Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

EGL is so Wrong!

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
C

Cutehonesty

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
52
One stone. Two gradings. I saw this one stone and here are the stats:

EGL Belgium graded a stone VVS2, Color F.
GIA graded same stone SI1, Color K.

Hello, is this bordering on fraud or what? How can two labs be so off?

How can there be such a HUGE color difference? Maybe EGL was blind that day... but isn't there such a big difference in color from colorless F to warm yellow color K?

I mean, I understand if it's one grading off on color but come on!
4.gif


Also, the stone looks like it's a G grading....however...GIA graded it as a K. Who is right and who is wrong? The stone has been taken to a GIA gemologist and she appraised it as a VS1 and G color. So all in all, it's all human perception. Diamonds are tricky business. Who do you believe?
 
Well the hard thing about this is that no one is WRONG. Technically both labs are "right" because each one has graded it against their own set of criteria. I.e., if you have a GIA "G" it doesn't necessarily mean that an EGL "G" is would be the same stone KWIM?

They each have their own set(s) of master stones that they teach grading with.

That being said GIA and AGS are considered much stricter labs so I tend to believe them because they are harder on stones than EGL. So an AGS or GIA G is going to be a pretty darn white stone whereas an EGL G can be quite warm. A GIA gemologist often isn't any better than EGL. Sometimes they are of course, but a GIA gemologist often doesn't mean squat unfortunately.
 
Yeah, the whole thing blows my mind to smithereens.

Imagine if each lab had their own weight standards.
EGL reports a stone weighs 1.1 carat but GIA weighs the same diamond and gets 0.72 carat.
People would be outraged.
They wouldn't stand for it.
Heads would roll.

Well color and clarity is no different.
Just because these 2 properties are not as simple to determine as weight doesn't mean all labs can't agree to the SAME standards - in the name of ethics.

This is a scandal.
It is the diamond industry's dirty little secret, and it really makes me angry thinking of all the consumers that are being lied to and taken advantage of.
29.gif
29.gif
29.gif

And everyone in the industry has gotten used to it and adjusted to it.
 
Kenny,

Different standards among the various labs is one of the very first things a newbie learns when researching a diamond project. While I agree that it would be nice if they all used the same protocols, I'm not sure that it's fair to say consumers are being lied to and taken advantage of - the information is out there, crystal clear, no cover-ups, if one cares to do the slightest bit of reading beforehand.


Ignorance is an excuse, and makes a poor defense.



That said, the discrepancy in this particular example is... impressive, to say the least
23.gif
 
yssie, I think Kenny''s point may be more valid than you are letting on.

The information is out there but only if you go searching for it or if you come across a jeweler/sales person who is kind enough to share it with you. There are plenty of stores out there that lead customers to believe that a EGL or even store issued grade is equal to that of AGS/GIA. At no point when I was B&M shopping did anyone even mention that there were inconsistencies between colour grades and labs. One sales person told me that the better cut diamonds were sent to GIA so we''d have better luck looking at those stones but even he didn''t imply that the colour/clarity grades from other labs were worse.

If you are a pricescope member/reader then it seems obvious but the majority of sales still happen in stores by customers who do little research besides talking to sales people and I am fairly certain that they have no idea that a EGL and GIA F colour are two completely different things. Heck, when we were looking at buying a ring we did our ''research'' by visiting all the local B&M stores and listening to what those salespeople and jewelers had to teach us, it was only because we got so much conflicting information that we starting digging online and found this site. I don''t think that it is fair to crucify consumers who don''t realise that there are resources like pricescope available to them before they make purchases.

One or two grades either way to me is acceptable (one certainly, two maybe) but a stone graded an F by EGL and a K by GIA is completely off, even by the pricescope mantra of ''be prepared for an EGL diamond to be up to two grades lower on colour and clarity".
 
. double.
 
This link explains how the grading labs rank.
 
NF, if EGL is going to grade the stone according to GIA color standard of D-Z color, then the master color stone should be calibrated accordlingly, else they are fraud or dead wrong. If they are using their own color grades, then it is their right to say what that grade is.
 
Date: 11/30/2009 5:35:21 AM
Author: Stone-cold11
NF, if EGL is going to grade the stone according to GIA color standard of D-Z color, then the master color stone should be calibrated accordlingly, else they are fraud or dead wrong. If they are using their own color grades, then it is their right to say what that grade is.
Click to expand...
Stone, I appreciate this point, which I''ll extend, but you''ve only brought out the dictionary, and not applied it.

It''s suggested above that EGL is faultless because they have their own definitions...that they speak a different language, vis-a-vis color. The responses above are utilitarian enough.

I would speculate (only), but understand with EGL, they are not using a newly created language...just mis-applying it. It''s a difference that may not amount to much, but I think it does make more sense.
 
Date: 11/30/2009 1:29:17 AM
Author: kenny

Imagine if each lab had their own weight standards.
EGL reports a stone weighs 1.1 carat but GIA weighs the same diamond and gets 0.72 carat.
People would be outraged.
They wouldn''t stand for it.
Heads would roll.
Click to expand...
This isn''t really a spot-on comparison because weight isn''t subjective the way color is; it''s a consistently measureable thing. Variances would be minute and would come only from differing equipment calibration.
 
Doesn''t EGL follow the same color and clarity guidelines as GIA? Don''t they use master stones based on GIA grades?
Who trains EGL graders, what credentials do they have? If they''re taking GIA courses to get their GG, then I don''t understand how EGL graders can be so off. Doesn''t make sense to me but as it happens all the time, i do see it as fraud.
 
I have graded diamonds for GIA and GCAL for 30 years and there is no explanation for a color or clarity to be more then one color or clarity different from any lab.
 
The only thing that I can think of is that possibly EGL was using a grading light that hadn''t filtered out the UV, and that the stone had fluorescence? That sort of thing *has* been known to happen. On the clarity, I''m just plain stumped ....
 
Date: 11/30/2009 1:04:05 AM
Author:Cutehonesty
One stone. Two gradings. I saw this one stone and here are the stats:

EGL Belgium graded a stone VVS2, Color F.
GIA graded same stone SI1, Color K.

Hello, is this bordering on fraud or what? How can two labs be so off?

How can there be such a HUGE color difference? Maybe EGL was blind that day... but isn''t there such a big difference in color from colorless F to warm yellow color K?

I mean, I understand if it''s one grading off on color but come on!
4.gif


Also, the stone looks like it''s a G grading....however...GIA graded it as a K. Who is right and who is wrong? The stone has been taken to a GIA gemologist and she appraised it as a VS1 and G color. So all in all, it''s all human perception. Diamonds are tricky business. Who do you believe?
Click to expand...
How can you be sure its the same diamond in both certs? Same wieght and inclusion plot?
Ahhhh wait a second a GIA gemologist is NOT the same as sending the stone to GIA.
Post the certificates including the inclusion plots. I don''t want to be making assumptions until I see the actual certs, something is wrong here.
 
Going back to the Original Post.

So,

A gemologist graded the stone G-VS1
EGL-Antwerp graded it F-VVS2
And GIA apparently graded the same stone K-SI1

Neglecting all the negative history of EGL, I would dare to say that the above information points to EGL being more correct than GIA in this case.

Taking into account the negative history of EGL and GIA being considered the authority, I would venture into something being wrong with the initial information. Maybe, these were not the same stones?

Of course, such conclusions hinge on the correctness of the gemologist. But playing devil''s advocate, would a journalist with this information not have sufficient info (with two sources) to write an article about GIA being extremely wrong?

Live long,
 
The gradings are truly from EGL and GIA. There is no mix up because the one diamond actually has 2 laser certificate engravings on it. Weird huh? The GIA one is very faint (if you did not purposely look for it, you would have overlooked it) but you can see the number and the EGL one is crisp laser.

Isn't that just the weirdest. So I'm thinking that after a low grading from GIA, they sent it to EGL to get a higher grading. Maybe they tried to buff the GIA laser off, who knows.

However I am convinced, this diamond is no K color as GIA states it to be. There is barely any hint of yellow in it. It's completely white. Maybe that's why they sent it to EGL for grading in hopes of getting a higher ranking stone.

Or maybe the topic should have been GIA is so wrong.
 
Date: 11/30/2009 9:05:48 AM
Author: elle_chris
Doesn''t EGL follow the same color and clarity guidelines as GIA? Don''t they use master stones based on GIA grades?
Who trains EGL graders, what credentials do they have? If they''re taking GIA courses to get their GG, then I don''t understand how EGL graders can be so off. Doesn''t make sense to me but as it happens all the time, i do see it as fraud.
Click to expand...
I am in accord with you. They claim to grade to the same standards as GIA, they use the GIA nomenclature to make sure the unsuspecting are not aware of their nefarious dealings and in other ways lay claim to being accurate.

They know that the US courts can do nothing to them and they do not care how off they are. There is a reason they are considered a lower tier lab.

Wink
 
Date: 12/1/2009 10:53:46 PM
Author: Cutehonesty
The gradings are truly from EGL and GIA. There is no mix up because the one diamond actually has 2 laser certificate engravings on it. Weird huh? The GIA one is very faint (if you did not purposely look for it, you would have overlooked it) but you can see the number and the EGL one is crisp laser.

Isn''t that just the weirdest. So I''m thinking that after a low grading from GIA, they sent it to EGL to get a higher grading. Maybe they tried to buff the GIA laser off, who knows.

However I am convinced, this diamond is no K color as GIA states it to be. There is barely any hint of yellow in it. It''s completely white. Maybe that''s why they sent it to EGL for grading in hopes of getting a higher ranking stone.

Or maybe the topic should have been GIA is so wrong.
Click to expand...
I fully agree, and do you notice how everyone (even my closest friends) are not reading what you are saying, but are confirming what they think you are saying.

Assuming that your gemologist is correct, and the stone is actually a G, here is what has probably happened.

The owner sent the stone originally to GIA and had it laser-inscribed. Assuming that this was a big company, they did not keep track of their own assessment of the stone, and GIA graded it K-SI1. This may even have been a typo of GIA (I can assure you that this happens, luckily not often).

Checking the stone after grading, the owner realised that this was an error of GIA. But fearing GIA''s system of database-checking before grading, he feared that returning it to GIA would be a waste of time. So, he had the stone boiled (cleaned) several times, so that the GIA-inscription became less noticeable, and had it re-graded by EGL. Result there, F-VVS2, a slightly liberal grade.

If anything, this example shows that the example of one stone proves nothing. Generalisations are very attractive, but just like drugs are not tested on two persons only, pepsi-tests between two diamonds (or two labs on one diamond in this case) do not work.

Live long,
 
Date: 11/30/2009 9:05:48 AM
Author: elle_chris
Who trains EGL graders, what credentials do they have? If they''re taking GIA courses to get their GG, then I don''t understand how EGL graders can be so off. Doesn''t make sense to me but as it happens all the time, i do see it as fraud.
Click to expand...
elle-chris - who made GIA the G.d that other labs should use to train their staff???
There are many other training org''s that do an excellent equivalent or better job depending on the focus. GIA courses are generally considered to be the bee''s knees for marketing and sales training - but rather soft on the technical side.

I have a little experiance with EGL India - I work with a company on the same floor in Mumbai. Thier Indian school is thru the door on the back left. The lab is on the right. The kitchen is, well, in the corridor.

EGL india staff lunch in corridor.JPG
 
That is both hilarious and disturbing. You must share more similar pictures if you have them!
 
Something doesn''t sound correct. That''s just too far a disparity to be believable. If it were EGL-Israel, I could understand, but EGL-Antwerp should be far closer in their grading to GIA than that.

It''s gotta be a different stone, or the cert is Israel rather than Antwerp, or something. 5 color grades and 3 clarity grades different does not follow at all my experience with EGL-Antwerp grading.

The GIA gemologist grading it G/VS1 while EGL-Antwerp grades it F/VVS2 sounds like a much more correct scenario.

Something''s not right.
 
Great pic! But, to be fair, it''s a bit misleading in that people might get the mistaken impression that only EGL''s office has conditions like that.

The Opera House is a very interesting building. All public corridors are dirty, smelly, and all together disgusting. People spit bettle nut juice on the walls (like Indian chewing tobacco). It has elevators that are decades old that hold only 3 or 4 people (including the permanent attendant on his stool. Step into most offices in the building, though, and you''re in pure Indian luxury.

I''ll never forget my first trip to India. I was tagging along with the head buyer of my former employer. Before we went to visit my former employer''s most important supplier, he warned me (in his very heavy Israeli accent), "Ira, directly outside the door of Bluestar is a public bathroom. When you walk by the door to that bathroom which is directly next to Bluestar''s door, the stench of urine is so strong, it''s like syrup."

Whoever hasn''t been to Mumbai before, the whole city is one giant contrast between utter poverty and utter wealth.



Date: 12/2/2009 7:02:09 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Date: 11/30/2009 9:05:48 AM

Author: elle_chris

Who trains EGL graders, what credentials do they have? If they''re taking GIA courses to get their GG, then I don''t understand how EGL graders can be so off. Doesn''t make sense to me but as it happens all the time, i do see it as fraud.
Click to expand...

elle-chris - who made GIA the G.d that other labs should use to train their staff???

There are many other training org''s that do an excellent equivalent or better job depending on the focus. GIA courses are generally considered to be the bee''s knees for marketing and sales training - but rather soft on the technical side.


I have a little experiance with EGL India - I work with a company on the same floor in Mumbai. Thier Indian school is thru the door on the back left. The lab is on the right. The kitchen is, well, in the corridor.
Click to expand...
 
Cute, did you see the GIA report with your own eyes, or was it pulled up on an internet report check using the "faint" inscription?

Was it yourself that found this discrepancy, or did a dealer tell you about it?

Do you have copies of the reports, or the numbers of the two reports?

Who had the diamond independently graded by the GIA gemologist?
 
I looked up the GIA by the faint laser inscribed number on the internet.
As for the EGL report, I saw it with my own eyes to match it with the stone which had the number inscribed.

I don''t know who sent the stone for grading. Also, I saw the numbers through a 30x loupe.

The diamond had a tiny little feather inclusion in it seen through a loupe and that''s all. The color is white to the eyes. No sign of yellow or anything. All I can say is if GIA calls this a K and SI diamond, I would never buy above a K or SI.

However, I have not seen much Color K diamonds so I don''t know how yellow they would be.
 
If the daimond was a K-brownie and Type IIa it could have had an HPHT treatment to improve the color. The clarity is another issue. The stone would have had to be repolished and the girdle inscription would have been removed or partly removed.
 
Changing the subject a little bit, Does GIA regularly catch HPHT treated diamonds? Do other labs check for this? Would EGL catch this?
 
I always thought that diamond treatment changes a diamond into a fancy color.
Anyway, not GIA did not list it as heat treated.
 
Date: 12/2/2009 9:42:44 PM
Author: 30yearsofdiamonds
If the daimond was a K-brownie and Type IIa it could have had an HPHT treatment to improve the color. The clarity is another issue. The stone would have had to be repolished and the girdle inscription would have been removed or partly removed.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but this is a non-issue.

If GIA graded the stone K before treatment, it could well be that HPHT-treatment improved the colour to G or F. But the process of HPHT creates a burnt skin (bad technical term) on the diamond, and the whole diamond surface needs to be re-cut to remove it.

Not only the GIA-inscription would have been removed then, also the stone would be a lot smaller.

Live long,
 
I'm thinking because the original GIA inscription was so faint, that you (or the dealer) possibly misread the numbers, and pulled up the wrong report.

It would have to have been a fluke, because you enter the carat weight as well when you pull up a report. So it would have been another stone with the same carat weight and a similar report number.

I just hate to see a lab get a bum rap (either GIA or EGL-Antwerp) because of an error on your or your dealer's part.

If you were to list all the specs on the GIA versus EGL report (or their two report numbers so we could look it up) we could probably tell you if it was the same stone or not. Otherwise you really don't have any hard evidence to support your statement that EGL-Antwerp (or GIA) was so far off.

I'm not trying to get on your case, but rather just trying to alleviate the public's perception that there could be such a difference between the two, based on your statement. I seriously doubt these two reports are for the same stone.

Another possibility is that the EGL report you saw was an EGL-Israel report, the softest graders (in my opinion) of the EGL worldwide franchise. I have seen their reports sometimes differ a fair amount from the mainstream, although this big a difference would be highly unlikely for them as well, in my opinion.

If you listed the EGL report number we could tell you what lab it originated from.
 
Date: 12/3/2009 1:24:32 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood

Another possibility is that the EGL report you saw was an EGL-Israel report, the softest graders (in my opinion) of the EGL worldwide franchise. I have seen their reports sometimes differ a fair amount from the mainstream, although this big a difference would be highly unlikely for them as well, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Rich - have you seen any graded by the Turkish lab?
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top