De Beers undercuts the man made diamond price

[blueMA]

I would also ask this question - if you own one, can see the performance, and then are later considering buying a mined stone, would the marked difference in price for no visible difference in performance (assuming buyers in general remain as uneducated about cut as they currently are) actually make any sense or be a barrier you would want to step over?

Or would you think "that's $x000 for no tangible benefits other than satisfying my/my partner's emotional/psychological 'needs' that have been manipulated by marketing by the very people looking to sell to me"?

Well, I've just lamented to my husband that I kinda regret spending so much for my pair of earrings recently if De Beers was going undercut the MMD so much and all people will be walking around with big diamond studs. He says "Honey don't regret it, and just buy one of their MMD as well if it makes you happy" so yeah the shift starts.

 

[Miki Moto]

Well, I've just lamented to my husband that I kinda regret spending so much for my pair of earrings recently if De Beers was going undercut the MMD so much and all people will be walking around with big diamond studs. He says "Honey don't regret it, and just buy one of their MMD as well if it makes you happy" so yeah the shift starts.

Not me! I want real natural diamonds. No synthetics for me. Diamonds are for me to enjoy, not to pretend or brag, and I like knowing I have the real thing.

I’m still going to upgrade my earrings!

 

[blueMA]

Not me! I want real natural diamonds. No synthetics for me. Diamonds are for me to enjoy, not to pretend or brag, and I like knowing I have the real thing.

I’m still going to upgrade my earrings!

I know what you mean... I regret it but at the same time don't regret it since the earrings mark our anniversary. However, the opportunity cost for such purchase is HUGE for the majority indebted public out there. What we'll see is that everyone will be walking around with indistinguishable synthetics and may assume you and I maybe wearing MMD as well. I see the natural diamond price going down in the long run regardless.

 

[Wewechew]

I wonder how the stones will be cut... i would love a 2 ctw pair of studs!!

That’s exactly where my mind is going!

 

[Miki Moto]

I know what you mean... I regret it but at the same time don't regret it since the earrings mark our anniversary. However, the opportunity cost for such purchase is HUGE for the majority indebted public out there. What we'll see is that everyone will be walking around with indistinguishable synthetics and may assume you and I maybe wearing MMD as well. I see the natural diamond price going down in the long run regardless.

That's the beauty of it... being real. For me, I see no glory in wearing a fake anything. I like big bling (big in my definition of course), and some of my friends have actually said to me, "why don't you just get a CZ, no one will know". My answer is always "I'll know". Jewelry is not for others... it's for me.

You have a gorgeous pair of natural diamond earrings that many may want to try and imitate, but yours is the real deal!

 

[blueMA]

That's the beauty of it... being real. For me, I see no glory in wearing a fake anything. I like big bling (big in my definition of course), and some of my friends have actually said to me, "why don't you just get a CZ, no one will know". My answer is always "I'll know". Jewelry is not for others... it's for me.

You have a gorgeous pair of natural diamond earrings that many may want to try and imitate, but yours is the real deal!

But don't you wear cultured pearls by Miki Moto? I believe natural sea pearls are virtually extinct and pretty much all of today's fresh and sea pearls in the market are manufactured?

 

[Miki Moto]

But don't you wear cultured pearls by Miki Moto? I believe natural sea pearls are virtually extinct and pretty much all of today's fresh and sea pearls in the market are manufactured?

Yes, Mikimoto pearls... pearls are my true love really (how do you remember all this?!). Natural pearls are nearly impossible to find and even when I have seen them, they are much older pieces, not new. Cultured pearls are from oysters who got a head start (nucleated oyster) and they are not man-made. Every pearl is unique and created by a single oyster. But if the pearls were man-made, no, not for me.

 

[blueMA]

Yes, Mikimoto pearls... pearls are my true love really (how do you remember all this?!). Natural pearls are nearly impossible to find and even when I have seen them, they are much older pieces, not new. Cultured pearls are from oysters who got a head start (nucleated oyster) and they are not man-made. Every pearl is unique and created by a single oyster. But if the pearls were man-made, no, not for me.

All of the cultured pearls are nucleated with only a very thin outer natural nacre layer. I suppose the final credit does go to the oysters for building the beautiful layer, but the philosophy could be debatable.

I'm afraid that as time goes by, the future generation's acceptance of MMD may become just as more lenient.

 

[Gussie]

This is an interesting thread with all the various opinions. I wouldn't trade my diamond for a mmd plus the extra money. But if I didn't have the funds, I tend to think I would go for a larger mmd. I wouldn't lie and say it was mined though. I would neither be bragging nor pretending, just enjoying my stone that was produced by man's innovation rather than nature.

 

[blueMA]

This is an interesting thread with all the various opinions. I wouldn't trade my diamond for a mmd plus the extra money. But if I didn't have the funds, I tend to think I would go for a larger mmd. I wouldn't lie and say it was mined though. I would neither be bragging nor pretending, just enjoying my stone that was produced by man's innovation rather than nature.

I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the blue MMD pendant. They'll be fun to collect and wear for sure!

 

[rockhoundofficiando]

Much of Debeer's current market share seems to be going to simulants, principally moissanite. This move will squash that. Only temporarily though, as moissanite prices have dropped significantly with the influx of new manufacturers, and cz of course is already cheap. Thus the price disparity will increase again between synthetic diamonds and sims and there always seems to be a market for cheaper imitations.

 

[Yimmers]

Well, looking at the jewelry preview, honestly, the pieces are not all that interesting to me, other than the round halo pendant (the pink princess pendant doesn't look great). However, thanks to PS, I want diamond huggies (you gonna make those, Lightbox???) and shapes or cuts off the beaten track. Not just a MRB or princess, even though they are popular cuts.

i know that AVC moissanites are being cut and sold; while still cheaper than mined diamonds, it's still a hefty chunk of change for something that I don't personally equate as to being real. I'm with the others - the idea of a MMD cut into an AVC, antique Emerald, or an Octavia is something I'd sorely consider just to be able to own the different cuts in a stone that is not a simulant.

 

[blueMA]

the idea of a MMD cut into an AVC

I would totally purchase an OEC MMD. I could easily see myself having a display full of different cut MMDs, just as many collectors of Swarovsky crystals.

 

[icy_jade]

This:
“Mikimoto patented his process for culturing spherical pearls in 1916. Mayhem ensued. Faultless in shape, colour and lustre, his pearls were denounced as fakes by the natural-pearl lobby. Scientists were called in to prove it. They concluded that the only way to tell whether a pearl was natural or cultured was by cutting it in half to see if it contained a nucleus, and that the only difference between natural and cultured pearls was that the nucleus was introduced into the oyster artificially rather than accidentally. Mikimoto’s pearls, therefore, were not fakes.

This was good enough for the majority of consumers, most of whom could only have dreamed of owning pearls otherwise. Early adopters such as Coco Chanel helped speed the acceptance of cultured pearls and to reshape attitudes towards pearls more generally. Chanel had begun designing imitation-pearl jewellery in the mid-1920s, using a centuries-old technique that involves coating glass beads with fish-scale paste and lacquer. (None other than Leonardo da Vinci had toyed with the recipe.) She festooned herself with pearls, natural, cultured and imitation, all indistinguishably mixed. She liked costume jewellery, she said, in words that echo the spirit if not the specifics of Mikimoto’s pearls-for-the-people ethos, because it was “devoid of arrogance in an age of overly easy luxury”.

Mikimoto ramped up production and by 1938 there were 350 farms in Japan, producing more than ten million pearls a year. By the middle of the century cultured pearls were a familiar and coveted feature of the jewellery landscape.“

From: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2009/07/pearl-industry200907/amp

I see a lot of similarities with the pearl industry and am watching this with great interest.

 

[Lisa Loves Shiny]

I already have earth mined diamonds and I think it will be great to add a lab diamond at the price predicted to my collection. I signed up for them to email me when the lab diamond pendant is available.

 

[tkyasx78]

I didnt see anything on the site’s coming soon area I was interested in, but I am hoping they will affordably price larger stones than one carat.
Earrings are great for the 1 ct range! I would love another pendant is the 2 ct range!
Fingers crossed this brings down the cost of lab diamonds across the board!
I have real rubies and lab rubies, Same for sapphires. Id love some lab diamonds to use for jewelry that would make designing pieces much more affordable.

 

[blueMA]

I already have earth mined diamonds and I think it will be great to add a lab diamond at the price predicted to my collection. I signed up for them to email me when the lab diamond pendant is available.

I was just telling my dog that she may be getting a pink diamond on her collar this evening.

 

[bludiva]

I see it as a genius strategic defensive move.

And like in the old days when Debeers was making and promoting the market for everyone in the diamond industry, now they are defending that market for everyone in the natural diamond industry. I personally hope they find it profitable selling MMD, but I do not think that is their real motive.

Totally agree it's about defending their real bread and butter. It would be worth it to them to run this business in the red. Curious to seeing what they offer in the fall...I think high quality or simulants that are popping up are going to be great for rare colors that many of us won't get to experience otherwise, and for people who really just don't care about jewelry, and for those who want a fabulous jewelry wardrobe on a budget. There's room for everyone.

 

[KingKuda]

As for the fakes not looking like the real thing, I would highly disagree with this as well. You obviously haven't been to Vietnam. Like I said, it is the kingdom of perfect replicas (and nail salons***). For the $10 fake example that I provided, yes, the discerning consumer may be able to tell them apart. But the slightly more expensive fakes? Not a chance. Seriously, go there and find one of the higher end fake LV bags. They'll run you $30-40 (depending on the detail of the bag), and they're pretty much an exact replica. Down to the very. last. stitch. In all seriousness, I think they're actually real bags that are dumped on the grey market and sold as "fakes" just to clear excess stock. Either that, or the replica producers have this down to an exact science. If there is a difference, I would need a microscope to differentiate it, and I am a fairly discerning consumer in these matters having seen both real versions (from friends in America) and excellent fakes (from friends in Vietnam).

Same goes for watches, which is more my forte. One of my friends has this watch (I believe it is this one, I can't remember exactly, but I know he said it was a high-priced fake):
https://bestreplica.sr/product/rolex-submariner-date-ss-black-ceramic-bezel/

I've seen a few real Subs in my time, and this is seriously as close as you're going to get. The movement is perfectly replicated, down to the very last piece. They even perfected the little hologram "Rolex" that is printed around the interior of the bezel. They have threads on watch forums of people taking these into ADs and having the ADs believe it's genuine. Yeah, it's still expensive for a replica at about $1000 after the discount, but beats the hell out of $10k for the real version. And this isn't the only company doing it. There are a few high end "Folex" producers that are really nailing it to an exacting degree.

All this to say that, in the world of fine goods, there's people out there in every case that are able to replicate the real thing to an exacting degree... But yet people will still pay for the real thing.

..Yeah, humans are illogical, but that's what makes us entertaining, isn't it?

So yeah, I don't think MMDs that cost 10% of mined diamonds will hurt the mined diamond industry too much. Perhaps a little, but there will still be a market for them, particularly for engagement rings where the whole "diamond is forever" mentality is really engrained. But I can definitely see low-cost MMDs infiltrating the market for studs/tennis bracelets/pendants/etc., where there isn't so much of the emotional undertones as for E-rings and people are mainly just looking for a sparkly status symbol that can pass for real.

***I'm allowed to make this joke because my girlfriend is Vietnamese.

You are honestly just rambling now and speaking garbage.

Fakes are fakes and differences are noticeable to the naked eye. I've been to Vietnam and I've also owned $200-300 fakes before which were of the highest possible quality. They are still a fake and for you to suggest they are 'real' and maybe just excess stock suggests to me that you have absolutely no idea in the world what you are looking for.

 

[KingKuda]

I think that there are a few factors that are being overlooked here, millennials are the most well educated generation of Americans ever, they're extremely open minded, and most of all their cost conscious. I am a lawyer in my late twenties (millennial), and I, like a lot of other millennials, have started to make decent money as of late, but just like a lot of others, have an abhorrent debt-income ratio. I am currently looking to buy an engagement ring and like most others am looking for the most bang for my buck. I've been diligently researching both mined and man made diamonds and as of right now I am torn. I can tell you right now that I don't at all buy into the idea of a diamond being rare or unique. I also don't at all look at a diamond as a thing of value because in reality it's a sunk cost that I will never see a return of investment on. I'm open to the idea of a MMD, but like most others I don't want to overpay for something that I could have for a fraction of the price a few months from now. And I think that's the approach most millennials take with regard to MMD and mined diamonds, it's all about value and bang for your buck. You have to remember that this is the instagram generation, the generation that spends more money on experiences than tangible items.

Absolutely and utterly this. I was comparing a mined diamond with a MMD and was tempted to save 20%. My girlfriend had told me that she didn't mind what I got her, as long as it was white and not too small (if it was small, then a seamless halo).

I honestly think the older generation are losing touch with what millennials are truly after. I don't know a single person that would buy a mined diamond that is 25% of a MMD simply because it came from the ground.

 

[TreeScientist]

You are honestly just rambling now and speaking garbage.

Fakes are fakes and differences are noticeable to the naked eye. I've been to Vietnam and I've also owned $200-300 fakes before which were of the highest possible quality. They are still a fake and for you to suggest they are 'real' and maybe just excess stock suggests to me that you have absolutely no idea in the world what you are looking for.

Haha, OK. You keep believing you can tell the difference. Drink the Kool-aid.

If this was the case, why are there hundreds of cases exactly like this one?:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/03/the-attack-of-the-superfakes/

Someone who thought they knew what they were doing, got a watch that looked extremely close to the real thing, and only found out when a jeweler took it to the back of the shop and examined it under fine scrutiny that it was an "excellent fake."

No, you cannot tell the difference in many cases unless the piece was examined by a professional. And I never claimed they were actually selling real ones as fakes. It was just an example to show how good a lot of these fakes actually are: That I would actually believe they were real.

I know my watches, and I for one know that, if someone showed me that $1000 fake Rolex that I linked to, I would absolutely not be able to tell. Actually, I was not able to tell at all. My friend fooled me.

Like I said, drink the Kool-aid...

 

[TreeScientist]

So my comment was more related to the MMD vs mined diamond, and how it is analogous to the world of other finely crafted fakes. In both cases, the following applies:

Could a professional tell the difference? Yes. A watchmaker/professional jeweler who takes the near-perfect Folex to the back of the shop could determine it was a fake, just like a jeweler could tell a MMD from mined diamond with the correct tools.

Could you tell the difference with the naked eye and without fine examination with professional tools? No

 

[KingKuda]

Haha, OK. You keep believing you can tell the difference. Drink the Kool-aid.

If this was the case, why are there hundreds of cases exactly like this one?:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/03/the-attack-of-the-superfakes/

Someone who thought they knew what they were doing, got a watch that looked extremely close to the real thing, and only found out when a jeweler took it to the back of the shop and examined it under fine scrutiny that it was an "excellent fake."

No, you cannot tell the difference in many cases. And I never claimed they were actually selling real ones as fakes. It was just an example to show how good a lot of these fakes actually are: That I would actually believe they were real.

I know my watches, and I for one know that, if someone showed me that $1000 fake Rolex that I linked to, I would absolutely not be able to tell. Actually, I was not able to tell at all. My friend fooled me.

Like I said, drink the Kool-aid...

What are you even on about with Kool-aid? Seriously, you are rambling.

Your exact quote was 'I think they're actually real bags that are dumped on the grey market and sold as "fakes" just to clear excess stock' so yes, you did claim they were selling reals as fakes which is absolutely and utterly ridiculous.

You are comparing a fake item made from different, cheaper materials with a diamond made to be exactly the same in every way possible as what comes out of the ground.

Your entire argument is also stupidly flawed as you are showing how strong the market for replicas is and how high the demand is, yet you were initially arguing that people want the 'real' thing. Work out what in fact your argument is before rambling and going on a tangent about your Vietnamese wife and the like.

**edited by moderator, name calling is not welcomed here**

 

[TreeScientist]

My agrument is not flawed, nor has it changed. As I've been stating this whole time, there are always people who will prefer the alternatives/fakes (like my friend with the Folex), which is why there is a strong market for them. But there are also people who will prefer the authentic product even if there's no way for non-professionals to tell the difference. All people have different preferences and values, which is what makes us unique. So both markets (real and replicas) can thrive in harmony with each other, as they have been with pretty much every luxury good item.

 

[Aino]

Interesting conversations going on here. The topic of lab-grown diamonds and fakes in general always divides opinions, some people tolerate them, some people see them as bargains and some people are vehemently against them. However - IMO - we should all still keep the tone of the conversation polite and not call each other stupid or make comparisons to children- we are all entitled to our own opinions.

And FYI, I visited one Shenzhen fake market once in China. The city is known by many as the hub for counterfeits. It was an absolutely fascinating and eye opening visit. Indeed as @TreeScientist said, they do occasionally have real brand items there. They bring them in to copy them, it is a necessary part of the process when producing The Perfect Fake. Once the copying process is done they will sell the real bag. Some merchants might try to sell it as the real thing, explaining why it's in the fake shop but some will just sell it amongst the other fake products - essentially as a fake.

Regarding the MMDs, personally I found this Lightbox news very exciting first. But having had a look at their preview jewelry selection, I don't think I will be buying them anytime soon. Paying 1000 USD for a 10k gold pendant seems too steep for something that I do not consider the real thing. It is not a cheap price for something that is essentially costume jewelry set in cheap gold or silver. What would their re-sale value be? How do they hold their value? I rather save it or even spend it on a tiny mined diamond. It's totally a mental thing. I would know what the stone is and wouldn't care if others thought it was real or not. But I know I might be in the minority group choosing - even with mined diamonds - quality over size.

 

[TreeScientist]

Interesting conversations going on here. The topic of lab-grown diamonds and fakes in general always divides opinions, some people tolerate them, some people see them as bargains and some people are vehemently against them. However - IMO - we should all still keep the tone of the conversation polite and not call each other stupid or make comparisons to children- we are all entitled to our own opinions.

And FYI, I visited one Shenzhen fake market once in China. The city is known by many as the hub for counterfeits. It was an absolutely fascinating and eye opening visit. Indeed as @TreeScientist said, they do occasionally have real brand items there. They bring them in to copy them, it is a necessary part of the process when producing The Perfect Fake. Once the copying process is done they will sell the real bag. Some merchants might try to sell it as the real thing, explaining why it's in the fake shop but some will just sell it amongst the other fake products - essentially as a fake.

Regarding the MMDs, personally I found this Lightbox news very exciting first. But having had a look at their preview jewelry selection, I don't think I will be buying them anytime soon. Paying 1000 USD for a 10k gold pendant seems too steep for something that I do not consider the real thing. It is not a cheap price for something that is essentially costume jewelry set in cheap gold or silver. What would their re-sale value be? How do they hold their value? I rather save it or even spend it on a tiny mined diamond. It's totally a mental thing. I would know what the stone is and wouldn't care if others thought it was real or not. But I know I might be in the minority group choosing - even with mined diamonds - quality over size.

Thank you @Aino, but trust me, it doesn't bother me at all. This sort of name-calling pales in comparison to what we sometimes see during the peer review process for scientific journals. You wouldn't believe how some reviewers react when your results challenge a theory they've worked their entire careers to support. Scientists develop a thick skin fairly quickly, or they'll never make it in academia.

I've honestly been surprised/astonished as well by some of the fake markets I've visited throughout Asia. It is really quite impressive the lengths they will go to in order to produce the perfect fake. I haven't been to Shenzhen yet, but I would love to see what they're capable of if I get the chance.

 

[Aino]

Thank you @Aino, but trust me, it doesn't bother me at all. This sort of name-calling pales in comparison to what we sometimes see during the peer review process for scientific journals. You wouldn't believe how some reviewers react when your results challenge a theory they've worked their entire careers to support. Scientists develop a thick skin fairly quickly, or they'll never make it in academia.

I've honestly been surprised/astonished as well by some of the fake markets I've visited throughout Asia. It is really quite impressive the lengths they will go to in order to produce the perfect fake. I haven't been to Shenzhen yet, but I would love to see what they're capable of if I get the chance.

I know, surviving in the word of academics requires thick skin and occasionally forgiving nature. However, accepting attacks and petty jabs on an online forum like this is a slightly different matter. I love how people get passionate here, debate and argument for their positions but no one ever wins by name calling or by dealing low blows. And many debates here are the type that have no winners or losers - they are based on subjective opinions so no need to take them personally. Whereas in academia, the topics are not always so inconsequential.

And yes the fake market is much more sophisticated that one would think. But whenever there are high rewards, there are willing souls.

 

[SandyinAnaheim]

...A better way of putting it is a ring from Tiffany's. They are beautiful, exclusive, pricey and every girl would love one. However because of the premium you have to pay to get one, people instead go out, copy the design and get it made for 50% of the cost of a Tiffany's ring...

I don't know how many chicks YOU know, but I have less than zero interest in anything Tiffany. Never have, never will. And neither do any of my friends in various age groups. When hunting for an ER, my husband talked me into visiting Tiffany to look at rings. I was already on PS and laughed at their ridiculous prices and low quality stones, and walked out. Take a look at eBay...it is swimming in Tiffany items that people can't sell even at a fraction of their original cost. SOOOO not exclusive....

...Still, what the eye observes in only part of the equation. Humans "see" much more with their thoughts than with the signals received from their optical nerves. The feeling of owning a REAL, NATURAL diamond, and being able to tell others that it is a natural diamond without lying, is something that I'm sure will still be worth a lot to many consumers.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I would propose that what a 'fake' item I am wearing says to you says more about you than it does about me ...

I don't think so. Isn't the real reason people wear fake items because they're trying to pretend that they own the genuine item? If not, then why not buy a real item they can afford that doesn't have the caché of the coveted item? I think that says a LOT MORE about them being poseurs than the people they're trying to impress with their fake items.

"millennials are the most well educated generation of Americans ever"
That's debatable. The numbers certainly show a higher percentage of degrees than previous generations. The question is whether the education they received was equal or nearly equal to what the previous generations received and if they really got true value for their money and the stupendous amount of student debt they piled up.

AMEN!

... But there are also people who will prefer the authentic product even if there's no way for non-professionals to tell the difference. All people have different preferences and values, which is what makes us unique...

I think the same thing. I would certainly have MMDs once they start putting them in hair barrettes. I love glittery little baubles for my hair. But I wouldn't consider them for jewelry. I spent too many years not having any REAL jewelry so now that I can afford little bits and pieces here and there, I will only wear real stones, not man-made items simulating real stones. But to each their own.

I don't ever remember being bombarded by marketing from DeBeers. What I remember as a child is my Mom's BRILLIANT platinum 7.5 tcw 3 stone beauty that she received as an ER from her second husband, and his solid 18k Tiger Eye Patek Philippe that he wore every day, or the diamond-crusted platinum Rolex President he wore on special occasions. I coveted those things because of their innate beauty, and because NO ONE I had ever seen or met before had items like these. They were the ungettable get. If everyone around us had them, I know I wouldn't have wanted them so strongly. I know my view may be in the minority, but I also also know I'm not the only one that thinks this way.

And that's the point I laboriously worked up to here. When everyone can afford simulated diamonds and is walking around with 2+ ct simulated diamond rings, and dripping with big simulated diamond studs, necklaces and bracelets, what will people who enjoy owning genuine items be wanting? I think they will still be wanting real diamonds, and the market for them will be even stronger.

 

[blueMA]

I'm sure the cultured pearls engendered similar polarizing debates around the turn of the century. Just imagine that a single natural pearl was deemed worth around $20 million during Cleopatra's time. I wonder how many of us today know of a woman who had never owned a pair of (cultured) pearl earrings? Just a hundred years ago, Cartier exchanged a Fifth Avenue townhouse worth 1 million with a strand of necklace.

If some people chooses to own jewelries and brands to flaunt their wealth then this surely wouldn't be acceptable, and there's nothing wrong with covering the ancient shiny rocks, but I personally like well made shiny pretty things so I have no problem experimenting with some that been manufactured. As usual I'll be judging them for merits without bias.

 

[OoohShiny]

I don't think so. Isn't the real reason people wear fake items because they're trying to pretend that they own the genuine item? If not, then why not buy a real item they can afford that doesn't have the caché of the coveted item? I think that says a LOT MORE about them being poseurs than the people they're trying to impress with their fake items.

There are a whole range of reasons why people buy fake/replica goods, in the same way that there are a whole range of reasons why people buy (expensive) genuine goods

As an example, many vintage watches are highly sought after but also extremely limited in supply, meaning they are very highly priced and/or impossible to get hold of. Some vintage Rolex divers are tens of thousands of dollars, or even more! but are still a great piece of classic, ageless design that looks good on the wrist today. What does one do if one does not like any of the modern watches available and does not have the ability to find 50k for a 50 year old watch made of stainless steel, that one wouldn't want to wear in some places anyway due to safety concerns and wanting to not damage their 'investment'? A (good) replica can be bought for well under $500, perhaps even half that, so why not get one?

There would be no impact on a current production model, there would be no effect on the supply-and-demand market for the genuine vintage items, and anyone into watches will (rightly or, I would assert, wrongly!) assess the person wearing the watch rather than the individual piece anyway, as per my earlier example of the homeless person. Owning the replica may even lead the wearer to aspire to buying the original at some point in the future, so the replica is actually encouraging the purchase of genuine items. Or the wearer may even already own the original item, but be wearing the replica because of personal safety concerns on that day!


Why should what someone is wearing be the subject of judgement of others, though? Does it really matter if A.N.Other person is wearing a $300 copy of a $30000 watch? How does it affect the life of the person doing the viewing?

Is the person viewing the watch applying to the wearer the 'Brand Values' that the maker of the original items tries so hard to attach to what is simply a lump of polished metal with some moving parts in it? And the viewer then feels somehow deceived when they find out the item in question is a copy? What exactly is it that imbues an inanimate object with 'aspirational' properties and values? Why do we as free-thinking, intelligent human beings allow ourselves to be manipulated to the point that we perpetuate a manufacturer's 'Brand Value messaging' for free and feel we must challenge people buying copies of expensive items?

I think that is the point behind my wording - someone looking at someone else wearing a fake/replica item has zero understanding of the reasoning for their choices unless they stop and ask them about the item and what led them to buy and wear it. If the viewer assumes the wearer is successful / rich / super-hard-working, that is an assumption based on the 'Brand Value' advertising undertaken by the manufacturer of the original item. The viewer should instead not assume anything in particular, other than perhaps the wearer has aesthetic taste that matches the manufacturers' / that of other people who buy them / that of the viewer (if the viewer likes the look of the item in question).


Perhaps the owner is indeed a poseur trying to pass a copy off as the genuine item! They do exist (and don't realise how amusing they are! lol) but many (most?) replica owners are perfectly happy to admit that what they are wearing is a copy. I've had several interesting conversations with people about replica watches, and if someone commented 'nice watch', my response would be 'thanks, our industrious friends in the Far East with little regard for Copyright laws did a good job!' lol.

Personally, I never set out to try to impress anyone - I like many designs of expensive watches that I can't afford and find the psychology behind this whole discussion very interesting (hence my waffling on again here ) so why shouldn't I or anyone else buy a copy of an item and enjoy wearing it? No-one's being hurt, the companies being copied haven't lost any sales (because the wearer is very likely not in the position to afford one anyway, but the company might actually even gain a sale in the long term, as mentioned earlier), and with the internet, one can form great friendships, sharing knowledge and participating in fun discussions on related forums

I don't ever remember being bombarded by marketing from DeBeers. What I remember as a child is my Mom's BRILLIANT platinum 7.5 tcw 3 stone beauty that she received as an ER from her second husband, and his solid 18k Tiger Eye Patek Philippe that he wore every day, or the diamond-crusted platinum Rolex President he wore on special occasions. I coveted those things because of their innate beauty, and because NO ONE I had ever seen or met before had items like these. They were the ungettable get. If everyone around us had them, I know I wouldn't have wanted them so strongly. I know my view may be in the minority, but I also also know I'm not the only one that thinks this way.

And that's the point I laboriously worked up to here. When everyone can afford simulated diamonds and is walking around with 2+ ct simulated diamond rings, and dripping with big simulated diamond studs, necklaces and bracelets, what will people who enjoy owning genuine items be wanting? I think they will still be wanting real diamonds, and the market for them will be even stronger.

I think you've picked up on two aspects of great relevance here.

Innate beauty is certainly one driver of attraction to items of great design, but the additional supply/demand/unaffordability restrictions and/or aspirational marketing are another way of driving demand. But which is more important and which is more effective?

Would you still have coveted the items mentioned if they could be bought for $20 each at the local mall? Would the attraction to their beauty override the attractiveness imbued by their aspirational nature?

It is an interesting discussion that comes up with regards to replica and homage watches quite a lot, in that if one really does like a design, why wouldn't one purchase a 'sterile' homage (that was identical to a branded item but had no brand markings on it whatsoever) if one's budget only stretched to, say, $300, rather than a replica/copy (with full copied branding) for the same price?

Personally speaking I am aware that I am conflicted on this front as I can see arguments for both but would perhaps tend towards the choice of a copy - maybe because it can be viewed as an experiment to see how people react!


DeBeers seem here to be attempting to clearly define a line between beauty and aspirational purchases, in that they are planning to sell MMDs based on their beauty, but continue selling Mined stones as an aspirational product.

Will the buying public critically analyse this situation and come to their own conclusions over whether the (considerable) premium being asked for the exclusivity of Mined stones is worth it? Or will they unthinkingly continue to lap up the 'brand values' that companies spend $billions on pushing?

I would put money on the latter myself!