Diamond graders, well trained folks, only have a statical concurrence on grading COLOR 65% of the time, no matter how well trained. One cannot expect any appraiser to do better. It is not possible with the current system.
One hopes that every appraiser is capable of grading an unmounted diamond to within 1 color grade of GIA and that applies except when a dealer has sent a "lucky report" whre the diamond already looks to have a 1 grade better than it ought to be grading.
I think this is an awesome question Circe!
Having had a lot of experience with people who've claimed to be appraisers, yet knew very little in general knowledge, I'd say there's not going to be consistency. Period.
We're a little spoiled around here with David, Richard, and Neil.
If we're talking "the street" many buyers are not familiar with the NAJA.
Many people that put out the "appraiser shingle" are simply not qualified in a broad sense.
For example- basis of evaluation. How much is a D/VS1 1.00 RBC worth?
Lets assume it's a triple EX.
To answer that question, we'd need to first ask and answer a bunch of other questions....
First one is "Where are are buying this hypothetical diamond?"
The very same diamond in a special blue box is worth more than the very same one in an nondescript box.
Too many appraisers are not asking these questions or informing buyers
(note- this is based on personal experience through discussions with thousands of consumers who are not familiar with PS)
When it comes to consistency on checking a color grade, we'd also have to ask more questions:
"What was the GIA color grade?"
I don't believe a number like 65% is going to be accurate- again, because of the variables.
Maybe 65% of appraisers will correctly identify an H color, but what if it's a Y-Z? The number will drop precipitously.
I see this as a large consumer problem.
With the growth of internet diamond sales, the need for good appraisers has really increased.
But if you think about it- finding that great appraiser is sometimes more difficult than finding a good seller. Another problem is that the consumer is on their own.
Clearly any seller recommended appraiser has a conflict of interest based on that reason alone.
This is a really tricky problem and I was waiting with interest to what consumers had to say about it. I still would love to hear more.
A few thoughts:
1) As David points, out, ‘appraiser’ is a completely unregulated profession and we’ve got quite a few hacks and some real gems. Add to this that what you’re asking isn’t even really an appraisal question, it’s a diamond grading question, and in fact it contains several of those. These are decidedly not the same things.
2) Few gemologists in the 'real world' are grading under laboratory conditions. In particular, cut grading with both the GIA and AGS systems requires unmounted stones and tools that most gemologists don’t have. Examining stones mounted leaves a significant margin for error on both clarity and color and it makes reliable cut grading basically impossible.
3) Grading scales vary dramatically both among labs and among gemologists. Taken in isolation, a data point like ‘clarity grade’ or ‘cut quality’ means nothing. It’s not even correct to say that the harsher the grade the better. The most CONSISTENT the grade the better, and few people use a particular grader often enough to recognize grading inconsistencies. Actually, the same applies to the labs and folks mostly rely on advice from places like this forum and advisors they trust ranging from appraisers to diamond dealers. I agree with David above (both of them) that this is the tip of a huge consumer problem and the #1 rule I can give is to choose advisers you trust, be it labs, dealers, appraisers or gurus, and ignore those you don’t. Credibility is NOT assumed and the burden is on them to convince you that their opinions have merit. Not all do.
To the original question...what breed of appraiser are we talking about?
There's the "appraiser" who's really the jeweler who sold you the piece and may have given you a "feel-good" appraisal.
There's the "appraiser" who is hired by the store to fill out a document that tells you ya did good.
There's the "appraiser" who knocks what you bought, advises you to return it and refers you to his preferred jeweler (kickback alert).
There's the "appraiser" who goes cheerfully forward with no awareness of gemological advances since his 1980s coursework.
There's the "appraiser" with 4 CZ master stones and a JCPenney Microscope judging "cut quality" based on polish, symmetry and a Magic 8-Ball.
There's the "appraiser" who hates big labs (fight the power!) and gives all diamonds a color or clarity downgrade to prove he's stricter.
At the top of the pyramid... High above the noise... You will find the well-read, up-to-date, plugged-in, objective, highly credentialed truly "independent appraisers." I find that these folks are really not concerned with what the labs do. Yes, they are acutely aware of existing standards. They employ such standards logically where appropriate, but often enforce their own criteria in areas which are wanting... In my experience such guys and gals are 1 in 1000. We are fortunate to have a few of them contributing here.
If anyone is interested, I penned an article some time ago, asking several top-appraisers about their craft. I found their answers illuminating.
John, you nailed it regarding "what breed of appraisers?"
There are many breeds.
It's scary that there are still so many inferior appraisal documents out there, handwritten
and often nothing more than a few words and letters, and a value.
The PS consumer knows better and their expectations are higher.
But the average consumer doesn't know what to expect and accepts an inferior appraisal because that person
has nothing to compare it to.
It's like a "seasonal tax preparer at a large chain store" vs. a credentialed CPA.
Who would you prefer?
Who do think would be more accurate and thorough?
The "harsher or kinder" question is thought provoking but difficult to gauge.
Personally, I've been told over the years that sometimes I'm a little too strict.
But I'm fine with that.