what are your thoughts on egl-usa los angeles certs? Are tey reliable?

[oldminer]

GIA grading is not totally reliable or consistent. It is excellent for human grading work, but it is far from a perfect system or science. No lab forced to compete using the in-house system of GIA can do "better" than the GIA does. There is no indendent board of skilled arbiters who could possibly make such a pronouncement. So it stands to reason that a one grade tolerance is as good as any other lab can do when being measured up to a standard maker such as the GIA lab using their own GIA system. Another lab owner can''t ever hope to do "better" and you know you can''t ever totally match and agree in every instance.

The real question posed by consumers should not be so much about the letter of the alphabet for GIA color or clarity, but should best be "What is the dollar value of the diamond I have selected?" Often the dollar value on reports from labs other than GIA or AGS is exactly as it should be for what the consumer has chosen. Occasionally, the value is even better than expected because of dealer discounting practices.

The situation with consumers buying diamonds with documents from the notoriously "bad" labs is often still okay financially, but so many of these people are dissappointed with the grades to the extent they are unhappy with the diamond, too.

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 8/27/2008 11:11:18 AM
Author: oldminer
GIA grading is not totally reliable or consistent. It is excellent for human grading work, but it is far from a perfect system or science. No lab forced to compete using the in-house system of GIA can do 'better' than the GIA does. There is no indendent board of skilled arbiters who could possibly make such a pronouncement. So it stands to reason that a one grade tolerance is as good as any other lab can do when being measured up to a standard maker such as the GIA lab using their own GIA system. Another lab owner can't ever hope to do 'better' and you know you can't ever totally match and agree in every instance.


The real question posed by consumers should not be so much about the letter of the alphabet for GIA color or clarity, but should best be 'What is the dollar value of the diamond I have selected?' Often the dollar value on reports from labs other than GIA or AGS is exactly as it should be for what the consumer has chosen. Occasionally, the value is even better than expected because of dealer discounting practices.


The situation with consumers buying diamonds with documents from the notoriously 'bad' labs is often still okay financially, but so many of these people are dissappointed with the grades to the extent they are unhappy with the diamond, too.

All graders, whether they are workers in a lab, in a store or an independent appraiser are faced with a curious problem that I call WWGD --What would GIA do? In this age of ‘certified’ diamonds, this has become effectively the definition of the various grades. GIA has an inherent advantage here because they are uniquely answering the question “What did GIA do?” By definition, at least by that definition, whatever GIA says is correct.

An argument can certainly be made that some GIA graded stones are better than others with identical or even higher grades or that if a stone were resubmitted to GIA it might produce different results a second time for whatever reason but that doesn’t change the fact that the GIA stamp of approval has become what makes a stone a particular grade. It's what makes a J a J and what makes a VVS2 a VVS2. Everyone else is estimating.

This doesn’t make other graders pointless. If it did, I would need a new job, but it does mean that each grading needs to be understood in the context of it’s grader, not just in relation to GIA. If the standard a lab is held to is that it must produce results that are identical to GIA, then only GIA can possibly meet them and GIA, by definition, is meeting them no matter what they do. The problem with this is in the standard, not with the lab. On the other hand, if a lab is not consistent with their own standards then the problem is with the lab and this is what makes the results less than reliable.

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

 

[John P]

Date: 8/27/2008 11:11:18 AM
Author: oldminer
GIA grading is not totally reliable or consistent. It is excellent for human grading work, but it is far from a perfect system or science. No lab forced to compete using the in-house system of GIA can do 'better' than the GIA does. There is no indendent board of skilled arbiters who could possibly make such a pronouncement. So it stands to reason that a one grade tolerance is as good as any other lab can do when being measured up to a standard maker such as the GIA lab using their own GIA system. Another lab owner can't ever hope to do 'better' and you know you can't ever totally match and agree in every instance.

I think this is valid Dave. At the same time, labs hoping to be seen as 'comparable' to GIA should err a grade higher as often as they err a grade lower. Most do not.