EGL vs. GIA with Data Comparison

[anitabee]

what do you mean by "strategically sent"?

 

[Doc_1]

what do you mean by "strategically sent"?

Am referring to this post on the 1st page of this thread

EGL, especially EGL International, gets a bad rap because they are seen as inconsistent. Sometimes a stone graded on the GIA scale as an I-1 will be graded SI2, sometimes SI1, sometimes I-1. The same happens with color. Sometimes GIA-H will mean EGLI-G, sometimes, EGLI-F, sometimes EGLI-H. If you're going strictly off of the paper rather than personally grading the stone or by hiring your own expert to grade it for you, you just don't have enough information to compare. On the other hand, if you ARE relying on your own expert (or your own expertise), what EGLI thought of it is basicaly irrelevant.

As has been pointed out above, you are not the first person to consider this issue, even in terms of that particular stone. In partiicular, someone chose that particular lab, and they didn't make this choice arbritrarilly. They could have used any lab in the world that they wanted and they chose that particular one because they felt that they could get the maximum price by attaching that particular pedigree. This decision was made by an industry insider, probably at the cutting house level, but it has since passed through the hands of several other experts, each of which had the opportunity to resubmit it to a new lab if they thought it would enable them to raise the price. It's not that it's impossible to game this system and win, it's that you're going up against well practiced insiders who HAVE actually seen the stone and so you are at a serious competitive disadvantage.

 

[Doc_1]

and this one on the 2d page:

Ummm......

Earlier, I proposed not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Despite my having been here a really long time (over 6 years?), I wonder if you guys are simply talking about what year the bathtub was manufactured.

That is to say...yes...with respect to color, I read from Richard Sherwood and others that a device like the SAS2000 has really amazingly "spot on" performance, such that while a colorimeter may be less than perferred, other devices can point to the potential objectification of the color process. If...that is really the point...

Anne has been able to repeat what Denver/Neil has most critically commented on, allowing Anne to repeat the refrain....smart guys like diamond cutters send diamonds to labs strategically, and know what they are doing. So, what's the darn difference what the color of the diamond is with respect to choice of the lab. The critical decision criteria surely...if it is to be meaningfully understood in some kind of way, has something to do with a characteristic of the diamond outside of the universe we are even discussing here....otherwise...this is simply not very interesting.

And yet, I have never found anyone with credentials to speak about this "black box" of strategic choice. I can make inferences, but they are based on nothing...vapors.

Berryl I belive has mentioned a 5th criteria...the diamond material itself. That the nature of the diamond "matter" has variability, and perhaps this will have something to do with it.

I really don't know.

Otherwise, although we yes know that using 3rd & 4th tier grading agents will have implications for the shopper, apart from knowing that there is increasing unpredictability concerning what is actually known about those old 4 Cs....I am betting right about now that those 4 Cs do not make up the universe upon which such a supposed strategic choice is made. Otherwise, why is the statement about this so called "strategic" choice as provocative as it would seem to be...?

Ira Z.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

what do you mean by "strategically sent"?

There are two meanings being used for this term Neil referred to both in his post.

In the case of a true Canadian diamond (i.e. mined and polished in Canada), there is not enough incentive to go through the hassle of sending a diamond cut here to the states for grading. Canadian diamonds, sold in canada are graded by a Canadian lab. This has nothing to do with the diamond's grade or any strategy on the part of the cutter, this is a commercial reality for diamond's being cut here and sold in Canada. EGL and Gemscan are much more common grading reports here than GIA, and it is known by experienced trade that Gemscan is much softer and inconsistant.

In the other case of cutters and dealers strategically choosing the lab whose grading paper will help bring the highest value that is quite another matter. This is why I see no reason for an online consumer to consider EGL stones unless it was a fancy shape, antique, or fancy colored diamond which may be unavailable with a top tier grading report.

Even in such cases if I was considering an EGL stone I would make a deal with the vendor to send to GIA, I would pay if the report was within one grade of color and clarity, and they would pay and would likely have to adjust the price if otherwise.

Regards,
CCL

 

[Jim Summa]

I looked at some Princess of Hearts diamonds in Boston in April while attending AGS conclave.
I don't think they had EGL reports...

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

I looked at some Princess of Hearts diamonds in Boston in April while attending AGS conclave.
I don't think they had EGL reports...

POHs sold in the US can have US grading reports. GOGs are sent to AGS.