GIA diamond question regards report #''s

[surfcali365]

I have this 1.35
H
VS1 im looking to buy.
the only thing that im having trouble with is that i wrote down the report # on the GIA report and when i went to GIAs website for some reason im unable to pull up the report for that diamond.
The report # is 5101033684
and the carat weight is 1.35

not sure if any of you guys are able to help or have done this before i have the 800 # im going to call GIA on monday and find out just wnated to see what you guys thought

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/27/2008 2:24:00 PM
Author:surfcali365
I have this 1.35
H
VS1 im looking to buy.
the only thing that im having trouble with is that i wrote down the report # on the GIA report and when i went to GIAs website for some reason im unable to pull up the report for that diamond.
The report # is 5101033684
and the carat weight is 1.35

not sure if any of you guys are able to help or have done this before i have the 800 # im going to call GIA on monday and find out just wnated to see what you guys thought

I tried it and didn''t get a result either, is it possible there is a wrong digit in the report #? I would check that firstly and the carat weight, then go from there.

 

[surfcali365]

I checked and bouble checked so im quite confused and not sure what to do i mean i saw the diamond and the report everything looked right then i was like let me pull it up on the GIA site and it didnt work which rasied a red flag for myself what do u think? or have u heard or seen this happen b4

 

[oldmancoyote]

As far as I know GIA report numbers have 8 digits; the number you have has 10, so there''s something a bit odd there. I have tried removing the last two / first two / first and last without getting a match. I suspect you have a stock number, rather than a GIA report number.

 

[surfcali365]

Ok not sure if this is true but that diamond i was looking at had just been issued. Its dated August 29, 2008 so could it be being its not even a month old it isnt in the system yet and are using 10 digit #''s vs 8''s

Just thought it was a possiblity im going to call GIA on Monday to make sure but thats what the jeweler said when i called and questioned him about it

 

[Regular Guy]

I think somewhat older reports are not included in the database. Do you know when it is supposed to be from?

 

[surfcali365]

i stated in the other post that before your post that isnt not older its in fact newer Sept 29, 2008 so we are talkin about 4 weeks ago it was issued

 

[denverappraiser]

They usually post things pretty fast. Could it be that you’re using the bar code number instead of the report number? The report number is in the left hand margin near the top of the page. These are not the same.

Can you post a scan of the report?

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

 

[Finally!]

A stone I''m looking at was graded by GIA on August 18, 2008 - it has a 10-digit number that starts with "510".

The GIA report is available on the merchant''s site, but I''m not able to check it in gia.edu''s Report Check feature - it''s not found.

It appears they''ve changed their report numbering scheme.

 

[surfcali365]

o gteat to hear thanks alot i knew it prob wasnt but you know that red flag went up hahah thanks a million

 

[Rhino]

Yes. To my knowledge the newer reports have more digits and I think 10 is right.

 

[JogiaDiamonds]

According to the GIA, online checks on new reports will be available from Oct 1.

...Just don''t blame me if it doesn''t happen.

 

[JogiaDiamonds]

*bump*

New report numbers are working now

 

[John P]

Thanks Nikhil.

Surfcali, here''s the link:

http://www.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=5101033684&weight=1.35

 

[stone-cold11]

This does not look like a well cut stone to me.

HCA 2.9 61.1% depth, 58% table, 32.5° crown angle, 41.4° pavilion angle.

 

[John P]

Looking over the basic numbers I’m not a fan of the 41.4 pavilion angle, especially coupled with 75% lower halves (with GIA rounding that average may actually be as low as 73%); this creates a lot of obstruction. Even with longer lower halves a 41.4 PA in this configuration is going to cause notable table reflection; see the blue area outlined in the RH image below. Too much obstruction will cause the diamond to appear dark in many cases.

The sims below are for purposes of illustration only since they assume perfect wire-frame symmetry: We have no way of knowing the cut precision of this diamond without an ideal-scope or ASET image. Depending on inconsistencies in the main angles (remember 41.4 and 32.5 are averages of multiple measurements – as are several other numbers) the effects could be exaggerated further.