- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,859
Very good points, Neil, in fact so good that your words have seduced me into adding my 2 cents.
I personally like the basic info of such tests, like the Rapaport-organized one, but such test is always based on premises that are not correct.
Like you said, the company submitting the stones, generally a seasoned professional, makes a business-decision in choosing the lab. This is based upon projected dollar-outcome, but also on the suspected speed-of-sale. Diamonds with certain lab-reports have a broader and more eager market, so it is a very important factor in that decision.
As Garry pointed out, some labs are more often used for programs or brands, so you see less 'free' or virtual stones with such lab-reports, and the risk of such stones actually not being in line with the paper-report is generally greater.
Also important, a number of labs have different locations, and whatever they claim about them being on par, in reality, there are always differences, probably not static differences, but most seasoned professionals make it their business to know which lab-location today is a tad less strict than the average.
Even within one lab-location, I personally believe that there are internal distinctions. I do not believe that with a customer sending in a batch of 200 stones, these stones will go through exactly the same hands as those of a customer sending in a small batch of 10 stones. This is of course speculation from my side, but I do believe that bigger batches basically go to a different 'sub-lab', although the lab is doing its utmost to keep all labs and 'sub-labs' on the same level.
Aside from that, I believe that such tests take the initial lab-grade as final. I do not believe that labs can be influenced in their systems (at least not the reputable ones), but on borderline-stones today's re-check with another group of graders can give a different result. Asking for re-checks is a standard procedure at a lab, and each lab is organized differently in that interaction between customer and lab. Some labs even seem to make it a money-maker, giving an exaggerated strict grade at first, then charging for the re-checks, and only in second grading giving the correct grade. Such practice is totally missed by such lab-test.
For the consumer, this gives possibly a gloomy picture. If the report says the color is G, it does not mean that the stone is G in color. At best, it is within the G-range of color, but in reality, depending on the lab-name, the location of the lab, the way it was submitted and the way it got a re-check at the lab, the stone will be in a range around the G-range. The same for clarity. And with us checking 1,000's of lab-graded stones per week, please do not ask me about the joke of fluorescence-grading, even at the most reputable lab. The result is that the global diamond-business is gradually splitting up in 2 schools.
One school is selling paper, often in big businesses wholesale, but they eventually end up in retail, where actually the lab-report is sold, and not the diamond. The procedure is simple, get the reports at apparently the cheapest price (compared to the Rap-list) and you have a solid business.
The other school is taking the lab-report as a basis to compare to, then checks the stone and only buys if the stone is good. Depending on the needs, this process is labor-intensive and highly selective.
In that sense, Neil's advise to consumers to carefully select a retailer is very wise.
Live long,
I personally like the basic info of such tests, like the Rapaport-organized one, but such test is always based on premises that are not correct.
Like you said, the company submitting the stones, generally a seasoned professional, makes a business-decision in choosing the lab. This is based upon projected dollar-outcome, but also on the suspected speed-of-sale. Diamonds with certain lab-reports have a broader and more eager market, so it is a very important factor in that decision.
As Garry pointed out, some labs are more often used for programs or brands, so you see less 'free' or virtual stones with such lab-reports, and the risk of such stones actually not being in line with the paper-report is generally greater.
Also important, a number of labs have different locations, and whatever they claim about them being on par, in reality, there are always differences, probably not static differences, but most seasoned professionals make it their business to know which lab-location today is a tad less strict than the average.
Even within one lab-location, I personally believe that there are internal distinctions. I do not believe that with a customer sending in a batch of 200 stones, these stones will go through exactly the same hands as those of a customer sending in a small batch of 10 stones. This is of course speculation from my side, but I do believe that bigger batches basically go to a different 'sub-lab', although the lab is doing its utmost to keep all labs and 'sub-labs' on the same level.
Aside from that, I believe that such tests take the initial lab-grade as final. I do not believe that labs can be influenced in their systems (at least not the reputable ones), but on borderline-stones today's re-check with another group of graders can give a different result. Asking for re-checks is a standard procedure at a lab, and each lab is organized differently in that interaction between customer and lab. Some labs even seem to make it a money-maker, giving an exaggerated strict grade at first, then charging for the re-checks, and only in second grading giving the correct grade. Such practice is totally missed by such lab-test.
For the consumer, this gives possibly a gloomy picture. If the report says the color is G, it does not mean that the stone is G in color. At best, it is within the G-range of color, but in reality, depending on the lab-name, the location of the lab, the way it was submitted and the way it got a re-check at the lab, the stone will be in a range around the G-range. The same for clarity. And with us checking 1,000's of lab-graded stones per week, please do not ask me about the joke of fluorescence-grading, even at the most reputable lab. The result is that the global diamond-business is gradually splitting up in 2 schools.
One school is selling paper, often in big businesses wholesale, but they eventually end up in retail, where actually the lab-report is sold, and not the diamond. The procedure is simple, get the reports at apparently the cheapest price (compared to the Rap-list) and you have a solid business.
The other school is taking the lab-report as a basis to compare to, then checks the stone and only buys if the stone is good. Depending on the needs, this process is labor-intensive and highly selective.
In that sense, Neil's advise to consumers to carefully select a retailer is very wise.
Live long,