Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 455 posts

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#381

Post by vilhelm_s »

fgonzag wrote: post #10

"Lightbox will transform the lab-grown diamond sector by offering consumers a lab-grown product they have told us they want but aren't getting: affordable fashion jewelry that may not be forever, but is perfect for right now" This is clearly a play to devalue the image of man made diamonds. "May not be forever" my ass, it's the exact same thing. Their goal is probably to try to quickly drive the price of man made dia…

I guess De Beers must be selling the synthetic diamons with a much smaller profit margin? A couple of years ago, makers of synthetic diamond jewelry said they would cost about 60% of natural ones ("Baruch says savings may be as high as 40 percent in some cases; this is especially appealing to savvy millennial shoppers." --https://www.racked.com/2016/6/14/11872830/lab-grown-diamonds...), and now Lightbox will sell them at 10% the price of natural ones.

Unlike mines you can't really establish a monopoly in vapor deposit ovens, so in the long run competition should drive down costs. It makes sense that De Beers would want to fast-forward that process, particularly since the price of natural diamonds is kindof arbitrary anyway.

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#382

Post by merpnderp »

dogma1138 wrote: post #301
menzoic wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The brand, called Lightbox, will offer synthetic diamonds at a fraction of the price it charges for stones pulled out of the earth.

Considering the $800 per carat price tag for their artificial diamonds they want to charge a hefty fee for them much more than it would cost you today to get them form China or India.

Where do you get these cheap diamonds from China or India?

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#384

Post by sandworm101 »

Vektorweg wrote: post #241
nradov wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never mind about jewelry and fashion. Cheap synthetic diamonds would open up a host of industrial applications. Bring on "The Diamond Age".

Industrial synthetic diamond production is around since at least the 80s and from all we know about De Beers, they are certainly not trying to get the price down.

Since the 80s but only tiny or imperfect stones. The true diamond age is when we can make large structural things with diamonds. Imagine an aircraft wing made from a honeycomb of diamond rather than aluminum.

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#385

Post by motohagiography »

Diamonds were the original bitcoin.

Knew a bit about the diamond business from growing up.

- Required huge proof of work. - Few practical use cases. - Store of value. - Highly portable. - Price a function of liquidity. - Clustered around use cases like capital flight, high denomination cash, opacity, and black market transactions, asset protection/hiding.

I would argue blockchain has done more harm to the diamond market than synthetic diamonds have. Between the two, it's been a perfect storm.

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#386

Post by ythn »

sandworm101 wrote: post #384
Vektorweg wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Industrial synthetic diamond production is around since at least the 80s and from all we know about De Beers, they are certainly not trying to get the price down.

Since the 80s but only tiny or imperfect stones. The true diamond age is when we can make large structural things with diamonds. Imagine an aircraft wing made from a honeycomb of diamond rather than aluminum.

Why make an aircraft wing out of diamond when you could make it out of graphene?

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#387

Post by saturdaysaint »

artellectual wrote: post #232

My wife and I got married without buying a diamond ring. I simply refused to spend money in things that are overvalued by the market because some marketing scheme was so strong that it made facts look silly. I told her that I refuse to spend money on things that cause other people pain. Especially when there is no guarantee that the diamond we buy are not blood diamond. Instead we invested our money in buying things…

With her blessing, I got my wife a moissanite ring. It looks like a $5,000 diamond ring and she got nothing but dazzled reactions from all of her friends. My wife unabashedly loves fancy stuff (new clothes, cute restaurants, latest iPhone, etc.) but there hasn't been a moment in the last 3 years where she's expressed any regret or interest in a "real" diamond. Millenials see through the con.

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#388

Post by knieveltech »

markatkinson wrote: post #346
fgonzag wrote: post #10

"Lightbox will transform the lab-grown diamond sector by offering consumers a lab-grown product they have told us they want but aren't getting: affordable fashion jewelry that may not be forever, but is perfect for right now" This is clearly a play to devalue the image of man made diamonds. "May not be forever" my ass, it's the exact same thing. Their goal is probably to try to quickly drive the price of man made dia…

My exact thoughts, this statement made me chuckle: 'Synthetic diamonds, which can be produced in about 500 hours, share the same physical, chemical and optical characteristics as natural stones. But they are not nearly as valuable.' So... the two items are identical in every possible way that matters except in the way that lines De Beers pockets? It almost feels like De Beers sponsored this article in a desperate cam…

Considering the De Beers cartel basically fabricated the entire ritual around engagement rings from thin air through paid marketing and op-ed pieces this would hardly be surprising if true.

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#389

Post by skykooler »

sandworm101 wrote: post #384
Vektorweg wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Industrial synthetic diamond production is around since at least the 80s and from all we know about De Beers, they are certainly not trying to get the price down.

Since the 80s but only tiny or imperfect stones. The true diamond age is when we can make large structural things with diamonds. Imagine an aircraft wing made from a honeycomb of diamond rather than aluminum.

Diamond is a very poor structural material. It is very hard, but also quite brittle; it breaks easily, is heavy, and is flammable. Additionally, airplane wings specifically need to be flexible to absorb turbulence (like the suspension system on a car), while diamond is very stiff.

Re: De Beers admits defeat over man-made diamonds

#390

Post by CydeWeys »

Hermel wrote: post #70

What you are all not getting is that a diamond is not about its chemical properties, but about economic signalling. Just like artificial fur could not replace natural fur, man-made diamonds will never be the luxury item mined diamonds are today. Diamonds, just like gold, are not valuable because of their physical properties, but because they are rare. If someone invented a way to produce arbitrary amounts of gold at…

The difference is that real fur is easily distinguishable from fake fur, at both a macroscopic and microscopic level.

Diamonds, on the other hand, are completely indistinguishable at a macro level and just barely distinguishable at a micro level.

Post reply on HN