Are GIA Certs from different countries not as strict as US GIA Cert?

[parsonsjnyc]

Hello everyone!

I remember a diamond dealer telling me that GIA certification in different countries is not as strict as US GIA certification.

Just wondering if I would need to get a US GIA certification for a diamond with a GIA certification done in India.

What do you all think?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Hello everyone!

I remember a diamond dealer telling me that GIA certification in different countries is not as strict as US GIA certification.

Just wondering if I would need to get a US GIA certification for a diamond with a GIA certification done in India.

What do you all think?

I have not heard of a disparity in grading with GIA in different countries, but I am replying just to bump your thread so maybe one of the diamond vendors can answer.

 

[parsonsjnyc]

Thank you!

 

[Karl_K]

There were some consistancy issues with the different gia labs I havent heard heard anything recently to know if that is still the case.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

It was widely reported by US dealers years ago but with no evidence - possibly sour grapes.
I regularly see diamonds listed in India and the same diamond pops up on a US dealers site for a month later at a few percent higher in price.
I bet they dont resend it to GIa for a new report!

 

[flyingpig]

A US dealer supporting the US
GIA branches he works closed with and where he sends and gets his diamonds from.

 

[Karl_K]

A US dealer supporting the US
GIA branches he works closed with and where he sends and gets his diamonds from.

No it was about suppliers/cutters lab shopping for a better grade among the gia labs.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

GIA has rigorous controls in place to make sure that submissions are anonymized to prevent any outside influence on results. It is also my understanding that diamonds submitted at one lab do not necessarily get graded at that lab. So a diamond submitted in India may get graded in New York or Hong Kong and vice versa. It is supposedly impossible to tell in which GIA lab, or on which continent, a given diamond was graded.

 

[denverappraiser]

See above. I"ll add that you can not tell where the stone was graded by looking at the report. This is not on there. Even personally submitting the stone to a particular lab does not mean it will be graded there (also mentioned above).

 

[oldminer]

The GIA has done a commendable job to keep bias out of their grading. Behind the scenes, temptations might be offered to push a grade upward for a promised reward. This is what GIA has done a good job in combating, but they can't prevent temptation offered by outsiders. There does not seem to be a problem at this time with the integrity of GIA reports.

 

[Karl_K]

kewl !it sounds like GIA has delt with the the problem.

 

[parsonsjnyc]

GIA has rigorous controls in place to make sure that submissions are anonymized to prevent any outside influence on results. It is also my understanding that diamonds submitted at one lab do not necessarily get graded at that lab. So a diamond submitted in India may get graded in New York or Hong Kong and vice versa. It is supposedly impossible to tell in which GIA lab, or on which continent, a given diamond was graded.

Very interesting. Thank you for this information.

 

[parsonsjnyc]

It was widely reported by US dealers years ago but with no evidence - possibly sour grapes.
I regularly see diamonds listed in India and the same diamond pops up on a US dealers site for a month later at a few percent higher in price.
I bet they dont resend it to GIa for a new report!

Very true! I cannot see the US dealers taking the time not to mention the expense.

 

[parsonsjnyc]

See above. I"ll add that you can not tell where the stone was graded by looking at the report. This is not on there. Even personally submitting the stone to a particular lab does not mean it will be graded there (also mentioned above).

A dealer said that one can tell which country the diamond was GIA appraised by the first 3 numbers of the report. Maybe he was just trying to get me to buy one of his diamonds.

 

[parsonsjnyc]

The GIA has done a commendable job to keep bias out of their grading. Behind the scenes, temptations might be offered to push a grade upward for a promised reward. This is what GIA has done a good job in combating, but they can't prevent temptation offered by outsiders. There does not seem to be a problem at this time with the integrity of GIA reports.

Thank you for your input!

 

[denverappraiser]

A dealer said that one can tell which country the diamond was GIA appraised by the first 3 numbers of the report. Maybe he was just trying to get me to buy one of his diamonds.

Yeah, I've heard that. I've also heard that it's inculcated in the bar code. I've checked. Neither is true, although both are commonly stated.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The GIA has done a commendable job to keep bias out of their grading. Behind the scenes, temptations might be offered to push a grade upward for a promised reward. This is what GIA has done a good job in combating, but they can't prevent temptation offered by outsiders. There does not seem to be a problem at this time with the integrity of GIA reports.

This was the case 18 years ago nearly resulting in the cutting off of a diamond salespersons right hand.

Diamonds.net - Court Case: Pincione VS. Vivid, GIA

(Rapaport...August 26, 2005) Judging from the e-mails and phone calls into Rapaport this past week, there is great concern within the diamond industry about a pending court case related to alleged payments in exchange for upgraded diamond certificates dating back to year 2001. What follows in...

www.diamonds.net

and sadly, the loss of GIA's best ever president, Bill Boyjian

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

This is the card that comes with the GIA reports.
I am sure the US dealers throw it away asap.

JCK or one of the trade magazines ran a survey some years back like this
Where do the diamonds you sell come from
Antwerp Belguim and Russia was the overwhelming answer.
As we all know India only cuts and polishes a few % of the worlds diamonds.

 

[flyingpig]

No it was about suppliers/cutters lab shopping for a better grade among the gia labs.

For me, it is a scare sales tactic by a US vendor. There maybe some truth in inconsistency among different GIA labs worldwide. I think that's not the point.

The point is that this US vendor is giving out impression that he offers GIA-US graded diamonds whereas online is full of GIA-India graded diamonds. I can totally see US consumers choosing diamonds graded by GIA-US if given choice. I see similar tactic in Canada. When I mention GIA, they say "that's AMERICAN".

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Only Clarity is done by people at GIA these days. Does not matter for Cut, Carat, Color, Fluoro etc

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I recieved confirmation from the top levels at GIA that just because a diamond is submitted to a given lab does not mean that the diamond was graded in that particular lab.

So the fact that a report has the name and address of the submitting party, and that entity is based in India, is not proof that the diamond was actually graded in India. The submitting party itself does not even know in which lab the diamond was graded. They only know which lab they submitted it to.

Quote from the response I recieved with some further detail:

"GIA routinely moves diamonds between labs for capacity planning, client anonymity and quality control. We’ve been doing so for years. We do the same with the US labs - items submitted in Carlsbad may be transfered to our NY lab for processing and visa versa."

 

[parsonsjnyc]

I recieved confirmation from the top levels at GIA that just because a diamond is submitted to a given lab does not mean that the diamond was graded in that particular lab.

So the fact that a report has the name and address of the submitting party, and that entity is based in India, is not proof that the diamond was actually graded in India. The submitting party itself does not even know in which lab the diamond was graded. They only know which lab they submitted it to.

Quote from the response I recieved with some further detail:

"GIA routinely moves diamonds between labs for capacity planning, client anonymity and quality control. We’ve been doing so for years. We do the same with the US labs - items submitted in Carlsbad may be transfered to our NY lab for processing and visa versa."

Very interesting fact. Thank you Texas Leaguer!

 

[parsonsjnyc]

Only Clarity is done by people at GIA these days. Does not matter for Cut, Carat, Color, Fluoro etc

Thanks Garry H! I never realized that only clarity is done by people at GIA. It would be nice if these agencies were more transparent.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thanks Garry H! I never realized that only clarity is done by people at GIA. It would be nice if these agencies were more transparent.

I do know that some automated color grading is being done at GIA. It is my understanding that only a subset of diamonds (smaller stones, no fluorescence, etc) are getting graded purely by proprietary GIA instruments.

 

[Karl_K]

For me, it is a scare sales tactic by a US vendor. There maybe some truth in inconsistency among different GIA labs worldwide. I think that's not the point.

The point is that this US vendor is giving out impression that he offers GIA-US graded diamonds whereas online is full of GIA-India graded diamonds. I can totally see US consumers choosing diamonds graded by GIA-US if given choice. I see similar tactic in Canada. When I mention GIA, they say "that's AMERICAN".

Like many things in the diamond industry its based on things that were true at one time.
It was not that long ago either that it was true.
People where lab shopping among the GIA labs for better grades.
It sounds like they have a handle on it now.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I do know that some automated color grading is being done at GIA. It is my understanding that only a subset of diamonds (smaller stones, no fluorescence, etc) are getting graded purely by proprietary GIA instruments.

As [B]parsonsjnyc[/B] wrote Bryan, some more transparency would be great.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

As [B]parsonsjnyc[/B] wrote Bryan, some more transparency would be great.

I like transparency. A lot. It is one of our core values at Whiteflash. We even publish the entire 'formula' for our brand so that everyone can hold us accountable for our claims.

However, I am not sure what the value is to the public to know that a certain percentage of stones are being colored graded using technology rather than the human eye. The entire goal is for the grading to be accurate and consistent. Unless that goal is not being met, does GIA not have the right to decide themselves how to get the job done? What would the public do with that information?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I like transparency. A lot. It is one of our core values at Whiteflash. We even publish the entire 'formula' for our brand so that everyone can hold us accountable for our claims.

However, I am not sure what the value is to the public to know that a certain percentage of stones are being colored graded using technology rather than the human eye. The entire goal is for the grading to be accurate and consistent. Unless that goal is not being met, does GIA not have the right to decide themselves how to get the job done? What would the public do with that information?

If they were a private corporation paying taxes that would be fair Bryan.
Have not checked if they are half or more billion dollars lately but they have a business not unlike Google, FB etc and are an essential monopoly who don't pay taxes

 

[Texas Leaguer]

But what value would it be for the public to regulate them to that degree?

How does a diamond shopper use that information in a productive way?

I suppose we could debate whether we should be supporting companies that maintain the status quo and always employ human labor instead of doing the job more efficiently with technology (and I could potentially be persuaded on those grounds). But I don't think that is the argument you are making.

 

[parsonsjnyc]

I like transparency. A lot. It is one of our core values at Whiteflash. We even publish the entire 'formula' for our brand so that everyone can hold us accountable for our claims.

However, I am not sure what the value is to the public to know that a certain percentage of stones are being colored graded using technology rather than the human eye. The entire goal is for the grading to be accurate and consistent. Unless that goal is not being met, does GIA not have the right to decide themselves how to get the job done? What would the public do with that information?

Very good point! As a consumer, I only care about accuracy no matter how it is achieved.

I understand from your post that you work for Whiteflash. I was deciding between Whiteflash and BG when ordering my wedding band and ultimately chose BG because I liked their settings more. I paid extra for colorless diamonds and was expecting Van Cleef color melee (I own a few pieces of Van Cleef with gorgeous colorless melee and wanted melee of the same quality. BG promised that quality but I was disappointed.

I also want a .20 pointer diamond tennis bracelet in colorless diamonds eventually. I love a handmade setting that BG has for an extra cost but afraid to order the piece from them because I was not happy with my wedding band. I wish that Whiteflash had custom handmade settings for more expensive pieces but that is not the case. Hopefully one day the company will reconsider having more bespoke settings.