GIA Certificate from 2000 - Concerns?

[rvaldes79]

Hello:

I am considering purchasing a round diamond (1.72, H, SI1) with a GIA certificate from 2000. The certificate says the Symmetry is Very Good and the Polish is Good. There is no Cut grade which I understand is due the year of the report. The dealer says it was acquired through a trade and obviously recommends the diamond, particularly, in terms of value $12,700.

He also has another round diamond (1.72, H, SI1) with a GIA certifcate from 2012 and the GIA report says that Cut, Symmetry, and Polish are both Excellent. This diamond is $14,900.

Looking at both diamonds with and without a loupe, I cannot tell the difference. If anything, the newer diamond seems to have more inclusions (very minor), which is confirmed by the GIA report. Also, the measurements of both diamonds are very similar (table on both is 58, the depth on both is less than 63). I've stared at them for what feels like an eternity and have gone on two occasions already to see both.

That said, I still can't get over the old GIA certificate and am not sure if this is a rational concern? Any thoughts?

 

[missy]

I would ask for them to send it in for a new cert from GIA. So much has changed regarding cut grade which they didn't do in 2000 and just to make sure the diamond is in good shape since it has been almost 13 years since it got that cert.

 

[John P]

I would ask for them to send it in for a new cert from GIA. So much has changed regarding cut grade which they didn't do in 2000 and just to make sure the diamond is in good shape since it has been almost 13 years since it got that cert.

Definitely. That's a lot of time passing by. Will your jeweler do this for you, or offer to split the cost?

As another alternative, you and the jeweler could agree to send it to an appraiser equipped with a 3D scanner. It will cost about the same as a new GIA report and take less time. In addition to verification that the diamond has not been damaged or altered since the 2000 report was issued, you would be informed of the current GIA cut-grade, the predicted AGS light performance grade (if the appraiser is licensed to use the AGS PGS) as well as getting additional independent insight on color-clarity and finish. Another added benefit would be documentation suitable for insurance purposes.

While the alternate route is not likely to be as attractive to a jeweler as just getting a new GIA Report, it has benefits for you. Then, down the road, if you decide to send it to a lab you'll know in advance what to expect from either GIA or AGSL.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi.
Great advice given so far. Please allow me to offer a different point of view, after considering your question.

Basically, you're looking at $2200 difference between the two stones. The stone with the older report is worth less. As John suggests, you can put it on a machine and find out exactly how much less. This will depend on how much it will cost to recut it up to a triple excellent.

On the other hand, the price you're being offered the other stone, with the current GIA report, seems competitive using the PS database as a barometer.
So, based on your comments, it might make sense to buy the Diamond with the new GIA report.

This is of course based on the assumption that you're comfortable with the dealer.


When I'm buying diamonds, if there's this sort of question mark in my mind, and yours is a valid consideration- I skip that stone and consider another.
All in all, based on everything involved, and speaking in a general sense, having never seen the stones first hand: a case could be made that the diamond with the current report offers more than $2200 better value.

 

[John P]

Basically, you're looking at $2200 difference between the two stones. The stone with the older report is worth less. As John suggests, you can put it on a machine and find out exactly how much less. This will depend on how much it will cost to recut it up to a triple excellent.

Indeed a different perspective. If you can provide mm measurements from the 2000 report I can speculate on David's line of thought to some degree.