nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Diamond engagement rings, are in fact, worthless

dellas1979

Hello there!

Just reading another thread there about someone saying they didnt have a lot of money to buy an engagement ring...

Are people out there aware that diamonds are in fact worthless (or worth a lot less than the 1000s spent on them?).

If love is true love, shouldnt it still be love without a ring you paid 1000s for? (As in most people are programmed to the "man with the knee on the ground and a diamond ring worth 1000s in his hand-its proves he loves you, right?).

This isnt a throw it in your face for people who do have rings and paid 1000s for them.

Its just to make people more aware (that is always was and still is a marketing gimmick)-its more about the true sentiment, isnt it?

Edit: This thread to make people aware. If you are aware and still agree/make that choice to be (successfully) part of a mass ad campaign, go for it. That is your choice!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ardinn

Since when are they worthless??

Timmyctc

Well yeah. Dont de Beers hold a monopoly on the supply and demand of diamonds and have no small supply of diamonds. Its a sentiment started by a marketing exec in the 1900s. Its the same with lots of things. Look at valentines day, in fact, look at any holiday. Everything is designed for people other than me to make money off people like me to give money to other people for nice things ill never afford. Screw diamonds man.

TheChizler

Try explaining your reasoning (which I'm all for!) to your fiancé...

The_Valeyard

dellas1979 wrote: »

Hello there!

Just reading another thread there about someone saying they didnt have a lot of money to buy an engagement ring...

Are people out there aware that diamonds are in fact worthless (or worth a lot less than the 1000s spent on them?).

If love is true love, shouldnt it still be love without a ring you paid 1000s for? (As in most people are programmed to the "man with the knee on the ground and a diamond ring worth 1000s in his hand-its proves he loves you, right?).

This isnt a throw it in your face for people who do have rings and paid 1000s for them.

Its just to make people more aware (its a marketing gimmick)-its more about the true sentiment, isnt it?

Is this your way of saving cash and cheaping out OP?

[Deleted User]

ardinn wrote: »

Since when are they worthless??

Since de beers monopoly which also introduced the idea of a diamond engagement ring

I think it's good to keep in perspective - it doesn't mean you have to stop getting them, but don't wreck yourself or have any sleepless nights over them either

Synthetic ones are supposed to be less flawed as well and I think they are cheaper

Banjo String

I got turfed out of Fields Jewellers in Liffey Valley one afternoon for having my hand down the back of my jocks.

Tossers had a sign in the window saying "come in and pick your ring in comfort" too, but they wouldn't even hear me out. :mad:

dellas1979

TheChizler wrote: »

Try explaining your reasoning (which I'm all for!) to your fiancé...

Well, they should be aware! Best of luck

Its to enable people to make informed choices. Not what they've been lead to believe.

emo72

Interesting thread. Do debeers own all the diamonds still in the ground? Why doesn't another company mine them and sell them for less? I was aware that debeers controlled the supply of stones, and that laboratory produced stones are of equal quality. People still want to buy them though.

Question number one. Who made debeers the boss?

galljga1

Supply and demand. Gold is not worth 1200 dollars an ounce to me. It is effectively worthless to me but if i want it, that is what i will pay and a lot more in a jewellers.

dellas1979

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Is this your way of saving cash and cheaping out OP?

Lols!! No.

Its called being aware. And being manipulated by advertising.

Isnt it the sentiment thats more important than the 1000s spent on a ring? A ring which people have been lead to believe the diamond is worth 1000s.

Tearin It Up

A Garth Brooks concert ticket and I'm yours. No diamonds wanted here.

Edit: preferably not an old ticket. A ticket to an upcoming concert.

gavmcg92

galljga1 wrote: »

Supply and demand. Gold is not worth 1200 dollars an ounce to me. It is effectively worthless to me but if i want it, that is what i will pay and a lot more in a jewellers.

Most important point here. They may not be in such short supply as people are lead to believe, but they are worth what people are willing to pay for them.

They're not worthless when you have people all over the world looking to buy them.

dellas1979 wrote: »

Lols!! No.

Its called being aware. And being manipulated by advertising.

Isnt it the sentiment thats more important than the 1000s spent on a ring? A ring which people have been lead to believe the diamond is worth 1000s.

Can't that be said about most things? Banksy art pieces are made from stencils most of the time. To some they're worthless, to others they're masterpieces. There's a lot of work that goes into shaping diamonds and fitting them. They may not be worth what people pay for them, but at the end of the day it's the market that determines the price of something.

shruikan2553

Synthetic diamonds are just as good, even better for many industrial uses. They had to develop ways to tell the difference and market them as being "cheap" when even the guy in the jewelers would have to send it off to some lab or use expensive machines to tell the difference. .

RORY O CONNOR

At anyone time only 1% of gemstone quality stones are in circulation, the rest are in vaults. it is an artificial scarcity created by the diamond sellers to give the stones a false value. Many years ago the Russians were dumping gemstone quality stones on the market to get currency. They were largely bought up by the big suppliers and put in a vault to keep them scarce and the values high.

dellas1979

gavmcg92 wrote: »

Most important point here. They may not be in such short supply as people are lead to believe, but they are worth what people are willing to pay for them.

They're not worthless when you have people all over the world looking to buy them.

Exactly - if people stopped buying diamond rings in the morning, diamonds are in fact worthless.

The little rock itself isnt worth much at all.

People should maybe stop sweating over the prices of engagement rings (or what its supposed to represent or the more you spend, the more you love someone) and maybe think outside the box a little.

(PS: It could be applied to a lot of things in our lives/advertising that we are fed..."buy this for 1000s and you'll feel better (or make some believe you love them").

PARlance

dellas1979 wrote: »

Lols!! No.

Its called being aware. And being manipulated by advertising.

Isnt it the sentiment thats more important than the 1000s spent on a ring? A ring which people have been lead to believe the diamond is worth 1000s.

Fascinating.... I hope this adverstising thing doesn't catch on.

Sent from my iPhone (costs nothing to make retails at over €500) as I sip on my coffee (cost of sale approx 30cent, paid ten times that for it)

galljga1

PARlance wrote: »

Fascinating.... I hope this adverstising thing doesn't catch on.

Sent from my iPhone (costs nothing to make retails at over €500) as I sip on my coffee (cost of sale approx 30cent, paid ten times that for it)

Madness I say...madness...

dellas1979

PARlance wrote: »

Fascinating.... I hope this adverstising thing doesn't catch on.

Sent from my iPhone (costs nothing to make retails at over €500) as I sip on my coffee (cost of sale approx 30cent, paid ten times that for it)

Ah - maybe you are too smart PARlance

RORY O CONNOR

And if diamonds were worth as much as they are sold for as rings why is it that a secondhand ring is worth about 25% of its original cost.,

gavmcg92

RORY O CONNOR wrote: »

And if diamonds were worth as much as they are sold for as rings why is it that a secondhand ring is worth about 25% of its original cost.,

Because cost price is multiplied by 2.25 in the retail sector to cover operating costs.

EDIT: Also depreciation.

Jawgap

A ring is more than stones and metal - a good ring also has a lot of craftsmanship 'built' into it.

The stones have to be cut and polished, and the metal has to be worked.

Even to the untrained eye a piece of crafted jewellery stands out from something mass or machine produced.

dellas1979

Jawgap wrote: »

A ring is more than stones and metal - a good ring also has a lot of craftsmanship 'built' into it.

The stones have to be cut and polished, and the metal has to be worked.

Even to the untrained eye a piece of crafted jewellery stands out from something mass or machine produced.

That is true-but Im not talking about craftmanship or anything (which obviously their expertise would add value to anything craft-wise), Im talking just about the actual stone itself.

PCX

dellas1979 wrote: »

Exactly - if people stopped buying diamond rings in the morning, diamonds are in fact worthless.

The little rock itself isnt worth much at all.

Isn't that exactly the same for any good?

Things like art, jewelry and clothes bought for fashion are not really necessary but the world is probably a better place if we can use those things to express ourselves rather than limiting ourselves to purely utilitarian items on principle.

Plus I don't buy into the economics of your argument. Company executives are too greedy to play the really long game with their assets. I think they would cash in rather than leave the spoils for the next generation of company men who come behind them.

Jawgap

dellas1979 wrote: »

That is true-but Im not talking about craftmanship or anything (which obviously their expertise would add value to anything craft-wise), Im talking just about the actual stone itself.

The point is a uncut diamond is pretty much worthless without the skilled cutters and polishers to turn them in something aesthetically pleasing.

DeBeers could further restrict the supply of raw stones and they wouldn't make a cent unless the stones had the potential to be 'beautiful' - it's the craftsmen (and women) who realise that potential.

strobe

dellas1979 wrote: »

Hello there!

Just reading another thread there about someone saying they didnt have a lot of money to buy an engagement ring...

Are people out there aware that diamonds are in fact worthless (or worth a lot less than the 1000s spent on them?).

If love is true love, shouldnt it still be love without a ring you paid 1000s for? (As in most people are programmed to the "man with the knee on the ground and a diamond ring worth 1000s in his hand-its proves he loves you, right?).

This isnt a throw it in your face for people who do have rings and paid 1000s for them.

Its just to make people more aware (that is always was and still is a marketing gimmick)-its more about the true sentiment, isnt it?

Whether it's a diamond ring, a bag of potatoes, or a gram of heroin, something is worth what people are willing to pay for it.

It ridiculous to say a diamond ring is worthless when you can sell it for thousands. It's worth thousands. As that is what it can be sold for.

There's no such thing as intrinsic value.

If I have a diamond ring, advertise it for sale for 50,000 euro, and have no problem selling it. Then it is worth 50,000 euro.

Eugene Norman

Most of the posts here are missing the point. Yes industrial diamonds are cheap and largely indistinguishable from the real thing. Yes there is a deliberate constraint on supply.

That's not why engagement rings are expensive. Engagement rings are expensive because people expect engagement rings to be expensive. Well I say people, I mean women. The fiancé.

If De Beers hadn't managed their slight of hand and diamonds were all cheap then the engagement ring would be made of platinum or something else which remained expensive.

As to why the modern "anti-patriarchal" world , a world where women work and don't need gifts proving their partners ability to keep a family, hasn't done away with this, or feminism hadn't made removing the tradition a war cry, your guess is as good as mine.

It's certainly a feminism I could support.

Eugene Norman

strobe wrote: »

Whether it's a diamond ring, a bag of potatoes, or a gram of heroin, something is worth what people are willing to pay for it.

It ridiculous to say a diamond ring is worthless when you can sell it for thousands. It's worth thousands. As that is what it can be sold for.

There's no such thing as intrinsic value.

If I have a diamond ring, advertise it for sale for 50,000 euro, and have no problem selling it. Then it is worth 50,000 euro.

With those kind of luxury goods you are correct. You can impute values from other income producing goods however and talk about over and under pricing.

One eyed Jack

strobe wrote: »

Whether it's a diamond ring, a bag of potatoes, or a gram of heroin, something is worth what people are willing to pay for it.

It ridiculous to say a diamond ring is worthless when you can sell it for thousands. It's worth thousands. As that is what it can be sold for.

There's no such thing as intrinsic value.

If I have a diamond ring, advertise it for sale for 50,000 euro, and have no problem selling it. Then it is worth 50,000 euro.

I tried tellin' 'em that in the Cash4Gold place. They told me GTFO

Ah no, seriously OP, I like your thinking, but I'm not sure my wife would be so pragmatic if given the choice between a new diamond ring, and a new ironing board / toaster / microwave, etc :pac:

Spanish Eyes

Anybody been to Antwerp for Diamonds!

dellas1979

strobe wrote: »

It ridiculous to say a diamond ring is worthless when you can sell it for thousands. It's worth thousands. As that is what it can be sold for.

Lookit, you can argue until the cows come home - but the rock itself is worthless (at least not 1000s spent on it). If you have bought (or know someone whos bought) a diamond ring, they bought into a mass ad campaign started in the 40s.

People believe that a diamond is "precious" (when in facts there are billions of 'em) and that they are worth something (a construct humans created, yes like a lot of other things - hello? Housing bubble?).

I accept I'll get shot down for telling the truth - that is fine. But, it might educate or save someone somewhere from spending 1000s on something worthless to "prove" their love for one another.