Warning! AGS 0003706305 is not what it seems.

Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.


Jan 16, 2003
AGS 0003706305 is not what it seems!

Round Brilliant 1.020ct F VS2 (AGS 0)


Table %..........57.0%
Depth %..........59.3%
Crown angle......34.4º
Pavilion angle...40.6º

I purchased this diamond via one of the more popular online sites. Pricescope showed it listed on several other sites so the diamond was obviously owned by an independent manufacturer. Common practice, not a problem. None of the online dealers keep a large inventory in-house.

The numbers on the diamond were great. It scored a 0.5 on the HCA with a grade of Excellent in all categories using the AGS figures (a separate run using Sarin numbers yielded a 0.7). The stone itself was absolutely beautiful when I saw it in person. Although it was not an H&A cut, it had a strong hearts and arrows pattern viewed through a Fantasy-scope. I didn’t have an Ideal-scope to judge light levels, but I compared it against other ideal stones at a local jeweler in under several lighting conditions and I liked what I saw.

So, what was the problem? I took it to an appraiser (as we all know one should) and he said everything matched the certification except that the color was a G. I was pretty much beside myself and decided to return the stone suspecting any number of shady scenarios. The sales director at the online company said that mis-grading was extremely rare, and offered to send it to an appraiser (well known in these forums for his objectivity and impartiality) so we would know for sure. I agreed and shipped the stone to him. I didn’t speak to him after the appraisal, but according to the sales director, he and two of his staff gemologists agreed. The stone was a G.

That didn’t change the way the stone looked, but it was a G not an F and therefore not worth as much. However, since the online company does not own the stone, they have no power to force the manufacturer to change the price and he was not willing to downgrade when asked. The sales director was not willing to take the price hit herself, and I don’t blame her. She would have been basically paying me all her profit and then some. Of course I did not want to pay for an F that was a G so I returned it. The sales director agreed not to sell the stone as an F, but the manufacturer would make no such promise and he is under no obligation to have AGS re-grade the stone. What do you think he is going to do?

Shopping for a diamond? Buyer beware. Get an appraisal and be sure. And to the unfortunate individual reading this too late, sorry to tell you the bad news.

Here are the pricescope links on the diamond that are still live...


Oct 30, 2002
An unfortunate incident but not altogether uncommon. Grading is subjective and can often be incorrect by a grade. Anything more than off by a grade would be suspicious.

Personally, if you liked the stone and the only difference was 1 color grade difference (very minimal difference BTW between F and G in face-up viewing--some would argue none), I think you should have kept it. The price difference should have been minimal, I would have kept the stone and asked for a bit of reimbursement or my appraisal fees paid or something for my trouble. A good stone is hard to find!

Good to note though that they will not change the grade or the listing. Hopefully anyone who is considering this stone will read this post and know that they are getting a G..and make sure it is priced accordingly.



Nov 10, 2002
I remember reading that graders are allowed up to two colour or clarity grades difference due to the subjectivity of grading. Different graders have different opinions.
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results