Diamond engagement rings, are in fact, worthless

Zambia · 29-03-2015 02:27PM

Noboby is forced to buy a ring.

Eugene Norman · 29-03-2015 02:28PM

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.

You really don't understand the psychology of engagement rings. Not about the diamond. It's about the expense.

Jawgap · 29-03-2015 02:28PM

It's simply worth what the market will pay for it.

Paintings, first edition comics etc are coloured ink or pain on canvass or paper but are worth a fortune.

Likewise classic cars.

Desire, not need drives prices for diamonds and other similar objects.

Maximus Alexander · 29-03-2015 02:32PM

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 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.

One eyed Jack · 29-03-2015 02:34PM

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.

I won't shoot you down OP, of course you're telling the truth, but you're missing the whole point of why people spend a small fortune on the engagement ring - tradition, showing off, indeed as a display of their commitment to each other - the bigger apparently... (never mind about the quality or the cut) did you see the size of the white snot hanging off Kim Kardashian's finger, or Beyoncé?

All about the bling, etc. Of course they're worthless now to most people, because they're tacky, but for some they are still a symbol of status and ehhh, wealth.

strobe · 29-03-2015 02:34PM

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.

But you're not telling the truth, you're misunderstanding what worth and value mean.
There's no such thing as intrinsic value. If a fistful of dog hair can be sold, and resold, for €10,000 euro. Then it is certainly not worthless, it's worth €10,000. Value is ultimately created by the purchaser being willing to purchase.

dellas1979 · 29-03-2015 02:34PM

Zambia wrote: »

Noboby is forced to buy a ring.

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.

PARlance · 29-03-2015 02:35PM

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.

Jawgap · 29-03-2015 02:37PM

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.

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.

strobe · 29-03-2015 02:37PM

dellas1979 wrote: »

1 potato would now be worth as much as a diamond engagement ring.

And therefore could certainly not be described as worthless.

Jawgap · 29-03-2015 02:38PM

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.

Sounds like you've found a good thread to mine.......

dellas1979 · 29-03-2015 02:39PM

strobe wrote: »

But you're not telling the truth, you're misunderstanding what value means.

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 · 29-03-2015 02:40PM

strobe wrote: »

And therefore could certainly not be described as worthless.

Strobe.
The potato itself is worthless.
The human demands on the potato made it expensive.

Maximus Alexander · 29-03-2015 02:40PM

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.

In fairness he was talking about buying engagement rings, not trading Faberge eggs.

strobe · 29-03-2015 02:42PM

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.

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.

PARlance · 29-03-2015 02:42PM

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.

It would probably be worth more because the last time I checked you can't throw a diamond in the ground, cover it in horse sh*te and come back to find 20 diamonds a few months later.

Most of us get the fairly basic premise that diamonds are expensive due to demand created by the decades of marketing and societal pressure. We get it. We still buy them. Because if it wasn't diamonds, it'd be something else....
What carrott does that spud come in???

PARlance · 29-03-2015 02:43PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Sounds like you've found a good thread to mine.......

Took a while to sieve through them

strobe · 29-03-2015 02:44PM

dellas1979 wrote: »

Strobe.
The potato itself is worthless.
The human demands on the potato made it expensive.

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.

dellas1979 · 29-03-2015 02:45PM

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.

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.

wendell borton · 29-03-2015 02:47PM

The best use for diamonds is cutting concrete.

Guy:Incognito · 29-03-2015 02:49PM

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!

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.

strobe · 29-03-2015 02:49PM

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.

I'm not gone attacky. You're just not really getting it. You're saying diamond rings are worthless, they are worth thousands. They have value. The value is what they can be sold for. Like everything.

Jawgap · 29-03-2015 02:52PM

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

In fairness he was talking about buying engagement rings, not trading Faberge eggs.

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.

Eugene Norman · 29-03-2015 02:53PM

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.

That's not true of the house. You can measure value vs price in anything that generates income.

hidinginthebush · 29-03-2015 02:55PM

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.,

A secondhand ring should indeed be worth a fraction of the original price. Unfortunately there are places all around town selling "antique" rings at prices far higher than new, fully certified ones.

Anyway, there's a very interesting and informative article here worth a read on the topic of diamonds.

I recently went through the process of getting an engagement ring for my fiancée, and sure, I was aghast at the prices asked, but I had money saved up, we went in and picked the ring together, I informed her of the budget, and she got a ring she absolutely adores. It's a fun day doing it together, and seeing how happy she was and still is with it, that's all that matters really.

dellas1979 · 29-03-2015 02:56PM

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.

I am a person who does not place my value, my love, my hopes, or my affection in "things", or the need to parade the "thing" around. Or get into huge debt for a "thing". A "thing" that we humans pump up the price on (for the most part by not understanding what is really going on). So, I feel this conversation will go around in circles.

Maximus Alexander · 29-03-2015 02:56PM

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.

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 · 29-03-2015 02:59PM

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.

That news was broken the day I handed over money for a sweet deemed the price of a penny

Jawgap · 29-03-2015 03:00PM

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.

Similar scenario.

Rarity creates value, because it creates the illusion of exclusivity.

Whether the diamond ring depreciates or appreciates in value is a function of what it's story is or becomes.

If the person whose finger you plonk it on goes on to live a fairly ordinary life, then the ring depreciates - although it probably remains of incalculable value to her and her family.

Same ring on a person who lives an extra-ordinary life becomes more 'valuable' because of it's provenance.

Tarzana2 · 29-03-2015 03:02PM

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?

This is old news.

Diamond engagement rings, are in fact, worthless

Comments