I saw a pair of EGL graded OMC earrings th eother day. EGL said nearly $3k and I said... "Nope, can't be worth that much! It's EGL!" The really funny thing was that the person had a tag at the bottom of her auction saying she was a GIA graduate.

Seriously, no one ever mentions Q-R. And, one rarely sees these "lost" letters...

I can understand why it might seem perfectly fine- but the problem is, sellers will actually try and pass off this lovely S-T, Q-R, M, whatever it actually is- as a "Certified I color"
So it could easily be seen as facilitating non truth. In my book, any sale based on descriptions known by the seller to be inaccurate is questionable.

(my emphasis)

But it isn't. A lab report stating X colour and Y clarity does not change the reality of what the stone's colour and clarity are. Colour and clarity are fundamentally objective rather than subjective evaluations - AGS even uses a colorimeter in colour grading and the quantity and type of inclusions that can be found with 10x magnification is an absolutely objective measure, subject only to the grader's willingness to do a thorough job.

Since everybody that criticises EGL does so on the basis of their (demonstrated) inconsistency on colour and clarity, it is even less excusable.  If EGL were consistently 1, 2 or 6 grades "less" than GIA, it would be OK. It is just that they have decided to use a different scale. But some grades are "on the spot" (e.g. the SI1 here), yet others are 6 (or 11) grades off. How does this help the buyer? And in turn, as a seller, how can using an EGL report to provide independent verification of a grade be seen as anything other than bad faith?

BTW - not that I want to promote the competition, but BN does NOT offer EGL graded stones. Other online merchants do.