- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 379
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20100515p2a00m0na014000c.html
MAINICHI DAILY NEWS
A leading gemology company engaged in diamond grading had deliberately
overestimated diamond qualities by manipulating color evaluation
standards, it has been learned.
The Gemological Association of All Japan (GAAJ) had been using the
manipulated color standards between late February in 2007 and late
October in 2008, affecting some 338,000 diamonds that were evaluated
during the period, industry insiders told the Mainichi.
The Association of Gemological Laboratories Japan (AGL), which is
responsible for the industry''s uniform evaluation standards and to
which GAAJ belongs, is poised to question GAAJ over the suspected
manipulation at an early date.
The GAAJ, however, has refuted the allegations, saying, "We only
rectified deviations of our in-house evaluation standards." That
regular meeting was held to eliminate variation on diamond grading
between GAAJ-ZENHOKYO laboratory and other AGL members, in conformity
with the approved masterstone system, and to seek consistent and
uniform grading results between our expert graders. Never did we aim
to give "loose" or "favorable" grading results for our own interest as
described in the news report.
According to industry sources, the GAAJ discussed manipulating diamond
color evaluation standards during a technical meeting at its Tokyo
headquarters on Feb. 24, 2007. Two days later, the association''s board
officially decided to go ahead with the manipulation so that color
evaluation of diamonds weighing 1-carat (0.2 grams) or over would be
upgraded by a half to one grade compared to the industry''s uniform
standards, and that of diamonds weighing less than 1-carat would be
upgraded by a half grade.
Any opinions on the following interchange between Cowing and Dr.
William Fong Yan?
The following opinion is not often stated publicly, but is a shared
view held by most all US appraisers and diamond dealers with whom I
have discussed this issue over more than two decades.
It is widely understood in the US diamond trade and among
gemologist/appraisers that the labs in Europe grade colour and clarity
more leniently than does GIA. This belief or understanding is
reflected in the asking prices for diamonds of identical colour and
clarity with GIA reports compared to those with, just for one example,
an EGL report from one of their European labs.
Given this understanding, which may not be known or may appear
controversial to appraisers/valuers outside the US, it appears likely
that GAAJ was more in line with GIA color grading before this
"adjustment", and that they will now be more in line with the grading
of the European labs and AGL.
Michael D Cowing
Respecting copyright and privacy concerns I note here that Dr. William Fong Yan
PhD FGA DGA disagrees with me and believes that "renowned European laboratories" and GAAJ grade as strictly as and in accordance with GIA grading, and that the belief that they grade more leniently is false and here-say.
Dear Dr. Fong Yan,
Thank you for your reply. I was prepared for more criticism of my
statements than your labeling of them as hear-say. I am glad to hear
your position on this issue.
I hope that by opening this subject, no one is offended, as I have a
keen interest in hearing the views and opinions of Britain, Europe,
Japan, India, China, Canada, Australia and Russia concerning this issue of
grading variability from lab to lab and country to country.
As I noted, what you in your extensive experience believe to be
"false, hear-say" views are shared by most all US appraisers and
diamond dealers with whom I have discussed this issue over more than
two decades. IMO a mountain of appraisal evidence over 25 years amounts to substantially more than hear-say.
Best regards,
Michael D Cowing
300x240.png)