GIA Bad Paper

[adamasgem]

Consumer Warning.. Don't always trust what is written on paper..

So I won't get spanked, I'll leave out the commentary, BUT, here is one example where a little simple numerical cross check of the measurements versus the weight by the "world's foremost authority(TM) " GIA would have shown that something was wrong.

The weight was right 0.52 cts but when you use the measurements, LW,D you get a stone weighing about 0.62 cts.

This makes all the rest of the numbers on the paper suspect, and as we will see in the next post with a Sarin scan, entirely different.

So anyone plugging in numbers to the HCA or FARCEWARE(TM), would be entirely mislead.

BullS**t paper, along with their attempt to destroy this class of stone by downgrading for brillianteering.

EDIT Couldn't upload a Sarin file so here is a link

http://www.adamasgem.org/srn/1_0403.srn

 

[adamasgem]

Here is another example of GIA's quality work, and a link to a Sarin scan for the same stone.

1022.srn

Anyone plugging in GIA's averaged, halfassed rounded numbers into the HCA would be entirely mislead.

Maybe they take the typical shortcut of using Sarin fast scans or not upgrading their software, and the public and trade be damned because "it works most of the time".

 

[Serg]

Marty,

Date: 8/14/2007 2:26:20 PM
Author:adamasgem
Consumer Warning.. Don''t always trust what is written on paper..

So I won''t get spanked, I''ll leave out the commentary, BUT, here is one example where a little simple numerical cross check of the measurements versus the weight by the ''world''s foremost authority(TM) '' GIA would have shown that something was wrong.

The weight was right 0.52 cts but when you use the measurements, LW,D you get a stone weighing about 0.62 cts.

This makes all the rest of the numbers on the paper suspect, and as we will see in the next post with a Sarin scan, entirely different.

So anyone plugging in numbers to the HCA or FARCEWARE(TM), would be entirely mislead.

BullS**t paper, along with their attempt to destroy this class of stone by downgrading for brillianteering.

EDIT Couldn''t upload a Sarin file so here is a link

http://www.adamasgem.org/srn/1_0403.srn

re:http://www.adamasgem.org/srn/1_0403.srn

5.19x5.20x3.18mm

P 40.74
Cr 34.5
Table 55

I think GIA mixed data from different diamonds

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/14/2007 3:17:18 PM
Author: Serg
Marty,

Date: 8/14/2007 2:26:20 PM
Author:adamasgem
Consumer Warning.. Don''t always trust what is written on paper..

So I won''t get spanked, I''ll leave out the commentary, BUT, here is one example where a little simple numerical cross check of the measurements versus the weight by the ''world''s foremost authority(TM) '' GIA would have shown that something was wrong.

The weight was right 0.52 cts but when you use the measurements, LW,D you get a stone weighing about 0.62 cts.

This makes all the rest of the numbers on the paper suspect, and as we will see in the next post with a Sarin scan, entirely different.

So anyone plugging in numbers to the HCA or FARCEWARE(TM), would be entirely mislead.

BullS**t paper, along with their attempt to destroy this class of stone by downgrading for brillianteering.

EDIT Couldn''t upload a Sarin file so here is a link

http://www.adamasgem.org/srn/1_0403.srn

re:http://www.adamasgem.org/srn/1_0403.srn

5.19x5.20x3.18mm

P 40.74
Cr 34.5
Table 55

I think GIA mixed data from different diamonds

Sergey, I wonder what the "other" diamond''s paper said

Everything they do is based on the barcode on the paper, so it is electronic.

I wonder whose scanners they are using now, their own? That may be the generic problem, or the people that do the scans don''t pay attention to the scans.

If they are using Sarins, the bean counters probably made them use the fast scan mode, instead of the most accurate scan mode, which is another possibility, because it saves them 30 seconds a stone in time. Of course, they probably don''t save the scans they used, and I doubt they would make them available online to the purchasers of their paper.

You would think that they, the "World''s Foremost", would have put some simple numerical cross-checks in place.

For those who don''t have a Sarin webviewer here is a link to the selfinstalling web viewer, which installs in Internet Explorer.

Sarin Web Viewer

My suggestion to consumers is to get the most accurate scan available from the seller, and don''t necessarily rely on the averaged and foolishly rounded numbers on the GIA paper for buying decisions or pluging into anything like the HCA.

 

[angeline]

As a consumer... I find this scary. In looking for a stone I use the reports and HCA to weed stones out. To call in every stone I might be interested in to get a ''proper'' Sarin done would be waaay too expensive. And how would we know anyway which ones might be wrong ? I guess this means we have to look mainly at in-house stones where the vendore has done some extra work.

Hmmmm, very interesting. Thanks for pointing this out.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/14/2007 3:17:18 PM
Author: Serg
Marty,

re:http://www.adamasgem.org/srn/1_0403.srn

5.19x5.20x3.18mm

P 40.74
Cr 34.5
Table 55

I think GIA mixed data from different diamonds

I think serg is right, I dont see even the cheapest scanner being that far off.
Btw the sarin scanner used on those stones for the srn didnt get it exackly right either.
A couple of the meet points are boinked.

Getting a full sarin or helium scan of any diamond no matter what the lab is a good idea.

GIA needs to track down why this happened and fix it.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/14/2007 5:40:46 PM
Author: angeline
As a consumer... I find this scary. In looking for a stone I use the reports and HCA to weed stones out. To call in every stone I might be interested in to get a ''proper'' Sarin done would be waaay too expensive. And how would we know anyway which ones might be wrong ? I guess this means we have to look mainly at in-house stones where the vendore has done some extra work.

Hmmmm, very interesting. Thanks for pointing this out.

The in-house pre-tested diamonds from the right vendor are the way too go with rounds and princess cuts.
With fancies you cant do that very often and have to have stones called in.
When calling stones in a vendor that has a relationship with the top cutters of that style is important.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Seems like simple human error to me.
There does not need to be a conspiracy or people burned at the stake Marty. I am more concerned about some other misgrading stories and some grading rules, such as steep deep diamonds etc

I expect GIA keeps .srn info as part of its Horizon system to pick up resubmitted diamonds.

 

[stebbo]

Date: 8/14/2007 11:12:29 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Seems like simple human error to me.

There does not need to be a conspiracy or people burned at the stake Marty.

But I must admit Marty''s GIA bashing and the responses bring a smile to my face, everytime...

Thanks guys, I needed a lift today.

 

[Serg]

Date: 8/14/2007 11:12:29 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Seems like simple human error to me.
There does not need to be a conspiracy or people burned at the stake Marty. I am more concerned about some other misgrading stories and some grading rules, such as steep deep diamonds etc

I expect GIA keeps .srn info as part of its Horizon system to pick up resubmitted diamonds.

But "You would think that they, the "World''s Foremost", would have put some simple numerical cross-checks in place. " is correct demand from Marty

 

[diagem]

Date: 8/15/2007 4:12:47 AM
Author: Serg

Date: 8/14/2007 11:12:29 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Seems like simple human error to me.
There does not need to be a conspiracy or people burned at the stake Marty. I am more concerned about some other misgrading stories and some grading rules, such as steep deep diamonds etc

I expect GIA keeps .srn info as part of its Horizon system to pick up resubmitted diamonds.

But ''You would think that they, the ''World''s Foremost'', would have put some simple numerical cross-checks in place. '' is correct demand from Marty

I agree..., It does look like human error..., but its no excuse by the "Worlds Foremost"!!!
Just like their miss-grading, miss-plotting, miss-identifying of certain Diamond shapes and faceting structures....

GIA has to understand (just like most other''s) that this industry is moving on from their primitiveness, and if they want to keep identifying (or calling) themselves as:

"THE WORLD''S FOREMOST AUTHORITY IN GEMOLOGY (tm)"

They are not excused from adapting to the path..., GIA has to listen to other the other voices "we" are hearing!!!

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/14/2007 11:12:29 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Seems like simple human error to me.
There does not need to be a conspiracy or people burned at the stake Marty. I am more concerned about some other misgrading stories and some grading rules, such as steep deep diamonds etc

I expect GIA keeps .srn info as part of its Horizon system to pick up resubmitted diamonds.

I agree Gary.. There apparently has been a continual sliding of overall grading standards at the 800# Gorilla''s habitat, capped off with "Every-Stone-is-an-EX-itis".

"Human-Error-flu"
"BadScan-itis"
"Loosen the rules virus"
"Fluorescence doesn''t matter flu"
"Kickbackitis" a/k/a "Certifigate"
"ShiftTheGrade-itis"

We could have a naming contest

I guess there be a lot of it going around the GIALAB, must be catchy in some variety or another )

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/15/2007 1:41:18 AM
Author: stebbo

Date: 8/14/2007 11:12:29 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Seems like simple human error to me.

There does not need to be a conspiracy or people burned at the stake Marty.

But I must admit Marty''s GIA bashing and the responses bring a smile to my face, everytime...

Thanks guys, I needed a lift today.

Glad to make your day

People shouldn''t take this "bashing" in the wrong vain, we are trying to get the "World''s Foremost Authority''s" attention, that they STILL have serious problems.

There are many good people there, especially in education.

The Lab is a whole other issue, becoming more of a paper mill because of the huge $$$$$$ involved. And lately, what seems like attempts at spreading its tenticles worldwide.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/15/2007 11:33:07 AM
Author: adamasgem

People shouldn''t take this ''bashing'' in the wrong vain, we are trying to get the ''World''s Foremost Authority''s'' attention, that they STILL have serious problems.

Marty, I like a little touch of sarcasm as much as the next guy......but if you really are trying to "get their attention" and want to be a catalyst for change, alienating them with derogatory mutations of their names/products probably isn''t the best road to do that.

I get satire as much as the next guy, but at some point, it crosses the line and ceases to be amusing. If someone wanted to change MY behavior, they wouldn''t have much success by repeatedly denoucing me as an idiot or a moron. If you stick to disagreeing with their ideology without the caustic commentary, you might have more success.

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

There''s no point in being "right" if you''re going to go about it the ''wrong'' way.

 

[stebbo]

Date: 8/14/2007 3:00:29 PM
Author: adamasgem
Here is another example of GIA''s quality work, and a link to a Sarin scan for the same stone.


1022.srn

This one''s pretty sad,
for it''s obvious even to me,
that the intention
was not weight retention,
but simply increased bew-ty.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

I imagine just as there is counterfeit money there must be counterfeit GIA grading reports. Can we get the report number so we can verify this one on the webiste?

 

[stebbo]

Date: 8/16/2007 2:45:37 AM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards
I imagine just as there is counterfeit money there must be counterfeit GIA grading reports. Can we get the report number so we can verify this one on the webiste?

It''s on the report

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

oh your right, off to the side, thanks

 

[Ellen]

Date: 8/15/2007 4:26:49 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 8/15/2007 11:33:07 AM
Author: adamasgem

People shouldn''t take this ''bashing'' in the wrong vain, we are trying to get the ''World''s Foremost Authority''s'' attention, that they STILL have serious problems.

Marty, I like a little touch of sarcasm as much as the next guy......but if you really are trying to ''get their attention'' and want to be a catalyst for change, alienating them with derogatory mutations of their names/products probably isn''t the best road to do that.

I get satire as much as the next guy, but at some point, it crosses the line and ceases to be amusing. If someone wanted to change MY behavior, they wouldn''t have much success by repeatedly denoucing me as an idiot or a moron. If you stick to disagreeing with their ideology without the caustic commentary, you might have more success.

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

There''s no point in being ''right'' if you''re going to go about it the ''wrong'' way.

.

 

[elmo]

I hope Marty''s not offended at the analogy but I see it a bit like Michael Moore taking on the World''s Foremost Authority. So I have to concur with stebbo.

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 8/15/2007 4:26:49 PM
Author: aljdewey

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

They get LOTS of honey. $900,000,000/year from lab operations last time I looked. Marty is one tiny drop of drop of vinegar.

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

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/16/2007 2:12:30 PM
Author: denverappraiser

Date: 8/15/2007 4:26:49 PM
Author: aljdewey

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

They get LOTS of honey. $900,000,000/year from lab operations last time I looked. Marty is one tiny drop of drop of vinegar.

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

Neil, I totally agree.....don''t get me wrong. I feel like Marty has completely valid points.

But I''m in sales....have been for 21 years now. And from that, I can assure you that most folks don''t respond well to being told how wrong they are.......even when you''re 100% right and have the facts to prove it. And they are less likely to hear why you think they should consider another point of view if you''re humiliating them while you do it.

IF the goal is to mock the system for the sake of mockery, then no tact need be applied.
IF the goal is to improve the system (and fix the serious problems Marty identifies), then approach becomes as important as the data.

Marty is well beyond smart enough to help influence the right kind of change.....but smart doesn''t mean anything if you can''t get a receptive audience, and you aren''t gonna do that by repeatedly poking them in the eye.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/16/2007 2:12:30 PM
Author: denverappraiser

Date: 8/15/2007 4:26:49 PM
Author: aljdewey

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

They get LOTS of honey. $900,000,000/year from lab operations last time I looked. Marty is one tiny drop of drop of vinegar.

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

I think you should take a re-look at the numbers Neil, because your memory is failing..

Any appraiser who parrots GIA''s numbers is in for problems.

And my little drops of vineger have had their effects..

 

[Nicrez]

Date: 8/16/2007 2:22:25 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 8/16/2007 2:12:30 PM
Author: denverappraiser

Date: 8/15/2007 4:26:49 PM
Author: aljdewey

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

They get LOTS of honey. $900,000,000/year from lab operations last time I looked. Marty is one tiny drop of drop of vinegar.

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

Neil, I totally agree.....don''t get me wrong. I feel like Marty has completely valid points.

But I''m in sales....have been for 21 years now. And from that, I can assure you that most folks don''t respond well to being told how wrong they are.......even when you''re 100% right and have the facts to prove it. And they are less likely to hear why you think they should consider another point of view if you''re humiliating them while you do it.

IF the goal is to mock the system for the sake of mockery, then no tact need be applied.
IF the goal is to improve the system (and fix the serious problems Marty identifies), then approach becomes as important as the data.

Marty is well beyond smart enough to help influence the right kind of change.....but smart doesn''t mean anything if you can''t get a receptive audience, and you aren''t gonna do that by repeatedly poking them in the eye.

*standing ovation for Aljdewey* Well said!

From what I learned as a child, the weight of a compliment or a criticism lies in the esteem you hold for the person making such a comment.

One''s regard (personally with GIA and within the industry) and the delivery of such a criticsm is the defining factor that can cause positive change or cause negative change to one''s own regard.

 

[denverappraiser]

Where I got that was from their non-profit filings with IRS, which are not exactly a press release but I agree that I’m going from memory and that’s a bad habit. I’ll certainly check my numbers and I’m guessing you pay more attention those numbers than I do. Care to make a correction?

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

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/16/2007 2:22:25 PM
Author: aljdewey

IF the goal is to mock the system for the sake of mockery, then no tact need be applied.
IF the goal is to improve the system (and fix the serious problems Marty identifies), then approach becomes as important as the data.

Marty is well beyond smart enough to help influence the right kind of change.....but smart doesn''t mean anything if you can''t get a receptive audience, and you aren''t gonna do that by repeatedly poking them in the eye.

Aljdewey.. You don''t know the history.. I didn''t have the money to sue the b**tards when they intentionally and maliciously maligned my product, a Lanham Act violation.

They don''t like criticism of any sort, regardless of whether it is correct or not, and have had the age old problem of not admitting mistakes.

I combine the truth and a sometimes lack of tack, to kick them in the backside when they need it. They don''t respond to anything else, in my opinion, and from historical perspective.

They are the 800# Gorrilla who does anything they want to do, including massive coverups.

And what they have done to the diamond buying public in the last eight to ten years is going to bite them where it hurts.

And their cut grade system is a sell-out, in the guise of "science".. It is all about money, PERIOD!!!!!!

 

[elmo]

Date: 8/16/2007 2:42:52 PM
Author: adamasgem
And what they have done to the diamond buying public in the last eight to ten years is going to bite them where it hurts.

What I want to see now is the youtube video of Marty burning his GG diploma while biting them where it hurts

.

 

[denverappraiser]

You’re right, my memory slipped. In 2004 (the most recent filing I can find) they reported just over $93,000,000 in revenue from the lab. An extra digit is important. I stand corrected.

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

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/15/2007 4:26:49 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 8/15/2007 11:33:07 AM
Author: adamasgem

People shouldn't take this 'bashing' in the wrong vain, we are trying to get the 'World's Foremost Authority's' attention, that they STILL have serious problems.

Marty, I like a little touch of sarcasm as much as the next guy......but if you really are trying to 'get their attention' and want to be a catalyst for change, alienating them with derogatory mutations of their names/products probably isn't the best road to do that.

I get satire as much as the next guy, but at some point, it crosses the line and ceases to be amusing. If someone wanted to change MY behavior, they wouldn't have much success by repeatedly denoucing me as an idiot or a moron. If you stick to disagreeing with their ideology without the caustic commentary, you might have more success.

Mama was right.......you get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

There's no point in being 'right' if you're going to go about it the 'wrong' way.

Well said Alj.

Marty we get it, you hate the gia lab with a passion, frankly to the point that a lot of people ignore anything you say about them without a ton of proof, you lose credibility every time you go off even when you have a good point.
A well reasoned calm post with proof that something went wrong would go a long ways towards fixing that.
In this case it appears your right they did mess up and need to track it down and fix it but saving the dramatics would be much more pleasant and effective.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/16/2007 3:32:33 PM
Author: strmrdr
Marty we get it, you hate the gia lab with a passion, frankly to the point that a lot of people ignore anything you say about them without a ton of proof, you lose credibility every time you go off even when you have a good point.
A well reasoned calm post with proof that something went wrong would go a long ways towards fixing that.
In this case it appears your right they did mess up and need to track it down and fix it but saving the dramatics would be much more pleasant and effective.

Storm, I''m not alone in "hating" what the GIA lab has done to the consumer...

Unfortunately, it is only the large $ lawsuits and the coverups because of multi million dollar diamonds that get and will get the press.

Few here seem to care about the sliipage in grading, that might only "cost" the "average" consumer a overly generous color grade or a color grade because of fluorescence or a liberal clarity grade or being sold a bill of goods on a cut grade because of a tax exempt institution pandering to the trade, in my opinion.

I have lost so much respect for the labs work.