AGS round ACA 1.24 H Si1 turns out to be an J Vs2

[diamondstud]

I took my internet purchase to an independent appraiser. He was very close on many things regarding the angles, but they weren''t exact. This diamond is ideal round ACA H SI1, but the indep says the diamond is a J Vs2 with a polish that is excellent and symmetry as very good. I was a bit surprised by this. I was concerned so I asked to compare against something I knew about and that was color. He put out the master diamonds that were 1ct. When we compared it to a K, the color of my diamond looked very close to it in my eyes,,,, im still young. It looked more "COLORFUL" than the 1ct H we were comparing it to.

So my question is: does the color become darker when the stone becomes bigger? Eg like when you pour a glass of water it is clear, but the lake the water is from is brown? Meaning, the smaller the H, the lighter it appears, but would be a K if it was a 2 ct?

Should I expect that the report isn''t exact, and is this typical of AGS report? That it isn''t ideal to GIA standards but to AGS it is?

scott

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Hi Scott. My first question would be whether the stone was loose or mounted when the appraiser examined it.

That''s a pretty big difference of opinion between an AGS "H" and an independent "J". If it was mounted, I would say "sure, it''s understandable, because mounted stones are more difficult to color grade".

But if it''s loose, I''m surprised at the difference of opinion. I wouldn''t expect more than a one grade difference in opinion on color from an AGS or GIA certed diamond.

There''s a fairly big price difference between an "H" and a "J" color. In the carat range, the difference is approximately 23%. The difference between an H/SI1 and a J/VS2 though would be approximately 19% (with the H/SI1 being worth more).

I hate to say it, but I''d get a third opinion. There''s too much money involved not to.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

One other thing. You said his master diamonds were "1 carat".

It''s very unusual to see a set of 1 carat diamond masters. The cost would be prohibitive. Most appraisers have 1/3rd to 1/2 carat diamond masters.

On the other hand, a lot of appraisers have 1 carat cubic zirconia masters. Ask your appraiser if his set is diamonds or cubic zirconias. If they''re cubic zirconias, that could be part of the problem. CZ masters are "okay", but not as precise as diamond masters for color grading.

 

[diamondstud]

This was an unmounted stone. The masters we compared them to were real and not cz. He only had 4 diamond stones an e h k and another we didn''t compare.

I believe he is putting color of i on the report, but to me it looked like a K when i compared it. What I am more concerned with is the appraiser telling me the symmetry being only "very good", not the IDEAL i was expecting to hear. He did quote me 9k. I paid 7500 for it once it was all over.

thanks for the response rich. now I dont know what to do. It is a WF diamond, so that is technically 3 appraisals. Sometimes I wish I was ignorant like I was 3 months ago

 

[Mara]

that''s really odd that an AGS certed stone as an H would show up as a J?

did you pay for three appraisals so far? if not i would get another paid independent appraisal from someone else and don''t tell them anything about what the other appraiser said, let them judge with their own eyes.

AGS is a highly reputed lab so i find this really interesting. keep us posted!

 

[diamondstud]

no, I have not paid for 3 appraisals. WF has verfied it was a 1.24 h Si1 and the geometry. They dont give price quotes., at least I didn''t get one.

scott

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would not keep it at that price unless there is reason to think the appraiser is mistaken.

 

[diamondstud]

here is the link.

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-6868701

scott

 

[Kaleigh]

Scott, That is odd. Will you seek another independent appraisal??

 

[diamondlil]

It does seem a bit odd for the independant to be that off. Another opinion may be in order, IMO.

 

[decodelighted]

Are you going to return the stone? I think I would. An H is not a J under any circumstances ... and you believed you were getting an ideal stone and found out otherwise. I would definately not want to pay the 20% more than it seems its worth by the new appraisal. NOTE: in my limited experience web-purchased stones often appraise for 2x the amount paid -- so your 9K appraisal for a 7500 stone ain''t great.

Have you contacted Whiteflash about this appraisal? They may agree to pay to have it sent to a third appraiser in order not to lose the sale.

Good luck

 

[diamondstud]

ok. I think i better clairify this. He first said it is on the H-I range, and is going to put it as an I. When i questioned more about it, he says at most a J, but will keep it as an I. So that is when i started to wonder, and asked to compare myself. He got the master''s back out first the E, that wasn''t it,, then the H. It still didn''t look correct so then it was to the K. It looked much closer to the K than the H to me. So the real question is, will the diamond color be impacted by the largeness of the stone????

Willl a B&M store do quick color appraisal for a small fee?

Here is an I. When you compare my stone to it, it is obviously more yellow. Maybe I''m not comparing apples to apples, or picture for picture but it''s clearly differen''t???

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-1920636.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-6868701

 

[diamondstud]

I have not contacted WF to dispute the appraisal. I thought that I would just "be happy" with what I heard, but now I am in more question than I started. I expected the appraiser to be impressed with the ACA, but that wasn''t the case. I was disappointed to hear symmetry of "Very good"

 

[Shay37]

Is this appraiser independent, or do they sell diamonds? Is it someone we know here? Everyone can make a mistake. So who made the mistake? The AGS or the appraiser you used? These are definitely questions you need answered. I would definitely get a third opinion or actually a fifth as it were. Count with me
1. AGS
2. Brian the cutter
3. Letter of verification
4. your appraiser

So it''s actually a fifth opinion.

shay

 

[diamondstud]

I hear great things about WF. So I agree, I question my appraiser. I do not feel giving the name is appropriate however - he is a PS appraiser found under "resources.".

What is this verification letter? I looked at the paperwork i got from WF, and it is as follows:

The AGS report, a duplicate of the AGS ( blue), the invoice, and the package the diamond is in ( with specifics on it that are somewhat close to what the AGS says but not # for # match - is this the verification letter?)

 

[JulieN]

Yes, a 1 ct K will seem darker than a quarter carat K.

 

[solange]

I think you should contact Brian at Whiteflash. Did he see the stone and discuss it with you before purchase?

The appraiser you used did not seem to be all that certain and I think it would be hard to tell on your own nor should you be expected to. It might be worth sending the stone back to Whiteflash for further inspection to see if they are willing to give you assurance, to your satisfaction, that the stone is the color you paid for. AGS is a highly regarded lab and the diamond was also inspected at Whiteflash and by their independent appraiser. I assume the all concurred on the color and symmetry of the stone. Perhaps the stone should be resubmitted to AGS if there really is such a discrepancy in the color which amounts to a significan price difference.

Have you checked into the credentials of the independent appraiser you used? I once bought an eternity band with .28 each stones. I knew nothing about appriasers and took it to three independent appraisers on 47th Street in the Diamond District. They all did visulal observations of the stones and gave me verbal appraisals. Each was different in color--one said F-G, one G-H and the third F, G and H.They also had differences in clarity.

Whiteflash is a very reliable company and I do not think they would knowingly sell you a stone that was misgraded and I am sure they will want you to be satisfied that the stone is as described. Good luck.

 

[portoar]

Date: 2/4/2006 8:44:59 PM
Author: diamondstud
I hear great things about WF. So I agree, I question my appraiser. I do not feel giving the name is appropriate however - he is a PS appraiser found under ''resources.''.

What is this verification letter? I looked at the paperwork i got from WF, and it is as follows:

The AGS report, a duplicate of the AGS ( blue), the invoice, and the package the diamond is in ( with specifics on it that are somewhat close to what the AGS says but not # for # match - is this the verification letter?)

Does the number on the AGS report match the number inscribed on the girdle of the diamond? Do the inclusions match up? Did your appraiser verify that the diamond and the AGS report match?

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 2/4/2006 9:04:26 PM
Author: portoar

Date: 2/4/2006 8:44:59 PM
Author: diamondstud
I hear great things about WF. So I agree, I question my appraiser. I do not feel giving the name is appropriate however - he is a PS appraiser found under ''resources.''.

What is this verification letter? I looked at the paperwork i got from WF, and it is as follows:

The AGS report, a duplicate of the AGS ( blue), the invoice, and the package the diamond is in ( with specifics on it that are somewhat close to what the AGS says but not # for # match - is this the verification letter?)

Does the number on the AGS report match the number inscribed on the girdle of the diamond? Do the inclusions match up? Did your appraiser verify that the diamond and the AGS report match?

Good question.

 

[diamondstud]

The appraiser knew it was from WF since I had it sent directly to him. Then the first thing he did was check out the girdle after weigh-in. A cut above written on it. Right there he was biased, so if anything the appraisal should be higher IMO. I asked how many WF diamonds he has seen and his reply was "5 " a week. i am not a judge of reputablility, but he seemed diamond conscious to me. I had my hour with him, and $125 after I have been up in the air thereafter about keeping it. Now I wonder what this verfication letter looks like ???

thanks for everybody''s input, it makes me feel better about my next step. I still have till the 10th.



scott

 

[Shay37]

Date: 2/4/2006 9:07:27 PM
Author: kaleigh

Date: 2/4/2006 9:04:26 PM
Author: portoar

Date: 2/4/2006 8:44:59 PM
Author: diamondstud
I hear great things about WF. So I agree, I question my appraiser. I do not feel giving the name is appropriate however - he is a PS appraiser found under ''resources.''.

What is this verification letter? I looked at the paperwork i got from WF, and it is as follows:

The AGS report, a duplicate of the AGS ( blue), the invoice, and the package the diamond is in ( with specifics on it that are somewhat close to what the AGS says but not # for # match - is this the verification letter?)

Does the number on the AGS report match the number inscribed on the girdle of the diamond? Do the inclusions match up? Did your appraiser verify that the diamond and the AGS report match?

Good question.

Yup, I thought about this after. I was coming to type it in and see that you guys already thought of that. I will merely add my voice to this thought. It is possible that you didn''t receive the right stone. I would definitely check to see if the AGS report number is the one the appraiser saw on the girdle.

shay

 

[diamondstud]

Yes, the AGS and the incription match. The inclusion map was dead on. The diameter he had was .06 less than what was on the report. He also had one of the numbers at 33, rather than the 34 the AGS says it is. His response about the symmetry was that AGS isn't as good of a report as the GIA. And that my stone as an AGS 0 would be a GIA of 1?

scott

 

[Shay37]

Date: 2/4/2006 9:15:20 PM
Author: diamondstud
Yes, the AGS and the incription match. His response about the symmetry was that AGS isn't as good of a report as the GIA. And that my stone as an AGS 0 would be a GIA of 1?

scott

Reeeeaaaaalllllly?

Interesting.

shay

 

[Shay37]

I''m going to say that I would find it disturbing if an appraiser said that to me about the AGS versus the GIA. It smacks of an inherent bias that I would not tolerate in an appraiser. It would make me wonder if I could trust his appraisal as being about my stone or his own axe to grind. Just my .02.

shay

 

[diamondstud]

When I look at other diamonds side by side via WF, i can see the arrows are slightly more blunted on mine than other ACA HA''s. check it out. Should I have relied more on a picture?

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/Matching_Compare.aspx?oldID=2318217&newID=2313852

scott

 

[Shay37]

Keep in mind that there are two different styles of ACA diamonds. One is the new line of which yours is an example. They have fatter arrows and the IS shows no leakage. That could be the difference that you are noting. The Classic line IS has leakage around the edges (deliberate) for contrast. I think that the arrows are a teensy bit (technical term) thinner. HTH

shay

P.S. I think that the only way to resolve this is with another appraisal.

 

[Kaleigh]

I agree Shay. But Scott, first call WF on Monday and talk to them. They will let you know how to proceed. I suspect John Q will see this thread before then and chime in. Good luck. I will be curious to know the outcome. Still seems odd to me as it''s a big jump from an H to a J. And the symmetry issue as well.

 

[diamondstud]

thanks for the responses everybody,, she''s worth all this effort, and that is what is so great.

scott

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 2/4/2006 8:27:44 PM
Author: diamondstud
ok. I think i better clairify this. He first said it is on the H-I range, and is going to put it as an I. When i questioned more about it, he says at most a J, but will keep it as an I. So that is when i started to wonder, and asked to compare myself. He got the master's back out first the E, that wasn't it,, then the H. It still didn't look correct so then it was to the K. It looked much closer to the K than the H to me.

Okay, so this is starting to make a little more sense.

In other words, the appraiser appraised it as an "I" color, not a "J". You're the one thinking it is a "J" because of your own comparison.

So the appraiser graded a stone as "I/VS2" that AGS graded as "H/SI1". That's not as big a difference as your topic heading infers. I think it is a little alarmist, considering. Something like "Independent Appraiser grades AGS H/SI1 ACA as I/VS2" would be more appropriate than "AGS round ACA H/SI1 turns out to be a J/VS2".

The appraiser's grading is within industry tolerance (within 1 grade). Even the grading of the three top major US labs disagreed within that tolerance level several times on Pricescope's survey.

I don't really see a problem here. Sounds like the stone has been properly represented by Whiteflash and AGS, with a fairly close confirmation by an independent. Only your own analysis has caused you doubt, and you do not have the training or experience of the other three parties.

How do you like the stone?

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 2/4/2006 8:27:44 PM
Author: diamondstud
oSo the real question is, will the diamond color be impacted by the largeness of the stone????

Do you mean the size difference between the 1ct "tester" stones and your 1.24 ct stone?? Then - uh - IMO no ... that''s not a huge size difference. Keep in mind color grades should stay true for 5ct, 6ct stones ...

But I''m no expert ... I''ll defer to them.