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

The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 619 posts

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#111

Post by gumby »

pyuser583 wrote: post #76
gumby wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The origin of diamond engagement rings was insurance: with the decline of "breach of promise" suits, the fiancée at least had something to sell as a settlement if the fiancé reneged on the promise of marriage. All of that nonsense is long gone; the fetish for engagement rings is just a residual and empty metaphor. Good riddance. My US gf was astonished and dubious that my relatives (in various other countries) didn't…

In almost all states, courts will order engagement rings to be returned if the marriage is canceled, and the giver wants it back. This is likely a legend.

Thats exactly my point: the whole infrastructure of breach of promise, (somewhat) rarity of diamonds etc has been obsolete for decades, almost a century in the US. Any point of an expensive engagement ring has not had practical value in living memory. Just a residual, empty practice.

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#112

Post by gnicholas »

bombcar wrote: post #70
xivzgrev wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guys, buying diamonds, can complain all day about what a rip off it is (it is). But if you apprise your fiancé of the alternatives / opp costs (moissanite, man made, second hand, etc) and she still wants a new diamond, just get her a new diamond. It will make her happy for years. My wife had her heart set on a pink diamond, so that’s what I got her. I made it clear though that if I got this, she is not getting a new…

And make sure you appraise her of it - shenanigans like buying something else and passing it off as a diamond could result in her being absolutely embarrassed in front of her friends, which should not be a position you want to put her in.

From what I hear, moissanite (and man-made diamonds) are pretty much indistinguishable from natural diamonds. How would someone's friends figure out that it's not a natural diamond? I would think the only way the wife would know is if she asked about the diamond's papers, if she was going to get an insurance policy for it or something.

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#113

Post by eru »

nerdponx wrote: post #55
brink wrote: post #3

I would like to take this moment to thank https://diamondssuck.com/ for preventing me from buying my wife a diamond, and getting her a much prettier moissanite instead. It's been on hn's front page several times.

I ended up buying a ~90 year old diamond ring from an estate jewelry store. Diamonds don't exactly have a shelf life.

You can set them on fire, though.

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#114

Post by Spooky23 »

kibwen wrote: post #107
ThrowawayTestr wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, not wearing the gem means those people slaved away in the mines for nothing.

> for nothing Rather, I suspect they slaved away in the mines so that they wouldn't be whipped and have their hands cut off.

Don’t buy silver or gold either. The genocide of entire peoples was committed to extract them from Latin American mines.

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#115

Post by gnicholas »

SnorkelTan wrote: post #54
smegger001 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup got my wives ring from a pawnshop cheap

Using the plural of wife might be unintentionally adding context here.

If you're racking up wives, all the more reason to save money. Alternatively, I could imagine a new wife becoming quite upset upon learning that her engagement ring was from a pawn shop...possibly upset enough to leave!

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#116

Post by selcuka »

twelve40 wrote: post #93
defrost wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gold, just gold, is an investment simply because people value it - it's a shiny noble metal that stays "pure", ergo percieved value. From a resource utility PoV it costs more to source than copper or aluminium which are nearly as conductive - so they win out for electronic and power transmision applications. There are applications where gold is the clear winner - "forever" circuits and switches that are worth the ext…

Currently the US government holds 8,134 metric tons of gold in reserves. You can call it "hording" (whatever that means) but clearly someone thinks it's worth keeping half a trillion dollars worth of the country's money in it.

> You can call it "hording" (whatever that means)

Isn't it "hoarding" (acquiring an excessive number of items and storing them in a chaotic manner)?

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#117

Post by eru »

Horffupolde wrote: post #100
squigz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get what?

The diamond ring has no utility, so there’s no calculation to make. It’s an irrational proof of commitment.

Proof of commitment can have utility. And status symbols can have utility.

(Going on a tangent: compare Bitcoin's proof-of-work, which also has utility. Of course, that doesn't mean diamonds nor proof-of-work are the best bang-for-buck. For the latter, you can use proof-of-stake or avoid cryptocurrencies altogether. For the former, there are plenty of other social arrangements that avoid diamond rings.)

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#118

Post by amrocha »

xivzgrev wrote: post #46
brink wrote: post #3

I would like to take this moment to thank https://diamondssuck.com/ for preventing me from buying my wife a diamond, and getting her a much prettier moissanite instead. It's been on hn's front page several times.

Guys, buying diamonds, can complain all day about what a rip off it is (it is). But if you apprise your fiancé of the alternatives / opp costs (moissanite, man made, second hand, etc) and she still wants a new diamond, just get her a new diamond. It will make her happy for years. My wife had her heart set on a pink diamond, so that’s what I got her. I made it clear though that if I got this, she is not getting a new…

If she wants a diamond despite knowing all the misery the diamond industry spreads, then you should probably just break up

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#119

Post by 4death4 »

amrocha wrote: post #118
xivzgrev wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guys, buying diamonds, can complain all day about what a rip off it is (it is). But if you apprise your fiancé of the alternatives / opp costs (moissanite, man made, second hand, etc) and she still wants a new diamond, just get her a new diamond. It will make her happy for years. My wife had her heart set on a pink diamond, so that’s what I got her. I made it clear though that if I got this, she is not getting a new…

If she wants a diamond despite knowing all the misery the diamond industry spreads, then you should probably just break up

What misery does a Chinese lab grown diamond really spread?

Re: The diamond world takes radical steps to stop a pricing plunge

#120

Post by skellington »

twelve40 wrote: post #93
defrost wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gold, just gold, is an investment simply because people value it - it's a shiny noble metal that stays "pure", ergo percieved value. From a resource utility PoV it costs more to source than copper or aluminium which are nearly as conductive - so they win out for electronic and power transmision applications. There are applications where gold is the clear winner - "forever" circuits and switches that are worth the ext…

Currently the US government holds 8,134 metric tons of gold in reserves. You can call it "hording" (whatever that means) but clearly someone thinks it's worth keeping half a trillion dollars worth of the country's money in it.

Sure...maybe...if you believe that gold is actually there and who knows if it is.

But either way, 1/2 a trillion is just 1/8th of the yearly federal budget. Not sure it is an amount that matters much to the government.

Post reply on HN