DIAMOND GRADING- Is it a science?

[valeria101]

Date: 11/24/2004 3:40:7 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
It makes me think that 12 authors might be a little too much for one competent Editor to handle.

It reminds me a little of what the Economist magazine said about the choice you guys had in your election:
The incompetent, or the incoherent

Tell me about it! With five co-authors is already hell. And we''re talking two editors, not one. Add ill-fitting time zones and preying is all that''s left

I am not a huge fan of The Economist though. Aside the "incompetent or the incoherent" there is an easier to manage type: the disinterested. Five guys dead on having their word out and not a comma more are not manageable (God help), twenty or more willing to contribute a bit of wisdom make editing a pleasure to behold

Too bad that was the former project...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 11/12/2003 6:52:43 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood
-----------
Individuals grading with an inherent bias (they’re selling the stone,
or have a vested interest in its sale.
-----------

You know, in re-reading my post this statement doesn''t ring correct to me. There are plenty of ethical dealers who grade their stones strictly and wouldn''t think of letting bias creep into it.

This statement would apply to the minority of dealers who let the fact that they''re selling the stone influence their grading. The majority of dealers are straight arrows when it comes to this matter.

Yes Rich - another consideration is the protection of a good name.
We grade very strictly inside my retail business - we only regularly supply independant certs for +.90ct.
We have never been challenged on a grading - because we grade strictly. Consequently we never have the challenge from a competitor bad mouthing our goods - BUT - we loose sales.

The choice is - reputation and the long run, or a quick buck. There are many jewellers who take this approach - but they will never be the cheapest.