Diamond Market Shows Serious Cracks From Man-Made Stones
- Reference: 0173627402
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/24/04/24/1529240/diamond-market-shows-serious-cracks-from-man-made-stones
- Source link:
> Diamonds may be forever but they are also seriously on sale. Natural rough diamond prices have collapsed 26 per cent in the past couple of years. Tepid US and Chinese demand for diamond jewellery hasn't helped. But most ring fingers point at the increasing popularity of cheaper laboratory grown diamonds (LGD). This fracturing of the diamond market is set to last. After a brief pandemic-era boom in diamond jewellery, miners are battling to whittle down oversupply of gems. Anglo-American's De Beers, along with Russia's Alrosa, control two-thirds of the rough diamond supply. DeBeers this week said its rough sales dropped 23 per cent in the first quarter.
>
> It is not enough. While rough stone inventory has stabilised of late, polished diamond stocks remain high. At more than $20bn at the end of 2023, these were near five-year highs, up a third since the end of 2022, according to Bank of America. Worse, as LGDs have taken market share, their prices have declined too, to about 15 per cent or less of their natural counterparts. Diamond miners spent years maintaining that romantic buyers would prefer the allure of rare, natural stones. It increasingly appears they were wrong.
>
> Synthetic diamonds are nothing new, having appeared about 70 years ago mostly for industrial purposes. But in the past decade LGDs have taken off. In 2015, LGD supply barely featured as a rival to natural stones. By last year it was more than 10 per cent of the global diamond jewellery market, according to specialist Paul Zimnisky. This has created a competitive frenzy among producers. LGDs' lower costs have enabled them to slash prices. In October, WD Lab Grown Diamonds, America's second-largest maker of synthetics, filed for bankruptcy. It has since had to shift its business away from retail towards industrial customers.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/b976ef65-f984-4b1f-a890-fc415a75226b
Blood diamonds anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's worse than the summary indicates. Many customers would prefer lab grown diamonds to mined diamonds even if they were the same price to avoid the stench of violence and exploitation that hovers around the diamond trade.
Re: (Score:3)
Find a girl who thinks its cool the diamond came from millions of tons of pure man made hydraulic pressure.
Re: (Score:2)
This is slashdot, who care what girls think. They have cooties!
Re: (Score:2)
This is true, there are no women on the internet; only men pretending.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So the internet is like woman's competitive sports?
Re: (Score:2)
How transphobic!
Re: (Score:3)
> Find a girl who thinks its cool the diamond came from millions of tons of pure man made hydraulic pressure.
IF I were to buy my lovely lady a diamond. (Not likely, as she would prefer a kickass new laptop.) I would absolutely get her a lab created one, because she would think it was cool, and the ethics of diamond mining.
Re: (Score:2)
Also being cheaper, it is gets lost or stolen, it is easier to replace especially since nearly identical diamond can be ordered again.
Re: (Score:2)
If she leaves based upon how much you spend, then you possibly missed other red flags along the way.
Re:Blood diamonds anyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
And which girls think it is cool that someone dug up a rock in a mine? Most of them care how diamonds look. Between lab grown and natural, there is no difference in that regard. Without lab equipment it is hard for any person just to look at a diamond and tell where it originated. The value of the diamond is currently about bragging rights; but that price is artificially controlled by DeBeers.
Re: (Score:2)
I think we both know there are women in who the value of the ring is not what it's made of but the dollar signs behind it.
Re: (Score:2)
But that's not your original point. You said women will care less about a diamond based on how it came from a lab. They really do not care about that at all. The price of the diamond is a different thing than how it was made whether in a lab or in the Earth's crust.
Re: (Score:2)
What I said
> Find a girl who thinks its cool the diamond came from millions of tons of pure man made hydraulic pressure.
and you say
> You said women will care less about a diamond based on how it came from a lab.
Please explain how you got from A to B please.
Re: (Score:2)
How many women actually think it's cool where it originated? That's my point which you seem to ignore. So "finding a girl" that thinks it is cool is about as likely as finding a girl that thinks my model train collection is cool. Yes some women like that may exist but MOST do not.
Re: (Score:2)
Different question:
A girl who knows anything about tech might in fact find it very cool that a jewelry grade diamond came out of a complex and impressive industrial process. If they are socially conscious they know about the diamond trade problems and DeBeers and don't want to support that.
A woman who doesn't find your trains "cool" may still find appeal in your passion for it, your attitude around your hobby tends to be more attractive to people than the thing itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, women are neither uniform nor immutable.
In a good long term partnership you both make an effort and can often find hot and interest in each others interests.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's 2024, girls love nerdy stuff like tactical board games, D&D and video games now. I've seen girls that like 40K miniatures.
Honestly, compared to when I was a geeky teenager kids today have it easier with finding common hobbies and interests.
Re: (Score:2)
> The value of the diamond is currently about bragging rights; but that price is artificially controlled by DeBeers.
You want the actual real-world value of a diamond? Go hit a pawn shop. They have loose diamonds by the score and for pennies on the (original MSRP) dollar.
Buy those diamonds, and get a custom mount made for them. Your girl won't know the difference and you'll have saved a ton.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I know, only a very skilled person with lab equipment can tell them apart. I've even heard one of the ways to tell is the lab grown is too perfect. Weird, since more perfect natural diamonds command higher prices. The other way is now they cheat. They laser etch LG into lab grown ones to make it easier on the poor lab techs. And I thought some natural diamonds got etched too. Gold and a few other elements (platinum for ex) really are rare and you can't grow them, so they will likely have more stay
Re: (Score:2)
Just find an intelligent girl who understands that there is no difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Or find a stupid girl who can't tell the difference between a diamond and a cubic zirconium.
Re: (Score:2)
Or find a girl of average intelligence who rolls her eyes at silly things like rings.
Re: (Score:2)
Well the lab ones tend to be higher purity and with fewer flaws.
If you really really want to impress a nerd by splashing dollars, get an isotopically pure diamond, which has even higher thermal conductivity.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're marrying a nerd, get him or her a ring made of carbon nanotubes. Or a ring with an embedded RFID that unlocks a box to put keepsakes in.
Re: (Score:2)
> Find a girl who thinks its cool the diamond came from millions of tons of pure man made hydraulic pressure.
I can't. None of them seem to give a shit. Which is why I as a boy get to decide whether to support violence and exploitation.
Re: (Score:2)
Many Bothans died to bring you this diamond ring.
Re: (Score:3)
Diamonds are not as rare as the industry would like the public to believe. Cartels like DeBeers control the supply. For the purposes of jewelry, synthetic ones have less variability which makes them more attractive for manufacturing. The main drawback is the stigma. If the public sentiment shifts to not caring, then DeBeers will face a decline.
Re: (Score:3)
And the best way to tell a lab diamond from a mined one: the lab diamond is better. Yet somehow after decades of selling diamonds based on how few flaws they had, they flipped the marketing and got people to buy that flawless was bad.
Re: (Score:3)
I heard that pitch one time from a bride: "My diamond had this small distinguishable crack so it can be identified later if it got stolen." I did not say what I thought. "My new car has an identifiable scratch so it can be recovered later if it gets stolen."
Re: (Score:1)
The diamond, like your car, has a serial number on it. No need for imperfections from natural diamonds for identification purposes. Diamonds a very well documented.
Re: (Score:3)
The point is the salesman made her diamond's flaws as a selling point. Natural diamonds with flaws are cheaper as perfect, flawless diamonds are rarer. However synthetic diamonds have fewer flaws as the process can be tightly controlled. In order to keep selling natural diamonds, they have to push the narrative that flaws make natural diamonds more attractive somehow.
Re: (Score:3)
Color is another aspect that has upended the natural diamond market. Colorless natural diamonds were worth more unless the color was intense which was rarer. Pink diamonds were the rarest and most expensive. Diamonds with just hints of color were worth less. Lab grown diamonds are able to replicate color reliably and one main clue that a diamond might be lab grown is if the color is too intense. If the diamond was natural, most people could not afford it.
Boo hoo (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure everyone is crying in their De Beers.
Diamond Shows Serious Cracks From Man-Made Stones (Score:2)
HA!! At first glance, I read it as man-made diamonds were somehow beginning to crack. (Age? Manufacturing defects? Aliens ... TRISOLARIANS?? Inquiring minds want to know!)
"Well that makes sense. They're fake, and nature of course does a much better job than man." I can just hear someone saying that line.
Good. Diamonds are stupidly overpriced (Score:5, Interesting)
Diamonds are abundant in nature - just in specific sites controlled by a couple of companies or so who control their supply tightly in order to keep prices artificially inflated. Demand is simply a result of great marketing. And I am not even going into the ethics problems.
When I proposed I chose an artificial moissanite in a nice setting. My then bride to be appreciated that it did not cost a fortune (spent the money on trips instead), was ethical, was actually very rare in nature - only appeared in meteorites, and it's arguably at least as nice or nicer (higher brilliance) than diamonds. If you like colour, there are many natural gemstones that are much rarer than diamonds that can come in many interesting shades. There is really no reason to prefer a diamond, especially not a natural one.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, by the standards used to compare diamonds as gemstones, color and clarity, an artificial cubic zircon excels over every diamond. You can buy 1 ct cubic zircons in bulk for ~ 10 cents a piece. De Beers has somehow managed to convince people to pay thousands of dollars more for an inferior product. The "rarity of diamonds" is just the marketing promotional puffery of one of the longest running marketing scams in the history of western civilization. Since the 1930s through repeating the lie over a
Good (Score:3)
Diamonds are only expensive because the cartels control the market.
I'm all for cheaper tools (Score:2)
Not seeing a downside here. Unless you are the tool? Oh yes, this is about vanity rocks, good for keeping you in your job for a few months longer. How many month's income is the appropriate amount of, ahem, "love" to satisfy the vapid desires of a grown child. The looks and sex don't last, but diamonds are forever good for cutting steel.
Re: (Score:2)
> ... but diamonds are forever good for cutting steel.
Not quite. The temperature at the cutting edge gets really high, and the iron reacts with the diamond's carbon, shortening the tool life. Diamond cutting inserts are then mostly used with non-ferrous metals and composites. For steel one would either use tungsten carbide or CBN (cubic boron nitride) inserts.
Re: (Score:2)
Diamonds are excellent for everything except steel, unless you're very gentle, eg hand sharpening of tools.
You see, carbon dissolves in iron, which is what makes steel in the first place and if you use diamonds to cut steel and you don't keep the temperature very low, the surface just dissolves away into the steel and blunts the diamond.
Every diamond is a blood diamond (Score:2, Troll)
Demand for the shiny rocks drives war, crime, slavery, and oppression. DeBeers has finally lost control of the market and that's a very good thing.
Next (Score:2)
Now we need to turn lead into gold :D
Re: (Score:2)
Long since accomplished. It's much more expensive to make that it is to mine.
Heirloom/historical diamonds (Score:1)
I can see valuing natural diamonds highly if they have an interesting provenance. If it was my great-grandmother's or if it was used by someone famous or involved in some famous historical event, then I might be willing to pay $$$ for it. Ditto if it's authenticated as a meteorite diamond.
But otherwise, it's just a fancy rock.
Diamonds for non-industrial purposes are... silly. (Score:2)
I understand that jewelry has deep, deep roots in culture. I certainly don't object to it. But diamonds have always been at the top of my list of the greatest illogical marketing successes of all time. The dollars-to-impact ratio of diamonds is so skewed that it's simply bizarre. Those marketers are kickass. They planted and nurtured a multi-faceted (see what I did there?) attack of expectations. They tied romance into it, the suggestion that being a good provider entailed paying large amounts for this rock
Shiny Rock Syndrome Has Down Side? (Score:2)
Who woulda thunk it?
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
I have no problem with people making money, I have done it every day for 50+ years. But the diamond business stands is a toxic combination of all the most extreme negative cartoonish stereotypes and abuses of a capitalist system. DeBeers, etc, deserve every bad thing they have coming to them. If synthetic diamonds put them out of business tomorrow, it will be a great step forward for western society.
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
What the passport bros don't tend to realize is that part of what marriage affords from a legal perspective is that same protection for the "traditional" woman.
If a woman puts aside career to take care of home and a family she has effectively sacrificed her financial independence, if the man decides to leave (no fault divorce cuts both ways) then she is in in fact entitled to a share of the money, she put in work and put aside money of her own.
Back in the mid century that the trad-cons pine for divorce rates were lower in large part because women could not afford to be divorced; you could easily be trapped in an abusive or unloving relationship simply because now you have these kids, no degree, no job experience. You are fucked if left on your own.
So if you are a man who want a long term relationship and a family learn to operate in the 21st century. Marriage is risk on both end, we men are not special.
Re: (Score:3)
Pointing out that the risk is shared by both parties does not, in fact, lower the risk nor the stakes. People will shun a high-risk-high-stakes investment, regardless of whether those risks are fair.
The "traditional marriage," where one member (typically the woman) gives up her career in order to be a stay-at-home spouse, is largely a thing of the past. Most families simply can't afford that arrangement anymore. In this economic landscape, it is almost selfish to want to be a stay-at-home-spouse. The fi
Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)
> In this economic landscape, it is almost selfish to want to be a stay-at-home-spouse
Maybe, it all depends on the two people. Most women today agree with you, that's why we are seeing women's success in college outpace men's in the recent decades and the "wage gap" (which is both real and not real, it's complicated) is closing YoY.
But women aren't here pining for "transitional marriage roles", they on the whole are doing great, making money, getting educated.
> 50% divorce rate
People use this but tend to forget that like 90% of human relationships don't succeed, marriage or not.
> But people who would like to see the marriage rates rise are going to have to do better than say "you need to learn better." Such a tactic utterly fails to address the reasons motivating the current trends.
I never said I was in favor of higher marriage rates, only trying to explain the other end of the issue.
I think just the same and putting blame on "feminism" is pure cope. Times are different, human relationships evolve.
But I do agree if one wants to make higher marriage and families a legislative priority then easing the financial burden on families is critical. Meanwhile in the US we have
No mandated paternity leave
No mandated vacation time
Barely any public childcare services or any pricing regulations on things like daycare
Until recently there wasn't even public Pre-K in most places
We had the CTC which did great but then rescinded it with no sign of reinstating it.
Re: (Score:2)
> But I do agree if one wants to make higher marriage and families a legislative priority then easing the financial burden on families is critical. Meanwhile in the US we have No mandated paternity leave No mandated vacation time Barely any public childcare services or any pricing regulations on things like daycare Until recently there wasn't even public Pre-K in most places
Those (lack of) things are all intended to keep women at home.
Re: (Score:2)
> More and more guys are seeing that [marriage] is just NOT a good deal for them.
And, for people with attitudes like those expressed in your post, that decision is generally not made BY them, but FOR them. (See: [1]Incel. [wikipedia.org])
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel
Re: (Score:2)
Sour grapes is that that is. If they have flaws, they either fix the flaws or accept things. The incels are bitter and angry and has turned them misogynist in their absurd belief that they are "owed" sex partners. The more that they buy this incel attitude the more that women are repulsed by it.
Re: (Score:2)
[1]This [reddit.com] is honestly how some dudes think it works. Then you have bell-ends like Andrew Tate and his useless followers encouraging the behavior.
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/rickandmorty/comments/7f0zo4/im_one_of_the_nice_guys/
Re: (Score:2)
The dropping marriage rate has little if anything to do with marriage being particularly unfair to one of the partners and more to do with the absence of the social pressure of decades and centuries past. The children of the 60s/70s didn't grow up believing that marriage was essential, and didn't require it of their children (at least not at the level of prior generations). What we're seeing now is much closer to the "voluntary" marriage rate, though we're going to need to adjust our culture to basically tr
Re: (Score:2)
Weddings don't need to be expensive. It's normally done just to flaunt the wealth. The wedding in the courthouse or city hall is just as effective, even a church wedding with only 20 guests at a backyard barbeque after will save a ton of money over inviting 100 people, and skip the dress and requiring costumes for the maids of honor and groomsmen. I've been to a Vegas wedding presided over by Elvis, it seemed to be affordable though I didn't see the bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Marriages do not require diamonds, that is a 100% marketing invention in the western world. I've known married couples without the rings, or with plain bands instead.
Re: (Score:3)
> We purchased a new diamond a couple years ago from a local jeweler
You would've paid much less if you'd bought it online. Diamonds have a huge retail markup.
> I asked her about man-made diamonds
You asked a jeweler about a product that means less income for jewelers, and you expect an honest answer?
Even a lab diamond is a silly waste of money. Look at diamond and Moissanite side-by-side and try to guess which is which.
Re: (Score:1)
'You asked a jeweler about a product that means less income for jewelers, and you expect an honest answer?'
It's like asking a baker if meat or bread are healthier.
Re: (Score:2)
Moissanite is fairly easy to tell from diamond because it's dispersion is so much higher. Cubic zirconia is a closer match, although still considerably higher.
Moissanite is much prettier than diamond though, and since the patents expired in 2018 gemstone silicon carbide should be getting pretty cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
Diamond rings also have a shitty resale value. The prices drops drastically when it leaves the store. Best bet is to take grandma's ring and resize it or reset the stone, but you won't be able to resell it for much.
Personally, I don't like diamonds. Emeralds look much nicer, and nice looking ones are much rarer. Sapphires are my favorite despire being more common.
Re: (Score:2)
Why don't I get voting points when I need them?
You are sooooo right.
Artificial Diamonds for the win.
(And artificial ebony would also be a good idea, as well as artificial rhino horn, if it collapses the market for the real thing.)
Re: (Score:1)
Why do you think that diamonds have value at all? De bird is doing great job popularizing them and keeping prices high enough to make people think that diamonds have value to own and show off. If prices for diamonds go down tomorrow, they would be considered as plastic crystals on shoes stripes. So thanks De birs for keeping so many peoples with job and industry alive. Frankly speaking I know that rubies are used for lasers and laboratories found the way to grow them long time ago, but I have no idea if dia
Re: (Score:1)
I agree with you but don't underestimate DeBeers.
They have enough diamond reserves that they can steeply discount natural ones for long enough to put synthetic diamond makers out of business.
LK
Re: Good (Score:1)
Spot on. De Beers, as an example, is an outfit with a nasty history. Maybe the expression of all that's wrong with that business. Very disappointing that the road to a lot of wedding rings was far from beautiful.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it's even specific to diamonds, but rather in the same vein as [1]Sorry, Boomers, your kids don't want your beloved china [foxnews.com]. Or fur coats. Or jewelery in general.
[2]Then [gstatic.com]
[3]Now [minutemediacdn.com] (yes that is also Mr T!)
[1] https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/sorry-boomers-your-kids-dont-want-your-beloved-china
[2] https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTk7xijxhwbB7Bd4MGKKDqepwhRoiftMk5CqXoCTbhSrXXnGBrEd981TVPy4b860BwnwYw&usqp=CAU
[3] https://images2.minutemediacdn.com/image/upload/c_fill,w_720,ar_16:9,f_auto,q_auto,g_auto/shape/cover/sport/e981bade352e66685af9d9d21ae038d1b38f48923b438acc0ea1c92b5fb7dd23.jpg
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Also, diamonds? These are almost worthless, except for scarcity. Well, having diamond-based grinding equipment is nice for some cutting jobs.