|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Mar 14, 2019 21:15:45 GMT
I mentioned desirability. What I meant was liquidity, but decided to avoid that term. A diamond is almost perfectly liquid. Values are relatively stable and the constant demand for a standard diamond ensures the value can be realised almost immediately for its true worth. Stones with lesser demand (malaya garnet) or unusual pieces (large carat) create huge uncertainty in both valuation (due to lack of comparables) and also hugely restricts the possible market for the stone. Going back to my original point, the loss you posted is a good reminder for all of us of the dangers of p2p, but drawing a direct comparison to a small diamond isn't really suitable. I don't know anything about stones, but noticed that recoveries of small (under 10k) bling are more successful than the larger ones. The diamond is estimated at 2.19cts, H colour and VVS1 clarity. Its a lot of work for me on what seems a simple loan but....... Plenty of sites that will value a diamond on the given information (which of course could be wrong) seems this one is a bit of a bargain at £8,000
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 14, 2019 22:13:58 GMT
I don't know anything about stones, but noticed that recoveries of small (under 10k) bling are more successful than the larger ones. The diamond is estimated at 2.19cts, H colour and VVS1 clarity. Its a lot of work for me on what seems a simple loan but....... Plenty of sites that will value a diamond on the given information (which of course could be wrong) seems this one is a bit of a bargain at £8,000 Sounds ok for 3k loan  providing the info is correct (you never know with FS ) I have a hefty £50 in this one (benefit of having 2 accounts) and keep renewal button green. Worth a risk, I think... The trouble is that it can take decades for these little things to compensate for the loss from other FS loans.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Mar 15, 2019 11:08:42 GMT
Sorry, but I do not understand that argument. It makes no sense. No one compares here the value of a Ferrari and a Fiat Panda. They obviously have different values. But if you tell me my Fiat Panda is worth £5000 and 3 days later, you sell it £600, there's a problem. I mentioned desirability. What I meant was liquidity, but decided to avoid that term. A diamond is almost perfectly liquid. Values are relatively stable and the constant demand for a standard diamond ensures the value can be realised almost immediately for its true worth. Stones with lesser demand (malaya garnet) or unusual pieces (large carat) create huge uncertainty in both valuation (due to lack of comparables) and also hugely restricts the possible market for the stone. Going back to my original point, the loss you posted is a good reminder for all of us of the dangers of p2p, but drawing a direct comparison to a small diamond isn't really suitable. I agree with the theory that comparatively small diamonds should operate in a relatively liquid market and should realise near to the full valuation minus auction and other associated fees of disposal. In practice I have concerns, as evidenced by two loan disposals.... FS: www.fundingsecure.com/myaccount/loan/2127087124- 2.5ct diamond earrings, £5k valuation, 60% LTV - failed to meet reserve, agreed sale at £2.6k (52% of valuation), FS fees foregone. O.K. we're all aware of the issues around FS at the moment so, perhaps this couldn't happen at Unbolted?.... Unbolted: unbolted.com/uk/lenders/view-loan/1892/- single stone diamond ring, GIA cert, £3k valuation, 70% LTV - sold £2.35k (78% of valuation), Unbolted fees foregone.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920 
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Mar 15, 2019 13:17:24 GMT
I don't know the jewellery business but I think it operates on massive profit margins - hence I wonder if the prior 2 valuations Dan1 refers to are trade rather then retail valuations?
|
|
providing the info is correct (you never know with FS 
