Igi certificates
When you put the GIA next to EGL these are two three letter companies. Public trust is paramount to the success of a highly subjective industry. Dealers went out of business, mines closed, inventories lost substantial values, and families in mining communities went hungry. This is the sort of thing that happened to emerald value when a news channel reported that 95% of emeralds were filled. I'm not sure you understand the repercussions of your video, if it were to go viral. And that's the market level that deceptive grading reports create problems. Your statement is not true when it comes to a retail sale, where a gemologist is only on one side of the transaction. But ONLY at the wholesale level, where gemologists are on both sides of the transaction. I agree with you that identical stones will be priced very close regardless of the lab report. But GIA and AGS reports, save for a couple isolated incidents, have been fully reliable for years. It's a good idea to find someone you trust- obviously. You're effectively saying that you need a trustworthy diamond dealer to purchase a diamond, because there are bad lab reports in the industry. What you're actually doing here is throwing the GIA and the AGS under the bus. Any outside party that wants to use GIA terms should use GIA standards.
![igi certificates igi certificates](https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/H36cf7db0b1664bff8d4957686f19eda3J/Tianyu-Gems-CVD-Diamond-Radiant-1-27CT-F-VS1-EX-VG-Lab-Grown-IGI-Certificate-Well.jpg)
GIA created the 4 C's terminology under their standards (effectively inventing the modern 4 C's). Which brings me back to the original point - buy a stone, not a certificate! And if you don't know jewelry, know your jeweler! And if he or she is honest, it doesn't matter which lab certified the stone, as it will be priced fairly. So, if your jeweler is a crook, you're screwed no matter what. There are countless cons an unscrupulous jeweler can use regardless of certification. If a jeweler is dishonest, GIA is just as easy to misrepresent as EGL. That's why I said you need to look at the STONE, not the paper.Īnd, as I've advocated at great length here and elsewhere, it's crucial for consumers to work with trusted (and trustworthy!) experts. But the fault there doesn't lie with the gem lab, it lies with the seller misrepresenting the certificate and stone. This is where the possibility of consumer confusion exists, and I agree that it's a problem. I think where deception comes into play is when a seller presents a certificate as being the same as GIA if it isn't, and prices accordingly. So the terms are now effectively part of the English language. Other entities use that terminology, including other labs, Rapaport, and retailers. They just invented the terminology we use to describe them today (which replaced earlier grading systems). First of all, GIA didn't invent the 4 Cs. "Whether it's a rock, or a grain of sand, both sink in water." In regards to EGL International or EGL USA, NEITHER should be using GIA terms with lower standards. The retail public shouldn't have to strictly rely on a fiduciary relationship with the retailer. The sole purpose of a grading report is to give qualitative and quantitative analysis of a highly subjective material. And if these labs wish to create their own quality standards, they absolutely should not use GIA terminology. And an unsuspecting consumer may purchase the lower standard grading report assuming it has the same gemological grading report standards as the GIA stone. The value difference between these is huge. For example, GIA might grade a stone I1, when a lower standard laboratory would call it an SI2.
![igi certificates igi certificates](https://www.diamondscreener.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/igi_vs_gia_prices_E_color_diamonds.png)
Lower standard reports are also often issued when a diamond's quality is split. It's very confusing to the consumer and advantageous to immoral dealers. When you have organizations that are issuing gemological grading reports that have lower qualitative standards than the GIA or the AGS, it opens up huge opportunities for retailers to take advantage of naive consumers. The issue is that diamond certifications are designed to standardize quality and allow the consumer to purchase the quality that they're comfortable with. It's both deceptive and immoral to use the qualitative terms of a leading laboratory with lower standards. GIA created the 4C's, and if EGL (or other labs) is going to use their descriptive terms to describe quality, they need to use GIA standards.