4 ms·

Someone should sell an investment-backed artificial diamond ring. So, for example, you could take a $500 ring and back it with a $10K investment that's tied to

by shasta 11y ago

Someone should sell an investment-backed artificial diamond ring. So, for example, you could take a $500 ring and back it with a $10K investment that's tied to the ring. The only reason anyone buys a real diamond ring is to avoid the embarrassment of a cheap ring - on the part of the guy giving it or the woman showing it to her friends. Being able to talk about it as a "$10K ring" would go a long way to making it less embarrassing.

softawre 11y ago
I like the way you think.
mcv 11y ago
Good idea. A ring that's still worth something after purchase would be a much more sensible than a ring with a piece of carbon that can't be sold. But personally I don't see why anyone would care about a $10k ring. Different cultures, I suppose.
SerisCo 11y ago
That's a great original idea, but it's still predicated on the assumption that more money = more love, that the purpose of the ring is to impress others, and that there's reason to be ashamed of a $500 ring. It's sad that American culture assumes that the man who spends $10K on a ring loves his fiancée more than the man who spends $500. Several companies that produce diamond alternatives, such as lab-grown diamonds and silicon carbide stones, are growing and rapidly expanding their product lines. I think the reason for this is that people are questioning the wisdom of spending a ton of money because marketing campaign have told them they must if they love their partners.
- rayiner 11y ago
  > It's sad that American culture assumes that the man who spends $10K on a ring loves his fiancée more than the man who spends $500. That presupposes that marriage is solely about love, which is itself an odd and mostly western concept. Marriage is, just as much, an economic arrangement in which people make often very significant sacrifices in order to create a household and potentially raise and support children. It necessarily entails a significant commitment on both sides, including the commitment to stick with each other in the case of hardship or sickness. When you account for that aspect of marriage, it makes total sense to require some showing of financial wherewithal.
  - SerisCo 11y ago
    Absolutely, there are considerations other than simply love. And to that point, I would argue that if a person values "financial wherewithal" in a partner, they wouldn't require the partner to drop tens of thousands of dollars on a fun but non-essential trinket.
creamyhorror 11y ago
Nice idea. To compete, this ring-with-real-value would need glossy marketing to create a sense of brand value that parallels existing diamond brands. "$10k" isn't enough, it has to be "$10k, beautifully cut and set, alluringly marketed." And the recipient of the ring should be able to redeem the value of the backing investment after a certain time. Worth a business attempt? Hmm.
- shasta 11y ago
  I agree, branding and style would be important. Having a celebrity or two use for their engagement wouldn't hurt, either. I think you'd want it to work kind of like a cashier's check. If you have the ring and your identification matches what's on file, then cashing out your investment is easy. If you've lost the ring or you're not the primary on the account, there are delays (of perhaps months) but cashing out is still possible.
Shorel 11y ago
I think you would need to invest quite a bit in bodyguards for that scheme to work.
jwhitlark 11y ago
While marketing had a role in this, expensive and basically worthless gifts are used as expensive signaling, much like a peacock's feathers. Basically you're showing that you can and are willing to take a hit for your future mate. http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/08/a-partial-defense-of-diamonds/182982/ http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/08/a-part...

by shasta 11y ago

softawre 11y ago

I like the way you think.

mcv 11y ago

Good idea. A ring that's still worth something after purchase would be a much more sensible than a ring with a piece of carbon that can't be sold. But personally I don't see why anyone would care about a $10k ring. Different cultures, I suppose.

SerisCo 11y ago

That's a great original idea, but it's still predicated on the assumption that more money = more love, that the purpose of the ring is to impress others, and that there's reason to be ashamed of a $500 ring. It's sad that American culture assumes that the man who spends $10K on a ring loves his fiancée more than the man who spends $500. Several companies that produce diamond alternatives, such as lab-grown diamonds and silicon carbide stones, are growing and rapidly expanding their product lines. I think the reason for this is that people are questioning the wisdom of spending a ton of money because marketing campaign have told them they must if they love their partners.

rayiner 11y ago
> It's sad that American culture assumes that the man who spends $10K on a ring loves his fiancée more than the man who spends $500. That presupposes that marriage is solely about love, which is itself an odd and mostly western concept. Marriage is, just as much, an economic arrangement in which people make often very significant sacrifices in order to create a household and potentially raise and support children. It necessarily entails a significant commitment on both sides, including the commitment to stick with each other in the case of hardship or sickness. When you account for that aspect of marriage, it makes total sense to require some showing of financial wherewithal.
- SerisCo 11y ago
  Absolutely, there are considerations other than simply love. And to that point, I would argue that if a person values "financial wherewithal" in a partner, they wouldn't require the partner to drop tens of thousands of dollars on a fun but non-essential trinket.

creamyhorror 11y ago

Nice idea. To compete, this ring-with-real-value would need glossy marketing to create a sense of brand value that parallels existing diamond brands. "$10k" isn't enough, it has to be "$10k, beautifully cut and set, alluringly marketed." And the recipient of the ring should be able to redeem the value of the backing investment after a certain time. Worth a business attempt? Hmm.

shasta 11y ago
I agree, branding and style would be important. Having a celebrity or two use for their engagement wouldn't hurt, either. I think you'd want it to work kind of like a cashier's check. If you have the ring and your identification matches what's on file, then cashing out your investment is easy. If you've lost the ring or you're not the primary on the account, there are delays (of perhaps months) but cashing out is still possible.

Shorel 11y ago

I think you would need to invest quite a bit in bodyguards for that scheme to work.

jwhitlark 11y ago

While marketing had a role in this, expensive and basically worthless gifts are used as expensive signaling, much like a peacock's feathers. Basically you're showing that you can and are willing to take a hit for your future mate. http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/08/a-partial-defense-of-diamonds/182982/ http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/08/a-part...