Surprised by dual-report listing

[Moh 10]

Is this common?
I have never see this before.

I imagine several diamonds for sale have been graded more than once but the seller only reveals the best grades and discards the report with the lower grades.

In this case the vendor reveals what BOTH GIA and EGL grades are.
I applaud the disclosure and I feel a knowledgeable PS prosumer would not be bothered by this in the least.

But most customers would be confused and bothered by this apparent indecision.
I think they would either not pursue the stone or suspect something is not right.
I’m really surprised the vendor revealed both.

[Question for vendors here, which is usually revealed, the lower GIA or the higher EGL?]
It this an ethical issue?

It is a very rare treat to actually see an example of how GIA and EGL rate the same stone.
We don't get to see that documented often.

Most customers are going to think, "So what is it, an H or a J? A VVS2 or a VS1?

It is the stone on the left of this link . . .

http://www.singlestone.com/index.php?page=collections&catID=14&pID=314&startRow=8

snip

Style: MJ07-30
5.64 H VVS2 EGL -J VS1 GIA (DUAL CERTIFICATES) certified vIntage Asscher Cut diamond ring set in a platinum diamond ring with baguettes.
Circa 1915.
Very rare stone!

 

[stone-cold11]

Interesting.

 

[Lorelei]

I have seen this come up occasionally, with an '' important'' stone such as this it could be that it has been graded twice over time and that both reports have stayed with the diamond. I would take GIA''s grading to be the most significant and if I were buying ( sadly not) get an appraisal done.

 

[tyty333]

Perfect example of EGL''s lenient grading compared to GIA.

 

[strmrdr]

5.64ct would be very hard to sell without a gia report to a knowledgeable person.
They likely list the egl for the buyer that is shopping around.
It makes for smart business in this case.

 

[tallchickbarbara]

Moh, it''s not terribly common, no. But it also shouldn''t be a question of ethics in this particular situation. Here, the seller is disclosing that the diamond has been certified by two different labs. They''re hiding nothing. They''re simply saying that they got a second opinion on this particular stone. It''s no different than getting a second opinion from a doctor, or going to two different independant appraisers to get more than one opinion on a diamond that you''ve recently purchased. The risk is, the opinions of the people giving them may vary... that''s why they''re opinions. It appears the seller has decided to show both solely for business purposes.

I''m not sure if most customers would be confused because I think most customers buying a 5.64 have done at least a bit of research about every lab or have at least seen several other larger stones prior to getting to this one. Is it an H or is it a J is a bit of a loaded question... it''s both. It''s a J to GIA and an H to EGL.

As a side note, my GOD I love the shape of that center stone. Yowsa.

 

[AprilBaby]

My 1.21 RB came with an EGL report "based on GIA report ####". I went to GIA and in fact the inscribed # matched as did the EGL report. Why did it come with 2 reports? Who knows, but I know it is what it is!

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 8/12/2009 2:41:26 PM
Author: AprilBaby
My 1.21 RB came with an EGL report 'based on GIA report ####'. I went to GIA and in fact the inscribed # matched as did the EGL report. Why did it come with 2 reports? Who knows, but I know it is what it is!

I find it very interesting that one gemological laboratory would issue a lab report based on the findings of another gemological laboratory as opposed to issuing a report stating their own opinion of the stone - at least if I am interpreting the situation correctly based on AprilBaby's statement. Trip!

I concur that the seller is being very forthright in not playing "the paper game" and disclosing the existence of two diamond grading reports, issued by different gemological laboratories, offering two different opinions of the diamond. It is full disclosure of sorts and allows potential buyers to consider both sets of information. Naturally the buyer should seek the qualified counsel of a neutral source such as an independent gemologist appraiser, as is always my advice.

Thank you for this very interesting post Moh 10, I find it very intriguing!

 

[denverappraiser]

My theory is that the jeweler wanted to sell it with GIA papers because, well, they’re GIA, but that they disagree with GIA’s conclusions and wanted something to justify that at least it’s a really good J/VS1 rather than bordering on the K/VS2 side. This is an internet sale so they have to attract the customer with the paperwork and the pictures rather than by saying "see look!" and letting is speak for itself (which is how I would expect a piece like that to change hands) and this leads to a different approach.

Based on the photo, it does look like a really pretty stone by the way.

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

 

[John P]

Date: 8/12/2009 2:33:48 PM
Author: BarbaraP

Moh, it's not terribly common, no. But it also shouldn't be a question of ethics in this particular situation. Here, the seller is disclosing that the diamond has been certified by two different labs. They're hiding nothing.

Agreed. Deception would be a matter of presentation. Ethics aren’t dependent on using one lab or two, they’re dependent on education, context, disclosure and value. Neil's explanation was reasonable.

The chosen grading report is often a function of the market(s) a dealer is in. As an example, Tiffany & Co. uses their own reports. Their strong name and loyal client base make this a smart choice - using another entity would work against their brand proposition. The majority of jewelry stores carry just one report per diamond but choose the labs based on their market and client base. In a mall this can mean soft/commercial loose stone reports or those finished jewelry "appraisal-reports" we all love. Higher end stores may carry GIA reports, but many also keep diamonds from softer labs on-hand for "price shopping" clients.

Consumers may be exposed to more duplicate reports in an active diamond market/district since the client base varies dramatically. Studied shoppers may have learned to insist on a GIA report but other pedestrians may not be informed - or even concerned with the lab. A busy district seller with a diamond in the case he can present as either a 1.50 H SI1 *or* a 1.50 G VS2 (same diamond, different reports) has more options for presentation when interfacing with shoppers of different levels of education and priorities. It is even possible that he could make an educational impression by showing both and illuminating how lab grading varies. Is there potential for abuse in the system? Yes. Does it happen? Unfortunately I’m sure it does, but that potential exists when presenting any of the "Cs" to shoppers.

Remember there are also diamonds with no reports, reports from labs almost no one has heard from and even some from highly reliable boutique labs like our PS appraisers run. A single diamond could run the gamut of major and minor labs and receive a spectrum of grading that would make an honest gemologist blush... But for every diamond/report there is a target market. That’s not bad it just “is.” For example, we submit exclusively to AGS because our dealer-clients serve consumers who value our brand proposition, including a report with the strictest performance requirements...but that is just us. There is nothing wrong with the 47th street dealer who dishes a diamond with no report to the hurry-up soldier-on-leave with a fistful of dollars who’ll be proposing tonight and shipping out tomorrow. In such a case a grading report may be a distant priority! As long as education, context, disclosure and value were involved in the transaction the consumer was likely well served.

There are all different flavors of makers, dealers and clientele in the global diamond village. The different trends and practices are limitless. Whether it's the side-by-side street kiosks in Tel-Aviv or the armed-guard showrooms in the most luxurious area of Manhattan the ethics depend on the presentation. As with many products I suggest an ounce of education by consumers is worth a pound of remorse.