Swap-A-Roo = Not for You?

[kenny]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

 

[maplefemme]

I would just like to say.. IMO it is very sad where this thread has gone... I think it should be closed out.... by the moderators... I think every story has two sides and this one has been aired out quite a bit dragging everyone down into the mud.... not sure it's really necessary.

Now.. for those that think I should keep my thoughts to myself.. OK... I respect that.. I probably should.. you're right.. but I just couldn't help myself.. I HIT SUBMIT!!!!!

1) you shouldn't keep your thoughts to yourself (they aren't offensive, after all)
2) Yes every story has two sides, and both had a chance to represent
3) PS should be a place where stuff like this IS aired. Educates us more on what can happen in the big bad gem world.
4) I don't think anyone is being dragged through the mud. It's just another good reminder that buyer beware. In fact, I think both parties have been quite civilized.
5) PSers love having opinions about stuff like this. It's the life of this forum, always has been, always will be.

Both myself and the vendor have been able to state our experiences and views on this subject very openly and calmly in this thread, it's not one-sided in the least.
You have your opinion TG and everyone else will have theirs on the subject, that's great.
I'm not trashing anyone, I am just stating my experience with buying PS pre-owned.
If we can't state anything but positive experiences then it's not reality and we all miss out on valuable learning.
If we censor everything that's not buttercups and roses, then we aren't getting the full picture.

Respectfully...

 

[Circe]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

 

[Mayk]

Just as a point of interest and why I think in some ways this thing is WAY off course.. I just went to OLD WORLD DIAMONDS.. and I clicked on a bunch of diamonds.. from .32 cts to 4.00 cts. The MAJORITY.. (all but one out of 25 or so I looked at..) had either N/A, EGLUSA or EGLNY.. only one stone had GIA. I thought and maybe I'm way off.. most old stones were graded by EGLUSA which I do know is one of the better of the worst when it comes to EGL labs.. and sort of the standard for Old Cuts... I guess I'm wrong reading this... but that site would certainly say... EGL is sort of the standard.. not saying the GIA is wrong or graded it wrong or anything about the grading of this particular stone.. just saying.. I thought EGL and Old Cuts were kind of a normal thing.... I'll keep reading because obviously.. this thread upset my poor little sense of balance....

 

[ericad]

This thread has become very emotional, and while I'd like to respond to each and every thought, I won't because it's an emotional transaction for us as well.

Maplefemme, if I misspoke in my original post on any count (about the details of who sent the stone to GIA, etc. since you were dealing with Grace and I was posting to the best of my recollection), my apologies.

I mentioned the lengthy layaway because it was longer than what we usually allow and I felt it was relevant with regards to our return policy and layaway purchases being final sale. It was most certainly not coming from a negative place and I meant you no offense by mentioning it.

With regards to grading, as I said, I'm very transparent about our process. We graded the stone ourselves against a grading set as well as against other GIA and EGL stones in our inventory at the time. We then asked 2 of our jewelers to confirm our assessment. We did not specifically represent the stone as a GIA-equivalent L/M, and we do use EGL as our grading standard. GIA gave the stone an S/T grade. We think that EGL, based on that, may have given it an O/P - in the lower colors, EGL is typically 2-3 grades higher than GIA, and in our opinion EGL is more consistent than GIA in their grading of stones lower than M color - we have discussed this with many other knowledgeable antique dealers who are in agreement about this. We graded it an L/M, or essentially 1.5 grades off from what EGL would have possibly graded it if we assume that GIA's S/T grade is the most correct. I will not accept accusations that we misrepresented the color by 7 grades. This is simply not true. I will accept responsibility that we may have been off by 1-2 color grades in our estimate of color on an uncerted stone based on EGL standards (remember that we're dealing with split grades, and not single letter grades).

Maplefemme signed an agreement that this sale was non-refundable. All buyers have the option to ask us to send the stone to an independent appraiser prior to purchase. We would have been happy to do so, but the buyer in this case did not request it. She loved the diamond based on the photos and videos, and the appearance of the stone hasn't changed.

When all of this happened, we asked them what they would like us to do to make it right - we were open to any form of resolution. She asked if she could trade it towards the 2.67, and we were agreeable to that. We also offered to ship the stone to her PRIOR to having Victor set it so that she could see it in person (we offered to pay all shipping costs). Her choice was to let her fiance handle it, and his request was for a partial refund based on the GIA report, with which we complied. Until this thread, the last we heard was that all parties were happy with this resolution. In reviewing our correspondence, neither Maplefemme nor her fiance ever requested a full refund based on the GIA report. We said tell us what to do to make it right, and they said price adjustment.

It's still the same beautiful diamond - its appearance hasn't changed and it's our sincerest hope that she loves the stone in person. If she doesn't, then our offer to give her full purchase price credit towards another stone still stands, whether now or 6 months from now. Alternately, we've offered to sell it for her on consignment at no charge. What we cannot offer her is a refund. This is not an option based on the terms of the original sale and the fact that we resolved this transaction in accordance with their wishes 2 months ago.

With regards to the 2.67, I'm truly at a loss for words. I don't know how else to explain that at the time we were discussing that stone with you, it was not being considered as a mark down item. The price was the price. Many weeks later we decided to make it our special of the month, marking it down 10% for a limited time only. As you can see when you visit our site, it's now listed back at the original price. How could we have offered it to you at a sale price when that sale did not yet exist? We are offering to honor the expired sale price to you now, but from your posts it seems that this is not enough.

Grace and I got into this business because we're passionate about antiques and about providing great service. We go to great lengths to accurately represent pieces to the best of our ability, and when we make a mistake we course-correct in order to improve our business, and we bend over backwards to resolve the situation for our client.

MAPLEFEMME, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE US DO AT THIS POINT TO MAKE THIS RIGHT? We have been agreeable to every one of your requests, yet you are dissatisfied. Please tell me what you would have us do so that we can move forward.

 

[kenny]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

None of those reasons would get me to part my money.

Customers can insist the stone be removed and sent to GIA.

IMHO, It's GIA/AGS report or no sale for any diamond of worth, but hey, people vary, customers and vendors.

Erica, wouldn't it be great if your business became a leader in selling only GIA/AGS graded stones?
You will never again have this controversy, and be seen as part of the solution instead of part of this scandalous lab-grading-standards-not-being-standard problem.
You could tactfully explain on the front page of your site the explanation.

 

[maplefemme]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

My first post on PS was answering a post asking who bought this stone, Kenny. Hardly a seasoned PSer, but I'm appreciative of the insight and knowledge I have gained through more versed PSers since that day.
Again, I reiterate, I take full responsibility for not buying a GIA or AGS formally graded stone.

 

[TravelingGal]

I would just like to say.. IMO it is very sad where this thread has gone... I think it should be closed out.... by the moderators... I think every story has two sides and this one has been aired out quite a bit dragging everyone down into the mud.... not sure it's really necessary.

Now.. for those that think I should keep my thoughts to myself.. OK... I respect that.. I probably should.. you're right.. but I just couldn't help myself.. I HIT SUBMIT!!!!!

1) you shouldn't keep your thoughts to yourself (they aren't offensive, after all)
2) Yes every story has two sides, and both had a chance to represent
3) PS should be a place where stuff like this IS aired. Educates us more on what can happen in the big bad gem world.
4) I don't think anyone is being dragged through the mud. It's just another good reminder that buyer beware. In fact, I think both parties have been quite civilized.
5) PSers love having opinions about stuff like this. It's the life of this forum, always has been, always will be.

Both myself and the vendor have been able to state our experiences and views on this subject very openly and calmly in this thread, it's not one-sided in the least.
You have your opinion TG and everyone else will have theirs on the subject, that's great.
I'm not trashing anyone, I am just stating my experience with buying PS pre-owned.
If we can't state anything but positive experiences then it's not reality and we all miss out on valuable learning.
If we censor everything that's not buttercups and roses, then we aren't getting the full picture.
Respectfully...

Um, I think what you said is what I said in my post??

 

[ericad]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

This is very simple. Because we don't only sell to Pricescopers and EGL is the standard among antique cuts. Try explaining to a non-pricescoper that GIA is stricter, and that your GIA stone is really comparable to another vendor's EGL stone of 2-3 grades higher, etc. Customers think you're BS'ing them and there's nothing that one can point to that says unequivocally that EGL will be X grades higher than GIA. It can vary. So then how do clients compare GIA old cuts to a sea of EGL stones? In order for our buyers to make true apples to apples comparisons of our stones against other antique dealers, we made the decision to switch from GIA to EGL. We also go to great lengths to explain to clients that EGL is softer on grading than GIA. This is not about preference or which lab is more correct. It's a business decision that we've made to stick with EGL in order to be competitive with other vendors. And for the most part our clients have had an easier time as a result.

The other factor in EGL's favor is that we firmly believe that they are more consistent with lower colored stones, which antique diamonds frequently are. Through personal experience, I would trust EGL's grading scale for lower than M diamonds over GIA. This is just a personal opinion based on our experience, and the experience of many seasoned old cut dealers we've spoken with. Many will disagree, but we like EGL for the lower colors.

 

[kenny]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

My first post on PS was answering a post asking who bought this stone, Kenny. Hardly a seasoned PSer, but I'm appreciative of the insight and knowledge I have gained through more versed PSers since that day.
Again, I reiterate, I take full responsibility for not buying a GIA or AGS formally graded stone.

Thanks, MF.
Sorry, I'm not picking on you.
I'm sorry you got caught up in this.

This thing of labs having different standards is an outrage and the visibility of PS can be a force for good to get these unethical labs to match GIA's grading standards or be put out of business.
I vote with my wallet and my posts here.

People vary and some are criminals.
IMHO, the lying labs are run by criminals.
Imagine if they lied about carat weight?
Lying about color and clarity is just as bad since they CAN be more consistent; it's not all wishy washy personal opinion.
An F is an F, not an I.
An VS2 is a VS2, not an I1.
If GIA/AGS can hold to certain standards so can other labs.

This subject makes me so mad.

 

[Circe]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

None of those reasons would get me to part my money.

Customers can insist the stone be removed and sent to GIA.

IMHO, It's GIA/AGS report or no sale for any diamond of worth, but hey, people vary, customers and vendors.

Erica, wouldn't it be great if your business became a leader in selling only GIA/AGS graded stones?
You will never again have this controversy, and be seen as part of the solution instead of part of this scandalous lab-grading-standards-not-being-standard problem.
You could tactfully explain on the front page of your site the explanation.

Oookay ... Kenny, you're missing the point that neither GIA nor AGS acknowledge the quirks of old cuts. Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity, and if your insurance replaces like with like, it can be useless. You want to reform the biz? Write to GIA and ask them to develop a cut category for old cuts instead of adopting a holier-than-thou attitude towards buyers or a finger-wagging one towards vendors. Or, you know, accept the whole "people vary" credo ...

 

[Maisie]

This thread has become very emotional, and while I'd like to respond to each and every thought, I won't because it's an emotional transaction for us as well.

Maplefemme, if I misspoke in my original post on any count (about the details of who sent the stone to GIA, etc. since you were dealing with Grace and I was posting to the best of my recollection), my apologies.

I mentioned the lengthy layaway because it was longer than what we usually allow and I felt it was relevant with regards to our return policy and layaway purchases being final sale. It was most certainly not coming from a negative place and I meant you no offense by mentioning it.

With regards to grading, as I said, I'm very transparent about our process. We graded the stone ourselves against a grading set as well as against other GIA and EGL stones in our inventory at the time. We then asked 2 of our jewelers to confirm our assessment. We did not specifically represent the stone as a GIA-equivalent L/M, and we do use EGL as our grading standard. GIA gave the stone an S/T grade. We think that EGL, based on that, may have given it an O/P - in the lower colors, EGL is typically 2-3 grades higher than GIA, and in our opinion EGL is more consistent than GIA in their grading of stones lower than M color - we have discussed this with many other knowledgeable antique dealers who are in agreement about this. We graded it an L/M, or essentially 1.5 grades off from what EGL would have possibly graded it if we assume that GIA's S/T grade is the most correct. I will not accept accusations that we misrepresented the color by 7 grades. This is simply not true. I will accept responsibility that we may have been off by 1-2 color grades in our estimate of color on an uncerted stone based on EGL standards (remember that we're dealing with split grades, and not single letter grades).

Maplefemme signed an agreement that this sale was non-refundable. All buyers have the option to ask us to send the stone to an independent appraiser prior to purchase. We would have been happy to do so, but the buyer in this case did not request it. She loved the diamond based on the photos and videos, and the appearance of the stone hasn't changed.

When all of this happened, we asked them what they would like us to do to make it right - we were open to any form of resolution. She asked if she could trade it towards the 2.67, and we were agreeable to that. We also offered to ship the stone to her PRIOR to having Victor set it so that she could see it in person (we offered to pay all shipping costs). Her choice was to let her fiance handle it, and his request was for a partial refund based on the GIA report, with which we complied. Until this thread, the last we heard was that all parties were happy with this resolution. In reviewing our correspondence, neither Maplefemme nor her fiance ever requested a full refund based on the GIA report. We said tell us what to do to make it right, and they said price adjustment.

It's still the same beautiful diamond - its appearance hasn't changed and it's our sincerest hope that she loves the stone in person. If she doesn't, then our offer to give her full purchase price credit towards another stone still stands, whether now or 6 months from now. Alternately, we've offered to sell it for her on consignment at no charge. What we cannot offer her is a refund. This is not an option based on the terms of the original sale and the fact that we resolved this transaction in accordance with their wishes 2 months ago.

With regards to the 2.67, I'm truly at a loss for words. I don't know how else to explain that at the time we were discussing that stone with you, it was not being considered as a mark down item. The price was the price. Many weeks later we decided to make it our special of the month, marking it down 10% for a limited time only. As you can see when you visit our site, it's now listed back at the original price. How could we have offered it to you at a sale price when that sale did not yet exist? We are offering to honor the expired sale price to you now, but from your posts it seems that this is not enough.

Grace and I got into this business because we're passionate about antiques and about providing great service. We go to great lengths to accurately represent pieces to the best of our ability, and when we make a mistake we course-correct in order to improve our business, and we bend over backwards to resolve the situation for our client.

MAPLEFEMME, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE US DO AT THIS POINT TO MAKE THIS RIGHT? We have been agreeable to every one of your requests, yet you are dissatisfied. Please tell me what you would have us do so that we can move forward.

It wasn't an accusation. It was a statement based on the fact that you listed the diamond as being L/M when the GIA grading was S/T. Can you understand that Maplefemme was shocked and disappointed in the big difference in grading?

 

[maplefemme]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

This is interesting, Circe, I'm wondering if they have changed that? GIA wrote "Old European Brilliant" on my report.

 

[Maisie]

Maplefemme, can I just ask if you have seen this diamond in person?

 

[Circe]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

This is interesting, Circe, I'm wondering if they have changed that? GIA wrote "Old European Brilliant" on my report.

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, is the problem - they don't have a strict policy on it, so it's up to the individual graders. And as I recall, even if they note what it is, it will still get a cut grade according to RB specs, which ... yeah.

 

[maplefemme]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

My first post on PS was answering a post asking who bought this stone, Kenny. Hardly a seasoned PSer, but I'm appreciative of the insight and knowledge I have gained through more versed PSers since that day.
Again, I reiterate, I take full responsibility for not buying a GIA or AGS formally graded stone.

Thanks, MF.
Sorry, I'm not picking on you.
I'm sorry you got caught up in this.

This thing of labs having different standards is an outrage and the visibility of PS can be a force for good to get these unethical labs to match GIA's grading standards or be put out of business.
I vote with my wallet and my posts here.

People vary and some are criminals.
IMHO, the lying labs are run by criminals.
Imagine if they lied about carat weight?
Lying about color and clarity is just as bad since they CAN be more consistent; it's not all wishy washy personal opinion.
An F is an F, not an I.
An VS2 is a VS2, not an I1.
If GIA/AGS can hold to certain standards so can other labs.

This subject makes me so mad.

No problems, Kenny

I also wish there was a consistent grading standard, it's very confusing for a layperson.
All I can do is make sure I buy GIA/AGS from here on in....oh, and come here to make sure the angles are up to snuff!

 

[maplefemme]

Maplefemme, can I just ask if you have seen this diamond in person?

Not yet, but I'm hopeful soon

 

[Maisie]

Maplefemme, can I just ask if you have seen this diamond in person?

Not yet, but I'm hopeful soon

Do you have a link to the listing from JBEG? I'd love to have a look at the pictures.

 

[minitiki]

I believe this is the diamond in question.

http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/SOLD-ITEMS-1/293ct-Old-European-Cut/10664378_6nFZjq#746165956_iNyVU

 

[Bliss]

I'm sorry to Maplefemme and EricaD for what looks like an emotional rollercoaster ride. Maplefemme, I am sure Victor is right about your stone being lively and beautiful - hopefully once you see the ring, you will fall head over heels in LOVE and forget the stress from the whole transaction. I know that will not be easy, but maybe as the days go by and the beautiful stone works its magic, you will be so mesmerized that you will forget.

This thread has been so helpful to me, so thank you for posting your experience. I have been eyeing several pieces on JBEG's site and was so close to calling to purchase... I always assumed that the color and clarity grades were consistent with what GIA or EGL (if that's what is used for older cuts) would also say. To think that this may not be the case is a huge shocker for me and a reminder to use my trusty brain when it comes to all purchases and not just trust vendors because PSers love them. There's probably only one...maybe two PS vendors I would trust 100% but that's only because I have worked with them for many years now. I feel like from now on, I should be mentally adding a couple of color grades when scanning JBEG from now on. This is OK with me because I love the beautiful pieces and the prices are always good, too. But wow, this is a good reminder of how we can't just trust anything blindly without a report. I would be devastated if I bought something that was estimated to be L/M and got O/P, even. This probably means I'm not cut out to buy old cuts, as lovely as they are! I think I understand why colored stone fanatics insist on reports, too. You just never know what you're getting until it's in your hands.

As for the original topic, I would love the swap-a-roos from the fickle pickles! I do wonder if something has been HPP around. More than often, it's a piece I had initial reservations about and they're confirmed when they go back up for sale so quickly. Like many others here, I wouldn't buy a piece from someone I didn't like or respect...only because I wouldn't want to deal with them in real life!

 

[Maisie]

I believe this is the diamond in question.

http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/SOLD-ITEMS-1/293ct-Old-European-Cut/10664378_6nFZjq#746165956_iNyVU

It does look very pretty. I could see quite a bit of colour in the video but it wouldn't bother me (I don't think - you can't be sure till you see a stone in person). I really hope you love it when it arrives Maplefemme. Which setting have you decided on from Victor?

 

[maplefemme]

This thread has become very emotional, and while I'd like to respond to each and every thought, I won't because it's an emotional transaction for us as well.

Maplefemme, if I misspoke in my original post on any count (about the details of who sent the stone to GIA, etc. since you were dealing with Grace and I was posting to the best of my recollection), my apologies.

I mentioned the lengthy layaway because it was longer than what we usually allow and I felt it was relevant with regards to our return policy and layaway purchases being final sale. It was most certainly not coming from a negative place and I meant you no offense by mentioning it.

I understand, however, Grace was perfectly fine when I asked for 4 months layaway and even offered longer if we needed, without my asking. If the layaway period were shorter it would not have changed your return policy or it being final sale, so I'm not sure how it was relevant, but thank you for explaining.


With regards to grading, as I said, I'm very transparent about our process. We graded the stone ourselves against a grading set as well as against other GIA and EGL stones in our inventory at the time. We then asked 2 of our jewelers to confirm our assessment. We did not specifically represent the stone as a GIA-equivalent L/M, and we do use EGL as our grading standard. GIA gave the stone an S/T grade. We think that EGL, based on that, may have given it an O/P - in the lower colors, EGL is typically 2-3 grades higher than GIA, and in our opinion EGL is more consistent than GIA in their grading of stones lower than M color - we have discussed this with many other knowledgeable antique dealers who are in agreement about this. We graded it an L/M, or essentially 1.5 grades off from what EGL would have possibly graded it if we assume that GIA's S/T grade is the most correct. I will not accept accusations that we misrepresented the color by 7 grades. This is simply not true. I will accept responsibility that we may have been off by 1-2 color grades in our estimate of color on an uncerted stone based on EGL standards (remember that we're dealing with split grades, and not single letter grades).

I was told it was graded as L/M with a GIA Master stone set, I'm not sure how I was supposed to understand it as being to graded EGL standard using a GIA Master set?

Maplefemme signed an agreement that this sale was non-refundable. All buyers have the option to ask us to send the stone to an independent appraiser prior to purchase. We would have been happy to do so, but the buyer in this case did not request it. She loved the diamond based on the photos and videos, and the appearance of the stone hasn't changed.

When all of this happened, we asked them what they would like us to do to make it right - we were open to any form of resolution. She asked if she could trade it towards the 2.67, and we were agreeable to that. We also offered to ship the stone to her PRIOR to having Victor set it so that she could see it in person (we offered to pay all shipping costs). Her choice was to let her fiance handle it, and his request was for a partial refund based on the GIA report, with which we complied. Until this thread, the last we heard was that all parties were happy with this resolution. In reviewing our correspondence, neither Maplefemme nor her fiance ever requested a full refund based on the GIA report. We said tell us what to do to make it right, and they said price adjustment.

It's still the same beautiful diamond - its appearance hasn't changed and it's our sincerest hope that she loves the stone in person. If she doesn't, then our offer to give her full purchase price credit towards another stone still stands, whether now or 6 months from now. Alternately, we've offered to sell it for her on consignment at no charge. What we cannot offer her is a refund. This is not an option based on the terms of the original sale and the fact that we resolved this transaction in accordance with their wishes 2 months ago.

With regards to the 2.67, I'm truly at a loss for words. I don't know how else to explain that at the time we were discussing that stone with you, it was not being considered as a mark down item. The price was the price. Many weeks later we decided to make it our special of the month, marking it down 10% for a limited time only. As you can see when you visit our site, it's now listed back at the original price. How could we have offered it to you at a sale price when that sale did not yet exist? We are offering to honor the expired sale price to you now, but from your posts it seems that this is not enough.

Grace and I got into this business because we're passionate about antiques and about providing great service. We go to great lengths to accurately represent pieces to the best of our ability, and when we make a mistake we course-correct in order to improve our business, and we bend over backwards to resolve the situation for our client.

MAPLEFEMME, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE US DO AT THIS POINT TO MAKE THIS RIGHT? We have been agreeable to every one of your requests, yet you are dissatisfied. Please tell me what you would have us do so that we can

Thank you for the offer, Erica. I do not wish to go back and forth on this because at the end of the day we both want resolution and we are at a disagreement still over certain details.
We are staying with this stone because my SO does not want to patronage JbEG further.
If it arrives and needs switching then we will find alternate means to do so.

My regards...

 

[maplefemme]

I believe this is the diamond in question.

http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/SOLD-ITEMS-1/293ct-Old-European-Cut/10664378_6nFZjq#746165956_iNyVU

It does look very pretty. I could see quite a bit of colour in the video but it wouldn't bother me (I don't think - you can't be sure till you see a stone in person). I really hope you love it when it arrives Maplefemme. Which setting have you decided on from Victor?

Thank you Maisie L/M was about as warm as I wanted to go, I see that warmth in the video too and hopefully that's as warm as it shows in person.
Victor is making a ring with "I" color single cuts on the shank and on the basket in a cathedral style, I'll post pics in SMTB when I get it.

Thanks again Maisie

 

[kenny]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

None of those reasons would get me to part my money.

Customers can insist the stone be removed and sent to GIA.

IMHO, It's GIA/AGS report or no sale for any diamond of worth, but hey, people vary, customers and vendors.

Erica, wouldn't it be great if your business became a leader in selling only GIA/AGS graded stones?
You will never again have this controversy, and be seen as part of the solution instead of part of this scandalous lab-grading-standards-not-being-standard problem.
You could tactfully explain on the front page of your site the explanation.

Kenny, you're missing the point that neither GIA nor AGS acknowledge the quirks of old cuts.
Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity, and if your insurance replaces like with like, it can be useless.

. . . as "useless" as GIA's reports for Oval, Pear, Emerald Cut, Square Emerald cut, Trillion, Triangle, Radiant, Cushion, Kite, Octagon, Shield, etc., ANY cut that is not a standard modern round brilliant - the only cut that gets a cut grade from GIA.

There's nothing quirky about antique rounds cuts that should keep them away from GIA, and sent to EGL.

After reading your post I called GIA.
After asking questions the person couldn't answer I got transferred 3 times and eventually spoke to a gemologist in their Carlsbad lab.
Her name was Kathy.
She said GIA DOES grade antique round cuts and, like mentioned above, they do not get graded for cut.
They grade everything for those diamonds that they grade for every other shape.

Circe you wrote, "Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity".
Not so.
GIA's grades are also useful for: Measurements, Weight, Polish, Symmetry, Fluorescence, Inclusion plots and list of inclusion types, Depth%, Table%, and Girdle Thickness.

These data may matter to the shopper.

Again people vary and this person won't buy a diamond graded by any other lab than AGS or GIA and runs screaming away from vendor grading.
I will present my reasons and others can make their own decisions.

Throwing your hands up and saying, "Well vendors of antique cuts like EGL so I'm going to support that with my purchases" is sad, IMHO.
It results in threads like this and upset customers.

 

[Circe]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

None of those reasons would get me to part my money.

Customers can insist the stone be removed and sent to GIA.

IMHO, It's GIA/AGS report or no sale for any diamond of worth, but hey, people vary, customers and vendors.

Erica, wouldn't it be great if your business became a leader in selling only GIA/AGS graded stones?
You will never again have this controversy, and be seen as part of the solution instead of part of this scandalous lab-grading-standards-not-being-standard problem.
You could tactfully explain on the front page of your site the explanation.

Kenny, you're missing the point that neither GIA nor AGS acknowledge the quirks of old cuts.
Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity, and if your insurance replaces like with like, it can be useless.

. . . as "useless" as GIA's reports for Oval, Pear, Emerald Cut, Square Emerald cut, Trillion, Triangle, Radiant, Cushion, Kite, Octagon, Shield, etc., ANY cut that is not a standard modern round brilliant - the only cut that gets a cut grade from GIA.

There's nothing quirky about antique rounds cuts that should keep them away from GIA, and sent to EGL.

GIA issues cut grades only to standard modern brilliant cuts.

I just called GIA.
After asking questions at the person couldn't answer I got transferred 3 times and eventually spoke to a gemologist in their Carlsbad lab.
Her name was Kathy.
She said GIA DOES grade antique round cuts and, like mentioned above, they do not get graded for cut.

Circe you wrote, "Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity".
Not so.
GIA's grades are also useful for: Measurements, Weight, Polish, Symmetry, Fluorescence, Inclusion plots and list of inclusion types, Depth%, Table%, and Girdle Thickness.

These data may matter to the shopper.

Again people vary and this person won't buy a diamond graded by any other lab than AGS or GIA and runs screaming away from vendor grading.
I will present my reasons and others can make their own decisions.

Throwing your hands up and saying, "Well vendors of antique cuts like EGL so I'm going to support that with my purchases" is sad, IMHO.
It results in threads like this and upset customers.

Which only reflects the subjectivity - because I took the course, and remember clearly that while you can specify the cut if you, as the grader, choose - OEC, OMB, etc. - it's up to the grader as to whether or not they do. A lot don't. EGL, as I understand it (never worked for 'em, just going off the rep!) makes a point of noting old cut details so you get a replacement in-kind.

This is derailing the original thread, though - let's start a new one to debate further, if you like. I was just pointing out the it wasn't an error on MF's part to buy a non-GIA stone, as it's kind of par for the course if you're shopping vintage.

 

[Maisie]

I believe this is the diamond in question.

http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/SOLD-ITEMS-1/293ct-Old-European-Cut/10664378_6nFZjq#746165956_iNyVU

It does look very pretty. I could see quite a bit of colour in the video but it wouldn't bother me (I don't think - you can't be sure till you see a stone in person). I really hope you love it when it arrives Maplefemme. Which setting have you decided on from Victor?

Thank you Maisie L/M was about as warm as I wanted to go, I see that warmth in the video too and hopefully that's as warm as it shows in person.
Victor is making a ring with "I" color single cuts on the shank and on the basket in a cathedral style, I'll post pics in SMTB when I get it.

Thanks again Maisie

I'm looking forward to seeing it and hearing what your reaction is

 

[kenny]

Why would anyone, especially a PSer, ever remotely consider a diamond , especially an expensive one, without a report from GIA or AGS? (melee exempted of course)

And if I was a vendor I'd never express a preference for EGL grading here on PS.

Because old cuts don't tend to come with them, GIA doesn't grade unmounted stones, and getting a stone out of a valuable antique setting can be a real kitch-bitty of a job. EGL does grade mounted, and has a rep for being good on old cuts (whereas GIA just calls them "round brilliants" and dings their cut grade.) It's a specialty field, it has its own logic.

None of those reasons would get me to part my money.

Customers can insist the stone be removed and sent to GIA.

IMHO, It's GIA/AGS report or no sale for any diamond of worth, but hey, people vary, customers and vendors.

Erica, wouldn't it be great if your business became a leader in selling only GIA/AGS graded stones?
You will never again have this controversy, and be seen as part of the solution instead of part of this scandalous lab-grading-standards-not-being-standard problem.
You could tactfully explain on the front page of your site the explanation.

Kenny, you're missing the point that neither GIA nor AGS acknowledge the quirks of old cuts.
Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity, and if your insurance replaces like with like, it can be useless.

. . . as "useless" as GIA's reports for Oval, Pear, Emerald Cut, Square Emerald cut, Trillion, Triangle, Radiant, Cushion, Kite, Octagon, Shield, etc., ANY cut that is not a standard modern round brilliant - the only cut that gets a cut grade from GIA.

There's nothing quirky about antique rounds cuts that should keep them away from GIA, and sent to EGL.

GIA issues cut grades only to standard modern brilliant cuts.

I just called GIA.
After asking questions at the person couldn't answer I got transferred 3 times and eventually spoke to a gemologist in their Carlsbad lab.
Her name was Kathy.
She said GIA DOES grade antique round cuts and, like mentioned above, they do not get graded for cut.

Circe you wrote, "Their grades are only useful for the color and the clarity".
Not so.
GIA's grades are also useful for: Measurements, Weight, Polish, Symmetry, Fluorescence, Inclusion plots and list of inclusion types, Depth%, Table%, and Girdle Thickness.

These data may matter to the shopper.

Again people vary and this person won't buy a diamond graded by any other lab than AGS or GIA and runs screaming away from vendor grading.
I will present my reasons and others can make their own decisions.

Throwing your hands up and saying, "Well vendors of antique cuts like EGL so I'm going to support that with my purchases" is sad, IMHO.
It results in threads like this and upset customers.

Which only reflects the subjectivity - because I took the course, and remember clearly that while you can specify the cut if you, as the grader, choose - OEC, OMB, etc. - it's up to the grader as to whether or not they do. A lot don't. EGL, as I understand it (never worked for 'em, just going off the rep!) makes a point of noting old cut details so you get a replacement in-kind.

This is derailing the original thread, though - let's start a new one to debate further, if you like. I was just pointing out the it wasn't an error on MF's part to buy a non-GIA stone, as it's kind of par for the course if you're shopping vintage.

If "par for the course" is a bad idea you change or don't play.
If a vendor told me it's EGL or nothing I'd just not buy.
I will not support the scam-labs.

 

[Circe]

Which in this case means, what ... not buying vintage? Or limiting your choices by an order of magnitude? Kinda impractical.

 

[risingsun]

This thread has become very emotional, and while I'd like to respond to each and every thought, I won't because it's an emotional transaction for us as well.

Maplefemme, if I misspoke in my original post on any count (about the details of who sent the stone to GIA, etc. since you were dealing with Grace and I was posting to the best of my recollection), my apologies.

I mentioned the lengthy layaway because it was longer than what we usually allow and I felt it was relevant with regards to our return policy and layaway purchases being final sale. It was most certainly not coming from a negative place and I meant you no offense by mentioning it.

I understand, however, Grace was perfectly fine when I asked for 4 months layaway and even offered longer if we needed, without my asking. If the layaway period were shorter it would not have changed your return policy or it being final sale, so I'm not sure how it was relevant, but thank you for explaining.


With regards to grading, as I said, I'm very transparent about our process. We graded the stone ourselves against a grading set as well as against other GIA and EGL stones in our inventory at the time. We then asked 2 of our jewelers to confirm our assessment. We did not specifically represent the stone as a GIA-equivalent L/M, and we do use EGL as our grading standard. GIA gave the stone an S/T grade. We think that EGL, based on that, may have given it an O/P - in the lower colors, EGL is typically 2-3 grades higher than GIA, and in our opinion EGL is more consistent than GIA in their grading of stones lower than M color - we have discussed this with many other knowledgeable antique dealers who are in agreement about this. We graded it an L/M, or essentially 1.5 grades off from what EGL would have possibly graded it if we assume that GIA's S/T grade is the most correct. I will not accept accusations that we misrepresented the color by 7 grades. This is simply not true. I will accept responsibility that we may have been off by 1-2 color grades in our estimate of color on an uncerted stone based on EGL standards (remember that we're dealing with split grades, and not single letter grades).

I was told it was graded as L/M with a GIA Master stone set, I'm not sure how I was supposed to understand it as being to graded EGL standard using a GIA Master set?

Maplefemme signed an agreement that this sale was non-refundable. All buyers have the option to ask us to send the stone to an independent appraiser prior to purchase. We would have been happy to do so, but the buyer in this case did not request it. She loved the diamond based on the photos and videos, and the appearance of the stone hasn't changed.

When all of this happened, we asked them what they would like us to do to make it right - we were open to any form of resolution. She asked if she could trade it towards the 2.67, and we were agreeable to that. We also offered to ship the stone to her PRIOR to having Victor set it so that she could see it in person (we offered to pay all shipping costs). Her choice was to let her fiance handle it, and his request was for a partial refund based on the GIA report, with which we complied. Until this thread, the last we heard was that all parties were happy with this resolution. In reviewing our correspondence, neither Maplefemme nor her fiance ever requested a full refund based on the GIA report. We said tell us what to do to make it right, and they said price adjustment.

It's still the same beautiful diamond - its appearance hasn't changed and it's our sincerest hope that she loves the stone in person. If she doesn't, then our offer to give her full purchase price credit towards another stone still stands, whether now or 6 months from now. Alternately, we've offered to sell it for her on consignment at no charge. What we cannot offer her is a refund. This is not an option based on the terms of the original sale and the fact that we resolved this transaction in accordance with their wishes 2 months ago.

With regards to the 2.67, I'm truly at a loss for words. I don't know how else to explain that at the time we were discussing that stone with you, it was not being considered as a mark down item. The price was the price. Many weeks later we decided to make it our special of the month, marking it down 10% for a limited time only. As you can see when you visit our site, it's now listed back at the original price. How could we have offered it to you at a sale price when that sale did not yet exist? We are offering to honor the expired sale price to you now, but from your posts it seems that this is not enough.

Grace and I got into this business because we're passionate about antiques and about providing great service. We go to great lengths to accurately represent pieces to the best of our ability, and when we make a mistake we course-correct in order to improve our business, and we bend over backwards to resolve the situation for our client.

MAPLEFEMME, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE US DO AT THIS POINT TO MAKE THIS RIGHT? We have been agreeable to every one of your requests, yet you are dissatisfied. Please tell me what you would have us do so that we can

Thank you for the offer, Erica. I do not wish to go back and forth on this because at the end of the day we both want resolution and we are at a disagreement still over certain details.
We are staying with this stone because my SO does not want to patronage JbEG further.
If it arrives and needs switching then we will find alternate means to do so.

My regards...

MF~ I do not know you or JbEG. I would like to share some thoughts with you. Whenever I have looked at OEC diamonds, they are graded by EGL. Many times these diamonds are already set into rings. I believe the issue really stems from your SO making a hard and fast decision to take a discount on the stone, rather than looking into the other options that were presented to him. It placed everyone involved into a box. At that point, any hope of working with the vendor became more difficult. You have been give options, again, today. You still have the opportunity to make this right, if you so desire. Your SO seems to be driving this situation. Have you spoken with him about your preferences? Vendors do make mistakes. How they handle them is very important regarding their customer service. I think you have been presented with some viable options. I believe it is time for you to become involved in the process of choosing your stone. It doesn't sit well with me when someone tells me that 'this" is what "we" are going to do. My DH wouldn't do that to me, nor I to him. Your SO may be a nice guy, but he is not taking your feelings into consideration on this matter, IMO.

 

[missy]

This thread has become very emotional, and while I'd like to respond to each and every thought, I won't because it's an emotional transaction for us as well.

Maplefemme, if I misspoke in my original post on any count (about the details of who sent the stone to GIA, etc. since you were dealing with Grace and I was posting to the best of my recollection), my apologies.

I mentioned the lengthy layaway because it was longer than what we usually allow and I felt it was relevant with regards to our return policy and layaway purchases being final sale. It was most certainly not coming from a negative place and I meant you no offense by mentioning it.

I understand, however, Grace was perfectly fine when I asked for 4 months layaway and even offered longer if we needed, without my asking. If the layaway period were shorter it would not have changed your return policy or it being final sale, so I'm not sure how it was relevant, but thank you for explaining.


With regards to grading, as I said, I'm very transparent about our process. We graded the stone ourselves against a grading set as well as against other GIA and EGL stones in our inventory at the time. We then asked 2 of our jewelers to confirm our assessment. We did not specifically represent the stone as a GIA-equivalent L/M, and we do use EGL as our grading standard. GIA gave the stone an S/T grade. We think that EGL, based on that, may have given it an O/P - in the lower colors, EGL is typically 2-3 grades higher than GIA, and in our opinion EGL is more consistent than GIA in their grading of stones lower than M color - we have discussed this with many other knowledgeable antique dealers who are in agreement about this. We graded it an L/M, or essentially 1.5 grades off from what EGL would have possibly graded it if we assume that GIA's S/T grade is the most correct. I will not accept accusations that we misrepresented the color by 7 grades. This is simply not true. I will accept responsibility that we may have been off by 1-2 color grades in our estimate of color on an uncerted stone based on EGL standards (remember that we're dealing with split grades, and not single letter grades).

I was told it was graded as L/M with a GIA Master stone set, I'm not sure how I was supposed to understand it as being to graded EGL standard using a GIA Master set?

Maplefemme signed an agreement that this sale was non-refundable. All buyers have the option to ask us to send the stone to an independent appraiser prior to purchase. We would have been happy to do so, but the buyer in this case did not request it. She loved the diamond based on the photos and videos, and the appearance of the stone hasn't changed.

When all of this happened, we asked them what they would like us to do to make it right - we were open to any form of resolution. She asked if she could trade it towards the 2.67, and we were agreeable to that. We also offered to ship the stone to her PRIOR to having Victor set it so that she could see it in person (we offered to pay all shipping costs). Her choice was to let her fiance handle it, and his request was for a partial refund based on the GIA report, with which we complied. Until this thread, the last we heard was that all parties were happy with this resolution. In reviewing our correspondence, neither Maplefemme nor her fiance ever requested a full refund based on the GIA report. We said tell us what to do to make it right, and they said price adjustment.

It's still the same beautiful diamond - its appearance hasn't changed and it's our sincerest hope that she loves the stone in person. If she doesn't, then our offer to give her full purchase price credit towards another stone still stands, whether now or 6 months from now. Alternately, we've offered to sell it for her on consignment at no charge. What we cannot offer her is a refund. This is not an option based on the terms of the original sale and the fact that we resolved this transaction in accordance with their wishes 2 months ago.

With regards to the 2.67, I'm truly at a loss for words. I don't know how else to explain that at the time we were discussing that stone with you, it was not being considered as a mark down item. The price was the price. Many weeks later we decided to make it our special of the month, marking it down 10% for a limited time only. As you can see when you visit our site, it's now listed back at the original price. How could we have offered it to you at a sale price when that sale did not yet exist? We are offering to honor the expired sale price to you now, but from your posts it seems that this is not enough.

Grace and I got into this business because we're passionate about antiques and about providing great service. We go to great lengths to accurately represent pieces to the best of our ability, and when we make a mistake we course-correct in order to improve our business, and we bend over backwards to resolve the situation for our client.

MAPLEFEMME, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE US DO AT THIS POINT TO MAKE THIS RIGHT? We have been agreeable to every one of your requests, yet you are dissatisfied. Please tell me what you would have us do so that we can

Thank you for the offer, Erica. I do not wish to go back and forth on this because at the end of the day we both want resolution and we are at a disagreement still over certain details.
We are staying with this stone because my SO does not want to patronage JbEG further.
If it arrives and needs switching then we will find alternate means to do so.

My regards...

MF~ I do not know you or JbEG. I would like to share some thoughts with you. Whenever I have looked at OEC diamonds, they are graded by EGL. Many times these diamonds are already set into rings. I believe the issue really stems from your SO making a hard and fast decision to take a discount on the stone, rather than looking into the other options that were presented to him. It placed everyone involved into a box. At that point, any hope of working with the vendor became more difficult. You have been give options, again, today. You still have the opportunity to make this right, if you so desire. Your SO seems to be driving this situation. Have you spoken with him about your preferences? Vendors do make mistakes. How they handle them is very important regarding their customer service. I think you have been presented with some viable options. I believe it is time for you to become involved in the process of choosing your stone. It doesn't sit well with me when someone tells me that 'this" is what "we" are going to do. My DH wouldn't do that to me, nor I to him. Your SO may be a nice guy, but he is not taking your feelings into consideration on this matter, IMO.

I agree with this. No one is perfect all the time and Erica and Grace are trying to fix this now. Sure I know you are upset they didn't offer you the discount on that other stone at the time this all happened but there is no going back. It's already done and past. Now is the only time we can deal with and I respect your choice to do as your FI wants but just want to add my perspective here.

I am sure your FI wants you to be happy with the end result since you will be wearing this ring as a symbol of your love and marriage. So while I understand his reluctance to deal with JbEG because of your disappointing experience with them I ask you to consider what will make you happiest in the long run.

If it were me I would first see what I think when the ring arrives from Victor. You *just* might fall in love with it and then case closed. Best case scenario. *If* the ring is a disappointment because it is too warm for you well then I would take Erica and Grace's kind offer of taking the ring back and receiving a credit. They have so many droolworthy pieces on their website that I hope you can (hopefully now or in the near future) find the ring of your dreams. No reason to settle IMO especially because they have risen to the occasion and want to make you happy.

I would discuss this with your FI and let your feelings be known. I have to agree with risingsun because in a loving and happy relationship decisions should be made as a team. I know your FI loves you and is good to you and no one is taking any of that away from you but he is a man and sometimes men can be hard headed about certain things. Good luck maplefemme- I know ultimately it will all work out!!