dellas1979 wrote: » 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.
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.
dellas1979 wrote: » 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.
Zambia wrote: » Noboby is forced to buy a ring.
Maximus Alexander wrote: » I think the point he's trying to make is that this will never happen. If you go out and buy an engagement ring for 5000 euro and try to sell it the next day, you'll get a tiny fraction of that back. The gold in the ring is likely worth a couple of hundred and the diamond is worth next to nothing. The thing is, people have an idea in their head that diamond and gold jewellery is valuable, but it's actually only valuable at the point of sale, if you try to sell it on it's practically worthless.
dellas1979 wrote: » 1 potato would now be worth as much as a diamond engagement ring.
PARlance wrote: » Glad to see the rocks of sense have weighed in with some gems of information. Just trying to cut through some of the inevitable puns, this could be more polished but I haven't got forever.
strobe wrote: » But you're not telling the truth, you're misunderstanding what value means.
strobe wrote: » And therefore could certainly not be described as worthless.
Jawgap wrote: » Again it depends. You or I buy a ring give it to our fiancé and then they of to sell it, it's going to depreciate rapidly. If there's a 'story' to it's ownership it will increase - that's why you can buy some jewellery at cheap prices, but try buying a comparable piece that was owned say by Princess Grace, Liz Taylor etc and the prices rise exponentially, even for the merest of trinkets that passed briefly through their ownership.
dellas1979 wrote: » I like the way you write - push it back onto me, like I am lying (for telling the truth). I do understand value, after all, I live in the same world as you. Just not on the same notions. I am saying how a diamond is valued is wrong. WE as humans created this.
dellas1979 wrote: » No but they should be aware of the circumstances of paying 1000s. And then make the choice/decision. I think the point is being missed - lets talk potatoes. If potatoes were constricted in the market (by a very clever company), and people were lead to believe they were valuable "precious", and people bought into that (a good ad campaign), 1 potato would now be worth as much as a diamond engagement ring.
Jawgap wrote: » Sounds like you've found a good thread to mine.......
dellas1979 wrote: » Strobe. The potato itself is worthless. The human demands on the potato made it expensive.
strobe wrote: » Apparently not. WE as humans create ALL valuations. Whether that's in diamond rings, sports cars, carrots, or clothes. The value is created by us as humans being willing to pay.
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?). s!
dellas1979 wrote: » Strobeeeee Thats what am saying (I dont understand why you've gone all attack-y. You should ask yourself why). I've said the above at least 3 times now.
Maximus Alexander wrote: » In fairness he was talking about buying engagement rings, not trading Faberge eggs.
strobe wrote: » The potato is in itself worthless, the diamond is in itself worthless, a house is in itself worthless. There no such thing as intrinsic value. Someone willing to pay x for y, is the only thing that values x at y, it's no more or less through for Diamond engagement rings as it is for anything else that a value can be placed on.
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.,
Jawgap wrote: » Neither was I. Give you an example.....a pre-1969 Omega Speedmaster watch will set you back anything from €2000 to €8000 depending on condition......you can bet there's no way you can buy one of the Speedmasters for that era owned by Armstrong, Aldrin etc for less than mid-six figures, even if they ever came up for sale (or Swigert's one that he used to time the Apollo 13 mid-course burn). Same everyday watches, different stories, higher prices.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Hate to break it to you but everything you buy is worth less than you're paying for it. Kind of how running a business works.
Maximus Alexander wrote: » Which is a special case and totally different to what the OP was talking about - the general practice of people going out and spending thousands on engagement rings.
dellas1979 wrote: » 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?
