Appraisers especially...help to create the Pricescope Checklist

[Regular Guy]

The idea for this was raised here, and your support for putting together a bulleted document that Pricescope readers can refer their prospective appraisers to is greatly appreciated.

Suggestions: items might be categorized with respect to your belief that the activity performed would be a) basic/fundamental to the services provided, and b) especially helpful.

Another suggestion...if credentials are fundamental to you, this can be included. I will note that some of the most credentialed appraisers in my locale seem to have no discernible criteria I have been able to establish with respect to evaluating cut, and so an emphasis could be placed on behaviors, and equipment, to the extent this can be helpfully delineated.

Finally, although a final checklist that a diamond shopper (let''''s use that as a criteria for this checklist) can use to passively or actively be brought to an appraiser''''s awareness in advance of an engagement is the end goal, until it is established, I''''d imagine some points will be quarrelable, and it is hoped this thread can be used to reach some common points of agreement. For example, in the referred to post, discussion pointed to both consideration for the use of a "proportion analyzer," and also, for expressing to the buyer degrees of measurement error. Consideration in this discussion could be given to acceptable technologies for the purpose at hand, and the implications of same (i.e., does a communication about how confident the buyer needs to be about achieving top performance, if that is sought, need to happen, and to what extent can this discussion be minimized by the use of one technology vs another).

Thanks in advance. I''''d start the list, but I may be better off asking the question.

 

[RockDoc]

Hi Ira

Sure the idea is good - but it appears that consumers pick appraiser primarilly based on location that is close them rather than by doing the due diligence of what they do or what credentials and equipment they have or will use in analyzing their purchases.


I think a lot of this is covered in the appraisal resources which Leonid has done a rather complete job of doing.

The following might be considered as self promotion, but I can''t help but think that consumers on the forum at least contact the appraisers who freely post on the forum rather than others.

I realize it is a pain in the posterior to ship things around the country like Johnny Appleseed, but finding a local appraiser unless you are foruntate enough to reside close to one of the real experts, certainly appears to be a preference even it is not the best choice for people.

Certainly the post thread that you''ve linked here is completely representative of having chosen the appropriate professional to do the job.

In that there is already a lot of stuff on resources and in posts, maybe a chart showing equipment services and credentials posted by the name of the appraiser would be a little more efficient for people to get the info you''re referring too.

I would certainly assist in helping to prepare such a chart if you like.

Rockdoc

 

[Regular Guy]

I suppose the checklist I envision would conform to the 80/20 rule. Sure, Rock, if you (or anyone besides me) thinks it could serve anything other than a fanciful purpose, I think that such a checklist, once created, could serve a few purposes:

- a diamond shopper could really either ask their prospective appraiser to review it and respond affirmatively to its items, letting the shopper consider, on that basis, whether or not to use that appraiser or not
- it could serve to provide education to both the shopper and appraiser being queried, about what sorts of things both will be mindful of as they go forward in this assessment process
- it will try to address the implicit trade-offs the shopper will make, when choosing to go with a more convenient appraiser down the street, over one some many miles away.

The 80/20 rule applies, because, although 80% of it will be routine due diligence stuff, the other 20% will be the interesting stuff that reasonable discussion could actually center around (and yet all the items should be on the checklist, if and when it would be presented to the appraiser).

So, for example, whereas an attentive enough appraiser recently posted on the boards that a shopper should pay careful attention to the cut...that he lists both an Idealscope and ASET as primary tools for evaluating cut may be either good news or bad news to an intended shopper, and the creation of a checklist, while not necessarily answering the question itself, will provide an opportunity for discussion of the implications of a shopper going to an appraiser thusly equipped. Particularly, on the matter of doing "due diligence" with respect to evaluating cut, there may be some minimum standards that it is believed the appraisers here would -- at least among themselves -- agree to, that they would direct the shopper to, and implicitly, will then direct the shopper away from, if those standards are not met.

How crazy is an idea like that?

 

[RockDoc]

Hi Ira

This probably a very worthwhile undertaking.

I only have one reservation. My concern is based on a real life happening with a particular appraiser who in the resources section inferred he had many more affiliations and educational credientials than what he truthfully had.

I think in order for this to be totally reliable information that consumers rely on, that someone review photographs of the equipment and verify any industry affilliations past and present, as well as completed courses for appraising.

If we have a checklist based on name with as many apprasiers that are listed in the resources section, then this would be a mountainous job. Further it should be done by someone who isn''t an appraiser. Maybe some volunteers such as yourself and Storm ( or others ) would participate in. Or maybe Leonid might offer to do this.

This should be someone independent of the appraisers or sellers so that complete unbiased verification is accomplished.

What d''ya think?

Rockdoc

 

[denverappraiser]

Ok. Here’s some questions to ask an appraiser:

General diamond questions:
#1. Is this a diamond?
#2. What is it’s color, clarity, weight and major dimensions?
#3. Is it the same diamond as the one described on this report?
#4. Is it in the same condition as what is described in the lab report?
#5. If there was disagreement between the answers to question #2 above and the contents of the lab report, please explain in detail.
#6. Is there any of the other information on this lab report that you disagree with, including but not limited to symmetry, polish, girdle and fluorescence?
#7. The guy I bought it from provided me with this handful of additional reports. What do they mean? Do you agree/disagree with any of the information presented?
#8. Was anything important about this stone omitted from this packet of information that we’ve just discussed? In particular, are there any concerns involving durability, fluorescence, treatments, or branding that I should be aware of or that will affect the value?
Specific cut grading questions:
#9. What are the crown angles, pavilion angles, table size, star and lower girdle measurements and anything else you can tell me about the dimensions? How did you get this information? Please explain the limitations of your equipment and techniques.
#10. Please interpret the data supplied in answer to question #9.
#11. Please provide me with: Idealscope/lightscope/firescope image, Brilliancescope report, GemAdvisor model, ASET picture etc. and explain how to interpret whatever is provided. Use both sides of the page if necessary.
#12. Is this a hearts and arrows / ideal cut / specialty cut / etc., as represented by the seller? Please explain why or why not.
#13. Please provide a cut grade(s) for this diamond and explain the scales you are using so that I can reasonably know how my stone ranks in comparison to others.
Pricing questions:
#14. What would you expect this stone to cost in the XXX marketplace (a local full-service jeweler - an online diamond broker - A local ‘wholesaler’ - A big-box store -a pawn shop - Ebay, etc.)?
#15. I am getting this stone from XXX. If I chose to shop at a different marketplace, what should I expect to gain/lose by making this change?
#16. Should I expect a stone like this be available from these alternative sources?
#17. What would be reasonable funding to allow my insurance company to replace it with another of like kind and quality in the case of a loss?
#18. I’m paying XYZ for this stone along with the following attributes that I consider valuable. My criteria is ABC and my concerns are 123. If I continue to shop, am I reasonably likely to come closer to my requirements for a lower price?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[jasper]

Written Appraisal Questions:

#19. Can you prepare a 100-character or less description for my insurance company that includes:

a) diamond shape, carat weight, color, and clarity
b) girdle inscription and certificate number
c) kind of mounting, with metal(s) in it
d) mention if the diamond is ideal cut or a valuable brand

For example:
LDS RG 14 KT YG/PLAT MTG WITH 0.50 CT RB IDEAL C DIA, H, SI2 GIRDLE INSCRIBED ILUVU G12345678

#20. Does the written appraisal include enough information to replace this jewelry with like kind and quality, including the tangible features (such as cut) that make this jewelry special?

#21. Does the written appraisal include a photograph?

-- Jasper
http://www.folds.net/diamond

 

[Regular Guy]

I'd like to share a few brief comments, including thanks for all who have participated thus far. I'll add, too, that provided we agree that the list initiated by Denver Appraiser is robust and a great start, unless we're finished, I hope this may continue, and can already see value in a document like this. I see this because, provisionally, we can present such a document to our prospective appraiser and ask the simple question...will you be able to do these (21) things for me, and proceed based on their comment. I think this sort of approach could be helpful. Probably, before it gets out the door, it will require tweaking, but I think this is probably a great start.

To Rock:

I had in mind here the creation of a document that could go to any appraiser we would seek out, rather than to pre-do a matching, which, as you note, is more what's intended by the data now presented under Resources at the top right. But, you've raised the specific and general concern about fraud. My first thought, by way of procedure, would be to suggest readers with a prospective appraiser in mind may need to call you to clarify what or who you mean. But really, since you've raised it, and since this data is on this publicly presented board...probably you and Leonid should work this out.

To Neil

So, I think this is good, and when reading the section on cut, I started to laugh with respect to the robust nature of your review. As a formatting item, and item #11 (and perhaps others like it) thought could be given to how the question on the checklist is actually presented, so that the appraiser could do more than say yes, I do that, and so, provide a format whereby the list is iterated out in a way that one or more of the items can be selected to indicate that that particular tool would be used in the appraisal session. Regarding your final question #18...I do really like the spin it gives. Do you routinely include that sort of query in your sessions with your clients now? I like it. Finally, your general diamond questions in part I are written to presume the diamond comes with a grading document. Not sure if any changes to existing language should be made to recognize some will not have even this when presented.

To Jasper

With my insurance, they do present such a 100 character (or so) description, and yet, I asked if they would maintain and abide by the longer report produced by my appraiser, and they said they would. Still, I think the addition of an appraiser created one would benefit. By 20, I think that you are asking the appraiser to analyze if the component parts that would have been presented add sufficiently up to the the whole thing, that the story is told to assist in getting a proper replacement. If I understand this correctly, it seems like it may be a useful addition. 21 seems like a useful addition as well, and speaking of it, I wonder how necessary it would be to provide qualifiers to the inclusion of a picture, i.e., would it be a simple picture, or one designed to capture some of it's optical qualities.

Many thanks already. Although I think it can be improved, just like anything, also, given some formatting tweaks, such a document may be close to ready to go out the door. Any further input is appreciated. For example, for appraisers on this board, if presented with such a checklist, what reactions would you have?

PS Edited to add...Neil, I think regarding both parts I & II...should they be divided a & b, with a new section written for the expectations both appraiser and shopper should share about the limits of retrievable knowledge if brought in already set vs brought in loose?

 

[oldminer]

It is no problem to serve people as they wish to be served. The purpose of filling such a list out and posting it somewhere has been done already, but might be further enhanced. I don''t think each consumer should submit the same queries over and over, but ought to be able to find the needed responses on a particular webpage. That would be a big help for consumers.

 

[denverappraiser]

Ira,

Yes, many of these questions assume that there is a lab report. PS generated pre-purchase appraisals almost always have a lab report. Even when they don’t have a report, they will have received some sort of representation about quality from the seller that the client is interested in reconciling although sometimes the clients count this as a secret and they don’t want to discuss it.

RE: #11. The intention here is that not all appraisers are offering the same sorts of information and not all are interpreting it the same way. The lightscope image is an example. This is a proprietary tool used by Rhino. Interpreting his images will not be the same as interpreting firescope images taken by Rockdoc. Both are valuable. No appraiser can supply everything and most customers would be unwilling to pay the fees even if they were. Whatever data the appraiser provides should be accompanied with an explanation of what is to be learned from that data.

These questions are intended as ones to ask during the appraisal session, not in the process of shopping for an appraiser. That may be a handy list as well. Clients interested in specific tools or services will have worked this out prior to the appointment. If a potential client asks me if I can provide a lightscope image, I will offer an IdealScope image and suggest that it’s an acceptable substitute but, in the end, if they want a lightscope pic, they must either talk to Jonathan or I have to send it out for that service.

RE: #18. Yes, I routinely discuss this. For many pre-purchase and new purchase type appraisals, this is the key question that caused them to hire me in the first place.

Jasper,

RE: #19. I agree that insurance companies are interested in this sort of thing for the benefit of their data entry people but I don’t think it’s usually in our clients best interest to encourage them to do it. Here’s a sample 100 word description that I’ve provided that they can insert into their templates.

“Ladies ring as described on American Gem Registry appraisal #12345: see attached report for details.”

Rockdoc,

The major credentialing organizations all have online methods for checking the credentials of their members. ISA, ASA, AGS, and NAJA all make it easy to see if an individual is entitled to use a particular credential. Unfortunately, GIA doesn’t make it easy but they’ll confirm or deny the validity of a GG if you write to them them. As you point out, well credentialed doesn’t mean highly skilled, but it’s a nice place to start. If a potential client can identify that the appraiser they are considering is lying about their credentials then they’ve got a useful clue about their credibility.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 12/11/2005 8:06:22 AM
Author: Regular Guy

PS Edited to add...Neil, I think regarding both parts I & II...should they be divided a & b, with a new section written for the expectations both appraiser and shopper should share about the limits of retrievable knowledge if brought in already set vs brought in loose?

Ira,

This sort of question is the reasons I was hesitant to get involved making this list. Different customers have wildly different expectations and requirements. A flowchart directing the appraisal process and the potential questions to ask might be an interesting exercise but it would be frustrating for everyone whose requirements are even slightly outside of the ordinary. This list is a suggestion only and it applies only to clients who are making a pre-purchase decision on an unmounted diamond where information about the cutting is a major consideration. This is NOT a typical appraisal assignment although it’s a type that is often discussed on the forum. Fewer than 10% of my clients fit this description and I suspect this is true of the other appraisers here as well.

We’re heading for a problem here. I think what you’re pressing for is a process for efficiently extracting as much information as possible from the appraiser. This is a fine goal since information is what we’re supplying and for certain clients this is desirable but it’s not a good approach for everyone. It’s not even a good plan for most. For starters, most appraisers charge by the hour to go through this sort of thing and asking every possible question in the form of a checklist drives up the price of the appraisal. Also, lists of this nature also tend to lead the client rather than to follow by directing their attention towards what they ‘should’ think is important. Information overload can be a serious problem for a lot of people and can make the shopping experience even more frustrating than it already is.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Modified Brilliant]

Information overload can be a serious problem for a lot of people and can make the shopping experience even more frustrating than it already is.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with Neil. I work for YOU the consumer. I will ask my client several times during the appointment if he or she has any questions. At that time, any concerns, questions or problems will be addressed. A "laundry list" form of appointment is not a "one size fits all" scenario. You have questions...I have answers. It''s not my intention to overburden you with even more information if that is not what you require. A consumer should never leave an appraiser''s office without having all of their questions answered fully. If you are satisfied with everything that you''ve asked for...then the appointment was beneficial and money was well spent. Why make this whole process so complicated? If you don''t care for your doctor''s bedside manner then find another doctor. "Appraise your appraiser" as Roc Doc says. Find one that suits YOUR personal needs.

www.metrojewelryappraisers.com

 

[Regular Guy]

OK, let''s stop a second before going forward. Anyone can go backward if that is their preference. Although I have been accused of being thick in my presentation of text....I made 2 posts before list creation began. The second post started (and concluded) this way:

Date: 12/10/2005 6:19:26 PM
Author: Regular Guy
I suppose the checklist I envision would conform to the 80/20 rule. Sure, Rock, if you (or anyone besides me) thinks it could serve anything other than a fanciful purpose, I think that such a checklist, once created, could serve a few purposes:

- a diamond shopper could really either ask their prospective appraiser to review it and respond affirmatively to its items, letting the shopper consider, on that basis, whether or not to use that appraiser or not
- it could serve to provide education to both the shopper and appraiser being queried, about what sorts of things both will be mindful of as they go forward in this assessment process
- it will try to address the implicit trade-offs the shopper will make, when choosing to go with a more convenient appraiser down the street, over one some many miles away.

and

Particularly, on the matter of doing ''due diligence'' with respect to evaluating cut, there may be some minimum standards that it is believed the appraisers here would -- at least among themselves -- agree to, that they would direct the shopper to, and implicitly, will then direct the shopper away from, if those standards are not met.

How crazy is an idea like that?

So, Neil, although your intention in the creation of the list, as you''re now saying, is for the purpose of using during the session, clearly, my intention for the creation of the list is to identify who you will work with at the outset. For those among you who have any sensitivity for my last question, if you think it is an important part of the appraiser''s job to evaluate cut, consistent with the intent of the shopper coming to you, than 2 things should reasonably follow from that:

- you have a set of standards that you think you could advise a shopper (no less your cousin) to look for at a minimum to judge about this, in choosing an appraiser
- further, if you think that minimum is not met locally for the shopper, you probably should feel no reluctance to suggest they should or at least could, with the advice of this checklist in use, go elsewhere to find what they should want, because they are likely not otherwise going to get it.

Dave, you could either direct shoppers to the list on the Resources page, if that list does equally as well, or, if the proposed checklist is handed to you, the hope is that you will have been involved enough, right here in this discussion, to proof it as well, and feel confident you could hardly do more than check "yes" when asked if you comply as well.

I think that the creation of a checklist...call it a paper tiger, if you will, or a document in formation where appraisers can agree to certain minimum standards, can only assist in providing the kind of service you and we consumers should agree together will benefit both. Those consumers who aren''t interested won''t bother, and those appraisers who don''t comply, but not for disagreeing with the idea that these behaviors should be considered basic (because then, I hope you will speak up now) will not be bothered by the customer at the end of the day.

Also, Jeff, regarding your comments:

"If you are satisfied with everything that you''ve asked for...then the appointment was beneficial and money was well spent. Why make this whole process so complicated? If you don''t care for your doctor''s bedside manner then find another doctor. "Appraise your appraiser" as Roc Doc says. Find one that suits YOUR personal needs."

The idea here is to help educate the shopper, too. The system, by way of this checklist, is designed to help establish a "common" understanding of what is basic to the job, and indeed, if concern about cut is realistic, then relatedly, what is needed, basically, to accomplish that. It is possible there will be differences on this, that could be reviewed. If the intent is to "appraise your appraiser," isn''t that exactly what the intent of this checklist is intended to help the shopper do? Unlike a doctor, you hope to not switch through your lifetime, but, presuming this is your one big purchase, you may indeed do this only once. How to appraise your appraiser, indeed?

Finally, Neil, if as you say:

"Fewer than 10% of my clients fit this description and I suspect this is true of the other appraisers here as well," unfortunately, this then only makes the argument for perhaps 2 sets of checklists reasonable. Would a second checklist, based on the situation wherein the shopper comes in with the stone mounted, solve the problem of the flowchart structure. Not sure if anyone wants to work on this any further, let alone withdraw what has been done. Fact is, based on providing the information to the diamond shopper early in the process about the impact of having the diamond mounted or not...having this information in advance has the opportunity of informing the shopper substantially in advance of the purchase of how to proceed, which may indeed causing them to not have it set, where they otherwise would, so separate checklists, to my mind, would not be the ideal.

P.S. Questions based on current practice expressed already (in these two related threads) that may be substantive...

- forgetting measurement error for the time being...should measurement of crown & pavilion angles, particularly in a round, be considered "basic" at all? Why or why not.

 

[jasper]

I think this list is really a combination of three lists.

List 1: Did I get a good deal on this diamond?
#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #8, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, and maybe #7.

List 2: Can you explain, in detail, how well cut this diamond is?
#1, #2, #3, #5, #6, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #16

List 3: What do I need for my insurance appraisal?
#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #12, #17, #19, #20, and maybe #7, #8, #13, #21

About question #19: Yes, my insurance goes by the full packet of information in their files (including the appraisal), not just the 100 character summary. And yes, Neil's 100-character description is adequate because it references the full appraisal. The real value of the brief description is that it is a meaningful summary when the full appraisal is not available. For example, it is printed on the annual policy renewal statement. If the customer calls up the insurance company with a question, the summary is available immediately to the agent on the phone, without needing to pull any records. Also, if the customer drops/changes their insurance and the appraisal does not make it to a new insurance company, the 100-character summary will probably be available on various renewal statements.

About question #21: The photograph is really meant as a companion to the 100-character description, not as part of the cut analysis. The photograph shows the style and color of the mounting.

a) is it a ring, an earring, a necklace, a pendant, et cetera?
b) how many prongs are used to hold each major stone? (4, 6, bezel, half-bezel, tension-set, et cetera)
c) what color metals are in it?
d) does it have a fancy basket? (Tiffany-style solitaire, cathedral setting, Cassandra heart ring, et cetera)
e) does it have sizing beads at the time of appraisal?
f) how many major stones does it have?
g) are the stone(s) melee, small, medium, or large?
h) what shape are the stones?
i) are the stones (more-or-less) white, yellow, brown, green, blue, purple, red?

The photograph lets the customer say, "My jewelry looked sort of like this", if it is ever lost or stolen. It does not give enough information to precisely reconstruct it, unless the bench jeweler is working with the same basket of parts and techniques that were used to make it in the first place. A 3/4 view showing the top and front of the jewelry is usually enough. A top view and front view, with optional side view, would also be enough.

-- Jasper
http://www.folds.net/diamond

 

[denverappraiser]

Ira,

You''re right. I answered the wrong question. Pretty good answer though so do I get partial credit?

It sounds like what you want is to rewrite the questions associated with the appraiser registration system. Is there more that you would like to see listed in these records?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[blitz]

The clients that come to my office, that have just purchased a diamond (85% from on-line), usually only want a 1/2 hour consultation ($75.00) to make sure the diamond matches the grading report. 1/2 the time they want to know if what they paid was fair. But most have done alot of research (pricescope readers), and are very familiar with quality vs price. 30% of the time, the vendor has provided an "appraisal" with their purchase and they want to know why this "appraisal" is so much higher then what they paid. Seldom do I get the light analysis, sarin, ogi machine question. And if I do, it is always during the initial inquiry. Then I refer them out.

I read the threads, and appreciate the input. I''m using it to review myself!

 

[NanStacy]

Hi Jennifer, Neal, David, Bill and other unidentified friends,.

I think this has been a great exercise in thinking about our practices, and what we offer our clients. I expect that we each formulate our practices to our own idea of how best to serve our clients.

I have been an independent appraiser for 15 years (owned a jewelry store for 10 years before that) and have always provided cut evaluation to my clients, obviously not at the same level in the past as now. Thanks to the Internet in general, and to Pricescope in particular, my clients are now tremendously more knowledgeable than they were 5 year ago. Most know more about diamond cut than the local jewelers they visit, which is a tough reality for the jewelers.

Yet, I decided it would not be cost-effective for me to purchase a Sarin or Ogi or some of the other expensive toys we all love so much. My position is that the vendors should supply such reports if they want to capture the super-ideal cut buyers. I am happy to explain the various reports to them, verify that the the diamond they have is the diamond represented by the paperwork, and examine the diamond with the optical tools I have at hand. I use an H&A analyzer, an Ideal Scope (yes, Gary, I bought 2 of them shortly after they appeared on Pricescope, and David Atlas gave us another one at the AGA seminar this year) and the new ASET. (Gary--at least it''s not a shot glass--more of a psychodelic space capsule!) A couple of other surprising optical tools are the viewfinder of the camera, and the Gemprint machine. I have been Gemprinting diamonds for 23 years, and was blown away the first time I saw a Hearts & Arrows on the Gemprint screen!

I agree that we are talking about a couple of different functions here--one, verification of the diamond in regard to representations and reports provided by the seller and two, insurance coverage appraisals. I do this in two steps--verification on the first visit, and if the diamond checks out OK, the insurance appraisal on the second visit. Since hardly any companies will insure an unmounted stone, there is not much point in charging the client for a lengthy appraisal before the gem is set. I enter all the information into the computer (which I have to do anyway under USPAP) and finish up on the second visit.

Most clients are pretty clear about what they expect during our initial phone conference. I think it is good if they think a little about what they expect of the appraiser, and discuss whether the appraiser can fulfill their expectations. Some are paranoid that a vendor has tampered with a Sarin scan, while in reality our diamond gauges have a few hundreths of a mm margin of error.

Someone raised the question of the validity of credentials listed by some appraisers. This is a real problem. We have one person on the ASA G&J Committee policing people falsely representing ASA and Master Gemologist Appraiser credentials. Clients should always check with the credentialing organization to see if the credential is real, and current.

Well, I''m starting to ramble, so I''ll sign off. I just wanted to contribute what I could to the discussion. Happy Holidays to everyone!

Nancy

 

[RockDoc]

Hi Nancy!!!!!!!


Good to see ya here. Still Flying?????

RE; Gemprint image on super proportioned stones: YEP - the patterns are really different. Even the guys at Gemprint when they see the images I send in for registrations are amazed at how "organized the pattern is.


As for the ASET - I like the desktop far better than the hand held one. Look down a few posts I''ve been posting some of the images I am able to get from it.

Regards to you.

Rockdoc

 

[RockDoc]

Here''s another question to add.


Do you check the diamond ( or other gemstone) and/or gold for radioactivity?

Do you have a geiger counter?

Rockdoc

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 12/11/2005 7:12:49 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Ira,

You're right. I answered the wrong question. Pretty good answer though so do I get partial credit?

It sounds like what you want is to rewrite the questions associated with the appraiser registration system. Is there more that you would like to see listed in these records?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ISA NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

More than partial credit, Neil.

I will quarrel with your statement, but not your conclusions (nor those of RockDoc and Dave). The intention was not to rewrite the questions in the appraiser registration system, but at least to create another format...perhaps something more active that requires the user and appraiser to engage in a meeting of the mind about expectations before their session itself. Whether or not this is needed really is a fair point, as the description of equipment and practices at the upper right does provide substantial reference points for the Pricescope shopper to conduct this sort of inquiry themselves, even absent a specially created checklist for the purpose. Also, that section at top right is updatable, I think I've already seen appraisers modify their content there, and surely Leonid is keeping it current, and for anyone interested in designers & brands for their rings, they can go right there this week to learn about those options as well.

This project needn't necessarily be dead in the water. Or, perhaps the questions raised here can carry it forward sufficiently. Personally, I think that there are circumstances for purchase that will more clearly dictate the direction a shopper should likely take for their appraiser shopping (and I've shared as much elsewhere, but it may bear repeating). If a new AGS document attaches to the diamond, local expertise is probably sufficient. Alternately, if today's GIA document alone attaches to a round diamond, sending the diamond off to an appraiser that can make a "reliable" measurement of proportions, in advance of even seeing it yourself, as a function of due diligence for shopping, may be a reasonable protocol. Of some importance..as GIA comes forward with documents including rounded proportion measurement, the local vs global issue makes the issue somewhat less clear. Although no new strategies were put forward in the discussion, this general idea (by implication) was raised previously, initiated by Dave, here (and spun by my idea of "slice").

For those of you appraisers who do offer services that stand apart from your peers with respect to helping the shopper differentiate one diamond from another....I think Pricescope can present an environment to make that point. Although some appraisers have already tried to do this by way of the specific services they themselves offer, there may be a value in attempting to review this idea on principle alone, helping Pricescope readers follow out the implications about what they read here already, i.e., if HCA makes sense to you, and even guided you in your purchase, then what resources do you need really to apply that to your own diamond purchase, and how important is it to confirm your diamond's place on that chart, (since an appraiser readily does that already for color & clarity now)...questions like that can come into play, for those so inclined.

 

[oldminer]

Pricescope has allowed appraisers who are available to Internet consumers to make themselves rather well known entities by particpation here. Those of us lucky enough to have the time to interact with other Pricescopers definitely benefit from the communication. It really is a rather small number of diamond appraisers or more general jewelry appraisers, that have the communication skills, the extra equipment and the knowledge of what savvy consumers need and want. I don''t think there are more than a small handful of us available to the public and most of us are participating here frequently.

Probably we''d all be willing to fill in the blanks of a questionairre that noted our strong points and service features. None of this measures experience, aptitude for the job, or the ability to interpret the results in the same way. I often compose long replies to queries made about our services because I have been unable to formulate a "one answer suits all" sort of response that isn''t way too long, overly complex, full of disclaimers and not really responsive in a direct way. The best way for me to handle questions is with personal, direct responses. I''m glad to participate in a more general method if it would help reduce the time spent on individual responses so long as it gets the job done without making people believe that the task is just so difficult that they cannot do it properly.

The purpose of an expert is to assist someone with less knowledge to make a difficult job into an easy one. When the fee for this is fair, everyone benefits.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 12/11/2005 9:44:42 AM
Author: denverappraiser




We’re heading for a problem here. I think what you’re pressing for is a process for efficiently extracting as much information as possible from the appraiser. This is a fine goal since information is what we’re supplying and for certain clients this is desirable but it’s not a good approach for everyone.

This is a recurrent feeling I get, too, whenever I see these "let's standardize things THIS way" proposals. I'm all in favor of progress and SIMPLIFYING things for shoppers........but I think it's a fruitless exercise to build a multi-stage contraption to replace a little common sense.

There is no "one-size-fits-all" solution. I applaud your strong desire to build an infrastructure, Ira, but honestly......it's possible to go way too far with a good thing, yanno?

A key element of working with an appraiser is relationship....just like with a vendor. There is no way to "streamline" personal fit and preferences. I may not like an appraiser if he makes a disparaging remark against yellow gold. He may not appeal to me because he is abrasive. He (or she, in all instances) may not appeal to me because his hair is blond, and a former blond suitor with whom things didn't work out has left me with residual dislike of blond men (not the case for me personally, but by way of example).

I'm left scratching my head as to why such a thing needs to be pigeonholed or "uber-structured"?????

 

[Richard Sherwood]

22. From your experience and in your professional opinion, how much additional sex do you think this diamond will get me?

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 12/12/2005 10:05:02 PM
Author: aljdewey

This is a recurrent feeling I get, too, whenever I see these 'let's standardize things THIS way' proposals. I'm all in favor of progress and SIMPLIFYING things for shoppers........but I think it's a fruitless exercise to build a multi-stage contraption to replace a little common sense.

There is no 'one-size-fits-all' solution. I applaud your strong desire to build an infrastructure, Ira, but honestly......it's possible to go way too far with a good thing, yanno?

Al, when I see you commenting on my threads, I get the feeling you're going to play Reagan to me, and say: "Now there he goes again." And by gum...there you go. And....you've pegged me pretty good. I'm trying to establish something in the middle, so consumers can decide whether to go "right or left" in their decision making to shop for an appraiser...i.e., stay local, or go global. In my "suggestion for a middle way," with a checklist, if the local guy doesn't cut it, you go global. But, there's been a lack of interest in this idea. Still, the smartest ideas seem to come up out of the cracks (Richard: "...how much additional sex do you think this diamond will get me?)...and so, lets cut to the chase shall we?

Actually, since Leonid and Irina have given this thread a little spotlight, I've tried to see what useful ideas can come here. In doing a review, I see that an enormous amount of good stuff has really preceded this post, already. For example, I know Leonid has been working on providing excellent appraiser resources for a long while, started earlier, and then later with the post on "tango, in implementing this idea.

Let me characterize two perhaps extreme potential or real scenarios that may help illuminate something here:

The longer an appraiser spends with a diamond, the more trouble it can cause for a shopper. It could happen. It's been reported by some they'll spend 10 hours with a stone. That kind of time invested, and you create a real relationship with the beast. Despite the fact that you might see great stuff and bad stuff, and can tell the difference between the two...spend long enough with one of these guys, and you'll find you can make friends with virtually any of them. So what if it scores 5.2 on the HCA...it could be re cut to become a winner. Taking one case in isolation has no real meaning, of course, and the facts as presented are never probably a good match with real life, but in general, I think the culture of appraisers is that, frequently, they see diamonds in isolation, and do have difficulty addressing that question #18 Neil composed above.

Now, take an ideal case for an appraisal, and a jeweler's worst nightmare. Presume that Rhino will take on the job of appraising your diamond. He'll say...OK, that's pretty nice, except, of course, for this one, and this one, and by the way, did you see this one? Perhaps the only saving grace in a situation like this is one I proposed in the thread on "appraiser list development," where a special agreement be set up, that Pricescope could have a hand in crafting, that will direct the diamond shopper to a high end jeweler, who will appraise, but where the agreement you first hand them will say that in accepting the job of appraising the stone, you will not be able to sell a diamond to that consumer within, say, 90 days.

I think that Leonid and Irina were supportive of this thread initially because of what they have seen recently, if not forever...the experience of a significant minority of shoppers who go to an appraiser, expecting perhaps too much, and feeling like they get back too little. Such a result is perhaps inevitable, when Pricescope does stridently encourage the use of an independent appraiser with the purchase of a diamond. And so, how reasonable is it, from Pricescope's point of view, to set out a plain speaking "checklist" that iterates between the appraiser and consumer just what is expected. Reasonably, you hope such an agreement and checklist reviewed by both in advance will help to mitigate complaints.

Beyond this document which would lay plain the set of expectations between the two, I had further hoped that the creation of a checklist could serve the purpose of establishing a peer review set of norms for quality, that the appraiser community would agree upon together, as reasonable points of assessment, for the appraiser to perform as a function of due diligence in carrying out their job. This is the potential "middle ground" suggested earlier in this post, but also which really, despite the fact that no such checklist has successfully come forward in this thread, does not in fact address the issues raised by the two scenarios above, too well.

It is inevitable that the opposite of what may need to happen will tend to happen. Those who seek out the best diamonds with AGS documentation may be most likely to also want to send their diamond away to an appraiser afar, to confirm doubly that what they purchased is the best, although they may be least likely to need to do this. Likewise, the buyer at a local shop with current GIA documentation may be most likely to bring their diamond to a local appraiser, if they've found Pricescope and the suggestion to do so, and in this environment, they are less likely to get the proportion sort of detail they might really want to benefit from. Regrettably, in both cases, shoppers will be challenged to get real time experience of comparative options available to them in the context of the appraisal session.

I say: a potpourri or resources can pour forth with benefit for the diamond consumer, and Pricescope could do well to continue doing what it has already done so well. The appraiser resources section here is a terrific boon. Presuming Neil and others will allow Pricescope to filch what has been written in this thread already, and given the administrator's relative interest in this topic, I'd welcome the creation of some sort of checklist that can be used by the consumer, proactively in advance of their engagement with the appraiser, so that they are more likely to come out satisfied at the end of the day. And, as I've said, a non-compete agreement could well be crafted, and provided to jeweler appraisers, so that Pricescope shoppers can open up their universe of appraisers to places where they can also see wares in comparison to the ones they might purchase, as an alternative, albeit one at least temporarily unavailable to them. (edited to add, also not wanting to leave Dave out of this post, that his reminder about NAJA as a resource makes the practicability of this idea all the more viable).

Finally, Rock's interest in being an appraiser to the world ultimately serves this post best. My expressed intention here is to figure when it makes sense to go global for appraiser resources vs local. Setting up threshold requirements in a checklist was sort of the idea to get at that. No matter what, by giving the imprimatur of my eyes to another in an assessment, I am at something of a loss (and so additional solutions, also somewhere discussed previously, of video viewing at a distance being implemented would compliment these considerations, no doubt), and there's no way around that, except to add another step in the process of due diligence, including an appraiser at a distance, but still to definitely include oneself in that process after all is said and done. But, where you've suggested, Rock, in the companion post that inspired this one, that you might consider: "Maybe we can author something on light return percentage of assuredness based on the method that it is evaluated by the appraiser and what equipment is actually used in evaluating this....." something like this, perhaps, could serve a good purpose in the long run, for those considering even a progressive local appraiser who has and is trained in the use of and idealscope, versus one at a distance, who will give you detailed proportion data, original with themselves, to boot.

Bottom line, an assortment of tools for the consumer will help to aid them in doing their job. Personality factors will play in determining which tools may serve them the most. Right now, although I'd say the existing appraiser resources list may ultimately help the most, the no-compete agreement could play a close second, and, if using a local appraiser, I'd sure consider using a checklist with them.

Thanks for spending your day with me (if you've gotten this far).

Regards,

 

[Regular Guy]

A recent thread caused me to point to this one, and I thought I''d do the reverse here as well.

In that context, one practical idea came to me, which I''ll bring forward here...

------------

I do see that one other...possibly helpful strategy...would be just to cut & copy the existing parts of the text at the Appraiser Resources page here, send it in an e-mail to the prospective appraiser, and have them confirm for you the pieces you might want to confirm (will be included in your appraisal session with them)...or customize this sort of communication, at will.

-----------