3 ms·

The diamond industry has a long history of marketing its goods that continues even today. 20 years ago, an engagement ring was 1 solitaire diamond. Now, it's

The diamond industry has a long history of marketing its goods that continues even today. 20 years ago, an engagement ring was 1 solitaire diamond. Now, it's much more common to buy a ring with 1 big diamond, 2 smaller ones on the side, and small diamonds around the ring. That's from marketing (and the lower cutting costs). 7 years ago, black diamonds were ground up and used on drill bits and saws, now they're sold in the US as "chocolate diamonds" for a nice premium. The diamond industry laughs at consumers in the US for that one. You can see it in the last 2 months as well - there's a big marketing blitz in the US right now that you need to buy a 2 diamond ring for your woman, one to symbolize love, the other to symbolize being a best friend. So I guess 1 is no longer enough. Each culture, naturally, responds to marketing in different ways. In the US, the marketing push has been to measure love by the size of the diamond. In Japan, it's measured by the color/clarity of the diamond. In the US, 2 months salary is the "rule". In Japan, it's 3 months salary.

JumpCrisscross 11y ago
> 20 years ago, an engagement ring was 1 solitaire diamond. Now, it's much more common to buy a ring with 1 big diamond, 2 smaller ones on the side, and small diamonds around the ring My favorite article on the diamond business is this 1982 print from The Atlantic, "Have You Ever Tried to Sell A Diamond?" [1]. I excerpted two relevant passages below. "The diamond market had to be further restructured in the mid-1960s to accomodate a surfeit of minute diamonds, which De Beers undertook to market for the Soviets. They had discovered diamond mines in Siberia, after intensive exploration, in the late 1950s: De Beers and its allies no longer controlled the diamond supply, and realized that open competition with the Soviets would inevitably lead, as Harry Oppenheimer gingerly put it, to 'price fluctuations,' which would weaken the carefully cultivated confidence of the public in the value of diamonds. Oppenheimer, assuming that neither party could afford risking the destruction of the diamond invention, offered the Soviets a straightforward deal -- 'a single channel' for controlling the world supply of diamonds. In accepting this arrangement, the Soviets became partners in the cartel, and co-protectors of the diamond invention. Almost all of the Soviet diamonds were under half a carat in their uncut form, and there was no ready retail outlet for millions of such tiny diamonds. When it made its secret deal with the Soviet Union, De Beers had expected production from the Siberian mines to decrease gradually. Instead, production accelerated at an incredible pace, and De Beers was forced to reconsider its sales strategy. De Beers ordered N. W. Ayer to reverse one of its themes: women were no longer to be led to equate the status and emotional commitment to an engagement with the sheer size of the diamond. A 'strategy for small diamond sales' was outlined, stressing the 'importance of quality, color and cut' over size. Pictures of 'one quarter carat' rings would replace pictures of 'up to 2 carat' rings. Moreover, the advertising agency began in its international campaign to 'illustrate gems as small as one-tenth of a carat and give them the same emotional importance as larger stones.' The news releases also made clear that women should think of diamonds, regardless of size, as objects of perfection: a small diamond could be as perfect as a large diamond. ... As American consumers became accustomed to the idea of buying smaller diamonds, they began to perceive larger diamonds as ostentatious. By the mid-1970s, the advertising campaign for smaller diamonds was beginning to seem too successful." http://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/82feb/8202diamond1.htm http://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/82feb/8202diamond1.ht...
- bluedevil2k 11y ago
  The big driver for small diamonds (< 0.25 carats) is that the price of cutting/polishing diamonds has plummeted in the last 10 years. Before then, diamonds were predominantly cut and polished in Antwerp and Tel Aviv. The price (measured in $/carat) was around $80. 10 years ago, Surat, India started to dominate the industry, and the price fell to $10. It's common in Surat for a family to get a bag of rough in the morning from a company, take it home and have the entire family cut and polish the bag, and return it for cash at the end of the day. The result of this price drop is that small diamonds suddenly become profitable. There's been other references to the Atlantic article from 1982, but the diamond industry has changed tremendously in the last 10 years. There's 2 good books to read about the recent changes: will find their names and edit this post with links. * http://www.rough-polished.com/en/analytics/77889.html http://www.rough-polished.com/en/analytics/77889.html Here's one book - http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-History-Cold-Blooded-Love-Affair/dp/0452283701/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1455547587&sr=1-6&keywords=diamonds http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-History-Cold-Blooded-Love-Affa... Here's the second book - http://www.amazon.com/The-Heartless-Stone-Journey-Diamonds/dp/0312339690/ref=pd_sim_14_2?ie=UTF8&dpID=51nAjFN8OmL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR102%2C160_&refRID=0EQXAGZRGNF5PSZ40W8S http://www.amazon.com/The-Heartless-Stone-Journey-Diamonds/d...
- madaxe_again 11y ago
  Have You Ever Tried to Sell A Diamond? Being on the buy side of that is great, however - got engaged last year and bought a beautiful 250 year old ring with about 30ct of stones in it, biggest about 6ct. Was probably originally some obese Georgian duke's, but whatever. Shrinking a band is easy. Silver, so the thing was black and grotty in a dusty display case in an antiques centre. Would've been tens or hundreds of thousands retail and new, just for the stones, but was instead nearer a thousand, and yes, got it assayed for insurable value. Buy things because they're nice, not because they're expensive.
andrei_says_ 11y ago
As a non-us-er, I am shocked to see that people actually believe that somehow their chosen one's love is held for ransom by Debeers and must be bought out with X salaries. It is so sad that it is possible to socially engineer customs for whole societies, influencing highly intelligent and well-educated people, which customs profit not said people but small corporate entities. At the same time, it is a very useful example and a pointer to important questions about many other beliefs perpetuated by manipulation and profit.
- Veratyr 11y ago
  Don't be too sad, not everyone follows these customs. Like most marketing and customs, there will be those who are convinced and follow and those who are not and don't. Ultimately, it's still up to the couple and there are many who simply buy what they like regardless of what tradition or marketing tells them to.

JumpCrisscross 11y ago

> 20 years ago, an engagement ring was 1 solitaire diamond. Now, it's much more common to buy a ring with 1 big diamond, 2 smaller ones on the side, and small diamonds around the ring My favorite article on the diamond business is this 1982 print from The Atlantic, "Have You Ever Tried to Sell A Diamond?" [1]. I excerpted two relevant passages below. "The diamond market had to be further restructured in the mid-1960s to accomodate a surfeit of minute diamonds, which De Beers undertook to market for the Soviets. They had discovered diamond mines in Siberia, after intensive exploration, in the late 1950s: De Beers and its allies no longer controlled the diamond supply, and realized that open competition with the Soviets would inevitably lead, as Harry Oppenheimer gingerly put it, to 'price fluctuations,' which would weaken the carefully cultivated confidence of the public in the value of diamonds. Oppenheimer, assuming that neither party could afford risking the destruction of the diamond invention, offered the Soviets a straightforward deal -- 'a single channel' for controlling the world supply of diamonds. In accepting this arrangement, the Soviets became partners in the cartel, and co-protectors of the diamond invention. Almost all of the Soviet diamonds were under half a carat in their uncut form, and there was no ready retail outlet for millions of such tiny diamonds. When it made its secret deal with the Soviet Union, De Beers had expected production from the Siberian mines to decrease gradually. Instead, production accelerated at an incredible pace, and De Beers was forced to reconsider its sales strategy. De Beers ordered N. W. Ayer to reverse one of its themes: women were no longer to be led to equate the status and emotional commitment to an engagement with the sheer size of the diamond. A 'strategy for small diamond sales' was outlined, stressing the 'importance of quality, color and cut' over size. Pictures of 'one quarter carat' rings would replace pictures of 'up to 2 carat' rings. Moreover, the advertising agency began in its international campaign to 'illustrate gems as small as one-tenth of a carat and give them the same emotional importance as larger stones.' The news releases also made clear that women should think of diamonds, regardless of size, as objects of perfection: a small diamond could be as perfect as a large diamond. ... As American consumers became accustomed to the idea of buying smaller diamonds, they began to perceive larger diamonds as ostentatious. By the mid-1970s, the advertising campaign for smaller diamonds was beginning to seem too successful." http://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/82feb/8202diamond1.htm http://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/82feb/8202diamond1.ht...

bluedevil2k 11y ago
The big driver for small diamonds (< 0.25 carats) is that the price of cutting/polishing diamonds has plummeted in the last 10 years. Before then, diamonds were predominantly cut and polished in Antwerp and Tel Aviv. The price (measured in $/carat) was around $80. 10 years ago, Surat, India started to dominate the industry, and the price fell to $10. It's common in Surat for a family to get a bag of rough in the morning from a company, take it home and have the entire family cut and polish the bag, and return it for cash at the end of the day. The result of this price drop is that small diamonds suddenly become profitable. There's been other references to the Atlantic article from 1982, but the diamond industry has changed tremendously in the last 10 years. There's 2 good books to read about the recent changes: will find their names and edit this post with links. * http://www.rough-polished.com/en/analytics/77889.html http://www.rough-polished.com/en/analytics/77889.html Here's one book - http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-History-Cold-Blooded-Love-Affair/dp/0452283701/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1455547587&sr=1-6&keywords=diamonds http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-History-Cold-Blooded-Love-Affa... Here's the second book - http://www.amazon.com/The-Heartless-Stone-Journey-Diamonds/dp/0312339690/ref=pd_sim_14_2?ie=UTF8&dpID=51nAjFN8OmL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR102%2C160_&refRID=0EQXAGZRGNF5PSZ40W8S http://www.amazon.com/The-Heartless-Stone-Journey-Diamonds/d...
madaxe_again 11y ago
Have You Ever Tried to Sell A Diamond? Being on the buy side of that is great, however - got engaged last year and bought a beautiful 250 year old ring with about 30ct of stones in it, biggest about 6ct. Was probably originally some obese Georgian duke's, but whatever. Shrinking a band is easy. Silver, so the thing was black and grotty in a dusty display case in an antiques centre. Would've been tens or hundreds of thousands retail and new, just for the stones, but was instead nearer a thousand, and yes, got it assayed for insurable value. Buy things because they're nice, not because they're expensive.

andrei_says_ 11y ago

As a non-us-er, I am shocked to see that people actually believe that somehow their chosen one's love is held for ransom by Debeers and must be bought out with X salaries. It is so sad that it is possible to socially engineer customs for whole societies, influencing highly intelligent and well-educated people, which customs profit not said people but small corporate entities. At the same time, it is a very useful example and a pointer to important questions about many other beliefs perpetuated by manipulation and profit.

Veratyr 11y ago
Don't be too sad, not everyone follows these customs. Like most marketing and customs, there will be those who are convinced and follow and those who are not and don't. Ultimately, it's still up to the couple and there are many who simply buy what they like regardless of what tradition or marketing tells them to.