Appraisal Discrepancy?? confused!

[coral]

I was wondering if anyone could help explain something - although I''''ve been trying to educate myself on the forum...I don''''t know that much about diamonds and how appraisals work.

My grandmother recently gave me her diamond (originally my great-grandmother''''s) to have re-set as my engagement ring. I eventually brought the loose stone to an appraiser who said it weighed 2.1 carats but looks like a 2.4. She said since it''''s an old stone more of its weight is in the top, making it look larger. Regardless, the actual weight of the stone is 2.1 carats. She also said the color is an M. (Sorry, I don''''t have the papers yet for more accurate specifications...)

The thing is, when my grandmother gave me the stone she told me that it was 3 carats. I figured that this was just what she "thought" it was. Turns out she just found an appraisal that she had done about 15 years ago which said the stone weighs 2.9 carats and the color is an I.

What could possibly explain this discrepancy? Is this common? I definitely trust my current appraisal over my grandmother''''s, but still find it strange that they could be so different. I''''m confused!!

 

[strmrdr]

If the new appraiser actually weighed the stone loose then it is the new appraiser who is right.

The older appraisal may have been based on measurements in the setting then a formula used and be off.
It is hard to say for sure what is going on.

 

[oldminer]

Diamonds tend to get weigh more and more over many years in the minds of owners. It''s human nature, I suppose. A scle tells the whole story. 2.10cts is it so it seems. Most old cut diamonds look small for their weight, so maybe your diamond is "spready" meaning it is a bit on the thin side for depth and has a larger length and width for 2.10ct weight.

I sure hope you kept your eye on it the whole time and know that the diamond you took away was the one you initially brought to the appraiser.

It would be unusual not to recognize such a diamond, but one must be diligent and cautious.

The 2.90ct weight on the old report might have been someone''s best estimate based on measurements and influenced by someone''s insistance that the diamond was 3 carats and no a lot less. Appraisers can be very flexible and it can lead to such question as you now have.

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 6/11/2009 11:02:49 AM
Author: strmrdr
If the new appraiser actually weighed the stone loose then it is the new appraiser who is right.

The older appraisal may have been based on measurements in the setting then a formula used and be off.

It is hard to say for sure what is going on.

Yes it could be a matter of one appraisal basing the weight of the diamond on formula, usually the words "gauged and graded while mounted, weight estimated by formula" would be included within the description... and another instance where the diamond was weighed while unmounted.

 

[John P]

Date: 6/11/2009 10:57:01 AM
Author:coral

Turns out she just found an appraisal that she had done about 15 years ago which said the stone weighs 2.9 carats and the color is an I.

What could possibly explain this discrepancy?

The posts above give the most likely explanation.

There's also chance that the person who did the 15 year old appraisal really inflated it. Do you know who did it and what that person's relationship was to any pending transaction at time of appraisal?

Another (remote) possibility is that the 2.9 ct was switched for a smaller stone during the last decade-and-a-half... but that's a reach, and someone here should probably slap my cyber-hand for saying the sky is falling: Stone-swapping is an oft-shouted, rarely-perpetrated stereotype. No reputable pro would ever risk his business with such tomfoolery. But the stereotype was developed -years ago- for a reason and with 15 years under the bridge I thought I'd float it.

 

[denverappraiser]

I think the most likely choice is that the 15 year old appraisal is simply in error.

Yes, it’s common.

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

 

[Modified Brilliant]

We have better equipment today with more precise accuracy also.

I agree with Neil.

www.metrojewelryappraisers.com

 

[Richard Sherwood]

I''ve run across soooo many old, hugely innacurate appraisals. It''s a shame, but the industry used to be really "loose", in my opinion.

 

[coral]

I also feel that the 15 year old appraisal must be off - just wanted to know how the experts saw it. Thank you everyone so much for your responses! I''ll post a pic of it and the actual specs once i get it back with the papers.

 

[lowphat]

Maybe they meant 2.09, not 2.9.

 

[coral]

lowphat, you''re right - I''ve also considered this possibility! But calling it an "I" and then an "M" ? Isn''t this a bit of a drastic difference in color??

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 6/12/2009 11:50:46 AM
Author: coral
lowphat, you're right - I've also considered this possibility! But calling it an 'I' and then an 'M' ? Isn't this a bit of a drastic difference in color??

Is the appraiser still around? I guess I would maybe ask him if you are curious enough. Sounds like the above appraisers came of with some good ideas and it sounds like grading and technology has improved over the years. Sounds like a pretty stone!!! You should post pics; we all love seeing pictures of diamonds.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 6/11/2009 9:03:46 PM
Author: Modified Brilliant
We have better equipment today with more precise accuracy also.

I agree with Neil.

www.metrojewelryappraisers.com

Love the new avvie Jeff!

 

[Gotgold]

On the color discrepancy; Was the ring set on the prior appraisal? If so, it''s possible the setting mislead the appraiser on the color of the stone. A friend of mine was selling a 5ct for a family a few years back, was set in platinum which doesn''t hide yellow in the stone- but it was accented by dark green emeralds which hid the color very well. He thought it was an E or F, it ended up being a I (or J) out of the setting (He also used a machine to check the color, results in the setting on 3 tests- E, E, F.) as I said out of the setting it turned out to be quite a bit more yellow.

That''s a possibility- would also (SORT OF) explain the big discrepancy in weight if it was in the setting, maybe it was a new gemologist and he wasn''t up on his measurement calculations??

- Gotgold
Dealer, 10+ years.
Gemology student- GIA.