EGL 4.10ct D-IF?

[WinkHPD]

I don't know the back story, and it must be a doozy, but on Polygon I read a post from Friday in which the EGL paper for a 4.10ct stated the diamond was a D-IF and a GIA report on a 4.10ct with the identical measurements stated the diamond to be a J-VS1.

Now, I can not say it was in fact the same diamond, but it certainly appears to be so. I can not say from which EGL lab it came from, but it certainly says a LOT about why EGL is not respected in the trade to the extent that some would have us respect them.

Wink

 

[ecf8503]

wow.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Scary, isn't it? Wow!

 

[kenny]

Why are these labs not prosecuted for fraud?

Must be politics.
Individuals must fear reprisals from powerful industry insiders who make millions by selling these stones, as they lie to the naive and trusting public about clarity and color grades.

As they say, follow the money.

 

[diamondringlover]

I can totally believe it, my 5 stone had a cert that said E-F color, IF, well the stones are really F and VS1....kinda of stinks that there is such a big difference in the different labs.

 

[yennyfire]

Yikes!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

You almost have to treat EGL stones just like uncertified ones and get an independent appraisal to find out what it really is. That's why I only look at GIA and AGS, though, because who wants to go to that much trouble as well as rewarding the sellers of EGL stones (and ultimately EGL).

 

[suchende]

Why are these labs not prosecuted for fraud?

Must be politics.
Individuals must fear reprisals from powerful industry insiders who make millions by selling these stones, as they lie to the naive and trusting public about clarity and color grades.

As they say, follow the money.

How can you claim fraud though? The rankings are too arbitrary. The law can't very well say only the GIA scale is "right" about what color a certain letter should correlate to.

 

[kenny]

Why are these labs not prosecuted for fraud?

Must be politics.
Individuals must fear reprisals from powerful industry insiders who make millions by selling these stones, as they lie to the naive and trusting public about clarity and color grades.

As they say, follow the money.

How can you claim fraud though? The rankings are too arbitrary. The law can't very well say only the GIA scale is "right" about what color a certain letter should correlate to.

It's simple.
Agree upon standards.
Enforce them.

It IS possible.
AGS and GIA did it.

Of course the question is WHO will take action.
If the industry does not clean itself up the public will demand government regulation.
It's only a matter of time since the Internet is spreading the word about this outrageous rip off.

Maybe to raise consciousness we need a Hollywood film like "Blood Diamonds".
Everyone loves to hear dirt!
That would get the industry off its smug complacent @ss.

Like cigarette sales, the only reason it happens today is it happened yesterday.

 

[suchende]

I'd honestly be upset if the government spent money on establishing standards and enforcing this, when the EPA, DOJ and SEC are underfunded and unable to consistently enforce far more impactful laws. I don't like to see people get defrauded either but I wouldn't want the gov't to make this a priority at the moment.

 

[WinkHPD]

I'd honestly be upset if the government spent money on establishing standards and enforcing this, when the EPA, DOJ and SEC are underfunded and unable to consistently enforce far more impactful laws. I don't like to see people get defrauded either but I wouldn't want the gov't to make this a priority at the moment.

The laws and Federal Trade Commission rules we currently have are not enforced, nor can we expect any new laws to be enforced. I am convinced that this type of thing will always go on with uninformed buyers and that we on Pricescope can help most by continuing to be an educational portal where this type of thing is exposed to the light of day.

Wink

 

[kenny]

Thanks Wink.

I salute trade members who bravely speak up here on PS about lab discrepancies.

You guys and gals to a great service to the public and the integrity of the industry.

 

[Haven]

Thanks Wink.
I salute trade members who speak up about lab discrepancies here on PS.
You guys and gals to a great service to the public and the integrity of the industry.

I agree.

This is a pretty shocking case, and it makes me wonder what the discrepancies are with some of the other less reputable labs out there. I went to a jewelry store in a mall several years ago and they were charging premium prices for stones that we would call frozen spit here on PS. I didn't recognize the grading lab, but one particular stone was graded VS2 and couldn't have been higher than an I1 at the very best. What's scary is to think of how many uninformed individuals go out and purchase those stones.

 

[denverappraiser]

EGL doesn't claim to be using the same scales. On THEIR scale it's a D/IF. So what? We could, if we wanted, pressure NIST (the people who define things like second, foot, pound, etc.) to put their stamp of approval on a diamond grading scale but I think a scale that meets their approval would look VERY different from the ones we're using today. Jewelers don't want it, consumers don't want it, GIA certainly doesn't want it. Who then, would be applying the pressure and where would the money come from?

The probelm is at the consumer level. People want 'certificates' to mean more than they do and they assume that there's a system in place to make that happen. There's not, and they don't. Personally I wouldn't even want it. I can think of precious few examples where adding more government involvement is beneficial and many where there participation just mucks it up even worse along with raising the prices to pay for their bureaucratic overhead. How about this: Buy diamonds from dealers you trust, and choose them based on criteria that goes beyond a claim of the lowest prices. Then trust them and listen to their advice. Veryfy using an independent appraiser that you've vetted.

 

[kenny]

EGL doesn't claim to be using the same scales. On THEIR scale it's a D/IF. So what? We could, if we wanted, pressure NIST (the people who define things like second, foot, pound, etc.) to put their stamp of approval on a diamond grading scale but I think a scale that meets their approval would look VERY different from the ones we're using today. Jewelers don't want it, consumers don't want it, GIA certainly doesn't want it. Who then, would be applying the pressure and where would the money come from?

The probelm is at the consumer level. People want 'certificates' to mean more than they do and they assume that there's a system in place to make that happen. There's not, and they don't. Personally I wouldn't even want it. I can think of precious few examples where adding more government involvement is beneficial and many where there participation just mucks it up even worse along with raising the prices to pay for their bureaucratic overhead. How about this: Buy diamonds from dealers you trust, and choose them based on criteria that goes beyond a claim of the lowest prices. Then trust them and listen to their advice. Veryfy using an independent appraiser that you've vetted.

The systems not broken, yet the answer is to pay money to appraisers like you.


I see now how appraisers profit from this scandal.
No wonder you see no problem.

This comes across like a dentist handing out candy.

 

[suchende]

Kenny, the problem here is that there is a degree of subjectivity in the color and clarity grades. I did a quick search of the FTC's staff papers and publications on the subject of jewelry, and they're talking about concrete, verifiable things, like weight and metal contents. I think that's about as much as we can expect from a regulatory body.

 

[denverappraiser]

EGL doesn't claim to be using the same scales. On THEIR scale it's a D/IF. So what? We could, if we wanted, pressure NIST (the people who define things like second, foot, pound, etc.) to put their stamp of approval on a diamond grading scale but I think a scale that meets their approval would look VERY different from the ones we're using today. Jewelers don't want it, consumers don't want it, GIA certainly doesn't want it. Who then, would be applying the pressure and where would the money come from?

The probelm is at the consumer level. People want 'certificates' to mean more than they do and they assume that there's a system in place to make that happen. There's not, and they don't. Personally I wouldn't even want it. I can think of precious few examples where adding more government involvement is beneficial and many where there participation just mucks it up even worse along with raising the prices to pay for their bureaucratic overhead. How about this: Buy diamonds from dealers you trust, and choose them based on criteria that goes beyond a claim of the lowest prices. Then trust them and listen to their advice. Veryfy using an independent appraiser that you've vetted.

The systems not broken, yet the answer is to pay money to appraisers like you.


I see now how appraisers profit from this scandal.
No wonder you see no problem.

This comes across like a dentist handing out candy.

What scandal? EGL uses a different grading system from GIA and lots of people don't understand either one. Where's the scandal? I wouldn't describe the EGL reports as very useful for shoppers, but it's not required that they issue useful documents, nor do I think it should be. They are permitted to give their opinion, and shoppers are welcome to ignore it.

I didn't say I don't see a problem. I said don't see greater government involvement as a solution and I think most of the problem comes from consumer expectations of what a lab is and what they do and don't offer. People are welcome, encouraged actually, to develop the necessary expertise themselves and simply duck these costs. The vast majority of shoppers here on PS, like yourself, avoid using professional services anyway because you see no value in them. That's your call and I have no problem with it. Others see it differently. What's wrong with that? I suppose another solution is to REQUIRE that every diamond sold be graded and evaluated by a government employee from the department of gems and that dealers would be subjected to fines and/or jail time if they dared to sell something else (enforced by the FBI, the courts and a newly created network of gem inspectors) to make sure the stores toe the line.
Dealers should probably be required to get a license and post a bond to insure compliance. Naturally it would be also be necessary to fine and/or jail any errant consumer who tried to buy something 'uncertified' based on their own expertise or from an unlicensed dealer but perhaps we could put in a system of licensing and testing to allow people to get a permit to do this as well. I'm sure this could be put into place for under a few thousand dollars an stone and just think of how much it would stimulate the economy.

FWIW, yes, I consider my services to be valuable. Fortunately so do my customers but I understand that you disagree. I don't actually see this changing even if the Feds DID get involved. If anything, I think it would get worse because people would STILL want to differentiate theirs from others and complying with the rules for proper documentation would surely become far more complicated. If the ever increasing complexity of the regulatory environment in the US and the effect this is having on the need for more attorneys, I suspect that more government regulation would be the best thing ever to happen to the appraisal profession, at least in terms of the business end of things.

 

[denverappraiser]

Kenny, the problem here is that there is a degree of subjectivity in the color and clarity grades. I did a quick search of the FTC's staff papers and publications on the subject of jewelry, and they're talking about concrete, verifiable things, like weight and metal contents. I think that's about as much as we can expect from a regulatory body.

They COULD develop a system that is well defined and verifiable if they wanted. Redefining 'clarity' to mean something like the level of impurities would be relatively easy to define for example. It's rather like defining the acceptable amount of rat hairs allowed in hot dogs. Like I said above, this would require completely changing the way diamonds are graded and whether or not this is in any way useful is highly debatable but it is within the power of the government to at least TRY and force through something like this in the name of consumer protection. Big costs, major ramp up in regulation, complete redesign of an industry, and no discernable benefit to consumers. Hmm, sounds like a government program to me.

 

[WinkHPD]

EGL doesn't claim to be using the same scales. On THEIR scale it's a D/IF. So what? We could, if we wanted, pressure NIST (the people who define things like second, foot, pound, etc.) to put their stamp of approval on a diamond grading scale but I think a scale that meets their approval would look VERY different from the ones we're using today. Jewelers don't want it, consumers don't want it, GIA certainly doesn't want it. Who then, would be applying the pressure and where would the money come from?

The probelm is at the consumer level. People want 'certificates' to mean more than they do and they assume that there's a system in place to make that happen. There's not, and they don't. Personally I wouldn't even want it. I can think of precious few examples where adding more government involvement is beneficial and many where there participation just mucks it up even worse along with raising the prices to pay for their bureaucratic overhead. How about this: Buy diamonds from dealers you trust, and choose them based on criteria that goes beyond a claim of the lowest prices. Then trust them and listen to their advice. Veryfy using an independent appraiser that you've vetted.

The systems not broken, yet the answer is to pay money to appraisers like you.


I see now how appraisers profit from this scandal.
No wonder you see no problem.

This comes across like a dentist handing out candy.

Kenny,

Actually, as a retailer, I thought Neil's advice was spot on; trust, but verify.

The system is not broken, but some of the people working in it are damaged. Seriously damaged. Their integrity bones have been broken, or perhaps were not issued at birth.

Good appraisers, and I consider Neil to be one of the best, not only help to bring comfort to a buyer, but also help to keep the good guys good. After all, if you were a retailer and knew one of your stones was going to Neil to be looked at, wouldn't you make doubly sure all your t's were crossed and your i's dotted?

While the vast majority of my clients do not seek the services of an appraiser, I am never offended when they do. I know that the appraiser will verify the work that I have done and the grades I have given and give the gift of further confidence to my clients. Frankly, I wish more people did use qualified appraisers, it would put the charletons out of work quicker and leave more work for those of us who do play by the rules.

Wink

 

[Rockdiamond]

+1 to Wink's post.
Any seller that discourages use of a third party appraiser is to be avoided- big time.
BUt better sellers can, and do provide the type of service that makes using a third party appraiser optional.

With regard to Neil- I think criticism is off base.
Neil devotes a lot of time to PS- and provides great information.
He certainly has earned a lot of credentials through his work here- and I never see him "fishing for business" as it were.

Thanks Wink.

I salute trade members who bravely speak up here on PS about lab discrepancies.

You guys and gals to a great service to the public and the integrity of the industry.

Kenny- thanks for that- the frustrating part is when consumers cite the PS study to "prove" EGL can be a bargain.
The wording of that study is woefully toothless.
When this is pointed out, someone that has purchased an EGL graded diamond may take offense....
Matters not to me- I will continue to point out this discrepancy whenever appropriate.

 

[Rank Amateur]

I understand the point about EGL not necessarily having the same color standards.

If it is really a J it must have some color, and in a stone that large I imagine the color is all the more easy to see. But EGL gave it a D. So what do they call the stones with less color? C, B, and A? As in, "I got me a B color TF from Big Ol' Dimon Shop in the mall."

The TF would stand for "Totally Flawless", dude.



This must be an honest mistake of some sort.