Fix it or forget it?

[starryeyed]

Ohhh, sorry missed the fact that GOG wanted you to send it Registered. It''s weird that they weren''t aware of the $25K limit. Maybe most people just insure it for the max and assume it will get there because of the security of the service. Or maybe it speaks to GOG''s profit margin!

 

[kenny]

GOG''s profit margin?
I don''t follow.
They know what I paid.

 

[starryeyed]

Right, but do you know what they paid??

I just tried to make a joke more than anything....

It''ll all work out Kenny!! No worries. It''s not easy being a perfectionist. I admire your precision!

 

[kenny]

I understand.
I am my greatest critic.

I do drive my piano technician crazy.
I have a great piano and keeping it in top condition requires lots of communication with a great piano tech.

But I feel I got an excellent stone for an excellent price. (I still feel that way.)
One of the main reasons for my high comfort with these prices is the prices are published online, fully visible to competitors who must also publish their prices online.
There is ultrahigh visibility and hyper-competition, and the whole accountability benifit that this Pricescope forum offers.
Everything is transparent, instead of being private and secret as in a B&M.

I believe these three forces combine to make the PS vendors very safe and reliable sources for superb diamonds at killer prices.


(Their profit margin is their business and they are entitled to it.)

But yes I understand you were joking.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/2/2006 1:39:33 PM
Author: kenny
Richard, thank you for your very thoughtful post.
You have addressed so many of my concerns.
You obviously know how we neurotic and illogical diamond customers think, if you could call it that.

Well, I think I''ll send it back. (It is hard to part with.)

What a bummer!
I paid a zillion dollars for something rare and beautiful that I can''t enjoy for weeks or months.

Even when finished I will have a stone that is modified from the 2004 GIA report.
If they send it back to GIA for a new report that will delay it longer.

Hey, maybe I could request it goes to AGS to be one of the first to get their Asscher cut grade. (Or is this a can of worms?)
Even if it doesn''t get an AGS 0 it would be of interest to see. (But I just won''t feel the same about the stone if it gets an AGS 4.)
Of course I''d have to wait even longer since they are not scheduled to start till Feb 07 - and who knows if there will be delays, or if they already have a backlog?
Plus we all know grades can vary a bit, even from the same lab.

GIA gave it F VVS2 in 2004.
If it came back from AGS with G or VS1 (or E or VVS1) it would be awkward for GOG and for me.
(Would GOG want more $$$ if it goes up, or would I expect $$$ back if it goes down.)
Actually, I think not.
I paid today''s fair market value based on that GIA report.
I think I should warrant consideration only if it lost measurable weight.

I''m getting a headache.

I totally get why you''d feel that way BUT BUT BUT really - if a stone THAT gorgeous scored that low then IMO there''s something wrong with their testing, not your stone.

 

[pyramid]

Date: 12/2/2006 1:18:43 PM
Author: RockDoc

Date: 12/2/2006 2:42:15 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
I thought it looked like a chip as well - it is a similar pattern to when a chip comes out of a glass where it kind of radiates in a circle sort of thing... I doubt it''s a natural but I BIG TIME defer to garry''s expertise on that LOL Still, I''d want to find out for sure... be kinda cool if he''s right!!

A lot of jewelers have trouble distinguishing chips from naturals.

The '' circle '' type thing you mentioned is gemologicall called concoidal fracture. Diamonds don''t have concoidal fracture.

Many times what appears to be concoidal ( like glass has when it fractures ) may look like what is actually a natural.

If a diamond gets a fracture it generally is ''spintery'' in its appearance.

Rockdoc

Rockdoc

It says in one of my reference books and I see it on the web on some smaller sites in charts for diamonds the description of:

fracture: concoidal, splintery


So is this a difference of opinion or else the books/charts are wrong?

 

[pyramid]

I noticed Garry saying he thought it was a natural on Kenny''s stone but if Kenny saw it going into the stone it must have been an indented natural or was it not indented enough for that?

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/2/2006 1:18:43 PM
Author: RockDoc

Date: 12/2/2006 2:42:15 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
I thought it looked like a chip as well - it is a similar pattern to when a chip comes out of a glass where it kind of radiates in a circle sort of thing... I doubt it''s a natural but I BIG TIME defer to garry''s expertise on that LOL Still, I''d want to find out for sure... be kinda cool if he''s right!!

A lot of jewelers have trouble distinguishing chips from naturals.

The '' circle '' type thing you mentioned is gemologicall called concoidal fracture. Diamonds don''t have concoidal fracture.

Many times what appears to be concoidal ( like glass has when it fractures ) may look like what is actually a natural.

If a diamond gets a fracture it generally is ''spintery'' in its appearance.

Rockdoc

thanks rockdoc - that makes sense!

 

[kenny]

Pyramid wrote, "I noticed Garry saying he thought it was a natural on Kenny's stone but if Kenny saw it going into the stone it must have been an indented natural or was it not indented enough for that?"

It can only go in.
It is on two facets (a crown facet and the girdle).

Both of these facets were polished flat.
Therefore, it can only go in.

Were you under the impression that naturals go out, not in?
By out I mean rise above the facets of the diamond.

 

[pyramid]

Hi Kenny

No, ofcourse I don''t know, but I thought they would be just above at the surface if it was a natural because the diamond to either side I assumed would be below the diamond''s ''skin''. An indented natural is usually indented at an angle (I think) so they must be deeper than you are seeing (assuming again).

 

[kenny]

But if a polishing wheel is flat and polishes a facet flat how could anything stick up above the surface of that facet?

Isn't a natural a little cave left over from the surface of the rough?

Leaving a little natural demonstrates efficient use of rough, maximizing profit.

 

[pyramid]

Yes you are probably right, I never really thought about that before. Maybe when Rhino gets it his cutter can tell him if it is a natural or not when he has it in his hand.

Did you try the needle thing which Diamondexpert said?

It seems you have Rockdoc and Rich versus Garry so I would go with the majority, if it was me, and get it polished out. Don''t know about that part Rich said though, about getting Rhino to document the repair, if a point was lost you probably would have to so you had the details if you were selling again to someone who would weigh it. I think I would just leave it, know myself if a point or two was lost, but leave the certificate as is. That is unless there is a need for it with the tension setting warranty etc.

 

[kenny]

I didn't try the needle thing.
It seems risky.

I'd be concerned about the possibility of the needle catches on the chip/natural just right and chips out more material.

Plus mom always said to not pick at booboos.

 

[pyramid]

I also notice that Rich said a natural would have been on the GIA certificate.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 12/2/2006 1:39:33 PM
Author: kenny

I''m getting a headache.

Hah hah hah...

Diamonds are like women. They will give you headaches at times, but they''re worth it.

Gorgeous stone, by the way. It looks to be stunning.

Congratulations.

 

[pyramid]

I have been reading info again and it seems I was remembering wrongly, it is the girdle thickness a natural in the confines of the girdle does not affect, it is considered a clarity characteristic.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 12/2/2006 5:25:19 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood

Date: 12/2/2006 1:39:33 PM
Author: kenny

I''m getting a headache.

Hah hah hah...

Diamonds are like women. They will give you headaches at times, but they''re worth it.

Gorgeous stone, by the way. It looks to be stunning.

Congratulations.

ROFLMAO

I feel better about getting it all taken care of Ken. Send that beaut back for a repolish.

Peace,

 

[kenny]

Rhine, don't forget to send it back when you're done.

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 12/2/2006 3:18:11 PM
Author: Pyramid

Date: 12/2/2006 1:18:43 PM
Author: RockDoc

Date: 12/2/2006 2:42:15 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
I thought it looked like a chip as well - it is a similar pattern to when a chip comes out of a glass where it kind of radiates in a circle sort of thing... I doubt it''s a natural but I BIG TIME defer to garry''s expertise on that LOL Still, I''d want to find out for sure... be kinda cool if he''s right!!

A lot of jewelers have trouble distinguishing chips from naturals.

The '' circle '' type thing you mentioned is gemologicall called concoidal fracture. Diamonds don''t have concoidal fracture.

Many times what appears to be concoidal ( like glass has when it fractures ) may look like what is actually a natural.

If a diamond gets a fracture it generally is ''spintery'' in its appearance.

Rockdoc

Rockdoc

It says in one of my reference books and I see it on the web on some smaller sites in charts for diamonds the description of:

fracture: concoidal, splintery


So is this a difference of opinion or else the books/charts are wrong?

Actually I have seen articles that talk about concoidal fracture in diamond.

I haven''t seen concoidal fracture in a diamond. Here''s an article that points out that concoidal fracture in CZ vs. steplike fracture in diamond is a key separating characteristic. The steplike fracture I think sometimes is identified as concoidal.

I think the splintery fracture/steplike fracture is mostly what is observed, however the articles you have may have a factual dissenting opinion. If so, I stand corrected.

Rockdoc

http://www.gemgate.com/npa/npa_08-05-05.pdf

 

[pyramid]

No I have not read anything factual. The book I have is 'Gemstones of the World' a revised and expanded edition by Walter Schumann, in it is just states about all gems types of fracture and has Conchoidal - Shell like. Then in the Section on Diamond it has fracture: conchoidal to splintery. The other book I have I could not find anything in. It is on the internet I have seen it written mostly so probably on small sites. Thanks for the article.

 

[pyramid]

http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00461/diamond.htm

I have just found this on a random search at an unknown site and in the description for diamond what the minerologists say Conchoidal, then it says what it means for kids and the description there says conchoidal means smooth rings so seems to be the step part as you said Rockdoc.