When was the last time you googled "GIA CERTFIGATE"???
- Thread starter diagem
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
boston_jeff
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2007
- Messages
- 633
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
There goes the PINK illusion....
http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullEditorial.asp
http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullEditorial.asp
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,460
Hi, I have been following this story and poking around to verify Chaim Evan-Zohar's claims.
He is a very well respected and seasoned journalist and consultant to the diamond industry for decades.
So far I am afraid to say it seems that there is a real risk that many more stones than I initially thought were fasly upgraded.
It does still seem however that the upgrades were done for special stones where the graders or supervisors who would be known to be the ones who worked on those size / color / clarity etc would be known in advance and could be targeted and bribed directly.
That means it is is still most unlikely that the typical stones we discuss here would be affected or involved.
Never the less it is a wicked and bad blight and GIA and the prosecution offices do seem to be behaving badly.
Chaim has aksed anyone and everyone to contact the Federal U.S. Attorney in charge of the case:
[email protected]
You could ask what is being done etc. You will probably not get a response either, but it is a small thing that should have an imact if the mail box needs 2 full time staff to clear it.
He is a very well respected and seasoned journalist and consultant to the diamond industry for decades.
So far I am afraid to say it seems that there is a real risk that many more stones than I initially thought were fasly upgraded.
It does still seem however that the upgrades were done for special stones where the graders or supervisors who would be known to be the ones who worked on those size / color / clarity etc would be known in advance and could be targeted and bribed directly.
That means it is is still most unlikely that the typical stones we discuss here would be affected or involved.
Never the less it is a wicked and bad blight and GIA and the prosecution offices do seem to be behaving badly.
Chaim has aksed anyone and everyone to contact the Federal U.S. Attorney in charge of the case:
[email protected]
You could ask what is being done etc. You will probably not get a response either, but it is a small thing that should have an imact if the mail box needs 2 full time staff to clear it.
Chaim also asked me to keep him posted on any concrete case that we hear of here on Pricescope and he has assured me that anything we bring to light shall be published. If anyone wants to do this anonomously they can contact myself via the website below or directly to the Pricescope Admin.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
Thank you Garry (your weight means a lot), Andrey (for giving this issue a stage) and a special thanks to Chaim Even-Zohar for having the courage to pursue this delicate subject even through the (imaginable) pressure coming from the interested parties!
As a member of this industry..., I feel it is my duty to support such activity..., especially when ethics are involved. The base of our industry!
I came to a conclusion over my years here on PS that education is key (hopefully will become a new norm in the industry), I would want to see how educated consumers can influence on the strong forces of this industry! And I strongly believe they can!
The Internet has quite a few pro''s and con''s..., one of the (many) positive tools is:
It opens/gives the possibility for the little people to voice their opinion and influence change!
Please make your voice heard, it is important to us all!
I have known Chaim for quite a while know..., and am following with great interests his push and motivation to bring the objective truth on this issue!
As a member of this industry..., I feel it is my duty to support such activity..., especially when ethics are involved. The base of our industry!
I came to a conclusion over my years here on PS that education is key (hopefully will become a new norm in the industry), I would want to see how educated consumers can influence on the strong forces of this industry! And I strongly believe they can!
The Internet has quite a few pro''s and con''s..., one of the (many) positive tools is:
It opens/gives the possibility for the little people to voice their opinion and influence change!
Please make your voice heard, it is important to us all!
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
For those that need so help with what too say here is what I sent:
Dear Sir,
It has come too my attention that you are in charge of the GIA grading bribery investigation and prosecution.
I am writing too request that you prosecute these people both inside and outside of GIA too the fullest extent of the law.
We as consumers rely on GIA to help protect us when we purchase a diamond and some have abused that trust for profit and personal gain.
I also urge you too put pressure on GIA to cooperate to the fullest extent to bring everyone involved to justice both inside and outside of GIA and send a strong message to the entire industry that wrong doing will be found out and punished.
Further pressure should be put on GIA and the entire industry to take steps to help prevent this from ever happening again and sending a message by prosecuting those responsible to the fullest extent of the law is the first step.
Thank you for your consideration
[my name]
Dear Sir,
It has come too my attention that you are in charge of the GIA grading bribery investigation and prosecution.
I am writing too request that you prosecute these people both inside and outside of GIA too the fullest extent of the law.
We as consumers rely on GIA to help protect us when we purchase a diamond and some have abused that trust for profit and personal gain.
I also urge you too put pressure on GIA to cooperate to the fullest extent to bring everyone involved to justice both inside and outside of GIA and send a strong message to the entire industry that wrong doing will be found out and punished.
Further pressure should be put on GIA and the entire industry to take steps to help prevent this from ever happening again and sending a message by prosecuting those responsible to the fullest extent of the law is the first step.
Thank you for your consideration
[my name]
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,460
Thank you Storm. I hope your leadership inspires others because no one wants to get ripped off, but every man woman and child looks after #1.
If there is no one who cares about everyone else then we all deserve less.
If there is no one who cares about everyone else then we all deserve less.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,859
The whole ''certifigate''-scandal is a very sad story.
For years, honest diamond dealers have lost out, or could not compete with the bribers and simply lost their business.
Now, if this turns out to become a major headline-story again (which it actually should), the honest people stand to loose again, since it might have a backlash on the overall trust in our industry.
I for sure am happy that we are only working with AGS-reports.
Live long,
For years, honest diamond dealers have lost out, or could not compete with the bribers and simply lost their business.
Now, if this turns out to become a major headline-story again (which it actually should), the honest people stand to loose again, since it might have a backlash on the overall trust in our industry.
I for sure am happy that we are only working with AGS-reports.
Live long,
niceice
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2003
- Messages
- 1,792
The sad reality is that fraud exists in practically every type of business and today''s consumer is smart to be savvy and conduct their due diligence at all stages of the purchase process. This is just one more example of why it is a good idea for a diamond buyer to have the characteristics of their purchase verified by an independent gemologist to ensure that the characteristics of the diamond purchased match the characteristics of the diamond advertised and that the grading is accurate regardless of what is stated on the lab report.
One would hope that this matter would be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law instead of being swept under the rug, however the nature of the legal system today is that such things be settled to avoid costly litigation and bad press... Only those in the industry seem to pay any real attention to the matter. This quote from the article provides the best advice "At the end of the day, if the industry cannot rely on law enforcement officials to “clean up” the mess, the industry players will have to do it by themselves."
If anything positive has come out of this experience, it is that both the GIA and AGS laboratories now provide consumers with the ability to verify the validity of their lab reports online via their report check feature:
GIA report check
AGS report check
One would hope that this matter would be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law instead of being swept under the rug, however the nature of the legal system today is that such things be settled to avoid costly litigation and bad press... Only those in the industry seem to pay any real attention to the matter. This quote from the article provides the best advice "At the end of the day, if the industry cannot rely on law enforcement officials to “clean up” the mess, the industry players will have to do it by themselves."
If anything positive has come out of this experience, it is that both the GIA and AGS laboratories now provide consumers with the ability to verify the validity of their lab reports online via their report check feature:
GIA report check
AGS report check
- Joined
- May 3, 2001
- Messages
- 7,516
One can only imagine that that same imaginable pressure is being applied to the people who long ago should have been prosecuting this case, so much so that as Mr. Even-Zohar points out in one of his articles that the statute of limitations has expired on some of the most daming evidence.
Wink
niceice
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2003
- Messages
- 1,792
This from National Jeweler online, March 18, 2008:
DMIA continues call for prosecution in ''Certifigate''
By Michelle Graff
The DMIA "will welcome news of their indictment, arrest, prosecution" for their crimes, the letter stated.
DMIA continues call for prosecution in ''Certifigate''
By Michelle Graff
New York—Leaders of the Diamond Manufacturers and Importers Association of America (DMIA) have again expressed their frustration at the lack of action by prosecutors in the Gemological Institute of America''s (GIA) "Certifigate" scandal.
The alleged scandal at the GIA surfaced in 2005 and involved GIA graders taking bribes to upgrade diamonds.
Leaders in the diamond industry have long expressed dismay over the lack of progress in the case, which has become a hot topic again in the diamond community in recent months.
At the DMIA''s first meeting of the year held on Monday night in New York City, DMIA President Ronald Friedman read excerpts from a February 2008 letter that DMIA officials sent to prosecuting attorneys in the case. The letter stated, in part, that the DMIA was "shocked and dismayed" at the scandal and remains concerned about the effect the scandal could have on public confidence in diamonds and the diamond industry.
The DMIA letter stated that officials also are concerned that the investigation of the GIA case has been "prioritized" by other investigations.
DMIA leaders "strongly encourage" prosecution of any or all wrongdoing in the case, including those individuals accused of bribery and fraud.
The DMIA "will welcome news of their indictment, arrest, prosecution" for their crimes, the letter stated.
Date: 3/18/2008 6:19:52 PM
Author: DiaGem
Unlikely on a step cut...
for same spectrums you will receive different hue in different part even step cut( last your joint cut with strmrdr could be good to receive yellow intense on short side and orange vivid in long side. Just take spectrum what has zero absorption for red, small absorption for yellow-green and full absorption for blue. short way will give yellow, long way will give orange or even dark red)
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
Garry.. I think the consensus opinion, from those who I have talked to, and based on absolutely no prosecutions, is that Chernoff has done nothing in two years or more, and that it should be taken out of his hands.
Maybe Chernoff''s Boss, Garcia, or someone in Washington should ask, why no prosecutions?.
I have also asked why did not GIA sue the bribers and the bribees civily, instead of playing what appears to be a cover-up game and an out of court hefty settlement in one case, a settlement that in effect, every US taxpayer footed the bill for because of the anti competative tax exempt status of the lab.
And I have been led to believe that the "problem" goes way beyond the "special stone" size category.
"Upgrades" are also not the only problem, as it appears that intentional pass-throughs of HPHT''d goods are also at issue.
Remember, DeBeers had been stockpiling all the IIa brownie rough for 20 years, by their own admission.
Where did all that "industrial" rough go after DeBeers went private? My educated guess is that it is all in the market as undisclosed treated colorless goods, and a not insignificant share probably with "natural" paper, based on ancedotal evidence, but mostly probably unpapered.
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
I''m reposting this DiaGem, as the hypertext archive link changes weekly
The Million dollar Jaylo pink diamond
http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullEditorial.asp?id=29815
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
Seems that IDEX took off Chaim''s article and changed the link back to the JayLo link ..
So here is the text they removed...
CERTIFIGATE: RALLYING SUPPORT FOR CLOSURE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 March 2008
Amid all of the emotions and sensitivity of the Gemological Institute of America’s (GIA) Certifigate scandal it is occasionally worthwhile to take stock of the state of affairs and to reflect on where we are now and, most importantly, where we are going. Should it be the objective to bring to justice a large part of my list of 25 bribers and several bribe recipients? Do we want the GIA as a certification institution to collapse and match Enron, Arthur Anderson, and WorldCom in the speed of its demise?
Or do we all want to work jointly and tirelessly to restore the GIA’s standing as the integrity standard of diamond paper? Do we want a worldwide recall of all GIA certificates of one carat and above issued prior to 1995? Should we be concerned about the consumer finding out or should we become proactive in informing consumers? Where is it all heading?
These are important questions. It is my guess that if one would conduct an opinion poll in the diamond industry, the large majority of the players would probably prefer that we stop writing about the subject so that it could simply be forgotten. These include people who are struggling in a difficult market and have been greatly hurt by the scandal but who just want to move forward and make a living. Then there are some mid-size and mega-companies throughout the value chain that have greatly benefited (and have grown enormously) and, therefore, would also prefer to keep a low profile on the scandal and to just let it pass. The pressure to have justice done comes from a small but rapidly growing group of people to whom ethics, decency and justice mean a lot.
The reason we recently put it so clearly back on our agenda was mostly because of the reports that U.S. Federal Attorney Harry Chernoff has closed the case files. I’m not the only one that believes so. We should not forget for a second that the Certifigate scandal covers a wide range of fraud, corruption, bribery, counterfeit and forgery – and that is even without mentioning consumer fraud and protection issues. We are talking about serious offenses. Whoever recognizes these basic elements has the answer to where we are heading: criminal matters must be dealt with and resolved in a court of law. It is just that simple.
There is an unfounded feeling in the market that there exists some kind of “coalition” between the GIA and U.S. Federal Attorney Chernoff against the bribers. That public perception may be the result of the repeated statements by the GIA that it is fully cooperating with the U.S.Attorney’s office on a continuing basis, passing loads of information to it. In all fairness, that is the way every involved or affected party ought to act; one must cooperate with law enforcement. If all parties that have hard information or evidence on the misconduct had shared it with the U.S. Department of Justice, there might have been no need today for urging the government to expedite the investigation.
One has to be careful not to develop conspiracy theories. We must assume that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney''s Office know how to conduct a criminal investigation and, most assuredly, that they do not take direction or advice from the GIA as to what investigative steps they should or should not take. We must assume that if the U.S. Attorney’s Office determines there is sufficient evidence to bring an indictment, it will take the necessary steps to do so; if sufficient evidence is lacking, it will not. Nevertheless, there are too many unanswered questions.
For instance, one of the “certified bribers” (the one who allegedly recorded bribes on a piece of paper) moved to Scandinavia. Why was there never an extradition request? It is, however, most telling that some 10 months ago he moved back to New York, apparently not at all worried that he might be arrested or face trial. It is his return to New York that has given added impetus to the belief that the U.S. Attorney has closed the case files.
Industry Leaders Voice Concern
Ronny Friedman, the president of the Diamond Manufacturers and Importers Association of America (DMIA), really gave the right answer to the above-mentioned questions at the organization’s annual meeting earlier this week. He expressed frustration at the slow pace of the wheels of justice. His displeasure with the U.S. Attorney’s office may be best demonstrated by his public announcement that the DMIA has been writing letters to the higher-ups in the U.S. Justice Department, such as Chernoff’s boss, Michael J. Garcia, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
“We are concerned that the investigation of this affair by your office may have been prioritized by other investigations,” wrote Friedman to Garcia. “If that is indeed the case, we hope this letter will impress upon you the significant harm to our industry which has resulted from the alleged criminal misconduct. In our role of responsible leadership for our industry, we strongly encourage the prosecutions of any and all criminal wrongdoing. In simple terms, if members of our industry have engaged in criminal acts such as bribery, fraud, etc., it is imperative that they be exposed and prosecuted for profiting from illegal conduct and prevented from continuing to destroy the image and reputation of our industry and our product,” wrote Friedman.
We have reasons to believe that other trade and industry leaders will also become more vocal on this issue in the months ahead – and that is a welcome development.
All of the publicity and public appeals for action will not result in a possible loss of public confidence in diamonds and the diamond industry. No, to the contrary. Loss of public confidence will come about as the result of the lack of action by law enforcement officials. U.S. Attorneys on all levels, including the U.S. Attorney General in Washington, must recognize that if they don’t issue indictments in Certifigate the resulting turmoil in the diamond jewelry market will be enormous. In light of the abundance of evidence of wrongdoings, the option of no prosecution should not exist.
In recent weeks, I have disclosed many isolated examples of Certifigate wrongdoings to highlight and illustrate how the scam operated in practice. More examples will follow in future publications. This week, through journalistic investigative channels, I have been able to satisfyingly verify that virtually each incident I have reported so far was also discovered by GIA’s internal investigator Tom O’Neil quite some time ago. I’ve also been able to ascertain that all of my examples had already been forwarded by the GIA to the U.S. Attorney’s office. So details on our “case studies” are on Chernoff’s desk. Whether he followed up on them is a different matter – many of those initials mentioned should have had visits from FBI agents, to say the least.
It remains exceedingly troubling that the U.S. Attorney is perceived as sitting on his laurels and allowing some of the evidence to become useless while the statute of limitations runs out. Friedman was courageous in singling out the visible lack of progress of the U.S.Attorney’s office (which he has visited) as presenting a serious predicament for the entire industry.
The GIA’s Investigation
Through many interviews, I have become more aware of the width and scope of GIA O’Neil’s internal investigation. He thoroughly questioned key players including the organization’s ex-president Bill Boyajian, ex-vice president Tom Yonelunas, and also existing key executives including Tom Moses, Donna Baker and Ralph Destino. O’Neil reports directly to the GIA’s Board of Governors and has a mandate to do and investigate anything he pleases. And the results of the investigation have been passed to the U.S. Attorney.
I admit that I am among those who have expressed doubts about what – if anything – the GIA had passed on to the authorities. However, as an investigative journalist in an ongoing and evolving story, I owe it to myself and to readers to keep an open mind and to change previously expressed positions or views whenever the facts warrant it. Wherever these facts take us.
Any failure by the GIA to present all the facts that it has discovered would make it subject to obstruction of justice charges. It only makes common sense that the Board of Governors will not allow this to happen. In response to our views that the GIA should be the U.S. Attorney’s main target, as its name and logo are on the questionable certificates, GIA President Donna Baker commented that the “GIA cooperated fully and completely with the criminal investigation so that it would NOT become a target itself. If the government had reason to believe GIA''s cooperation was less than complete or candid, our status would indeed become that of target.”
However, cooperating with the U.S. Justice Department isn’t the same as cleaning up house. On that score we believe there are still serious shortcomings. [There are those in the market that tell us that some of the old practices are still taking place today. We are investigating, following up leads, and for the time being, we have not seen firm evidence of any continued wrongdoing.]
The Complexity of Evidence
One should not underestimate the complexity of building a legal case that would lead to convictions. My (limited) understanding of the U.S. justice system is such that a prosecutor will hesitate to go to court if he doesn’t have comfort that he’ll win and get convictions. One of the main reasons that it is so difficult to substantiate some of the charges in the Certifigate scandal is that in many cases the right grade was obtained fraudulently. In the books of the GIA, it is hard to trace those instances – one must show that money passed hands, the bribery, the laundering.
Allow me an example that took place in 1999. A very honorable and respectable diamond dealer had a 20-carat stone on which he got a D-VVSI grading. The diamantaire believed that the stone was a D Flawless, and he argued with the GIA for almost two years – to no avail. Then, through a middle man, he was advised to reduce two points of the stone after which the diamond was submitted by L., a member of the community of bribers. The stone then got a D Flawless within days. Also, the make was moved from “Very Good” to “Excellent.”
The exercise cost the diamantaire close to $30,000 and he ended up getting the grade he had deserved to begin with. [This case has also been discovered by GIA investigator O’Neil and passed on to the prosecutor.] What the government needs is proof on how this money passed and to whom, something which might move the focus of the government’s case to an all-out money laundering investigation.
I’d like to differentiate between aspects of Certifigate that affect the consumer (such as upgrades or deficient certificates that fraudulently omit information such as HPHT or fluorescence) and issues of traders being defrauded by their peers in cahoots with some bribe-recipients at the GIA. We have seen examples of trade-partnerships in large stones that first got the grades they rightfully deserved. Then one partner bought out the others -- and subsequently got himself an upgrade. His honest co-partners in the stone lost out.
We also have examples of people who were out of favor with certain GIA graders and who believe they were intentionally downgraded. We are also aware of GIA graders “tipping off” outside parties by telling them that Mr. So-and-So has submitted such-and-such stone. The graders would tell the outside parties to go and buy that stone and then get a better grade.
We have seen evidence where brokers would show a stone to a potential client, who would note the number on the certificate and would then find out from an inside GIA source who had submitted that stone. This would enable the potential client to purchase the stone directly from its owners and bypass the broker. Or, how about the scenario in which HPHT diamonds were not checked for this treatment – is that “an accident” or intentional omission? Federal agents must be able to judge a variety of different suspicious scenarios.
Certifigate and the Patriot Act
Some major rough suppliers and other players in the diamond industry have various codes of ethics or best practice principals. These companies can move the benchmarks of their standards any time they please. And they do. But they may have lost sight of the fact that the regulatory landscape has changed since 9/11. But no company is above the law.
The U.S. Patriot Act and FinCEN’s Jewelry Rules, UK anti-money laundering legislation, the FATF standards, and European Community law all clearly state that bribery and forgery are predicate money laundering offenses. These are serious criminal offenses in virtually every jurisdiction where rough suppliers and their clients operate.
The laws which govern the diamond business in New York and elsewhere require dealers and suppliers to conduct adequate AML/CFT due diligence of trading partners; require the reporting of suspicious transactions; and prohibit one to accept moneys that were derived from illegal activities (i.e. any payment for rough by fraudulent client). Moreover, anyone’s non-performance in following the laws may make one unwittingly a corroborator to money laundering. The laws don’t require anyone to have legal proof. The mere presence of suspicions is enough for one to take actions.
In this very confusing Certifigate situation, one should be guided by law. Members in the diamond community who actually do a serious due diligence on their trading partners in accordance with the applicable AML/CFT regulations are violating the law if they knowingly deal with companies or individuals suspected of money laundering and bribery. The mandatory AML/CFT program of diamond merchants requires dealers to “develop procedures for identifying transactions involving potentiality illegal activity, and procedures setting forth actions that a dealer will take in a response to such transactions.”
FinCEN’s Jewelry Rules allow the diamond dealer considerable discretion in determining “whether a transaction should be refused or terminated” which “must be based on the facts and circumstances relating to the transaction and the dealer''s knowledge of the customer or supplier question.”
The publication (by GIA or others) of the names of the suspected bribers may leave any industry player – including upstream suppliers and downstream jewelry chains – with an implied obligation to sever business ties with these companies. As so much anecdotal information has become available in recent years – including a court case – and in the absence of a clear determination by the U.S. Attorney, those who wish to play it safe should also view Certifigate through the lenses of their own internal AML/CFT programs.
The spate of the recent articles on Certifigate have contributed to an industry-wide wake-up call, or, more precisely, to the awareness that the industry cannot remain complacent on the issue. Referring once again to Ronny Friedman’s call to U.S. Attorney Garcia: it reflects the industry’s overriding need for “closure” – to end these lingering uncertainties and to restore tranquility to the trade. His plea deserves the widest possible industry support and the heads of other trade organizations should go on record and publicly endorse these views.
Pleaded Friedman to Garcia: “If your office’s investigation of this matter is currently ongoing, we implore you and the members of your staff as well as other law enforcement agencies, to devote your full time and attention to bringing this investigation to an expeditious conclusion. If any member of our industry is found by you to have been actively involved in criminal conduct, you may be assured that we will welcome news of their indictment, arrest and prosecution for said conduct.”
Well done, Ronny.
The Mole
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 31
I think the "other" labs should be prosecuted as well for "upgrading" diamonds quality grades on a near daily basis, which I feel is more harmful to the average consumer. These "other" labs have made an industry of over grading diamonds to benefit the companies submitting the stones for certificates.
Oh well, I guess ignorance is bliss.
Oh well, I guess ignorance is bliss.
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
Well Mole, you hit it right on the nose regarding some of the paper factories.
But the industry itself already knew the relative worth of such paper and either uses, or mis-uses their products.
And you can see the pricing differentials between the majors and the minors, although worldwide, the minors grade many more stones than the majors. And by and large, it seems that the paper from some of the largest minor players in the world are not generally used or promoted on the wholesale lists.
It really concerns the industry when they find they can''t trust what the supposed industry leader says.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
on smaller stones the trading of inside information would likely be more valuable than upgrades and much much easier too pull off.
Because of more people being involved I don''t see it extending too far down in the actual grading but the information angle goes all the way down to 25 pointers.
Knowing what your competition has in the pipeline is very very valuable information likely much more so than a handful of upgrades on large stones and just as illegal too do.
Lets say you know your competition has very few D&E EX grade stones in the pipeline this allows one to hold tighter on discounts because they know there isn''t competition.
If your competition is going too have a flood on the market of E/vs stones in 3 weeks you can push yours out the door at higher prices or hold them for a better time too sell.
There is millions and millions of dollars in this type of information.
Because of more people being involved I don''t see it extending too far down in the actual grading but the information angle goes all the way down to 25 pointers.
Knowing what your competition has in the pipeline is very very valuable information likely much more so than a handful of upgrades on large stones and just as illegal too do.
Lets say you know your competition has very few D&E EX grade stones in the pipeline this allows one to hold tighter on discounts because they know there isn''t competition.
If your competition is going too have a flood on the market of E/vs stones in 3 weeks you can push yours out the door at higher prices or hold them for a better time too sell.
There is millions and millions of dollars in this type of information.
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
This is an interesting read from 2004, as to the number of juiced stones "seen"
http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullMazalUbracha.asp?id=22022
http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullMazalUbracha.asp?id=22022
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,460
Marty the logstics of bribing an individual grader seem to be knowing that grader willl likely see your stone. If your stone is a 1ct E VVS1 then getting D IF on it is going to add some thousands to your pocket, and if the grader gets 10% it is not going to make him / her wealthy for the risk / exposure, and how is the grader going to know to make the upgrade on your stone when there are probably 20 like it on any one day?
It seems more likely to me that a 4.21ct can easily be identified by the grader, so as Chaim says, you sidle up to a grader having lunch at the same cafe each day, slip him a brown paper bag and tell him he gets the other half on friday.
(for those who do not know, diamonds go thru labs ''blind'' i.e. their is no owners info on the packet.)
The other bigger risk is upgrades. I often hear from suppliers that the GIA seems to run a money mill by downgrading several stones in a shipment, and then for the rechecking fee they will very very often agree to upgrade to what the submitter really believes is the grade. I imagine the graders and communication at this stage would be more likely to know who the other party is and this would be an obvious opportunity for bribery. But i am not 100% informed on the process. Anyone who is might like to comment?
It seems more likely to me that a 4.21ct can easily be identified by the grader, so as Chaim says, you sidle up to a grader having lunch at the same cafe each day, slip him a brown paper bag and tell him he gets the other half on friday.
(for those who do not know, diamonds go thru labs ''blind'' i.e. their is no owners info on the packet.)
The other bigger risk is upgrades. I often hear from suppliers that the GIA seems to run a money mill by downgrading several stones in a shipment, and then for the rechecking fee they will very very often agree to upgrade to what the submitter really believes is the grade. I imagine the graders and communication at this stage would be more likely to know who the other party is and this would be an obvious opportunity for bribery. But i am not 100% informed on the process. Anyone who is might like to comment?
- Status
300x240.png)