6 replies to this topic

[JV123]

Hello,

I purchased a diamond just the other day. Still waiting for it to arrive. On the Report the dealer disclosed with the sale (AGS) the comments mentioned a GIA inscribtion. So I looked up the Report and found conflicting information. The one that stands out to me is the AGS G & GIA I color grades. If anyone can help, please check the data of these two reports.

AGS

AGS#: 848XXXXReport Type: Diamond Quality™
DocumentShape and Style: Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.33 - 6.38 x 3.84 mm
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Color Grade: AGS 1.5 (G)
Clarity Grade: AGS 4 (VS2)
Carat Weight 0.936
Fluorescence: Negligible Comments:
"<GIA- NOT inscribed by us symbol> 1554XXX" has been inscribed on the girdle of this diamond.
Table: 56.0%Crown
Angle: 34.3
Crown Height: 15.0%
Girdle: Faceted, 0.8% to 3.6%
Pavilion Angle: 41.1
Pavilion Depth: 43.3%
Star Length: 53%
Lower Girdle Length: 73%
Total Depth: 60.4%
Culet: Pointed

GIA

Report Type: GIA Diamond Dossier® Date of Issue: April 04, 2007

Laser Inscription Registry: GIA 1554XXXX

Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.33 - 6.38 x 3.86 mm
Carat Weight: 0.93
Color Grade: I
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade: Excellent
Proportions: Depth: 60.7 %
Table: 56 %
Crown Angle: 34.5°
Crown Height: 15 %
Pavilion Angle: 41.2°
Pavilion Depth: 43.5 %
Star length: 55 %
Lower Half: 75 %
Girdle: Thin, Faceted
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: Faint
Clarity Characteristics: Crystal, Cloud

I'm not sure what to do at this point. This was an online purchase & I have not seen the diamond yet. Again, I was only informed of the AGS Report at the time of purchase. Any input is much appreciated.

Regards,

Jeff

Edited by JV123, 01 August 2007 - 06:46 PM.

[denverappraiser]

It’s a tad unusual for GIA and AGS to differ by 2 grades but the scenario where there are 2 exams on the same stone that produce different results is not unusual at all. You didn’t list the date of the AGS report but it’s obviously more recent the GIA one from April 07 so it will be relatively recent. My theory is that the cutter/dealer who submitted it to GIA didn’t agree with the ‘I’ grade that GIA provided and immediately sent it on to AGS in the hopes of a more saleable report. Apparently it worked. They liked AGS’s answer better so they used that one. Were it not for the inscription, you never would have had a clue. This process is done frequently by the dealers although they rarely get busted like this. Obviously I can’t say which is more accurate without inspecting the stone but I’ld bet on AGS in this situation. I would further guess that the next time this dealer sends out a stone, especially an ideal cut, they’ll choose AGS first and then send it to GIA if they don’t like the results rather than the reverse for exactly this reason.

Neil

[JV123]

Neil,

Your info is much appreciated. It's unfortunate I was able to see both reports in a sense that now I may wonder about the actual grade. I wouldn't think that the color would be that subjective...or atleast by two grades & by two of the top labs. It all comes down to did I get what I payed for. Paying for a (G). I think I will speak with the dealer about this.

Also, from what is shown on the reports does this look like a good stone?...understanding that a visual will be the deciding factor. Just wondering about the dimensions and other grades.

This is my first purchase. An engagement ring. I just want to feel great about the purchase.

Regards,

Jeff

[barry]

GIA is spot on with their color/clarity grading so you are paying More for Less.

Very surprised that the Dealer did not remove the laser inscription from the diamond before submitting to AGS; stupid actually. OTOH, probably was hedging his bets and was going to use the Lab that gave him the best grading.

If you're really keen on keeping this diamond, my advice is to try to ask the dealer to adjust his price to be somewhere between the G & I color.

Otherwise, pass on this one and keep looking. In the immortal words of the late great Appraiser, Bill (Rockdoc) Lieberum; "There's always another bus".

Let us know what happens.

[denverappraiser]

I’ve found AGSL to be spot on as well so there’s an issue here where at least one of them made a mistake. It happens. What’s yet to be determined is who. It might actually be both. It probably would have served the dealer better to send it back to GIA for a recheck rather than to switch labs in the middle of the stream. Everybody screws up occasionally and GIA will recheck one of their exams for errors for a discounted fee and it’s free if they decide that the original was wrong.

Obviously the dealer planned to use the report with the best results and I have little doubt that he/she is quite annoyed at how this has played out. The ‘G’ was good news, but the inscription comment was definitely not. It wouldn’t do any good to remove it now so they are stuck with either using the GIA and pricing it as an ‘I’, using the AGS with the comment and dealing with the flack, or spending some more money to polish it off and get yet another exam. Obviously they’ve chosen to go with the second. I agree with Barry that this could be leverage to get a discount because their alternatives aren’t all that pleasant.

Look at the stone when it arrives. If you still love it, show it to a grader who is working for you instead of the seller and see if you can pin down what the correct answer is. Then call up the seller and start negotiating.

Neil

[JV123]

A big thank you to Neil & Barry! The outcome was, after a call to the Dealer, I chose another diamond. The new stone is a 1.03, G, EX-Cut, EX-Sym, EX-Polish, SI1. I went with a lower clarity to afford the larger stone. The dealer spent a lot of time finding the right stone for me. Also I was given a discount on the purchase. I thought if I kept the other diamond I would always wonder about the grade. Again, Thanks!

Regards,

Jeff

Edited by JV123, 03 August 2007 - 06:39 AM.

[barry]

Glad we could help!

Enjoy your new Rock!