question about different AGS certificates

[aljdewey]

Date: 9/16/2007 2:29:12 PM
Author: johngalt2004

Date: 9/15/2007 3:08:04 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Neil is right. We request DQRs for all Expert Selection diamonds sent to AGSL, even those which have ideal light performance. This is because A Cut Above is our 'all the bells and whistles' brand (all have AGS Ideal DQDs). The whole premise of Expert Selection is 'best value for the money' and the less costly DQR helps us sell ES diamonds at a lower price.

The term round ideal has been used by our company since the 1996-2005 ideal proportions-based grading system existed and is very strict. We will not advertise a diamond as 'AGS Ideal' unless it's accompanied by an AGS DQD, even if it does have ideal light performance. Once in a while you'll find a stray Expert Selection diamond with a DQD. It's rare but it happens; usually a diamond for which we ordered a DQD, but was kept from being in our ACA line after it returned from the lab for some reason of Brian Gavin's.

Please feel free to contact us about a specific diamond - we're happy to answer any questions you may have.

I don't think I understand this explanation. A natural assumption would be that a DQR would only be preferred for a diamond that will not earn a zero cut score either for finish or light performance. No other explanation really stands up to common sense.

J-Galt, I think you're missing a few elements in your natural assumption.

1. Most average consumers (meaning not Pricescopers) don't really care about the paper; what they care about is performance. They want the diamond to perform well, but it doesn't have to be the be-all, end-all of stones. They want better-than-average, but not necessarily top-in-class. For those folks, the DQR (combined with measurement info provided by a Sarin) is enough, and they can save on the stone in the process. Win-win.

2. Since AGS amended their grading critera, there are (I think) approx. 11 criteria considered toward awarding the cut grade. Some impact performance greatly (crown/pav relationship); others don't impact performance at all (VG polish).

3. To some people, labels and outward appearances of quality are important; to others, the inherent quality of the product is more important that the label/logo. If I could get a Jaguar for several thousand $$ less just because it didn't come with the fancy hood ornament, I'd be stoked. For other people, there's no point in owning a Jag if they don't have the hood ornament to show off that they own a Jag.

Same is true with diamonds......for many people, the greatest value lies in getting a stone that performs as well as an AGS0 without paying for the AGS paper. ES diamonds allow they to do that. They can get stones that perform every bit as well as AGS0 stones without having to pay the premium for it.

Put more simply......a stone is what it is, regardless of pedigree. Some people don't place enough importance on pedigree to pay more for it. My Sheltie is an AKC candidate. I never filed his paperwork because I just don't care. He'd make the grade, but I don't want to pay for his paperwork when it doesn't change a thing about him to me.


I love whiteflash and am not trying to knock them, but it would not make any marketing sense to squelch an ags zero score for the rationale that the swankier certificate only goes with the ACA. I would question that marketing decision. .......If I could pay another $50-$100 for a certificate which would let me charge an extra $1000, I'd probably kinda sorta purchase and publish the DQD whenever it scored a zero for cut.

I'd gather that you're not in marketing, then, because you're missing the point. There is more than one type of customer, and Brian recognized that not everyone is going to place importance on label/brand. So, he created another designation - Expert Selection. It represents most value for the money, and it appeals to the 'value' driven shoppers. In doing so, he has found a way to serve several groups of clients well by catering to their wants and by recognizing that one size doesn't fit all.

Also, it's not as though AGS0 stones grow on trees.....they don't. It wouldn't make sense for ANY vendor looking to do any type of volume to say 'well, I won't sell stones that are exceptionally fine makes just because they may not have AGS0 designation'. That's counterintuitive to business.

I wanted nothing but the best for my e-ring....so we bought an ACA. For my earrings, my only goal was "better than average", and ES stones let me get them within my budget without paying for an extreme level of brand that didn't matter to me on earrings. For purpose of example......I didn't need a diamond in the top 1% for earrings. Achieving one in the top 5% was fine by me....and I paid less for them because of it.

ES isn't just stones that didn't make the ACA brand, by the way. They also can include stones brought in for clients that don't end up being purchased. If the stone is a good stone, Brian will elect to purchase it for inventory and put it into ES.

If I could pay another $50-$100 for a certificate which would let me charge an extra $1000, I'd probably kinda sorta purchase and publish the DQD whenever it scored a zero for cut.

Not if you wanted to maintain the exclusivity of your brand, you wouldn't. Not really much different than Tiffany's refusal to sell its much-coveted solitaire setting separately. If you want it, you have to buy the whole ring.

 

[aljdewey]

I think perhaps I could have put it more simply.....

J/Galt, suffice to say that not all customers want the same things. What you want/value isn''t necessarily what I want/value.

Smart vendors recognize that, and they respond by creating many different price points/features. In doing so, they avoid the "all your eggs in one basket" syndrome.

They recognize that there is more than one flavor than vanilla, and they work to provide as many flavors as they can to satisfy as many desires as they can. As long as the quality of the ice cream supports their reputation for a fine product, regardless of flavor, it''s all good.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 9/16/2007 2:29:12 PM
Author: johngalt2004

I don't think I understand this explanation. A natural assumption would be that a DQR would only be preferred for a diamond that will not earn a zero cut score either for finish or light performance. No other explanation really stands up to common sense. But AGS is not helping by not scoring the finish with precision on the DQR (excellent is the highest score on DQR where ideal is the highest score on DQD). AGS seems to have in effect neutralized the finish difference between ideal and excellent on the DQR. That seems 'less than direct' if not outright dishonest by AGS. This document seems to in fact be very inferior since CUT is the ags' bread and butter, and they're taking a pass on scoring it??? Yeah I know here is a newb copping an attitude toward AGS ha ha. But I'm just saying... from a reasonably intelligent layman's perspective, the DQR smells.

Newb!

Remember that the AGSL is in business though John. As it stands only a fraction of diamonds are sent there because they are so strict. Here's a question: Before coming to PS how many AGSL graded diamonds did you find in the malls and other stores, compared to EGL and IGI? (I'll pause as the tumbleweed blows by)... Offering the DQR allows a decision to keep the color/clarity strictness and proportions info intact without 'penalizing' a diamond that didn't earn ideal finish grades - which make a non-visible difference and are a controversial aspect of AGSL's ideal cut grade. To many shoppers a DQD with EX/EX and sweet proportions is more 'mind clean' than an AGS1 or AGS2 DQD.

 

[johngalt2004]

Date: 9/17/2007 12:46:33 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 9/16/2007 2:29:12 PM
Author: johngalt2004

I don''t think I understand this explanation. A natural assumption would be that a DQR would only be preferred for a diamond that will not earn a zero cut score either for finish or light performance. No other explanation really stands up to common sense. But AGS is not helping by not scoring the finish with precision on the DQR (excellent is the highest score on DQR where ideal is the highest score on DQD). AGS seems to have in effect neutralized the finish difference between ideal and excellent on the DQR. That seems ''less than direct'' if not outright dishonest by AGS. This document seems to in fact be very inferior since CUT is the ags'' bread and butter, and they''re taking a pass on scoring it??? Yeah I know here is a newb copping an attitude toward AGS ha ha. But I''m just saying... from a reasonably intelligent layman''s perspective, the DQR smells.

Newb!

Remember that the AGSL is in business though John. As it stands only a fraction of diamonds are sent there because they are so strict. Here''s a question: Before coming to PS how many AGSL graded diamonds did you find in the malls and other stores, compared to EGL and IGI? (I''ll pause as the tumbleweed blows by)... Offering the DQR allows a decision to keep the color/clarity strictness and proportions info intact without ''penalizing'' a diamond that didn''t earn ideal finish grades - which make a non-visible difference and are a controversial aspect of AGSL''s ideal cut grade. To many shoppers a DQD with EX/EX and sweet proportions is more ''mind clean'' than an AGS1 or AGS2 DQD.

Now this is a very straight answer and why I love and trust Whiteflash so much! I feel you are clearly calling a spade a spade here and I love that about you man! Thanks.

ps: to me as a customer, a GIA cert with excellent scores and the sarin results would be more mind clean than any DQD but I definitly get the picture here and it makes sense. also to me as a customer, I think the AGS would be well served to eliminate the DQD because it seems a watering down of their chief image as the foremost CUT graders... but I''m sure reasonable people have discussed the pros and cons and decided to go this way. Anyway your answer is succinct, makes common sense to me, and I really appreciate it.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Now for the tempest in a teapot.

First of all, let’s be clear that great light performance and H&A aren’t the same thing. You can have one without the other. AGS0 is about light performance. H&A is about cut precision. This thread about H&A is a good read for any who missed it.

DQR for the ES line is our business decision. We pay the premium for our premium products, but not everyone wants the DQD. They don’t value the name as much as they do getting the maximum they can for the most reasonable price. That’s cool with us. The diamond is what’s important. The report is a formality which can be tailored to what the end-user values. Actual photos, reflectors and onsite expert eyes communicate quality.

I’ll try to address main points from but I respectfully submit that much of this conversation is a bit cart-before-horse, per the above. I’ve lost track of the tangents, so I’ll try to summarize and hope it reads as simple as it actually is:

‘A Cut Above’ comes with DQD. It’s our flagship product so it gets the top document. As you know, each goes beyond even AGS0 in terms of cut precision and other aspects Brian privately requires. We price them competitively and if a DQD is important to you we have hundreds of them.

‘Expert Selection’ diamonds do not come with DQDs... Those graded by AGS come with a DQR. The ES diamonds within ACA parameters received a 0 in light performance but not in finish. The ES diamonds outside ACA parameters may or may not be 0 candidates. You can check cutting charts for rounds and reflector photos for fancies if you’re interested but if you’re really that keen on a DQD we suggest you get a diamond with a DQD.

Ira, some ‘Expert Selection’ diamonds go to GIA, simply because AGSL is not globally recognized as the leader and we have clients who insist on a GIA report. Prior to 2000 ‘A Cut Above’ was GIA graded. Brian switched to AGSL because he admired their strictness. Occasionally we discuss the possibility of branding some ‘A Cut Above’ with GIA reports again; simply because of time spent convincing clients in certain areas of the world that AGSL is equal to GIA in stature.

Date: 9/16/2007 4:51:18 PM
Author: Regular Guy

I wonder the extent to which a shopper could ask them to be more like Rhino, and ask them to speculate with authority about the extent to which a particular ES, non DQD earning diamond would have earned the DQD...if only it had been submitted for one.

We’re glad to talk about any diamond’s performance but we won't speak for the lab. We have a cutter, AGS & GIA trained gemologists and a former diamond grader onsite so you’ll get candid and reliable information but we don't assign an AGSL grade that wasn’t officially earned.

Date: 9/16/2007 3:19:56 PM
Author: johngalt2004

Before I even read your post above I want to say that I love WF too and if I had not gotten deep in bed with a local guy on this transaction I would be happily spending my money there. But it would be on an ACA and nothing but. I don't think all the cards are on the table about the ES, but I think they represent a giant discount on a stellar diamond no matter how you slice it and I love WF. They seem to me to be a very high class outfit and I am not trying to accuse them of anything here.

I appreciate the comments (and love your screen name) but I disagree. We have online proportions scan, lab report, 40x image, two reflector photos and available onsite GG analysis on the table. We don’t think there is any problem with a DQR when providing the abundant data and credentialed gemological analysis we do onsite and in-hand. Throw on the pile a 100% lifetime trade-up option which says we’ll proudly take your diamond back in the future and we sleep pretty well at night.

For the paper purists, maybe it will help to know GIA didn’t even list proportions or a cut grade until 2006 yet online sellers were dishing them without any extra information; often drop-shipped by a third party (a practice that continues). This is one reason the “internet guys” get such a bad rep in the retail trade. We, along with a few other sellers, drew a line in the sand and said “we won’t drop ship.” We were among the first to show actual photos, Sarin, proof of performance and cut quality beyond just the lab report. This put the actual diamond center-stage, not the paper.

In fact, from 2000-2006 the DQR was a more comprehensive report than GIA’s (and is still unrounded). To those whom it matters, since GIA grading is proportions-based it’s still easy to cross-reference a DQR with that system or with the AGS cutting guidelines…or simply call our toll-free number and ask for input.

We work hard to provide diversity: If you want GIA we have it. If you want AGS we have it. If you want true H&A we have it. If you want close-to-H&A we have it. If you want the AGS0 princess we have it. If you want a top quality princess without the premium we have it. If you want something on the virtual list we’ll research it for you… Some of you want ideal polish and symmetry and others want the best-budget G-SI1, VG+ with an ideal-scope that knocks your socks off. We have both. Oh, did I mention we also make jewelry?

Seriously though, if you have a mind clean need for the DQD get a DQD. If you prefer GIA just do it. If you love you some IGI - gitterdun… Different people seek different things. Ultimately the diamond is more important than the paper. We work pretty hard to provide info beyond the grading report within our expertise and offer short and long-term benefits which stand behind the quality. We're not saying our way is "right," we're saying our way is us. There are many different approaches.

We appreciate all of your feedback because it never hurts to listen. Also, your collective kind comments about the people who work here are highly valued, particularly because the company is the people.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 9/17/2007 12:57:43 PM
Author: johngalt2004

Date: 9/17/2007 12:46:33 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Newb!

Remember that the AGSL is in business though John. As it stands only a fraction of diamonds are sent there because they are so strict. Here''s a question: Before coming to PS how many AGSL graded diamonds did you find in the malls and other stores, compared to EGL and IGI? (I''ll pause as the tumbleweed blows by)... Offering the DQR allows a decision to keep the color/clarity strictness and proportions info intact without ''penalizing'' a diamond that didn''t earn ideal finish grades - which make a non-visible difference and are a controversial aspect of AGSL''s ideal cut grade. To many shoppers a DQD with EX/EX and sweet proportions is more ''mind clean'' than an AGS1 or AGS2 DQD.

Now this is a very straight answer and why I love and trust Whiteflash so much! I feel you are clearly calling a spade a spade here and I love that about you man! Thanks.

ps: to me as a customer, a GIA cert with excellent scores and the sarin results would be more mind clean than any DQD but I definitly get the picture here and it makes sense. also to me as a customer, I think the AGS would be well served to eliminate the DQD because it seems a watering down of their chief image as the foremost CUT graders... but I''m sure reasonable people have discussed the pros and cons and decided to go this way. Anyway your answer is succinct, makes common sense to me, and I really appreciate it.

JG, no problem, your questions are logical. Many people can learn from the asking.

 

[Regular Guy]

JQ,

Thanks for getting back. Which you usually do!

I for one was never questioning your ethics, nor reasonable pursuit of business. And, you have answered the question of why both AGS & GIA!

But...removing the ethical dimension...considering everyone might indeed be pursuing their own enlightened self interest, I give you the venn diagram...with each sphere working ethically within its own dimension...and where the coincidence of overlap...where it benefits the attendant sphere, is the reasonable pursuit.

WF seeks to sport both AGS & GIA options
Some diamonds WF sports will be lower cost and not have DQD, consistent with differentiating them
WF sends some diamonds to AGS and some to GIA for their respective pursuits
Shopper seeks to find discounted fab diamond
I wonder if the decision process WF uses to send a diamond to one lab vs another can be dissected to a benefit.

The ordinary shopper is curious if there is anything in WF''s business process to suggest which discounted option may be better than another.

Coincidentally, WF includes GIA for uninformed shoppers who demand them. Likelihood is high this shopper does not consult Pricescope, so everyone understands they can fend for themselves.

Shopper, by my earlier speculation, it is conjectured, may do better with DQR than with GIA excellent

We close doors at Pricescope to our secret, and ask WF to confirm readers here who find this know where to score!

Readers here promise to not expose source document, but would be hard pressed to fail to give up the juice.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 9/16/2007 4:51:18 PM
Author: Regular Guy



but I wonder the extent to which a shopper could ask them to be more like Rhino, and ask them to speculate with authority about the extent to which a particular ES, non DQD earning diamond would have earned the DQD...if only it had been submitted for one.

Many of us have a problem with that as we feel it is wrong to speculate on what a lab would give a stone without actually sending the stone to that lab.

While very similar, the cut grading systems of AGS and GIA are very different in the minutae and I doubt that many vendors will play that game. I for one would not like to be held to my estimate if a client submitted the diamond for grading by AGS and it came back one color, clarity, or cut grade different. I have a feeling that the courts would order me to pay up the difference plus penalties. No thanks!

Wink

 

[denverappraiser]

Ira,

Yes, DQD’s have been available for Asschers for several months now. They may not have made it through the manufacturing pipeline yet which would explain why you don’t see any being promoted here.

You can get a DQD on any eligible stone that currently has a DQR and a relatively recent inspection by AGSL (mid 2005 in the case of round brilliants, a bit more recent in the case of princesses and emerald cuts). It is not necessary to send the stone back to AGSL and it’s not necessary to pay 4x the price to get it.


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

 

[Regular Guy]

Neil,

Thanks for both your comments.

This is an information age. When I had a tooth problem somewhat recently, I could go on-line, and find a dental forum, or dentist, whatever, who would answer my web based query for a fee. Though I didn't pursue this, I certainly considered it. The model is reasonable enough.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/17/2007 5:49:39 PM
Author: Wink

Many of us have a problem with that as we feel it is wrong to speculate on what a lab would give a stone without actually sending the stone to that lab.

yea it would be but it isn''t wrong to use the AGS software in the AGS approved manner to give a light performance grade.
Which is why AGS released the software in the first place.