First time diamond wholesale purchase

[ngambit]

John,
Thanks for taking the time to get feedback from your staff. Don't take this the wrong way when I ask these questions. I'm just trying to learn.

Do you consider EGL USA, EGL international, and other EGL-country specific (ie egl-Israel) all the same when taking that average or speaking of egl certs in general?Should the question be more granular ?

When searching the featured sponsors of PS and filtering by egl, there seems to be a considerable, and consistent, premium for egl usa vs egl international. Why? From what I've seen , egl usa provide angles for both crown and pavilion as well as the percentages. The other egl certificates only show percentages for crown and pavilion.

Niel, thanks for your detailed response. There were some interesting points. In particular you mentioned egl rounds their numbers. What did you mean by that ?

I've been scouring different online vendors for 2.1-2.2 vs2 g excellent cut egl *usa* and the prices seem to be between 19 - 22k. Is purchasing one of these like buying a scratch and win ?

With that said I do not go away thinking any different from my deal. I've been assured by my jeweller that we can get an independent opinion. I do not want to ruffle any feathers as I appreciate the advice that comes from the experienced people here.

 

[Gypsy]

Start here for an answer about your EGL question: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/egl-certification-are-any-of-them-ok.142863/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/egl-certification-are-any-of-them-ok.142863/[/URL]


They are not consistent.

Additional comments:

EGL fools consumers into thinking they are getting more bang for their buck.

You are not. Vendors choose which lab to send their diamonds to, and they send stones to EGL only when they will get MORE money for the diamond with an EGL report than with a GIA report.

You cannot "game the system" by converting EGL grades to GIA grades. EGL is inconsistent with its grading and that makes a conversion impossible. It is part of how EGL messes with consumers.

There is one rule to EGL stones: You are paying too much for what you are getting. Period. Full stop.

Buy a GIA diamond or AGS diamond and accept that you would "feel" like your money is going as far. But you are actually getting more for your money. And you are spending your money wisely.

Average of 2 grades means some diamonds are graded correctly. Some are 4-6 grades off, some are only 2-3. You don't know. So you can't convert.


I realize that in the PS search some of the vendors stock EGL stones. That's the advertising vendors and that's determined by the forum owner.

But if you look at this board and see who gets recommended by the posters on here, you'll see that all the vendors we regularly recommend: GOG, BGD, WF, JA, BN, HPD, ERD all refuse to stock EGL.

Why is that?
Because it's a crap shoot and we don't advocating gambling on here.

 

[heididdl]

But I am not sure how complicated it is to send a stone into the US and back to Canada for an appraisal.

That's a good question. I'd imagine it's easy, but maybe Neil or Dave Atlas could answer.

An advantage of sending the diamond to GIA would be the trading document agreed-on as "official.” In fact the jeweler may prefer that scenario, in case the OP decides to walk-away from the deal.

A disadvantage of GIA is turnaround time. They are quoting a return date of May 30 for diamonds 2cts+ right now. It may or may-not be practical for the OP to wait for a month.

If accuracy is the goal, and another grading report isn't a priority, the right appraiser can provide accurate answers and faster service. It’s what they do. There are many quality pros - the two I named above included - easily as skilled as the best GIA graders (the seniors grading the diamonds of high value/size) and far more experienced than average line-graders knocking out dozens of 1ct stones per day. To their credit, GIA uses a system of several graders - where split decisions are resolved by someone more experienced. That means it's not just one set of eyes. Yet anyone who works in this business has seen their fair share of head-scratchers and flat-wrong reports.

So, while I agree GIA can provide “the” globally-regarded document a skilled independent professional can be fully capable of naming the color and clarity per GIA standards with equal accuracy. With diamonds that are loose it's rather easy, in fact.

A Little GIA secret. I brought in my 366 EC stone last month and they are giving courtesy to private customers bringing in their first stone. I had a 3 day turn around.

 

[John P]

John,
Thanks for taking the time to get feedback from your staff. Don't take this the wrong way when I ask these questions. I'm just trying to learn.

Do you consider EGL USA, EGL international, and other EGL-country specific (ie egl-Israel) all the same when taking that average or speaking of egl certs in general?Should the question be more granular ?

When searching the featured sponsors of PS and filtering by egl, there seems to be a considerable, and consistent, premium for egl usa vs egl international. Why? From what I've seen , egl usa provide angles for both crown and pavilion as well as the percentages. The other egl certificates only show percentages for crown and pavilion.

RE "Don't take this the wrong way:" Are you kidding? I'm taking it the opposite You are a consumer who's seeking legitimate answers from a forum of diamond collectors, enthusiasts and pros. It's refreshing, as I often see buyers in commercial markets who would rather (in the style of the three monkeys - no hear, no speak, no see) go into denial to believe they are getting some dreamland "deal" at some dreamland price, rather than investigate the facts, as you are.

To your question: I should clarify that it's not "my staff." I do training in numerous showrooms selling high-quality diamonds. The people I polled are staff members at a very successful store in Minneapolis. I did not distinguish between EGL locations. I know the onsite gemologist considers EGL international softer than EGL USA. To be frank, I do too... But that's like saying my first girlfriend cheated on me less than some of my others. Frankly, any cheating is wrong. Moreover, the nature of cheating makes it unlikely that I'll truly know the true extent of what happened with any of them.

With that said I do not go away thinking any different from my deal. I've been assured by my jeweller that we can get an independent opinion. I do not want to ruffle any feathers as I appreciate the advice that comes from the experienced people here.

That's great news. To me, it sounds like your jeweler (who was up-front about EGL being soft) is a stand-up pro who's willing to get consensus on what this diamond "is" and provide a deal. If that's the case it could be a win-win. By the way, did you ever report what your jeweler said it's color and clarity would be per GIA standards?

 

[John P]

A Little GIA secret. I brought in my 366 EC stone last month and they are giving courtesy to private customers bringing in their first stone. I had a 3 day turn around.

Wow. That's a great tip. When I next need to submit a diamond I might see if any new/private friends of mine would be willing to undertake it. Seriously...so much better than a 3-4 month wait!

This, from two days ago.
http://www.jckonline.com/2014/05/01/gia-aims-to-turn-around-its-long-turnarounds

 

[ngambit]

Specifically when searching for a stone, I asked him to find me something under budget with my main criteria being carat size and then cut. I was never specific about wanting a certain color or clarity. He went to work and said he found a bright stone with high brilliance. If I was specific about wanting vs2 and g color and he represented this as that, then I would be more concerned. He said that egl usa was softer than Gia for color and clarity . He is confident it is a well cut stone that will check out in terms of valuation. When I search specifically for other egl usa stones online, it's in a similar range.

 

[MollyMalone]

TBH,I don't see the point to mulling further over the EGL-USA cert you have; it's the diamond that's gong to be worn, not the piece of paper.

But as a general fyi for anyone reading this thread, the Rapaport Diamond Trading Network did a comparison study last year. It concluded that
* GIA, IGI and EGL-US labs were close enough in their grading of the stones submitted as to "suggest that the[se] U.S.-based labs are working within comparable boundaries"; but
* the EGLs abroad -- with whom EGL-USA shares no corporate affiliation -- are appreciably more lenient.

Think It's interesting reading even if you're someone who will consider only stones that have an AGS report:
http://www.diamonds.net/News/NewsItem.aspx?ArticleID=43417

 

[MollyMalone]

My dad called when I was at the keyboard earlier, so I hit Submit on my preceding post. Since my time for editing that has long since expired, let me finish the thought that didn't make it in the first time around:

TBH,I don't see the point to mulling further over the EGL-USA cert you have; it's the diamond that's gong to be worn, not the piece of paper. ETA: So I too will encourage you to get an independent assessment, if you don't want to walk away from this stone just yet. It would be great if there is a good, local appraiser who would also be willing to give you an explanation for his/her conclusions (assuming you'd be willing to pay any extra fee charged for that extra time) because that would give you more useful info for future reference than a GIA or AGS lab report will provide.

 

[SB621]

I hope you don't mind me going in a different direction here. I have an EGL USA (I believe) 2.04ct D, SI2 Triple XXX diamond that we bought in 2009 I believe, for what I thought was fair pricing- very similar to your story above. A few years later I wanted to upgrade to something else. I love my MRB but I got hit hard but old cuts so my husband was all for me selling or trading in my MRB to get what I really wanted. No one was interested in buying with an EGL report so I ended up getting a lab report from GIA. It came back F, I1 with XX and VG. This significantly dropped down the price by almost a 1/3 of what we originally paid. Even with the major price jumps in diamonds in 2011 we still lost several thousands on what the diamond was worth, forget breaking even.

So while you are getting great information here and I'm sure your intended will love the diamond, if you think she will ever upgrade you really should stick with GIA. My diamond was appraised by 2 different GIA appraisers who came highly recommended (not through PS but local community) and both thought it was E SI2 so really the 4 c's can be all slightly different depending who is doing what. Because there is a big $$$$ drop if it is even 1 grade off I would insist on a GIA report.

Goodluck!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

But as a general fyi for anyone reading this thread, the Rapaport Diamond Trading Network did a comparison study last year. It concluded that
* GIA, IGI and EGL-US labs were close enough in their grading of the stones submitted as to "suggest that the[se] U.S.-based labs are working within comparable boundaries"; but
* the EGLs abroad -- with whom EGL-USA shares no corporate affiliation -- are appreciably more lenient.

Think It's interesting reading even if you're someone who will consider only stones that have an AGS report:
http://www.diamonds.net/News/NewsItem.aspx?ArticleID=43417

Thanks for posting this link Molly. It is informative and draws out the key issues that the trade needs to address in order to foster consumer confidence, and of course, issues that consumers need to be aware of given the current landscape.

One point the article makes that I think is important relates to the notion that the market has already 'priced in' the leniency factor of second tier labs. Even if that is somewhat the case at the wholesale level, how that cert is used on the consumer level is much less certain and alot more troubling.

 

[John P]

Here's a snapshot of what Bryan refers to.

From a Rap Conference in 2012: This data is derived from actual wholesale trading values on our largest B2B network.

In essence, suppliers charging $ 10,000 for a given diamond with GIA 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) were charging around $ 6,900 for the same 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) from EGL USA. Less for the same 123 from EGL's foreign labs. There are varying factors like size - broken down above - but I'm sure the gist is clear.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thanks John. That is exactly what I was referring to.

So, if we recognize that out of bounds grading by certain labs creates consumer confusion and loss of consumer confidence which is bad for everybody, how does the trade go about self-policing against such behavior? Surely, shining this kind of light on it helps, but there has been a recognition of this for a long time within the trade and it is just sort of tolerated and factored in (to the extent that you can factor in grading that can be either wildly inaccurate or willfully fraudulent - K Si1 is a G VS1? come on!!).

 

[Roqsteady]

At this point I wish each lab had their own terminology (instead of all using D-Z for color, F-I3 for clarity, etc.) Granted, this would make it more convoluted for consumers to sift through the different lab gradings but that's somewhat the point - the softer labs like EGL and IGI are benefiting and piggybacking from the confusion by using the same terms to grade. Obviously this would never happen as AGS and GIA wouldn't be hurt and the other labs would never get business. To an extent the AGS and GIA already diverge with how they grade cut ("000" vs "XXX"), so it isn't entirely unprecedented.

 

[ngambit]

This reflects what I am seeing when searching some of the online prices. GIA stones with the same grade are priced much higher than EGL-USA. EGL-USA graded stones are higher priced than EGL Isreal/HK, etc. To a novice here it appears a stone is valued by its characteristics and not by its certificate. As long as one can receive independent,expert analysis. I can appreciate from an online shopping perspective to steer towards the more reliable certificate because it seems like less hassle.

I've reached out to a few local people here and waiting to hear back.

 

[John P]

At this point I wish each lab had their own terminology (instead of all using D-Z for color, F-I3 for clarity, etc.) Granted, this would make it more convoluted for consumers to sift through the different lab gradings but that's somewhat the point - the softer labs like EGL and IGI are benefiting and piggybacking from the confusion by using the same terms to grade. Obviously this would never happen as AGS and GIA wouldn't be hurt and the other labs would never get business. To an extent the AGS and GIA already diverge with how they grade cut ("000" vs "XXX"), so it isn't entirely unprecedented.

AGS tried to do this by using numbers in every category. They call their D-IF-Ideal = 0-0-000 and G-SI1-Ideal = 1.5-5-000. But the trade and trickle-down have demonstrated a preference for GIA nomenclature.

http://www.americangemsociety.org/ags-diamond-grading-system

This reflects what I am seeing when searching some of the online prices. GIA stones with the same grade are priced much higher than EGL-USA. EGL-USA graded stones are higher priced than EGL Isreal/HK, etc.

That observation is on-point. And from there it's in the hands of the dealers.

It reminded me of a bedtime story about Buyer Billy and two different flavors of sellers (Stan and Fred).
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...nline-purchases.154659/#post-2815564#p2815564

 

[Texas Leaguer]

It reminded me of a bedtime story about Buyer Billy and two different flavors of sellers (Stan and Fred).
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...nline-purchases.154659/#post-2815564#p2815564

Very good illustration of a scenario that is played out hundreds of times a day. Disservice to the customer (paid too much/got too little), to the standup dealer (lost the sale,the customer and the referrals), to the labs grading diamonds in a controlled and consistent way, and to the diamond industry as a whole (if the customer ever attempts to sell the stone he will find out that the deal was not all he thought it was. He is likely to be bitter and unlikely to buy another diamond. And he will likely tell others that diamonds are a ripoff.)

Because people tend to shop until someone tells them what they want to hear, there are Friendly Freds aplenty out there. I'm not even blaming them. It's a problem that starts at a higher level and trickles down. And as it does so it gains momentum such that the impact on the consumer is highly unpredictable. Therefore, there is no way to accurately factor for it.

The industry should find a way to effectively self-police. I know it's a thorny problem, but everyone loses until this problem is properly addressed.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

At this point I wish each lab had their own terminology (instead of all using D-Z for color, F-I3 for clarity, etc.) Granted, this would make it more convoluted for consumers to sift through the different lab gradings but that's somewhat the point - the softer labs like EGL and IGI are benefiting and piggybacking from the confusion by using the same terms to grade. Obviously this would never happen as AGS and GIA wouldn't be hurt and the other labs would never get business. To an extent the AGS and GIA already diverge with how they grade cut ("000" vs "XXX"), so it isn't entirely unprecedented.

I agree with the sentiment. There is a precedent for differences in the language and procedures that different quality labs use. As you mentioned, there is significant difference between GIA and AGS in both the technology and the language used to describe cut quality. That is precisely what makes AGSL an added value to the market. Of course, they also have had to maintain a solid reputation for consistent and accurate grading of the other quality factors or they would not enjoy the stature that they do. But labs that are simply issuing reports, adding no additional value, and cannot be relied upon for consistent grading within an acceptable tolerance, are a negative for the market in my opinion.

That said, I am not advocating for eliminating labs. To the contrary, I would be in favor of new labs if they serve a solid purpose. Let's say a lab comes along (like AGS did around cut grading) that learns how to use computer analysis to do color grading by evaluating spectroscopic data. That lab could potentially create a value add for the market that would justify their existence. Again, if they were going to be a full service lab they would also need to be able to do dependable clarity grading, cut grading, and the other analytics as well.

Labs should be accountable for maintaining acceptable standards. Labs that exist primarily for the fact that they provide ultra soft grades to dealers should not be part of a healthy industry.

 

[KenD]

TBH,I don't see the point to mulling further over the EGL-USA cert you have; it's the diamond that's gong to be worn, not the piece of paper.

But as a general fyi for anyone reading this thread, the Rapaport Diamond Trading Network did a comparison study last year. It concluded that
* GIA, IGI and EGL-US labs were close enough in their grading of the stones submitted as to "suggest that the[se] U.S.-based labs are working within comparable boundaries"; but
* the EGLs abroad -- with whom EGL-USA shares no corporate affiliation -- are appreciably more lenient.

Think It's interesting reading even if you're someone who will consider only stones that have an AGS report:
http://www.diamonds.net/News/NewsItem.aspx?ArticleID=43417

Looking at the data in Table 1, it seems that EGL-USA was a little more lenient in grading the larger stones, than the smaller ones. Hard to tell, since most of the stones were around 1 ct. Also, the sample size was very small, compared to the total number of diamonds being graded by the labs.
I'll leave it to someone else to do the regression analysis.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

TBH,I don't see the point to mulling further over the EGL-USA cert you have; it's the diamond that's gong to be worn, not the piece of paper.

But as a general fyi for anyone reading this thread, the Rapaport Diamond Trading Network did a comparison study last year. It concluded that
* GIA, IGI and EGL-US labs were close enough in their grading of the stones submitted as to "suggest that the[se] U.S.-based labs are working within comparable boundaries"; but
* the EGLs abroad -- with whom EGL-USA shares no corporate affiliation -- are appreciably more lenient.

Think It's interesting reading even if you're someone who will consider only stones that have an AGS report:
http://www.diamonds.net/News/NewsItem.aspx?ArticleID=43417

Looking at the data in Table 1, it seems that EGL-USA was a little more lenient in grading the larger stones, than the smaller ones. Hard to tell, since most of the stones were around 1 ct. Also, the sample size was very small, compared to the total number of diamonds being graded by the labs.
I'll leave it to someone else to do the regression analysis.

Regarding the sample size, there is mention in the article that this study was a "precursor" of a larger study that was ongoing at the time of the article. It will be very interesting to see the results of a more comprehensive study on the subject. Perhaps that will provide enough data to convince the trade to rally around bringing all diamond labs within a common set of boundaries.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

There's a related new thread about an expose on a Nashville jeweler here:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/this-is-scary-ripping-people-off-and-defending-it.201677/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/this-is-scary-ripping-people-off-and-defending-it.201677/[/URL]

 

[ngambit]

Just a follow up. I took the stone to a local appraiser (who does not sell jewellery) in Vancouver. The stone was provided without the EGL USA cert and no details from me and came back VS2 and G color. Thanks for the advice to seek out help and work with my jeweler (who ended up being awesome about the whole thing).

After my experience, I would recommend to others to seek out GIA. This is especially true if you are buying online. With that said, I would buy EGL usa again if it came recommended from my jeweler and backed by an independent. I can see how the system can be abused with certain sale tactics.

It's been mounted now and I'm very happy! Proposal date is less than a month away now.

 

[Andelain]

Here's a snapshot of what Bryan refers to.

From a Rap Conference in 2012: This data is derived from actual wholesale trading values on our largest B2B network.

In essence, suppliers charging $ 10,000 for a given diamond with GIA 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) were charging around $ 6,900 for the same 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) from EGL USA. Less for the same 123 from EGL's foreign labs. There are varying factors like size - broken down above - but I'm sure the gist is clear.

I know this is an old (and very informative) thread, I hope you don't mind me bumping it with a question. Why do you think the AGS stones are taking a price hit at the 2 ct mark?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Here's a snapshot of what Bryan refers to.

From a Rap Conference in 2012: This data is derived from actual wholesale trading values on our largest B2B network.

In essence, suppliers charging $ 10,000 for a given diamond with GIA 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) were charging around $ 6,900 for the same 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) from EGL USA. Less for the same 123 from EGL's foreign labs. There are varying factors like size - broken down above - but I'm sure the gist is clear.

I know this is an old (and very informative) thread, I hope you don't mind me bumping it with a question. Why do you think the AGS stones are taking a price hit at the 2 ct mark?

That's a fascinating question. I do not know the answer but I will offer one theory and I would be very interested to hear others.

AGSL is kind of the new kid on the block in terms of top tier labs. They sprang into being primarily as a newer generation of consumers started learning about the importance of cut quality. That trend has accelerated with the coming of the internet and more widely available information on the subject. So, my guess is that the younger demographic is behind the premium we see for AGS grading. However, as the diamonds hit the 2ct threshold with their significant jump in price points, the market is more weighted to the "old school" demographics, thus less awareness/appreciation of the AGS value proposition and therefore less willingness to pay a premium.

If this theory is correct we will see that premium begin to assert itself in the years ahead in the bigger, higher dollar stones as well.

 

[John P]

I know this is an old (and very informative) thread, I hope you don't mind me bumping it with a question. Why do you think the AGS stones are taking a price hit at the 2 ct mark?

Good question. I'd view it a different way:

The number of GIA-graded diamonds traded via Rapnet eclipses all other lab-reports by a very wide margin. For that reason, and per reputation, GIA is always set at "100." In that sense, I don't believe GIA is "taking a price hit" from 0.50-1.99ct. With VG+ included, and the vast majority of loose diamonds in that span, I'd say AGSL is commanding a known-quality premium.

In the same way I don't think AGSL and the others are "taking a price hit" at 2.00 ct. Instead, the data shows that GIA commands a premium (per Bryan Boyne) in higher carats and collection-categories.


Here is the same chart from this year's conference. The numbers and implications are similar.

 

[Andelain]

Here's a snapshot of what Bryan refers to.

From a Rap Conference in 2012: This data is derived from actual wholesale trading values on our largest B2B network.

In essence, suppliers charging $ 10,000 for a given diamond with GIA 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) were charging around $ 6,900 for the same 123 (ct-cut-col-clar-etc.) from EGL USA. Less for the same 123 from EGL's foreign labs. There are varying factors like size - broken down above - but I'm sure the gist is clear.

I know this is an old (and very informative) thread, I hope you don't mind me bumping it with a question. Why do you think the AGS stones are taking a price hit at the 2 ct mark?

That's a fascinating question. I do not know the answer but I will offer one theory and I would be very interested to hear others.

AGSL is kind of the new kid on the block in terms of top tier labs. They sprang into being primarily as a newer generation of consumers started learning about the importance of cut quality. That trend has accelerated with the coming of the internet and more widely available information on the subject. So, my guess is that the younger demographic is behind the premium we see for AGS grading. However, as the diamonds hit the 2ct threshold with their significant jump in price points, the market is more weighted to the "old school" demographics, thus less awareness/appreciation of the AGS value proposition and therefore less willingness to pay a premium.

If this theory is correct we will see that premium begin to assert itself in the years ahead in the bigger, higher dollar stones as well.

That makes a lot of sense, thanks for 'weighing' in.

 

[Andelain]

The number of GIA-graded diamonds traded via Rapnet eclipses all other lab-reports by a very wide margin. For that reason, and per reputation, GIA is always set at "100." In that sense, I don't believe GIA is "taking a price hit" from 0.50-1.99ct. With VG+ included, and the vast majority of loose diamonds in that span, I'd say AGSL is commanding a known-quality premium.

In the same way I don't think AGSL and the others are "taking a price hit" at 2.00 ct. Instead, the data shows that GIA commands a premium (per Bryan Boyne) in higher carats and collection-categories.

I don't mean it in a negative sense, I was just wondering why AGS graded stones are selling for less, instead of the premium that smaller stones sell for.

 

[MelisendeDiamonds]

In the same way I don't think AGSL and the others are "taking a price hit" at 2.00 ct. Instead, the data shows that GIA commands a premium (per Bryan Boyne) in higher carats and collection-categories.

I have an alternate explanation, AGSL provides reports with and without light performance cut grading. From 0.5 to 2 carats there are many brands and submissions that obtain AGS 0000 which justify a premium over GIA XXX.

However in 2Ct and above there are proportionally less AGS0000 stones because the price gap between AGS0000 and GIA XXX increases with higher carat weight, the rough gets very expensive, and the market demand at this level doesn't justify the risk of cutting to AGSL standards as opposed to the largest part of the market which is GIA XXX.

Without the AGSL cut grading premium over GIAL at 2ct and above, the default of GIAL being considered the standard for color and clarity dominates and commands a higher value overall than AGSL paper of the same grades.

 

[denverappraiser]

I agree.

It’s not just paper. Manufacturers plan their cutting to fit particular standards. The decision of what lab a specific stone is going to be submitted to is made while the stone is still in the rough planning stage. In nearly every case, cutting to GIA specs is both easier to do and produces heavier results than cutting that same stone to AGS specs. As the stones get larger and more expensive, this becomes increasingly important, ESPECIALLY if you’re near an important weight category like 2.00. The cost of aiming and missing AGS000 gets higher and higher. They can always resubmit it to GIA later and get the xxx, but they can never get back the weight.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

In the same way I don't think AGSL and the others are "taking a price hit" at 2.00 ct. Instead, the data shows that GIA commands a premium (per Bryan Boyne) in higher carats and collection-categories.

I have an alternate explanation, AGSL provides reports with and without light performance cut grading. From 0.5 to 2 carats there are many brands and submissions that obtain AGS 0000 which justify a premium over GIA XXX.

However in 2Ct and above there are proportionally less AGS0000 stones because the price gap between AGS0000 and GIA XXX increases with higher carat weight, the rough gets very expensive, and the market demand at this level doesn't justify the risk of cutting to AGSL standards as opposed to the largest part of the market which is GIA XXX.

Without the AGSL cut grading premium over GIAL at 2ct and above, the default of GIAL being considered the standard for color and clarity dominates and commands a higher value overall than AGSL paper of the same grades.

I think these are valid points and probably have as much to do with it, or more, than my theory.

It's interesting to note in Johns post that in the newest survey the AGS premium for smalls has increased, and there is indeed improvement in the bigs. Maybe my theory is also at play.

Another conclusion that could be drawn : maybe a good time to buy big AGS stones

 

[denverappraiser]

I think the AGS premium comes from one and only one source. Consumer demand. The GIA preference comes from the trade. They’re safe and they’re easy to sell. I’m reminded of an old rule from the personal computer business a few decades ago. No one was ever fired for buying IBM. ‘Clones’ were plentiful, half the price and often better but it didn’t matter. IBM ruled the roost and businesses bought IBM. 20 years later you’ll notice that this has changed. Clones are no longer called clones and they stand or fall on their own merits. IBM isn’t even in the business any more.