Newbie buying diamond online

[Lorelei]

I think you are doing very well without any input from me! Both diamonds are good, I prefer the first one however of course! The second might not be eyeclean and it is a little deeper than I prefer but you are doing a great job! The first diamond ask if it is clean but I would be fairly confident it would be.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/13/2006 8:56:30 AM
Author: Lorelei
I think you are doing very well without any input from me! Both diamonds are good, I prefer the first one however of course! The second might not be eyeclean and it is a little deeper than I prefer but you are doing a great job! The first diamond ask if it is clean but I would be fairly confident it would be.

Ditto.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Lorelei,

I just realised we found the same rock on the one 1.36ct F SI1. I think this one really have a good balance of cost, size, colour and clarity! Personally I found the 1.52ct H SI2 a little deep (depth 62.2) but I am not sure whether it will appear dark. The colour is a little less than desirable but the size is

.

Also earlier on, you posted 1.28ct I SI1 at just US$6.7k. Great value I would say, especially since it is a hearts and arrow cut!

I am quite biased towards the 1.36ct one currently...

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/13/2006 9:19:17 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Lorelei,

I just realised we found the same rock on the one 1.36ct F SI1. I think this one really have a good balance of cost, size, colour and clarity! Personally I found the 1.52ct H SI2 a little deep (depth 62.2) but I am not sure whether it will appear dark. The colour is a little less than desirable but the size is

.

Also earlier on, you posted 1.28ct I SI1 at just US$6.7k. Great value I would say, especially since it is a hearts and arrow cut!

I am quite biased to the 1.36ct one currently...

It's a sign I tell ya! I think the 1.36 is possibly an incredible diamond, you could always ring Jim and ask what he thinks, get him to pull these diamonds and look at them for you. He is a great guy and will give you good no pressure advice. The 1.52 has a great cut, my concern is whether it is eyeclean or not, it is a little deeper than I prefer but if this diamond is eyeclean it could be a winner.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Date: 9/13/2006 9:22:09 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 9/13/2006 9:19:17 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Lorelei,

I just realised we found the same rock on the one 1.36ct F SI1. I think this one really have a good balance of cost, size, colour and clarity! Personally I found the 1.52ct H SI2 a little deep (depth 62.2) but I am not sure whether it will appear dark. The colour is a little less than desirable but the size is

.

Also earlier on, you posted 1.28ct I SI1 at just US$6.7k. Great value I would say, especially since it is a hearts and arrow cut!

I am quite biased to the 1.36ct one currently...

It's a sign I tell ya! I think the 1.36 is possibly an incredible diamond, you could always ring Jim and ask what he thinks, get him to pull these diamonds and look at them for you. He is a great guy and will give you great no pressure advice.

Is it possible to email instead since I am from Singapore and may be quite difficult to call due to time zones. Maybe I will drop them an email. I am still waiting for WF to get back to me on my first request.

Initially I was bent on getting from WF, but they have rather limited choices for the range that I want.

As for the 1.52ct, what do you mean by "not eyeclean". Are you implying that the inclusions might be visible since the clarity is SI2? What about the depth? It sounds a little deep for me.

I am just playing around with the search functions to see what turns up. So your valuable advice would still be very welcomed!!!

 

[Lorelei]

James Allen is in NY I believe and WF in Houston, Texas so that would give you an idea of time differences. Give Jim an email and call when you can to verify, this is the best way with any vendor just to make sure. But in the first instance drop him an email to register your interest.

 

[Lorelei]

As for the 1.52ct, what do you mean by "not eyeclean". Are you implying that the inclusions might be visible since the clarity is SI2? What about the depth? It sounds a little deep for me.


Blast - can''t lose the highlighter! Yes by not being eyeclean I mean that the inclusions might be visible to the naked eye looking at the magnified pic - there is a reason it was graded an SI2. However with the magnified pics it is hard to tell and it is best to ask the vendor as what may look like a horrendous inclusion might be a non issue in real life.

Also the diamond is a little deeper than I prefer, but it isn''t a deal breaker as the crown and pavillion angles and everything else is great with this diamond.

 

[Ellen]

"As for the 1.52ct, what do you mean by "not eyeclean". Are you implying that the inclusions might be visible since the clarity is SI2? What about the depth? It sounds a little deep for me."



I think Lorelei missed this, but yes, that''s what she means. And it''s not horribly deep, but us pickyins don''t really go there.

p.s. I knew that was the same diamond (1.36), but thought you posted it just to compare.

 

[Ellen]

oops lol That''s what I get for not refreshing.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Sorry to be so bothersome but I found something I cannot understand.

I compared between these 2 diamonds:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=860780
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=131&item=860714

And I cannot understand why the smaller one is more expensive since the cut, colour and clarity is similar?
And the smaller rock has a larger difference in the circumference (7.08-7.13) so the symmetry might be an issue right?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/13/2006 9:43:49 AM
Author: Ellen
oops lol That''s what I get for not refreshing.

hehehehe....

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/13/2006 9:44:30 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Sorry to be so bothersome but I found something I cannot understand.

I compared between these 2 diamonds:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=860780
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=131&item=860714

And I cannot understand why the smaller one is more expensive since the cut, colour and clarity is similar?
And the smaller rock has a larger difference in the circumference (7.08-7.13) so the symmetry might be an issue right?

Hmmm, I honestly don''t know.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 9/13/2006 9:44:30 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Sorry to be so bothersome but I found something I cannot understand.

I compared between these 2 diamonds:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=860780
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=131&item=860714

And I cannot understand why the smaller one is more expensive since the cut, colour and clarity is similar?
And the smaller rock has a larger difference in the circumference (7.08-7.13) so the symmetry might be an issue right?

I''d say either random variation, or precise "you get what you pay for" differentiation, based on the degree of the SI 1 being more or less than satisfactory, or a combination of both. Both are in-house, so you could ask Jim to look at both, and compare on your behalf, since a less than eye clean SI 1 could kill the deal for you, and this is not uncommon.

Otherwise, everything about the 1.36 is in favor over the 1.35. The 1.35 does not come up on the search by cut db when constraints held to excellent since it scores 2.2 vs 1 on the HCA. Also, the + vs - on the spread for the 1.36 (also obviously wider) is in its favor. However, the 1.35, again if eye clean vs the 1.36 could flip the order of preference around, so good work on your part.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Reading through the thread again, I saw 3 of JulieN's recommendations:

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/a-cut-above-h-a-cut-diamond-755755.htm#
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/a-cut-above-h-a-cut-diamond-2415710.htm#
http://www.diamondexpert.com/diamonds/dbs.cgi?sf=detd.setup.cgi&active=active&stock=RB20106151&submit_search=1

Just wondering if anyone thinks any of these 2 is a better deal than the 1.36ct since they are all H&As?

ps: I realised the 1.36ct rock is not inscribed. Is it safe?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/13/2006 11:05:49 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Reading through the thread again, I saw 3 of JulieN''s recommendations:

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/a-cut-above-h-a-cut-diamond-755755.htm#
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/a-cut-above-h-a-cut-diamond-2415710.htm#
http://www.diamondexpert.com/diamonds/dbs.cgi?sf=detd.setup.cgi&active=active&stock=RB20106151&submit_search=1

Just wondering if anyone thinks any of these 2 is a better deal than the 1.36ct since they are all H&As?

ps: I realised the 1.36ct rock is not inscribed. Is it safe?

You couldn''t go wrong on those either. And no inscription is no biggie. You can have it inscribed if you want.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/13/2006 11:28:55 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 9/13/2006 11:05:49 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Reading through the thread again, I saw 3 of JulieN''s recommendations:

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/a-cut-above-h-a-cut-diamond-755755.htm#
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/a-cut-above-h-a-cut-diamond-2415710.htm#
http://www.diamondexpert.com/diamonds/dbs.cgi?sf=detd.setup.cgi&active=active&stock=RB20106151&submit_search=1

Just wondering if anyone thinks any of these 2 is a better deal than the 1.36ct since they are all H&As?

ps: I realised the 1.36ct rock is not inscribed. Is it safe?

You couldn''t go wrong on those either. And no inscription is no biggie. You can have it inscribed if you want.

Ditto. Any ACA diamond is going to be a winner - thats given. You have to decide what means the most to you, extra size with the 1.36 for the money or go with a smaller ACA....Personally I would rather go larger and go with the 1.36 if it is eyeclean, as it does get up nearer to the 1.5 carat mark and it should be an incredible performer, but the choice is yours as to what you feel your GF would love the most.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Wow, thanks people for your kind advice!

Jim (Schultz) just replied to my query! He mentioned that the 1.52ct is not recommended for engagement ring as dark specks can be seen. However, the 1.36ct is *beautiful* with only a small feather in the center which is white and very tiny!

He also asked me if I want this rock on hold. Just wondering, if I put this rock on hold, can I still search around or am I obliged to buy it? I don't want to be a jerk to put this rock on hold but yet I want to be absolutely sure before asking Jim (who is such a nice guy) to reserve it for me. Oh yes, I still need to sort out my funds between my few accounts before I can pay for it!

Oh yes, Jim attached an IS pic for me (how cool is that!?)! It looks very very promising!
http://img243.imageshack.us/my.php?image=860714bu9.jpg

I am almost tempted to pull the trigger. But because I started out wanting to buy an ACA rock, I am still torn. But I read that ACA rock is a branded cut that has "perfect" symmetry but that does NOT necessary mean that rocks that are not ACA are not good. Comments anyone?

[Edit] I just did a search on the 1.36ct rock and it was stated it is no longer available. I am not sure if Jim had reserved it for me, or someone else had bought it. Ok, now I am getting depressed. I was so close to getting it.

 

[Regular Guy]

Of course, only Jim can tell you whether that diamond has your name on it or not. Nice, by the way, to see he is able to get pretty descriptive with you, and also, have an idealscope at the ready.

But, I''ll let my friends who interpret these better than I judge the meaning...but it looks like you have a distinctive claw at 4:00!

 

[SpideyWeb]

The wait is painful.

I woke up in the morning and found that the diamond I am about to get is no longer available.

Does this happen often? I thought this only happens in eBay auctions...

 

[Lorelei]

oh dear...I hope you can still get that one and that no one lurking has poached that 1.36, but maybe it is on hold for you...Of course rocks that aren't ACA are great if the cut is good, branded cuts are one thing and a preference, but you can still get a fabulous diamond which is a non branded. It seems that this is happening more and more with lurkers snapping up the recommendations

, hopefully this isn't what has happened here, but I think now it is best to act quickly to put a possible diamond on hold to circumvent this practise or we will have to maybe post the info but not the links and vendors.

The IS on our 1.36 looks terrific too, I hope you can get it...

 

[SpideyWeb]

Yes the IS looks great! I don''t really get what Regular Guy had mentioned about the claw at 4.00. I notice something different at 4.00 but I don''t really understand the "claw" thingy. Is it a good thing or a bad thing?

Maybe I have to start searching again. But maybe I am too disappointed, I can''t seem to find any better deal...

 

[Lorelei]

I am not sure, but maybe Ira means the dark area at 4.00 which looks like a pincer and he was making a joke about it! Don't worry!

Lets keep our fingers crossed that this diamond is on hold for you, if not don't despair - we will find you something else just as good if not better!

I will have to be more crafty with the details this time if it is the case that a lurker pinched this diamond!

I know anything is fair game until it is either on hold or paid for, it just makes me mad...But I could be jumping the gun and accusing lurkers unjustly

 

[SpideyWeb]

My girl had commented to me that her friend''s 1.5ct looks too big and "weird" on her hand. I am not sure if she is hinting to me to get a smaller rock or to help save me a little money. However, I also learned on this site that diamonds are NEVER too big.

If I can get that 1.36ct, I will be thrilled! Just hope she doesn''t turn out to not like it and finds it "weird".

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/14/2006 5:42:18 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
My girl had commented to me that her friend''s 1.5ct looks too big and ''weird'' on her hand. I am not sure if she is hinting to me to get a smaller rock or to help save me a little money. However, I also learned on this site that diamonds are NEVER too big.

If I can get that 1.36ct, I will be thrilled! Just hope she doesn''t turn out to not like it and finds it ''weird''.

Trust me, Spidey, if you can get that 1.36 your girl won''t find it weird in the least but the perfect size for her! I wear 3.4 carats and trust me, even that isn''t too big!

 

[Ellen]

Spidey, a 1.36 is a lovely size. I''m one of the few who''s not a size gal, and recently got a 1.40. I think it''s perfect.

I''ll be waiting to hear on this stones status...

 

[SpideyWeb]

I found this:
1.44 H SI1
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=131&item=950280

Price sounds good for alot of weight. But the HCA score is 2.3.

 

[Lorelei]

Actually this looks good to me, the magnified image looks clean as far as I can tell, see what Jim says at the open of business regarding the other and get him to eyeball this one too. I prefer the numbers of our 1.36 but this one might be a nice alternative. I can see it doesn''t score as well on the HCA, but it still could be a sock exploder with everything else!

 

[SpideyWeb]

How about Jim just replied and said he placed the 1.36ct on hold for me!!!!!

I am so thrilled!!!!

Now inscription service costs $50. Is it worth doing?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/14/2006 11:35:06 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
How about Jim just replied and said he placed the 1.36ct on hold for me!!!!!

I am so thrilled!!!!

Now inscription service costs $50. Is it worth doing?

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HOORAY!!!

Sorry I got a bit carried away! Spidey for some reason I was really upset to think we missed out on that diamond. I had a look many times today and couldn''t find anything as good, especially with the F colour, so I am thrilled to bits!!!!!! I know you won''t be sorry and I INSIST on pics when you get it!!!

Thoughts vary on the inscription, it is entirely up to you really.

I AM SO EXCITED FOR YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I know this diamond is going to be awesome!

 

[SpideyWeb]

Thanks Lorelei!!! If not for you people, I wouldn''t have found this treasure!

But since I need to set it locally, Would you think it is safer to have it inscribed? The inscribtion cannot be done for free? Most graded diamonds are inscribed right?

Anyway I also would like to know how bank wire transfer works as this is the first time I am doing this. Is this any different from Telex (or something like that)?