Bigger engagement rings?

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

Also, to be fair, CZ's look pretty cheap after they've been through some wear, so a band would be preferable to that, for me.

I was with you until this.  If CZ's lose their luster so do rubies and sapphires.  They have the same durability.  

Moissanite is even harder.  But it is more expensive.  

Allanite is becoming a thing because it has a brilliance and sub-color that is pretty nice.  But it only has a hardness of 6.0 or so.  Apparently, it varies.  But it is roughly the same hardness as an emerald.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Guest

[beefche]

52 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

I'd like to think most women would, but I don't know if I could accurately say "most". I have more than a couple of friends for whom the ring was a pretty big deal. I told Faramir I'd be happy with a band, but I'll admit that I was delighted that  he wanted to design a ring for me. It's precious to me for that reason more than anything. Also, to be fair, CZ's look pretty cheap after they've been through some wear, so a band would be preferable to that, for me. I was so goofy in love (still am) that you're right in that I didn't care much. I just wanted to be his wife.

I've also developed a philosophical objection to diamonds since then, but that's another conversation.  I think they're doing some pretty cool things with creating diamonds in a lab, but I don't think they're priced much better than the real McCoy. 

 

I'm going to admit it. I wouldn't have turned down my husband if he couldn't buy me a ring, but I wanted a nice ring. Didn't have to cost a fortune, but I wanted more than just a band. Again, if he couldn't afford it, I would have understood and accepted, but I certainly would say for a special anniversary to save and get me a nicer one.

And according to my brother (sorry, I need to just call him something....DaBeef)...according to DaBeef most of the diamonds we every day people get are lab made. The ones that people have issues with (the "blood" diamonds) are priced WAY above and usually only obtained by the wealthy (meaning, not me). He works for an upscale jeweler and has seen/worked some of those diamonds. 

Also, most other gems are lab made as well...sapphires, rubies, emeralds, etc.

[Just_A_Guy]

58 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

I'd like to think most women would, but I don't know if I could accurately say "most". I have more than a couple of friends for whom the ring was a pretty big deal. I told Faramir I'd be happy with a band, but I'll admit that I was delighted that  he wanted to design a ring for me. It's precious to me for that reason more than anything. Also, to be fair, CZ's look pretty cheap after they've been through some wear, so a band would be preferable to that, for me. I was so goofy in love (still am) that you're right in that I didn't care much. I just wanted to be his wife.

I've also developed a philosophical objection to diamonds since then, but that's another conversation.  I think they're doing some pretty cool things with creating diamonds in a lab, but I don't think they're priced much better than the real McCoy. 

So . . .

Faramir . . . gives Eowyn . . . a ring . . . and she calls it precioussssss . . .

I'm sensing trouble in paradise.  Are you quite sure you know where that ring came from?

Edited March 16, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

We loves it, Precious!

[Guest]

Some cost more than others.  This one only costs ...YOUR SOUL!!!

[Blackmarch]

the best wedding ring i've come across so far is a home made one created from meteor metal.

[Guest MormonGator]

9 minutes ago, Blackmarch said:

the best wedding ring i've come across so far is a home made one created from meteor metal.

I don't wear my wedding ring. I don't even know where it is. I have a tattoo in honor of LadyGator instead.

[zil]

7 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I don't wear my wedding ring.

Don't you mean your 6 wedding rings?

[Guest MormonGator]

14 minutes ago, zil said:

Don't you mean your 6 wedding rings?

LOL! Yes, sorry #4. 

[NightSG]

On 3/16/2016 at 7:10 PM, beefche said:

My husband hates diamonds. But, he likes to point out that the only thing that can break his ring is my ring with the diamonds. He has a tungsten carbide ring that cost us very, very little.  

Diamondshark.com sometimes has them for $9.99 with free shipping for basic tungsten carbide.  However, as hard as they are to scratch, dropping one on ceramic tile can easily shatter it.  I lost one to that and another got pretty scuffed up when I was working for a company that made serious industrial abrasives specifically for shaping stuff like tungsten.  

[Ironhold]

MBA time here. 

Do you want to know why diamonds cost so much, folks?

1. Hype

2. Oligopoly on supply

Diamonds are nothing more than carbon that have been subjected to the proper conditions of heat and pressure. Every so often both DC Comics and groups spoofing DC will even go so far as to show Superman making a diamond out of coal in order to get himself out of trouble with Lois. That's both how common the base material for diamonds are and how common the knowledge of this is. 

Cubic zirconium is actually rarer than diamond, but costs less because the demand is less. After all, diamonds are the "proof" you love her, while cubic zirconium is "proof" that you're a cheapskate. There are actually places in this world (I understand there's quite a few of them in Arkansas) where you can rent a patch of land and spend the day searching for diamonds; from the sounds of it, diamonds are almost as common in Arkansas as trilobite fossils are here in Texas. 

As you can imagine, we had a few discussions about this in both my business and geology classes in college. Basically, the whole diamond industry as we know it is a big honkin' scam. It's an even bigger scam than the gold industry, folks. 

[Vort]

The De Beers cartel is hardly secret. High diamond prices are certainly a big scam these days. It's as if aluminum were sold at the prices it commanded in Napoleon's day.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Vort said:

The De Beers cartel is hardly secret. High diamond prices are certainly a big scam these days. It's as if aluminum were sold at the prices it commanded in Napoleon's day.

When Vort, LeSellers and I agree on something, it's probably worth looking into. Amen, Vort. 

[Guest]

OK, I'm going to disagree with all four of you.

1. While natural diamonds are more common than natural CZ (in fact I've never heard of natural CZ) good quality stones of good size are not.  This is why the larger the stone, the higher the per carat price.  Tiny 5 pt diamonds are really cheap per carat.  A 5 carat or larger stone is insanely expensive per carat.
2. CZ that we see in jewelry stores are all synthetic.  I'm still not certain about natural CZ.
3. Synthetic diamonds cannot be made in jewelry quality any bigger than 1 or 2 carats.  But CZ can be made many carats in size of good quality.
4. Not only are diamonds harder but they are also stronger and more durable than CZ (ya know, diamonds are forever...).  A nearly perfect CZ can crack under standard wear and tear on a ring.  Any diamond of good quality would have to be subject to a lot of stress to crack.
5. Labor on a CZ is a lot easier than labor on a diamond.  The various cuts are designed to bring out the brilliance of the stone.  But diamonds don't come out of the ground like that.  They're fairly dull in their natural state.  They have to be cut just right.  And that requires special methods and tools.  That costs money.
6. Even the oligopoly has to bow to the laws of supply and demand: http://www.mining.com/diamond-miners-likely-to-cut-prices-further-in-2016-to-lift-demand-moodys/  Yes, the oligopoly does play a role.  But when you consider that there is more to it than the simple availability of the "commodity" there is some method to the madness.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Guest

[LeSellers]

28 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

OK, I'm going to disagree with all four of you.

1. While natural diamonds are more common than natural CZ (in fact I've never heard of natural CZ) good quality stones of good size are not.  This is why the larger the stone, the higher the per carat price.

Please consider the following:

When I wrote my book on diamonds in 1980, the De Beers’ cartel was the master of the universe of diamonds. Its invention of calibrated scarcity had succeeded in creating the brilliant illusion that diamonds were rare. It was an illusion that the Oppenheimer family was able to sustain through masterful marketing and manipulation for over eight decades.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ed-epstein/will-the-diamond-cartel-s_b_4659749.html

https://youtu.be/7Yo6EVP-Trw

And more:

A gemstone is the ultimate luxury
product. It has no material use. Men
and women desire to have diamonds
not for what they [diamonds] can do
but for what they desire.
— Nicky Oppenheimer, DeBeers deputy chairman, at a Foreign Correspondents Association Lunch.

To hear these words from a person who attributes his entire wealth and power to the trade of diamonds illustrates the peculiar nature of the diamond market: Jewelry diamonds are unjustifiably expensive, given they are not actually scarce and would fetch a price of $2 to $30 if put to industrial use. Still, by appealing to the customers’ sentiment, diamonds are one of the most precious luxury items and enjoy almost global acceptance. This fact is often attributed to the history of one company. DeBeers, founded by Cecil Rhodes in 1870, has been a highly successful and effective controller of the diamond market, having developed a unique purchasing and marketing cartel that has influenced prices in the market virtually undisturbed for almost a century.

http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~lcabral/teaching/debeers3.pdf

Lehi

Edited March 18, 2016 by LeSellers

[Anddenex]

This conversation brings back disturbing memories of hearing women talk about wedding rings and the size of the ring that every finance should spend:

1) Example 1: If a finance is unable to produce a ring that is more than $2K, don't say yes.

2) Example 2: She was purchased a ring (around $6K) and when she saw a ring that had a bigger diamond, although hers had more diamonds (just the main diamond was smaller), she turned to me, "Do you think my ring is big enough?" If I wasn't such a nice guy, my first thought was to slap her.

3) Example 3: Fiance recognized he wanted to ask his girlfriend to marry him, but did not have money for a ring. He bought a 25 cent ring from the vending machine.  When another girl over heard this she said, "Did she throw the ring at him and say "No!" I would have.  My ring better be at least $2K or more."

Now on a different note, one of my favorite engagement stories was a close friend who on the spur of the moment asked his girlfriend to marry him. It was one of those, feeling the spirit and I am going to ask" (there wasn't any doubt though what she was going to say), with no ring purchased or pursued. She said yes, and asked, "Where is my ring." He was unprepared, and she went and grabbed tin foil, cut a piece off, rolled it into a thin sheet and then looped it making a circle.  She said, "Now I have a ring, please put it on my finger." If memory suits me, she wore that ring until her wedding day, by which it was replaced with an inexpensive ring.

My sons and daughters will be counseled regarding what is more important in a marriage, and it isn't the ring. My 2 cents, maybe 5 cents, in the matter.  The more materialistic our desires the bigger we will see rings -- entitlement era.

[Backroads]

Not to.steal Eowyn ' s praise, but I completely agree.

CZ just doesn't have the same look as a diamond or other good stone. If one wants CZ for its own sake, great, but it's a weird and poor substitute if you're trying to fake a diamond for appearance.

A well-made band, however unadorned, will look elegant and tasteful.

I've been wearing just my gold band lately. My daughter lost it months ago and I recently found it. I don't wear my engagement ring at night, but the band is unnoticeable I can always wear it and still look married and avoid crazy single dads at school unlike my teammate.

 

[Backroads]

[Guest]

10 hours ago, LeSellers said:

Please consider the following:...

Lehi

Nothing you said refuted anything I said.

[LeSellers]

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Nothing you said refuted anything I said.

You said you disagreed with all four of us. The point, that diamonds are artificially high priced (via a cartel), is the major issue.

Whenever supply is artificially depressed or demand is artificially increased, the price goes up. Under ordinary conditions, diamonds would cost a dollar a caret (more or less irrespective of size) because de Beers has a vault full of uncut stones and pushed women into believing that diamonds are forever.

So, while all your points may be individually valid, the main thrust, that diamonds should cost more than CZ (or anything else) is simply erroneous. The market is rigged.

Lehi

[Guest]

I perhaps misled with the first line of my post.  The remainder of the post (the explanation part) indicated that I mainly thought your claims were unduly weighted, not entirely false.  I even said, "Yes, the oligopoly does play a role".  But there are other factors.

I was adding the facts to consider that diamonds actually have intrinsic value.   And there are reasons (as I stated) why people would consider diamonds to be worth it beyond the "hype" provided by the oligopoly.

The fact that the diamond cost has remained level (falling behind inflation) as well as the fact that diamonds are going DOWN this year is an indication that the power of that oligopoly is dwindling.  But all gems are gems.  They are, by definition, luxuries.  Law of supply and demand does not care what is driving the demand.  But the fact demand exists means it pushes the market. It doesn't matter that Macs are really no better than Windows or ... (oops, someone's going to start a threadjack there) whatever.  The fact that people are dazed by the chic of it all drives a demand that allows Apple to sell them at higher prices.

You can make the same argument about almost anything.  Why name brands?  Hype.  This is not unique to gems or luxuries.  It is called marketing and salesmanship.  But there are indications in the previous posts that diamonds have no intrinsic value.  I believe one of the links explicitly stated so.  And it's simply not true.

All the articles and links that were provided, as well as other links that I've looked up on my own, continue to say "diamonds are plentiful".  That's like saying engineers, doctors, and lawyers are plentiful.  But one of good quality is hard to find.  And those articles don't address that issue.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Guest

[unixknight]

Sorry to be that guy...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5kWu1ifBGU

Adam Ruins Everything - Why Engagement Rings are a Scam.

Warning:  There's a little rough language in it, being a College Humor video, but the information is well worth watching...  If you aren't worried about having your illusions about diamond rings broken. 

[classylady]

I didn't get my ring until about 10 years after the wedding.  I love it.  It has a main diamond with two smaller diamonds and two small rubies.  I wear it all the time and rarely take it off.  I did feel bad about not getting a ring prior to our wedding, but it didn't keep me from saying yes.  I would have accepted any engagement ring that my future-intended would have chosen for me.

One day, on my husband's side of the family, there was a luncheon with all my sisters-in-law (8 of them) and my mother-in-law.  They were all telling their story of their engagement and their rings and asked me "where's yours, Classylady?" I had to tell them my husband hadn't gotten one for me.  They were all embarrassed for me and a little miffed at their brother/son, for they knew he had gotten his ex-wife a ring but not one for me.  Shortly after that I got my ring.

[Guest]

How many times does the same thing need to be posted before someone gets that I already addressed those points?

[unixknight]

39 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

How many times does the same thing need to be posted before someone gets that I already addressed those points?

Assuming that was directed at me... the video I linked to was meant to be funny and make a point about corporate advertising creating cultural norms.  I have zero interest in the question of whether diamonds are actually plentiful or whether their cost is too high.

There's more to the thread than the issues you guys are fighting over.