AGS Diamond Quality Certificate

[whatmeworry]

Since I''m on a rant,

. What''s a fair policy for a vendor and a customer? How about we guarantee that our diamond will appraise, carat, color, clarity as advertised. Take it to any appraiser and if doesn''t appraise as advertised we give you your money back. Is that fair? Or how about we give you your money back and pay for half the cost of the appraisal? Would that be a nice guarantee on a diamond?

This seems somewhat similar to the big box electronics guaranteeing the lowest price available on a television set. If you find the same model cheaper within 30 days we give you your will match the price, etc. etc.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/7/2007 3:36:00 PM
Author: whatmeworry
Given the lack of an internationally accepted standard of grading diamonds, people can either perceive vendors standing behind their products as a joke or as added value.

Examples I have seen here on this Forum:
1. Tiffany: We guarantee the grading to be excatly as we advertise. Yay for Tiffany ! I can shop knowing I won''t be scammed.

Guarantee according to whom and by whose standards?

2. Costco: We guarantee our diamonds to be I VS2 or better. Boo. What a sham! Grading according to whose standards? IGI? Boo! Their lab is a joke!.

Yes, but IGI is widely accepted by Costco and others of their ilk who just want the appearance of giving a better deal. They sell many millions of dollars worth of diamonds every year, but not many I suspect to Pricescopers.

Example: I just bought a G SI1 from grade from well respected Lab , I just had it appraised from

1. Mr. Smith who gave it a grade of F VS1. Wow I got a great deal, I''m so happy!

You are easily pleased, Mr. Smith is obviously NOT the man I want doing any appraisals for me as a buyer. One grade up or down is a matter of opinion, he is two grades higher on the clarity, probably NOT a strict grader.

2. Miss Jones who gave it a grade of I SI2, Boo! Boo!. Miss Jones you suck as an appraiser. Let''s find another opinion.

Probably lump her in their with Mr. Smith as not being overly competent or at least not well versed in what the respected lab''s standards are.

3. Mr. Brown who gives it a grade of H SI1. Okay, Mr. Vendor you just sold me something not as advertised, whatcha going to do?

I am going to challange Mr. Brown''s evaluation of the diamond I sold you and tell you that the standards of the grading labs is a one grade varience up or down and since he is two color grades off I want to see his master stones and to see why he is grading a stone with a (well respected lab''s) report so differently in color than the lab is. I will probably not accept his opinion unless he has a set of color master stones graded by either GIA or AGS that is in clean condition and I agree with his assesment against that set of stones. By the way, I will be checking his stones against my 5 stone set to see if he has good masters. His saying it is an H-SI1 carries little to no weight in the gem world versus GIA or AGS saying it is a G-SI1. If I happen to agree with Mr. Brown I will send it back to the well respected lab with a note and ask for a second opinion. I will wait for the report to come back before taking any further action. Chances are pretty good that Mr. Brown is off base.

Even given the lack of an internationally accepted standard, I thnk vendors/appraisers standing behind their product is added value. Here''s my standards (agree with it or not), I guarantee that my product lives up this this standard. What''s wrong with that?

Nothing, but who gets to determine the standards? Certainly not any of the three appraisers above.

As stated earlier, I have had one lucky cert, and sold it as such with full disclosure and priced at the value of the lower color that I believed the stone to have had.

However, you taking my stone to Mr. Brown who may not like me or may be incompetent will not force me to back off of my standards even an inch. I had an appraiser in this town grade a stone four grades below its actual color so that the now jilted man could try to force me to take back a stone he no longer needed. It was pathetic, transparent and unsuccessful. This was back in the day of EGL LA, so we sent the diamond to GIA who graded it one clarity grade higher than EGL and one color grade lower. In the end I did give him back his money because his parents are good friends, but not because of the shameful attempt to blackmail me with bad publicity. I actually sold the stone for more than its original asking price since the clarity grade had more effect on the price than the color in that instance. (I believe it went from VS1 to VVS2 but it was a long time ago...)

So, as noted, your experience with Mr. Brown will not phase me much because of my experience with inept and possibly dishonest appraisers. The major labs are major labs because they have set the standards and with few exceptions meet those standards. The Mr. Browns of the world do not mean much to the trade because they are independant and may or may not be competent.

Wink

 

[belle]

Date: 5/7/2007 4:15:38 PM
Author: whatmeworry
Since I''m on a rant,

. What''s a fair policy for a vendor and a customer? How about we guarantee that our diamond will appraise, carat, color, clarity as advertised. Take it to any appraiser and if doesn''t appraise as advertised we give you your money back. Is that fair? Or how about we give you your money back and pay for half the cost of the appraisal? Would that be a nice guarantee on a diamond?

This seems somewhat similar to the big box electronics guaranteeing the lowest price available on a television set. If you find the same model cheaper within 30 days we give you your will match the price, etc. etc.

this is the problem with diamond grading, and the reason i was disagreeing with strm on the guarantee of liability above..... diamonds are rocks....from the ground. the very nature (literally) of natural diamond formation and the fact that there is no standardization and grading is totally subjective makes it virtually impossible to have any kind of consistency.
guaranteeing man made goods is one thing but those of mother nature.....impossible. i understand the position that ags is in. they want to instill confidence without making ostentatious assumptions. those assumptions being that everyone will agree with their ''grade''. why would everyone agree? there is much more to gain by others who would disagree.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/7/2007 4:15:38 PM
Author: whatmeworry
Since I''m on a rant,

. What''s a fair policy for a vendor and a customer? How about we guarantee that our diamond will appraise, carat, color, clarity as advertised. Take it to any appraiser and if doesn''t appraise as advertised we give you your money back. Is that fair? Or how about we give you your money back and pay for half the cost of the appraisal? Would that be a nice guarantee on a diamond?

This seems somewhat similar to the big box electronics guaranteeing the lowest price available on a television set. If you find the same model cheaper within 30 days we give you your will match the price, etc. etc.

I think my answer is pretty well stated in the above post. Because of the lack of accountability for many appraisers I can not recommend or be liable for their foibles. Now if Neal Beatty and his yellow bra lived here in town I would have not any problem doing what you suggest, but with what I have available now...

I think the biggest problem is the perception by many that there are a sufficient number of well trained and qualified appraisers standing around to do this work. I am sadly unable to tell you that this is true...

Wink

 

[whatmeworry]

Belle and Wink,
I completely agree that a vendor can''t be held liable for an opinion. The best they can do is offer their money back. I think that''s a pretty good guarantee.

On another note; If Neil and and his yellow bra showed up in town I would take pictures.

 

[WinkHPD]

LOL! So would I. Every time I see him though the yellow bra is nowhere to be seen...

 

[belle]

Date: 5/7/2007 4:43:51 PM
Author: whatmeworry
Belle and Wink,
I completely agree that a vendor can''t be held liable for an opinion. The best they can do is offer their money back. I think that''s a pretty good guarantee.

On another note; If Neil and and his yellow bra showed up in town I would take pictures.

i think any good vendor already does that.

no comment on neil and his yellow bra. the one pic is more than enough, i think.

 

[whatmeworry]

I''m really on a roll today

. Wouldn''t a money back guarantee by vendors have self correcting influence on the industry? Gee, Mr. Supplier you keep sending me these F VS1 diamonds that customers keep returning because appraisers think they are I SI2. I can''t sell them so I''m going with another supplier (or another lab).

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/7/2007 4:54:53 PM
Author: whatmeworry
I''m really on a roll today

. Wouldn''t a money back guarantee by vendors have self correcting influence on the industry? Gee, Mr. Supplier you keep sending me these F VS1 diamonds that customers keep returning because appraisers think they are I SI2. I can''t sell them so I''m going with another supplier (or another lab).

That is one of the major reasons why so many of us went to papered stones all these many years ago. Diamond dealers either can not grade or assume that we can not. I found that almost every uncerted stone that I brought in to look at was overgraded and returned, some suppliers were way worse than others and quickly entered my circular file.

Way back when WhiteFlash was actually a wholesaler, Brian the Cutter was one of the exceptions, but then his stones that I bought were always papered H&A cuts even then. Paul Slegers always tells me what he thinks a stone will get before he sends it to AGS, and normally he is as tight as they are, with only a few exceptions, in which I think if we sent the stones to GIA we would get the grade we feel the stone deserves.

These two fine men are class acts and I am so pleased to call both of them friend.

It would be nice if your thoughts were correct that this would be self correcting for the industry, unfortunately there are just too many who would not know nor care about an overgraded stone if it jumped up and bit them on the nose.

Wink

 

[denverappraiser]

There are a fair number of stores that will offer you a refund no matter what the problem is. This actually strikes me as the optimum solution. How about this for terms?:

100% refund on our special brand in full, for any reason, forever. Bring it back undamaged and you get your money back.

This isn’t actually as nutty as it sounds at first blush. Buying back diamonds at 15 or even 5 year old retail prices is a great deal for the store, especially if they had a modest markup to start with. Most stores give 30 days or so anyway so the real question is deciding where the line is. In any case, they’re effectively borrowing the customer’s money at 0% interest for however long the customer keeps it. Of course, it’s important to make this offer only on diamonds that you and/or your supplier are willing to carry in inventory and there need to be some fine print type restrictions but the superideal PS specials actually move through the system pretty fast. Taking a return on a 2001 sale and reselling it to someone else at 2007 prices could be a pretty good business. 95%+ aren’t going to do it anyway so even if the market drops there’s not a huge risk in it and, if the market really tanks, they’re all going to have to go out and get real jobs anyway. I recommend lingerie modeling.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Fashion Trendsetter in Denver

 

[WinkHPD]

Well, that''s the theory, and a good one in normal times. I don''t know the number of major Japanese jewelers who went bankrupt when that happened in Japan, but it is a big one. Many many people lost every thing they owned when the market went south and clients brought back their diamonds in huge numbers. Some of these were major formally cash rich vendors, not cash strapped mom and pops. That is a devestatingly dangeroud guarantee if the economy tanks.

Wink

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/7/2007 6:01:14 PM
Author: Wink
Well, that''s the theory, and a good one in normal times. I don''t know the number of major Japanese jewelers who went bankrupt when that happened in Japan, but it is a big one. Many many people lost every thing they owned when the market went south and clients brought back their diamonds in huge numbers. Some of these were major formally cash rich vendors, not cash strapped mom and pops. That is a devestatingly dangeroud guarantee if the economy tanks.

Wink

Now that is good old experience talking...

In Diamonds..., Theory is so far from practice...

But we all urge for some speculations...

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 5/7/2007 5:43:25 PM
Author: denverappraiser

100% refund on our special brand in full, for any reason, forever. Bring it back undamaged and you get your money back.

This isn’t actually as nutty as it sounds at first blush. Buying back diamonds at 15 or even 5 year old retail prices is a great deal for the store, especially if they had a modest markup to start with.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Fashion Trendsetter in Denver

Forever Neil????
You forget 1980 prices

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/8/2007 1:39:43 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 5/7/2007 5:43:25 PM
Author: denverappraiser

100% refund on our special brand in full, for any reason, forever. Bring it back undamaged and you get your money back.

This isn’t actually as nutty as it sounds at first blush. Buying back diamonds at 15 or even 5 year old retail prices is a great deal for the store, especially if they had a modest markup to start with.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Fashion Trendsetter in Denver

Forever Neil????
You forget 1980 prices

Hey old man,

You forget that Neil is a puppy and probably did not partake in that ridicules era of excess and bust.

Another old man...

 

[RockDoc]

Of course another issue is the condition about the "reasonable" mark up.

It wasn''t that long ago that markups were a lot higher than they have been in the past 5 years of so.

Additiionally, over the past years, different cut shapes have gone in and out of vogue. That would have some bearing too.

About 10 15 years ago Marquises were hot. They been a little soft until just recently, where there are reports of prices on some qualities becoming "firmed" up.

Then there''s the desireability issue. Certain stone qualites and sizes have become less desireable. Like I-2-I-3''s as consumers get "smarter" through the internet. To wit, if you bought a 2 carat plus stones five years ago, yes most retailers would buy it back for what you paid, but if you bought a 1/2 carat stone, 15 years ago at a B&M retail price, would getting a 100% buy back be very smart for the seller?

So for other reasons, putting a buy back forever, isn''t practical in an "across the board" scenario that most retailers would prefer.


Rockdoc

 

[denverappraiser]

Wink & Marty,

I’m older than you think but not as long in the tooth as you guys. You were in the business when they invented rocks so I'll defer to your greater experience. Actually, I made good money in the 80’s as a gold scrapper. Diamonds was too much of a circus for me. It’s a matter of assessing risks. This is fundamentally an insurance question although in hindsight there was a lot of money flowing around and I bet I could have done ok. It’s necessary to set prices, fine print details and such to make it a profitable deal. It *IS* possible. I agree that it’s a bit extreme but those, for example, are Costco’s terms. Slight variations on the details and it’s pretty easy, even if the market drops dramatically.

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

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 5/8/2007 4:39:37 PM
Author: RockDoc
So for other reasons, putting a buy back forever, isn''t practical in an ''across the board'' scenario that most retailers would prefer.

Rockdoc

Who said anything about ''across the board''? How about only on specialty branded, h&a, GIA/VS1/F/1.00ct. stones sold with a special limited edition designer mounting (mounting not refundable)?

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

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/8/2007 5:13:13 PM
Author: denverappraiser

Date: 5/8/2007 4:39:37 PM
Author: RockDoc
So for other reasons, putting a buy back forever, isn''t practical in an ''across the board'' scenario that most retailers would prefer.

Rockdoc

Who said anything about ''across the board''? How about only on specialty branded, h&a, GIA/VS1/F/1.00ct. stones sold with a special limited edition designer mounting (mounting not refundable)?

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

So now you want to guarantee a small and "selective" part of products that you are selling???
That is a good way to show confidence to your clients...

And by saying "Branded, H&A, GIA, VS1, F, 1.00 ct......" you are limiting the guarantee to where the Diamonds are the most limited/scarce!!!


Neil..., its just not realistic!

How little are the sales of Jewelery at Cosco compared to their overall sales?

 

[denverappraiser]

I’m not sure if you’re agreeing or disagreeing. I can be done. It is being done. Whether it’s of any value to shoppers depends entirely on the fine print, just like any guarantee. That’s why I brought it up in this thread. The details matter.

I didn’t suggest that such a thing should be offered on everything a store sells although, again, that’s the policy at Costco, Walmart, Sears and many other major retailers. The key to evaluating the merits of a guarantee is ALWAYS in the fine print.

This sort of thing is a matter of evaluating risk. It’s fundamentally an insurance question. In the AGS DQC scenario, the jeweler is guaranteeing that AGSL will be repeatable in their grading. I think their exposure here is fairly low for reasons that have been discussed above. Risk assessment in business is not unprecedented. We all do it. Insurance companies are in the business of evaluating and valuing risk of all kinds of things that range from the extremely unlikely (asteroid damage) to the certain (life insurance) and they seem to be making some pretty good profits at it. What’s so impossible about insuring against a diamond market crash as it relates to a particular stone? It’s about the risks vs. the rewards for the insurer (ie the jeweler). Some of this can even be underwritten by the supplier. The Stuller Red Box program, available to almost every retailer in the US, will cover this up to the dealers cost on the stone for example. The retailer is guaranteeing only the portion represented by his own markup. Still a risk to be sure, and don’t forget the risk of Stuller disappearing, but all of this can be dealt with in the fine print and in setting the ‘premium’ for this insurance component. On exactly which sales and under what circumstances is it offered? Should the jeweler set aside 5% of the proceeds from guaranteed sales or is 15% required? Set the prices accordingly. If the customer doesn’t like the price or the terms, they can buy an alternative stone without the guarantee that will presumably be cheaper. If customers like the idea of it and buy more from the store, that’s the whole point.

This same issue applies to the breakage risk associated with setting of stones, a problem that gets discussed here regularly. The jeweler has or at least should have a pretty good idea what the risks are for a particular job while the consumer generally does not. This puts the jeweler in the position of being able to evaluate their risks for a particular job, charge accordingly, take the hit on the ones that go bad and make some more money on the ones that go well. Most customers are thrilled to accept this deal even when, in the long run, it’s probably less expensive to go with the ‘all damage risk is yours’ type of setter. Happier customers, more profit to the skilled jewelers who don’t break very much and a new career for those that do … Everybody wins.

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

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 5/8/2007 1:39:43 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 5/7/2007 5:43:25 PM
Author: denverappraiser

100% refund on our special brand in full, for any reason, forever. Bring it back undamaged and you get your money back.

This isn’t actually as nutty as it sounds at first blush. Buying back diamonds at 15 or even 5 year old retail prices is a great deal for the store, especially if they had a modest markup to start with.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Fashion Trendsetter in Denver

Forever Neil????
You forget 1980 prices

Neil... "Forever" is a long time especially if it is for "any reason"..
Factor in the US divorce rate.. A Diamond may be Forever, Marriages Aren''t"

A laboratory or a jeweler can only stand behind a product or opinion for mistakes that it might make, not the buyer or the buyers'' change in circumstances.

 

[oldminer]

You can promise "forever" knowing full well that all these promises are finite and not truly forever in the cosmic sense. Forever might mean, until the store goes out of business, until the purchaser dies, until the bill of sale is lost, until you''ve moved far enough away that you can''t even remember the name of the store where the purchase was made. That sort of "forever" is a lot more in line with the nature of "Forever" when it comes to marraige.... As you know and often offer, forever in this regard may be sooner than we think.

 

[denverappraiser]

The risk to the jeweler associated with a refund goes down every year after the sale. Beyond, say, 75 years, it’s effectively zero because all original buyers will be deceased. I don’t claim to have worked out the math or the actuarial implications, only that it is possible. Frankly, I think the chances of a return is going to be close to zero at 25 years as well but, in any case, for practical purposes ‘forever’ really means a much more finite amount of time. I would be surprised if the risk would be significant after as little as 10 years or even less.

This same risk is inherent in ‘trade up’ type programs, something that lots of jewelers offer.

Here’s the tradeup policy from a popular jeweler:

“We have a lifetime trade-up policy. We will credit you with 100% of the original diamond purchase price towards a diamond of greater value.”

Let’s parse it shall we?

‘Lifetime’ is an interesting choice of words. Who’s lifetime? The product’s and the store’s to be sure. Maybe the consumers. Damaged goods would obviously not be eligible and if the store is out of business when you decide to trade up it clearly would not apply. Would they accept a tradeup from a beneficiary who inherited a stone from a deceased customer? Probably, but it’s not spelled out in the terms and I don't think this policy obligates them to do so. What about from someone who received it as a gift? Is this transferable? Again, it probably is but it doesn’t actually say so there’s a possibility to slip out here if they really felt like it.

Note that it applies only to diamond purchases, not to other transactions at t the store, like rings, labor, shipping and the like.

‘Greater value’. What’s that? I’m going to guess that this refers to the then asking price of diamonds available for sale on the date of trade-in but this also isn’t discussed in the terms and it makes a big difference. Let’s go with that one but realize that an important assumption has been made.

As with the guarantee being discussed, this is a bet by the jeweler that prices will climb over time. If there’s a dive, they’ll take a hit. How? Buy a diamond for $10k. A few years later, after prices drop in half, you trade it in for a new one that costs $10,001. The new one will be priced at the then prevailing prices and so it will, presumably, be considerably better for that $1 cash payment. At the same time, the jeweler will need to resell the traded stone based on the new lower pricing structure, not the $10k that they had to give you for it. That’s a $5000 haircut!

Ah, but that was a trade-in, they didn’t have to pay cash. Yes they did. They had to buy that new stone they gave you for $1 and they are taking into inventory the one you are trading in. They had some profit built into that second sale so it’s not quite as grim as writing just you a check for the whole amount but it’s close. That will depend on their margins on the second sale. 25%? 15%? How much more would they need to charge for a stone with a cash-out program to cover that additional contingent liability? Would customers be willing to pay, say, 10% more for such an upgraded program with half going into a reserve to fund such contingencies? Would that be enough to cover the stores risk? I don’t know, but now we’re haggling about the price, not whether it’s a viable offer.

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

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 5/6/2007 11:46:15 AM
Author: oldminer

They can guarantee their opinion will be the same today as it will be next week or next year when it comes to diamond grading provided they can re-identify the diamond as one they gave an opinion on previously.

David, you''ve phrased it this way twice now in the posts, and I feel compelled to point something out.

As a consumer, my definition of ''repeatability of grading results'' means that theorhetically, any stone could be submitted several times (each time being considered an unknown entity) and put through appropriate assessments with an expectation that the results of those assessments (each independent of the other) would be reasonably consistent.

What you''re describing above isn''t really ''repeatability of results'' to me. It''s more "as long as I can find out what I told you last time (because I can identify the stone and therefore figure out what I told you last time), then I promise to tell you the same thing again."

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 5/9/2007 4:55:14 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 5/6/2007 11:46:15 AM
Author: oldminer

They can guarantee their opinion will be the same today as it will be next week or next year when it comes to diamond grading provided they can re-identify the diamond as one they gave an opinion on previously.

David, you''ve phrased it this way twice now in the posts, and I feel compelled to point something out.

As a consumer, my definition of ''repeatability of grading results'' means that theorhetically, any stone could be submitted several times (each time being considered an unknown entity) and put through appropriate assessments with an expectation that the results of those assessments (each independent of the other) would be reasonably consistent.

What you''re describing above isn''t really ''repeatability of results'' to me. It''s more ''as long as I can find out what I told you last time (because I can identify the stone and therefore figure out what I told you last time), then I promise to tell you the same thing again.''

ALJ

It''s a double edged sword.

In regrading, having positive id software at the lab, which is run on every stone coming in, brings up very reasonable doubts and concerns about how "pure" the second grading would be. Do they do it to every stone that comes in? We don''t know.

From that perspective - many would consider it a negative.

But if the lab were able to identify your stone from a previous "visit" and reconcile it to having been damaged, found and recovered when lost, or recovered when stolen. that of course is the postive side of things. I am not sure GIA offers searching the database for a stone where you don''t know the previous grading report nuimber, and providing a duplicate report ( I sort of doubt they do this ) but for stones that the report number and report is lost, I think most people would see that as a positive.

GIA has horizon software ( proprietary to GIA) which how it works is secretive. I was told once by a fairly reliable source, that it is based on measurement, and a "3D" plot of where inclusions are, type and size.

Rockdoc

 

[oldminer]

There are upsides and downsides to being able to re-identify a diamond process in a lab. GIA knows if a diamond is being resubmitted even if the paperwork is not presented. Maybe it isn''t 100% capable of re-recognition, but it is very good sorftware and it is part of their process. Even in my small operation, we automated a re-identification routine nearly ten years ago. From time to time a diamond comes back for a return visit. No big deal.

If one wishes to produce a guarantee, it is totally logical and sensible to limit the risks. By being able to re-recognize a diamond a lab can manage the risk of their guarantee. Honesty must be assumed or one needs to question why on earth they would trust the lab to render an opinion in the first place? A guarantee made by a crook is definitely worthless. A guarantee made by honest experts must have some value. How much? It depends on how important the advice and reliance upon that advice has been.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 5/9/2007 4:55:14 PM
Author: aljdewey
What you''re describing above isn''t really ''repeatability of results'' to me. It''s more ''as long as I can find out what I told you last time (because I can identify the stone and therefore figure out what I told you last time), then I promise to tell you the same thing again.''

Al, this is especially helpful for when the SAS2000 breaks down.

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/11/2007 4:46:21 PM
Author: oldminer
There are upsides and downsides to being able to re-identify a diamond process in a lab. GIA knows if a diamond is being resubmitted even if the paperwork is not presented. Maybe it isn''t 100% capable of re-recognition, but it is very good sorftware and it is part of their process. Even in my small operation, we automated a re-identification routine nearly ten years ago. From time to time a diamond comes back for a return visit. No big deal.

If one wishes to produce a guarantee, it is totally logical and sensible to limit the risks. By being able to re-recognize a diamond a lab can manage the risk of their guarantee. Honesty must be assumed or one needs to question why on earth they would trust the lab to render an opinion in the first place? A guarantee made by a crook is definitely worthless. A guarantee made by honest experts must have some value. How much? It depends on how important the advice and reliance upon that advice has been.

I have witnesed just recently numerous Diamonds that each had 2 or sometimes even 3 different reports with different grades and/or other information.
And those were not even re-cut for the purpose of throwing off the GIA from recognizing them.

And believe me these were not mistakes...

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/11/2007 4:46:21 PM
Author: oldminer
There are upsides and downsides to being able to re-identify a diamond process in a lab. GIA knows if a diamond is being resubmitted even if the paperwork is not presented. Maybe it isn''t 100% capable of re-recognition, but it is very good sorftware and it is part of their process. Even in my small operation, we automated a re-identification routine nearly ten years ago. From time to time a diamond comes back for a return visit. No big deal.

If one wishes to produce a guarantee, it is totally logical and sensible to limit the risks. By being able to re-recognize a diamond a lab can manage the risk of their guarantee. Honesty must be assumed or one needs to question why on earth they would trust the lab to render an opinion in the first place? A guarantee made by a crook is definitely worthless. A guarantee made by honest experts must have some value. How much? It depends on how important the advice and reliance upon that advice has been.

Yes, manage their objectivity!!!!

 

[pricescope]

Update.

As we wrote in the first post, when we first saw the announcement, we emailed to AGS with the following questions.

1. What is the difference in factual grading data and legal aspects between previous grading reports and new certificates? “By publishing this signed document, AGS’ DQC meets the legal definition of a certificate,” said Cecilia Garner, President and CEO of the Jewelers Vigilance Committee. – According to Wikipedia: "A certificate is an official document affirming some fact". It is not clear how this document is legally different from other grading reports that also provide facts/data on the diamonds.
2. On the sample of the document there is a disclaimer advising consulting independent expert/gemologist. Furthermore, on the reverse side of the document there is a usual disclaimer of any warranty. What is the value of the certificate, which still requires third party verification and doesn’t warranty anything?
3. “the DQC is a guarantee of authenticity and performance by the jeweler“. and “The DQC is validated at the retail level, making it the first certificate ever to connect the jeweler to the consumer…The DQC is validated at the retail level, making it the first certificate ever to connect the jeweler to the consumer,” It sounds more like certification of a jeweler than a diamond
4. The fact that it will only be available for AGS retailers and will not be available in the Internet sounds a bit like protectionism.
5. Can a diamond with DQC be (re)sold on eBay by private consumers or AGS members (companies) or it becomes invalid and looses its value when used for reselling?

With gratitude, we publish here the reply from Ms. Ruth Batson, executive director and CEO, American Gem Society. (published with permission of Ms. Batson)

Thank you for your interest in the new American Gem Society Diamond Quality Certificate. The AGS created this product as part of its continuing dedication to consumer protection and setting and maintaining the highest possible standard of business ethics and professionalism in the jewelry industry. Prior to launching the DQC, the American Gem Society conferred with, and ultimately received the approval of, the leading legal watchdog in the jewelry industry, the Jewelers Vigilance Committee to call this new grading report a certificate.

The primary benefit of the new DQC is that the consumer receives a written warranty from both the American Gem Society Laboratories and an AGS credentialed jeweler that the information contained in the DQC is accurate. The certificate, however, is not a valuation or an appraisal and therefore the certificate disclaims any representation or warranty regarding the diamond’s value.

 

[pricescope]

For those who interested, ethical standards of AGS can be found here: http://www.americangemsociety.org/whoisamericangemsoci.htm

By receiving the answer above from AGS, we took a liberty to ask Ms. Cecilia L. Gardner, JVC’s president, CEO and general counsel, several questions, which are published below along with her answers.

Q: What is legal definition of a certificate?
A: A certificate includes a signature taking legal responsibility for the statement contained therein.

Q: Why traditional grading report cannot be considered a certificate while same report signed by a jeweler can?
A: Because a "traditional" grading report is not signed.

Q: Does it mean that there is a certain guarantee involved and what is guaranteed in particular in this case (accuracy of grading, representations, etc)?
A: The difference is that the signer of the certificate takes legal responsibility for the statement contained within the certificate.

Q: Can any other grading lab (big or small) issue similar type of the document for their clients (e.g. manufacturers, wholesalers, jewelers) which they can sign and turn into certificate?
A: yes.

We appreciate Ms. Gardner help with our questions very much indeed.