4 ms·
Not if they don't lower their prices! >Smaller diamond producers have reduced their own prices. De Beers, a unit of mining group Anglo American, and its Russia
by delfinom 6y ago
Not if they don't lower their prices!
>Smaller diamond producers have reduced their own prices. De Beers, a unit of mining group Anglo American, and its Russian competitor Alrosa have reportedly rejected price cuts and would rather allow buyers to pull out of previous contracts.
$5 they'll hold firm on their prices and just take tax credits in countries for "business losses".
- klyrs 6y ago> Not if they don't lower their prices! These are fun semantics... if you can't liquidate your inventory for a substantial fraction of its "price" then I'd say that it simply doesn't have the value you've priced it at. If there are only ten suckers in the world willing to buy a widget for a billion dollars, and you have a thousand of those widgets, then you're sitting on roughly ten billion dollars -- not a trillion.
- sukilot 6y agoThey are likely treating it like real estate and taking a temporary loss in order to prop up future value when the economy recovers.
- the_omegist 6y agoCan they? Diamonds are a practically useless product (except in science and the industry) based only on the social signalling [0] they give to their owner. And this signalling is due to their high price.[1] De Beers created the demand artificially for engagement rings so they are pretty much done,I guess. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)