that veers from that is very distasteful to me.

 

[the_mother_thing]

@marymm BGD may not have specifically used the word ‘inferior’, but their response (quoted below) to OP conveys precisely that when they assert such judgments about a diamond’s particulars based on an image. We tell people on here all the time that images are helpful to weed out & identify potential areas of concern with a diamond, but seeing it in person & judging it with your eyes is the best/true test.

I do agree BGD could have been less critical and more “professionally-courteous” in responding to OP; but I don’t think OP did anything wrong in asking ‘why’. It is a very reasonable question to ask when someone who is well-respected in the industry suggests your high-dollar, branded, super-ideal diamond “needs a recut”.

“His primary concern is that the indexing and alignment of the facets are off and will affect the sparkle factor. Please reference the attached images which have been marked up to illustrate these inconsistencies. In addition, the size and shape of the lower girdle halves are not consistent enough to meet Brian Gavin's stringent Signature standards. Several other factors, many of which are proprietary and patented, disqualify your diamond.”

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Just a quick word since there has been mention of ‘acrimony” being at play here. The split is now over a decade old folks! That’s an eternity in this day and age. Heck, in dog years it’s like 70

Whiteflash has long since moved on. Many of our staff were not even here back then.

In fact, as I alluded to in my earlier post, we have respect for all the vendors who are doing the hard work to bring precision cut diamonds to the market. At this point in time, we are still a niche part of the overall market where diamonds generally are still being cut with yields and economic advantage for the producers as the central driver. Believe it or not, there have been advocates for cutting for beauty over weight since the late 1900’s! Al Gilbertson wrote a fascinating book about the history of the ideal cut which profiles some of those pioneers.

In a real sense, we in this niche are still fighting that same battle, and it is therefore preferable for all in the fight to respect one another. We all benefit from each other’s efforts to educate the consumer market – as the saying goes ‘a rising tide lifts all boats”.

Whiteflash and other vendors have continued to support the pricescope community with advertising dollars and active participation through this decade and before. Why some companies have chosen not to engage is a mystery as the insights gained here are as important for vendors as they are for the consumers and prosumers.

BGD offers high quality diamonds and fine jewelry, and from what we can tell they are dedicated to providing a high level of customer care. Their voice could be a complement to other voices here and would be beneficial to the collective cause.

Therefore, from our perspective, not only is acrimony NOT at play, but we would encourage them to engage in supporting the forum. We would welcome that is a win/win for everyone.

 

[Garnetgirl]

A diplomatic and courteous response from @Texas Leaguer as always.

 

[lovedogs]

Yet another reason why I love @Texas Leaguer and WF! The diplomacy and kindness is awesome. You are an asset to this forum!

 

[whitewave]

It seems the only criteria this stone doesn't meet is that it didn't come from BG. And that is 100% fair, however he should just say so.

And BG did imply that the ACA stone was inferior when he mentioned inconsistencies in the hearts images. A simple, "I'm sorry... we cannot accept outside diamonds" would have sufficed. Enough of this pettiness.

I thought this was from someone else’s inquiry, not Ops?

 

[msop04]

I thought this was from someone else’s inquiry, not Ops?

So it is... sorry, I thought it had been quoted from the OP. Nevertheless, that is another buyer that has been told their ACA is inferior to BG's.

I'm pretty sure this was conveyed to the OP by BG?

“His primary concern is that the indexing and alignment of the facets are off and will affect the sparkle factor. Please reference the attached images which have been marked up to illustrate these inconsistencies. In addition, the size and shape of the lower girdle halves are not consistent enough to meet Brian Gavin's stringent Signature standards. Several other factors, many of which are proprietary and patented, disqualify your diamond.”

 

[diamondseeker2006]

For the record, no one I have ever spoken to at Whiteflash has ever said a negative word about any former employee, and I am sorry if my quoting an earlier post inferred that. That plus Bryan's posts above say a lot about their integrity and why I have chosen to stick with Whiteflash personally, as well as recommending their stones when it fits the buyer's needs.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Yet another reason why I love @Texas Leaguer and WF! The diplomacy and kindness is awesome. You are an asset to this forum!

You are too kind @lovedogs

This community has been an asset to me and to Whiteflash, and especially to people new to diamond shopping. Everybody can learn something valuable or interesting every time they log in.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Thanks for weighing in @TexasLeaguer! Integrity is always impressive and appreciated. We are fortunate to have vendors here that participate and educate us from time to time.

 

[Obscura]

Do remember too that this is not Brian himself answering, but one of the staff, likely a sales manager. And what is that sales person's sole duty? To get you to buy from *that* brand. Of course they will try to upsell their brand over another vendor, friendly or unfriendly terms.

It also is not lucrative for any brand to take a lot of trade ins that aren't their own because they do not have that initial purchase under their belt. And then have to discount the diamond to reflect the trade in. They see no profit until the trade in stone is sold.

Could it have been worded or clarified better? Probably, but would you rather be told "we don't want to be out the money as sales are slow right now" or "we don't want to deal with polishing or reselling this stone as it's too big/small/too many like it" or something more fluffy like you got? It depends on the individual. At the end of the day it is their money, inventory, and burden of resale, and therefore their prerogative to not deal with it.

I agree that OP contact WF for her wanted parameters as they have a full value trade in for their stones.

Though WF are also critical of trade ins. I remember seeing a thread where they didn't want to take a non ACA stone. They reached a very fair agreement, but it was not the same as if it was an ACA of course. This was also initially a sales person handling the inquiry, but Texas League stepped in with his famous awesome customer service. I apologize I cannot find the thread.

Both companies are passionate about great diamonds and want to give great customer service, but they still need to make money.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I have had purchased from 4 super ideal cut H&A vendors in the past (WF, HPD, BGD and GOG) they all have their own secret sauce.

....

 

[diamondseeker2006]

@Obscura I think we all understand that no vendor takes unlimited trade-ins. The problem here was that the vendor tried to make the customer feel that her stone was inferior. All they needed to say is that we rarely take trade-ins other than our own stones, so we are sorry we cannot accept your stone as a trade.

 

[lovedogs]

@Obscura I think we all understand that no vendor takes unlimited trade-ins. The problem here was that the vendor tried to make the customer feel that her stone was inferior. All they needed to say is that we rarely take trade-ins other than our own stones, so we are sorry we cannot accept your stone as a trade.

100% this. I totally understand vendors not wanting to take lots of trades and have no issue witg that. I do, however, take issue with BGD implying the ACA that OP wanted to trade in wasn't up "to standard" for BGD. Honesty is important.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I have had purchased from 4 super ideal cut H&A vendors in the past (WF, HPD, BGD and GOG) they all have their own secret sauce.

....

I would say it differently DF.
Each vendor has their own unique value proposition.

In our niche there are companies with different business models, different specialties, and a different range of services and products offered.

The attributes of any particular product offered should be clearly stated and independently verifiable. If information that is integral to the quality or nature of the product is difficult to understand, or if that information is withheld, then a consumer is wise to be skeptical.

With regard to super ideal diamonds there is no secret sauce. The diagnostic tools readily available to both the trade and to consumers undermine such a notion.

Every business has a right to keep proprietary information to themselves - their suppliers, their costs, their processes, their specialized equipment, etc. But the resultant product qualities should not be hidden behind a cloak of secrecy. I doubt that consumers ever wanted that, but especially not today in the information age.

Every company also has a narrative and they provide different degrees of 'romance' with the purchase through a charming or compelling story. Consumers DO like a good story behind the products they buy. It can definitely add to the joy of ownership (especially if it's true). But when the romance gets tangled up with the claims of product quality, that is where shoppers have the right to call BS!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Do remember too that this is not Brian himself answering, but one of the staff, likely a sales manager. And what is that sales person's sole duty? To get you to buy from *that* brand. Of course they will try to upsell their brand over another vendor, friendly or unfriendly terms.

It also is not lucrative for any brand to take a lot of trade ins that aren't their own because they do not have that initial purchase under their belt. And then have to discount the diamond to reflect the trade in. They see no profit until the trade in stone is sold.

Could it have been worded or clarified better? Probably, but would you rather be told "we don't want to be out the money as sales are slow right now" or "we don't want to deal with polishing or reselling this stone as it's too big/small/too many like it" or something more fluffy like you got? It depends on the individual. At the end of the day it is their money, inventory, and burden of resale, and therefore their prerogative to not deal with it.

I agree that OP contact WF for her wanted parameters as they have a full value trade in for their stones.

Though WF are also critical of trade ins. I remember seeing a thread where they didn't want to take a non ACA stone. They reached a very fair agreement, but it was not the same as if it was an ACA of course. This was also initially a sales person handling the inquiry, but Texas League stepped in with his famous awesome customer service. I apologize I cannot find the thread.

Both companies are passionate about great diamonds and want to give great customer service, but they still need to make money.

@Obscura ,
Thank you for your kind words. And yes, we have had quite a bit of experience with fielding requests for trade-ins of non-Whiteflash diamonds. And I can tell you that it is challenging! So nobody should ever be mad at any vendor for opting out of such an opportunity. It can be anything but a clear path to a win/win outcome for vendor or customer.

From a customer's perspective there is perceived value, which can be significantly different from actual value. That can result in a certain amount of negativity, putting the vendor in somewhat of an adversarial role with someone who wants to become their customer. Not good. From the vendor's perspective, even if the diamond fits their quality criteria (or can be efficiently re-cut), there are considerations of current cash flow, inventory needs, etc. Essentially the vendor is buying the customer's diamond for stock, which may or may not make sense at any given time.

At one time we had published our process for non-WF stones on our Lifetime Trade-up page, a paragraph that has since been removed from the page. We decided to no longer promote this activity because of the aforementioned complications, though we will always be open to discussing it with customers on an individual basis. If we can arrange a win/win we are happy to do so.

 

[Obscura]

@Obscura I think we all understand that no vendor takes unlimited trade-ins. The problem here was that the vendor tried to make the customer feel that her stone was inferior. All they needed to say is that we rarely take trade-ins other than our own stones, so we are sorry we cannot accept your stone as a trade.

Yes, but my point was some people will get mad and throw a fit if told "we don't want to take your stone" instead of "your stone doesn't fit our criteria." In this case, the opposite would have been preferred.

And the fact that as I mentioned, it was likely a sales rep. that supposedly made the OP feel their stone was "inferior" (which as it's a super ideal stone, I find hard to fathom) and not from Brian himself, so I would take it with a grain of salt, what the intention behind the decision truly is.

I don't care how passionate and customer oriented any business is. They will not lose money if they don't have to. Likewise I highly doubt a feud would stand in the way of a profit.

 

[Obscura]

@Obscura ,
Thank you for your kind words. And yes, we have had quite a bit of experience with fielding requests for trade-ins of non-Whiteflash diamonds. And I can tell you that it is challenging! So nobody should ever be mad at any vendor for opting out of such an opportunity. It can be anything but a clear path to a win/win outcome for vendor or customer.

From a customer's perspective there is perceived value, which can be significantly different from actual value. That can result in a certain amount of negativity, putting the vendor in somewhat of an adversarial role with someone who wants to become their customer. Not good. From the vendor's perspective, even if the diamond fits their quality criteria (or can be efficiently re-cut), there are considerations of current cash flow, inventory needs, etc. Essentially the vendor is buying the customer's diamond for stock, which may or may not make sense at any given time.

At one time we had published our process for non-WF stones on our Lifetime Trade-up page, a paragraph that has since been removed from the page. We decided to no longer promote this activity because of the aforementioned complications, though we will always be open to discussing it with customers on an individual basis. If we can arrange a win/win we are happy to do so.

This! As I do not have inside knowledge of the diamond industry, I was trying to put it in general terms. But this is much better worded. Thank you!

I think what you said earlier about the romantacism is on point too.

 

[the_mother_thing]

And the fact that as I mentioned, it was likely a sales rep. that supposedly made the OP feel their stone was "inferior" (which as it's a super ideal stone, I find hard to fathom) and not from Brian himself, so I would take it with a grain of salt, what the intention behind the decision truly is.

I don’t recall anyone specifically trashing the owner personally. At the same time, when it’s ‘your’ name on the invoice, website, and ring box, every employee is representative of ‘you’.

 

[Obscura]

I don’t recall anyone specifically trashing the owner personally. At the same time, when it’s ‘your’ name on the invoice, website, and ring box, every employee is representative of ‘you’.

Didn't say anyone was trashing him either, did I? I do think there has been a lot of assumptions though. I'm simply pointing out logistics.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Didn't say anyone was trashing him either, did I? I do think there has been a lot of assumptions though. I'm simply pointing out logistics.

No need to get defensive. I just quoted your statement - inferring people were blaming the owner personally - and responded that they were not; rather, the business ... which means the staff who communicated with OP and the approach they took in responding to her trade-in request and question.

The only ‘assumption’ I’ve read in this thread was that of BGD that OP’s diamond was inferior/sub-par/whatever you infer from their statements. BGD’s statements speak loud & clear IMO. And I have zero against them, personally. I have actually been considering buying a diamond from them, but things like this give me pause because OP stated she owns BGD items, and the response she got was not one I would want if I gave a business my money, especially when it’s a luxury item.

 

[Obscura]

@the-mother-ring

Must have been a misunderstanding on both ends. I was not saying people were "trashing him", I was pointing out it was not likely a "feud" thing as earlier posts suggested, but rather a financial logistics thing. That was the assumptions I was referring to.

I do agree it's silly to say it doesn't meet standards, unless it *does* have to do something that is a trade secret and they don't want to say. However unlikely. But I'm in no position to say.

 

[bmfang]

I look at the proportions on the OPs stones and to me they are right in the money for the range of proportions that BGD also has for their own stones.

I am not a cutter like Mr Gavin is and I certainly don’t have the years of experience that he does. He may have noticed something in the scope images that the OP provided that I don’t readily notice.

Or it’s more likely to me that a business decision was made regarding likely cost of allowing trade in and then recutting that stone if they wanted to for resale as a BGD Signature H&A vs what they could get for it if they were to sell to another dealer if a trade in occurred.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I do agree it's silly to say it doesn't meet standards, unless it *does* have to do something that is a trade secret and they don't want to say. However unlikely. But I'm in no position to say.

Who knows ... but at the end of the day, both WF ACA & BGD Signature diamonds have one thing in common: they BOTH receive an Ideal cut grade from AGS. And AGS doesn’t issue that cut grade on ‘inferior’ diamonds.