employees at GIA fired?

[lauralu]

We went into wedding day diamonds to look a their Verragio settings one more time this past week. While looking (they ended up not having the one I wanted to see again anyway) the sales person started talking about diamonds and how their signature diamond is cut with extra facets yadda yadda yadda. I told him we are only going to buy a GIA or AGS certed stone when ready and we already knew where we would be making our purchase.

He than explained to us that we should not put so much stock in GIA considering they fired 10 plus people because they were taking bribes to grade stones better than they should have been graded. So why would I believe in AGS or GIA over their diamonds because of this information.

i did say i did not know anything about this news, but did say I still wanted a certed diamond and did not want to look at his.

We will still buy AGS or GIA but, anyone know anything about this and when it actually happened? I am curious

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Marty Haske posts all about it - it is a long and complex story - you can best read all about it on his posts
https://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/profile/myprofile.asp?mode=recentposts&userID=3671

 

[WinkHPD]

Thanks for the link Garry.

I will add my 2 cents here also.

Anyone who uses the actions of a few to put down the whole is either stupid or trying to con you into believing that his second rate stones are better than the "tainted" ones. I have my own issues with GIA, but there is no way I would throw out the baby with the bath water rather than just wanting the bath to get the clean up job done. In my opinion the GIA and AGS have brought a much better understanding of diamonds to the level of the consumer (with a LOT of help from Pricescope) and in doing so have made it possible for you to get a MUCH better value when you buy. Good on you for sticking to your guns!

I am willing to bet, but that would be definitely against the rules, that he had stones from EGL or IGI that he was trying to tell you were better than GIA.

Would I have won the bet if we could have made it???

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/3/2009 1:05:15 AM
Author: Wink
Thanks for the link Garry.

I will add my 2 cents here also.

Anyone who uses the actions of a few to put down the whole is either stupid or trying to con you into believing that his second rate stones are better than the ''tainted'' ones. I have my own issues with GIA, but there is no way I would throw out the baby with the bath water rather than just wanting the bath to get the clean up job done. In my opinion the GIA and AGS have brought a much better understanding of diamonds to the level of the consumer (with a LOT of help from Pricescope) and in doing so have made it possible for you to get a MUCH better value when you buy. Good on you for sticking to your guns!

I am willing to bet, but that would be definitely against the rules, that he had stones from EGL or IGI that he was trying to tell you were better than GIA.

Would I have won the bet if we could have made it???

Wink

new year Wink

EGL israel - yes.
IGI no.

I find IGI to be amazingly consistant.
GIA is all over the shop. Staff training issues me thinks.

e.g I sent a stone graded by a local lab as E SI1 to GIA because the cleint demanded it.
It came back yesterday D VS2.
I have no doubt it would be a IGI SI1 and border line D/E.

Can a retailer grade diamonds better than a lab?
I think so. I would trust Tiffany over GIA on color and clarity (but neither on cut quality).
I certainly trust some of my cutter vendors over all labs.

 

[diagem]

Date: 1/3/2009 4:53:56 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 1/3/2009 1:05:15 AM
Author: Wink
Thanks for the link Garry.

I will add my 2 cents here also.

Anyone who uses the actions of a few to put down the whole is either stupid or trying to con you into believing that his second rate stones are better than the ''tainted'' ones. I have my own issues with GIA, but there is no way I would throw out the baby with the bath water rather than just wanting the bath to get the clean up job done. In my opinion the GIA and AGS have brought a much better understanding of diamonds to the level of the consumer (with a LOT of help from Pricescope) and in doing so have made it possible for you to get a MUCH better value when you buy. Good on you for sticking to your guns!

I am willing to bet, but that would be definitely against the rules, that he had stones from EGL or IGI that he was trying to tell you were better than GIA.

Would I have won the bet if we could have made it???

Wink

new year Wink

EGL israel - yes.
IGI no.

I find IGI to be amazingly consistant. Me too....
GIA is all over the shop. Staff training issues me thinks.

Staff training??? They just fired a bunch..., couldnt GIA make sure they keep the consistent pro''s?

e.g I sent a stone graded by a local lab as E SI1 to GIA because the cleint demanded it.
It came back yesterday D VS2.
I have no doubt it would be a IGI SI1 and border line D/E.

I have witnessed numerous inconsistencies in regards with their VS2-SI1 grades..., especially depending on the size vs. inclusion calls.

Can a retailer grade diamonds better than a lab?
I think so. I would trust Tiffany over GIA on color and clarity (but neither on cut quality).
I certainly trust some of my cutter vendors over all labs.

I would say professional (instead of retailer)..., and yes..., I believe real experience beats a diploma any day!

 

[JogiaDiamonds]

There was an email sent by a large-ish Indian manufacturer just before Christmas with a list of 88 "exclusive" (ie large) diamonds.

All 88 diamonds were graded by their in-house grading department, which we''ve found to be very accurate, and I''m sure those who have bought from them will agree. In the days that we bought from them, we always got upgrades from a local lab.

Of the 88 stones, 3 were coloured, so I''ll leave them out. 56 were sent to GIA. 29 were sent to IGI.

Of those sent to the GIA:

46 came back with the same grade.
5 came back with a clarity of 1 grade up.
4 came back with a colour of 1 grade up.
1 came back with a colour and clarity of 1 grade up.

Of those sent to the IGI:

2 came back with the same grade.
1 came back with a clarity of 1 grade up.
15 came back with a colour of 1 grade up.
5 came back with a colour and clarity of 1 grade up.
1 came back with a colour of 1 grade up and 2 clarity grades up
5 came back with two colour grades up.

I''m sure someone who has this email can check my sums, but it seems to me that GIA is way ahead of IGI in terms of grading.

 

[oldminer]

Jogia;

Please do the math on those diamonds sent to GIA and IGI and tell us, assuming the labs are each correct, how much more or less valuabale diamonds sent to GIA and IGI would be if one can get away with saying IGI and GIA are equal. Use the value of your grading versus the lab's grading for each group. Let's assume your own grade is the exactly correct grade.

It is so very tempting to take advantage of the situation that we see little restraint. This hurts the good guys costing them unknown thousands of lost sales to those who just don't care about their customers or honest dealing.

The trade acknowledges openly that there is some subjectivity in color and clarity grading, but says very little about the "beyond subjectivity" misgrading of several rogue labs. IGI has the staff, the equipment and the ability to meet GIA head to head. They grade more diamonds than GIA worldwide and have a great reputation in many parts of the world. When diamonds are sold for the value based on their likely real GIA grade, then little harm is done to consumers. When dishonest retailers knowngly use wrong grades supplied by poor graders to misrepresent value in order to make unfair profits, then I have a big problem with them.

The dishonest dealer who knowingly supplies misgraded reports silently conspiring with the dishonest retailer who claims all labs are the same in order to cheat the consumer is where this complex problem lies. It is difficult to erradicate, but via consumer education we are making it less profitable. In the long run, honesty ought to pay a larger dividend than cheating.

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 1/4/2009 1:52:20 AM
Author: JogiaDiamonds
There was an email sent by a large-ish Indian manufacturer just before Christmas with a list of 88 ''exclusive'' (ie large) diamonds.


All 88 diamonds were graded by their in-house grading department, which we''ve found to be very accurate, and I''m sure those who have bought from them will agree. In the days that we bought from them, we always got upgrades from a local lab.


Of the 88 stones, 3 were coloured, so I''ll leave them out. 56 were sent to GIA. 29 were sent to IGI.


Of those sent to the GIA:


46 came back with the same grade.

5 came back with a clarity of 1 grade up.

4 came back with a colour of 1 grade up.

1 came back with a colour and clarity of 1 grade up.


Of those sent to the IGI:


2 came back with the same grade.

1 came back with a clarity of 1 grade up.

15 came back with a colour of 1 grade up.

5 came back with a colour and clarity of 1 grade up.

1 came back with a colour of 1 grade up and 2 clarity grades up

5 came back with two colour grades up.


I''m sure someone who has this email can check my sums, but it seems to me that GIA is way ahead of IGI in terms of grading.

An important key in this sort of ‘test’ is to understand what question is being answered. What is a grade? For most grading assignments, and certainly for the one at hand, the task is to accurately predict what GIA would call it. Obviously this gives GIA an advantage in that they are, by definition, correct. This is a huge problem for everyone else because they’re a moving target. Matching them spot on 46/56 times and landing within one grade on the remainder is a darned good score but it tells us more about the in-house graders than it does about GIA, which was surely the point of releasing the data. If it were possible to get data on 56 stones repeatedly graded in isolation from one another by GIA graders I would expect greater variation than this. I give this qualifier because with computers and a bit of cleverness it’s pretty easy for a lab like GIA to recognize a stone that they’ve graded before and they check this every time. If a stone comes through a second time and the graders don’t match the previous results, that’s cause for an automatic recheck. Repeated gradings of the same stone are NOT done in isolation. You can certainly call this a way of eliminating ‘errors’ but the result is what appears to be a more consistent set of results by correcting those variations that are easiest to detect while having no affect on the vast majority of others.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[purrfectpear]

Sometimes I wonder if it''s a case of "you get what you pay for"?

I remember seeing some GIA job openings posted earlier in the year for entry level jobs. The only requirement was a high school diploma. They provided the training and I remember the pay was LOW. Really low IMO.

 

[oldminer]

All the major labs and many minor labs have systems in place to prevent grade changes by blind resubmition once a document has been issued. These work on weight, shape, measurements, color range, clarity range, girdle thicknesses, culet size and UV reaction in order to detect a resubmitted stone. These efforts are seen as eliminating some liability and making it appear as if the lab is more consistent than it really is. It is very difficult to improve the actual grading because the system is so subjective and unscientific. It is a traditional system that the market has adapted very well to and is highly hesitant to see it change. The financial consequences of re-grading hundreds of thousands of diamonds is beyond measure.

An expert diamond dealer can call the color and clarity as well as any lab. However, only certain lab documents carry the weight of authority. If you compare the value of a group of diamonds based on what the dealer grades them and compare this to a GIA lab result, there will be only a small difference in final outcome. If the dealer uses a weak lab, the dollar value appears to magically increase so long as the dealer and the retailer use the lab results as their comparison tool. However, the underlying real value has not changed at all.

It is much like shopping in the mall and seeing fantastic discounts from "retail" but finding the price you are being asked is the same as last year or the year before. All that has changed was the phoney retail, not the actual value.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/4/2009 1:52:20 AM
Author: JogiaDiamonds
There was an email sent by a large-ish Indian manufacturer just before Christmas with a list of 88 ''exclusive'' (ie large) diamonds.

All 88 diamonds were graded by their in-house grading department, which we''ve found to be very accurate, and I''m sure those who have bought from them will agree. In the days that we bought from them, we always got upgrades from a local lab.

Of the 88 stones, 3 were coloured, so I''ll leave them out. 56 were sent to GIA. 29 were sent to IGI.

Of those sent to the GIA:

46 came back with the same grade.
5 came back with a clarity of 1 grade up.
4 came back with a colour of 1 grade up.
1 came back with a colour and clarity of 1 grade up.

Of those sent to the IGI:

2 came back with the same grade.
1 came back with a clarity of 1 grade up.
15 came back with a colour of 1 grade up.
5 came back with a colour and clarity of 1 grade up.
1 came back with a colour of 1 grade up and 2 clarity grades up
5 came back with two colour grades up.

I''m sure someone who has this email can check my sums, but it seems to me that GIA is way ahead of IGI in terms of grading.

Dear Nikhil, perhaps you could email the file to me?
I think it comes from a company starting with V?

I would also like to discuss a seperate matter with you and cant find your email address?