Rappaport is at it again!!

[Rockdiamond]

Today's list includes increases for virtually every color/clarity combo in various sizes.
1.00-1.49 was untouched in both round and fancy shapes.
But from 1.50 and up- the increases are up between 4-7% across the board.....wow.
Inflation, supply chain issues...or both????

 

[Karl_K]

tail wagging the dog?

 

[AprilBaby]

Maybe they want to encourage people to buy lab diamonds

 

[John Pollard]

Maybe they want to encourage people to buy lab diamonds

Or the @Garry H (Cut Nut) "Holloway Axiom" is already taking effect - and natural diamond demand, M2M costs and perceived values have started to rise in response to LG dynamics.

Likely #toosoon. But let's keep it in mind.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Yup - it is real - try to buy a nice oval 1.5ct up and se what happened to prices!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Maybe they want to encourage people to buy lab diamonds

It’s all so interesting ……it may speed up the eventual separation of lab grown and natural diamonds pricing structure

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

It’s all so interesting ……it may speed up the eventual separation of lab grown and natural diamonds pricing structure

You assumption is higher prices cause people to buy cheaper things David.
I think your thinking is not flawless

 

[oncrutchesrightnow]

Or the @Garry H (Cut Nut) "Holloway Axiom" is already taking effect - and natural diamond demand, M2M costs and perceived values have started to rise in response to LG dynamics.

Likely #toosoon. But let's keep it in mind.

The Kneecapper Directive.

You assumption is higher prices cause people to buy cheaper things David.
I think your thinking is not flawless

That just means his thinking is like SI1 — more value for the money.

Is the one-carat-premium getting bigger? Would that affect people’s analysis?

 

[diagem]

I suggest before jumping the guns take a look at the latest Nov 2021 Geneva auction results for mega colorless "rare" diamonds.

I keep following very high end colorless diamond prices and it paints a very different picture for me.

And if that is a continued trend (and it is) then I am staying very cautious on the values of colorless diamonds.

 

[John Pollard]

I keep following very high end colorless diamond prices and it paints a very different picture for me.

Unless previously worn by Madame Déficit, eh?

 

[DAF]

I made myself laugh with David's "supply chain issues" statement. I thought of one of those container ships hanging off of the coast somewhere, unable to to dock, with a trailer with one lonely manila envelope in it with lots of diamond paquettes.

Thank goodness they're more portable than that. Had to share.

 

[diagem]

Unless previously worn by Madame Déficit, eh?

Even MA's bracelets had a mild and strange bidding session..., nothing compared to the $36mil frenzy over her lone pearl pendent a few years ago..

 

[lulu_ma]

I suggest before jumping the guns take a look at the latest Nov 2021 Geneva auction results for mega colorless "rare" diamonds.

I keep following very high end colorless diamond prices and it paints a very different picture for me.

And if that is a continued trend (and it is) then I am staying very cautious on the values of colorless diamonds.

Can you expound on this for us plebs? What trend/s are you seeing?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Really great discussion...

I suggest before jumping the guns take a look at the latest Nov 2021 Geneva auction results for mega colorless "rare" diamonds.

I fail to see a strong connection between 20ct D/IF stones and 3ct G/VS2....but clearly, I could be missing something...

You assumption is higher prices cause people to buy cheaper things David.

Interesting old buddy.
I thought we'd see eye to eye on this.
When I am considering the prices of lab grown diamonds, and Rap goes up.....it sort of re-iterates how ....."wrong" it is to use Rap to determine the value of LG diamonds.
Of course at this point, if you want to trade in LG diamonds, you need to play by the rules....which, admitedly, keep changing

 

[diagem]

Can you expound on this for us plebs? What trend/s are you seeing?

Hi sure..., it took me a few minutes to find these four significant chain of events but there are plenty more...

1) "In 2013, Christie’s sold a 101.73 carat, pear-shaped, D-color, flawless, sold for $26.7 million – or $262,830 per carat. The buyer was Swatch Group’s Harry Winston division, which dubbed the gem, “The Winston Legacy.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/13/rocks-on-the-block-100-carat-diamonds.html

2) "Hong Kong: A 118.28-carat white diamond broke a world record today when it fetched more than $30 million at a Hong Kong auction....
.....The sale beat the record set at a diamond auction last year, when a 101.73-carat diamond was sold for $26.7 million."

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/dia...0-million-dollars-at-hong-kong-auction-536992

3) "A 102.39-carat D-color flawless oval diamond was sold in a single-lot auction for more than $15.6 million.....
.......However, the total price fell far short of what similar diamonds sold for at auction. For example, a 118.28-carat oval D-color, flawless, type IIa, oval diamond sold for $30.8 million at Sotheby’s Hong Kong, October 2013; and “The Winston Legacy,” a 101.73-carat, D-color, flawless, type IIa, pear-shaped diamond sold for $ 26.8 million at Christie’s Geneva, May 2013."

4) "The exceptional 101.38-carat pear-shaped D Flawless sold for HK$95.1 million / US$12.3 million to an anonymous private collector in a landmark single-lot auction. Named “The Key 10138”, the diamond - the second largest pear-shaped diamond ever to appear on the public market..."

https://www.sothebys.com/en/press/c...world-class-100-carat-diamond-to-crypto-buyer

 

[diagem]

We might all be missing something as the information is currently incomplete and we cant really predict the future. But in my book material is material and if the "rarest of the rare" is crashing systematically over the last decade or so..., then its a red light for me personally!

in the early 20th century natural pearl traders also failed to see the connection between large ultra rare pearl values vs. their normal (natural pearls are manifold rarer than colorless diamonds)..., this didnt help the fact that for at least 7 decades natural pears were kept in drawers instead of safes..., they literally had no value.
This of course doesn't mean too much as markets have their own lives but I prefer looking at history to try to understand forward scenarios..., just a bad habit of mine I suppose.

 

[diagem]

Hi sure..., it took me a few minutes to find these four significant chain of events but there are plenty more...

3) "A 102.39-carat D-color flawless oval diamond was sold in a single-lot auction for more than $15.6 million.....
.......However, the total price fell far short of what similar diamonds sold for at auction. For example, a 118.28-carat oval D-color, flawless, type IIa, oval diamond sold for $30.8 million at Sotheby’s Hong Kong, October 2013; and “The Winston Legacy,” a 101.73-carat, D-color, flawless, type IIa, pear-shaped diamond sold for $ 26.8 million at Christie’s Geneva, May 2013."

Forgot to add the link to 3)

A 102.39-carat D-color flawless oval diamond was sold in a single-lot auction for more than $15.6 million.

 

[John Pollard]

You assumption is higher prices cause people to buy cheaper things David.
I think your thinking is not flawless

That just means his thinking is like SI1 — more value for the money.

Is this what's meant by clarity of thought?

 

[Karl_K]

I dont know, since they added the xray machines before the crushers at many mines the number of 100ct+ polished has risen.
They are still rare but not as rare as they once were which could be the reason for the price drop on them.

 

[lulu_ma]

Hi sure..., it took me a few minutes to find these four significant chain of events but there are plenty more...

1) "In 2013, Christie’s sold a 101.73 carat, pear-shaped, D-color, flawless, sold for $26.7 million – or $262,830 per carat. The buyer was Swatch Group’s Harry Winston division, which dubbed the gem, “The Winston Legacy.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/13/rocks-on-the-block-100-carat-diamonds.html

2) "Hong Kong: A 118.28-carat white diamond broke a world record today when it fetched more than $30 million at a Hong Kong auction....
.....The sale beat the record set at a diamond auction last year, when a 101.73-carat diamond was sold for $26.7 million."

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/dia...0-million-dollars-at-hong-kong-auction-536992

3) "A 102.39-carat D-color flawless oval diamond was sold in a single-lot auction for more than $15.6 million.....
.......However, the total price fell far short of what similar diamonds sold for at auction. For example, a 118.28-carat oval D-color, flawless, type IIa, oval diamond sold for $30.8 million at Sotheby’s Hong Kong, October 2013; and “The Winston Legacy,” a 101.73-carat, D-color, flawless, type IIa, pear-shaped diamond sold for $ 26.8 million at Christie’s Geneva, May 2013."

4) "The exceptional 101.38-carat pear-shaped D Flawless sold for HK$95.1 million / US$12.3 million to an anonymous private collector in a landmark single-lot auction. Named “The Key 10138”, the diamond - the second largest pear-shaped diamond ever to appear on the public market..."

https://www.sothebys.com/en/press/c...world-class-100-carat-diamond-to-crypto-buyer

Thanks for the background. This is a fascinating discussion. Too bad I don't have $12 million in crypto lying around

 

[Rockdiamond]

But in my book material is material and if the "rarest of the rare" is crashing systematically over the last decade or so..., then its a red light for me personally!

I totally agree- that none of us can predict the future......
But I still don't see a strong connection.
If we look at the last 10 years...."normal" diamonds have done a bit of up and down over the decade, and prices are currently on an upward swing....
Yet you've noticed a systematic crashing of the stratospheric stones over this same period.... which seems to prove my point that they operate under different rules.....

 

[LilAlex]

General recognition of inflation. Impending holiday season.

Note that all luxury goods have increased incredibly -- SS Rolex, Burma ruby, Kashmir sapphire, etc. This small a change is just noise, imo.

 

[diagem]

I totally agree- that none of us can predict the future......
But I still don't see a strong connection.
If we look at the last 10 years...."normal" diamonds have done a bit of up and down over the decade, and prices are currently on an upward swing....
Yet you've noticed a systematic crashing of the stratospheric stones over this same period.... which seems to prove my point that they operate under different rules.....

If you agree we cant predict the future, then how are you able to prove your point... yet?

 

[Rockdiamond]

If you agree we cant predict the future, then how are you able to prove your point... yet?

By looking at the present.
Prices are rising on "normal" diamonds.....
Prices are falling on "superman" diamonds...... which would seem to indicate a disconnect between the two...no?

PS - it's just fun speculation....like who will win a football match....

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I totally agree- that none of us can predict the future......
But I still don't see a strong connection.
If we look at the last 10 years...."normal" diamonds have done a bit of up and down over the decade, and prices are currently on an upward swing....
Yet you've noticed a systematic crashing of the stratospheric stones over this same period.... which seems to prove my point that they operate under different rules.....

Hate to be a told ya so David - but actually smaller than 1ct diamonds have taken a dive over the decade buy heaps.
Larger sizes have wobbled but remain where they were a decade ago!
Very large diamonds have become more common as almost all mines now employ XRF technology and we will be finding more +100ct rough in the next decades compared to 20 years ago.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Looks rather up and down to me…
Also, charting prices of sub 1.00ct stones… is far less reliable. Natural Melee prices in NYC are certainly not falling- in contrast to the chart.

 

[oncrutchesrightnow]

but actually smaller than 1ct diamonds have taken a dive over the decade buy heaps.

Those of us who like 5-6mm diamonds are pretty happy these days. One person’s melee is another person’s center stone.

Another hypothesis is that the 0.5-0.99 carat EGD diamond prices will now buy 1-2+ carats LGDs in nice settings. So demand for <1 carat would fall due not just to replacement by LGD for “melee,” but also replacement by LGD for “center stones” for a certain segment of consumers. That last bit is what might have been underestimated.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Those of us who like 5-6mm diamonds are pretty happy these days. One person’s melee is another person’s center stone.

Another hypothesis is that the 0.5-0.99 carat EGD diamond prices will now buy 1-2+ carats LGDs in nice settings. So demand for <1 carat would fall due not just to replacement by LGD for “melee,” but also replacement by LGD for “center stones” for a certain segment of consumers. That last bit is what might have been underestimated.

Melee are under 0.20ct and those prices as David is saying have risen because of Covid.
But they are not included in the PriceScope diamond prices chart because the smallest size in the PS data base is 0.23ct.
Personally I believe the LGD effect will be more pronounced on low quality Maul Store goods where the comparison will be yellowish or brownish frozen spit vs nice clean better cut man and woman made goods.
BTW some people have noted cut quality is not as good in LGD's - two factors
1. - 3/4s are getting HCA under 2.0 vs natural 1/4 <2.0 so even if the symmetry is wonky they will still outperform (CVD rough is shallower than natural).
2. - I believe a lot of lower end not strong in the bank cutters have moved from melee to larger LGD (less need for $$ inventory and high tech planning equipment). Result contributes to higher melee prices.

 

[LilAlex]

There is a reason that no one else presents data in this format -- monthly percent change. It fails to capture the final price relative to the initial price.

Are these really monthly changes? Or annual changes reported on a monthly basis? Or something else entirely? No way that big diamonds have gone up 30% per month for a decade -- that would a be 5 x 10^13-fold increase (50 quadrillion-fold?). I could not find an explanation of the y-axis in the original figure. Why is it not in the legend at the top of the figure?

But no matter the time frame, if there were monthly alternating price fluctuations of +10% and -10%, the plotted curve would look nice and flat -- I mean it would be jagged but the regression line would be flat, creating the impression that prices are stable. But the final price, relative to the initial price, would be way down. You can prove this for yourself by starting with 1.0 and then multiplying it by 1.1 (= 10% increase), then 0.9 (= 10% decrease), then 1.1, then 0.9, etc. You will quickly see how the price plummets even though the average of the percent changes looks flat.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

There is a reason that no one else presents data in this format -- monthly percent change. It fails to capture the final price relative to the initial price.

Are these really monthly changes? Or annual changes reported on a monthly basis? Or something else entirely? No way that big diamonds have gone up 30% per month for a decade -- that would a be 5 x 10^13-fold increase (50 quadrillion-fold?). I could not find an explanation of the y-axis in the original figure. Why is it not in the legend at the top of the figure?

But no matter the time frame, if there were monthly alternating price fluctuations of +10% and -10%, the plotted curve would look nice and flat -- I mean it would be jagged but the regression line would be flat, creating the impression that prices are stable. But the final price, relative to the initial price, would be way down. You can prove this for yourself by starting with 1.0 and then multiplying it by 1.1 (= 10% increase), then 0.9 (= 10% decrease), then 1.1, then 0.9, etc. You will quickly see how the price plummets even though the average of the percent changes looks flat.

We need Andrey to explain in more detail but I hope he is in bed by now!

These prices are based on the listings on Pricescope of close to 1 million diamonds. Two carat and up diamonds in the qualities mentioned on the chart, D-I VVS2-SI2, are now on average 30-40% more expensive per carat than they were in March 2008.
Of course there is probably now more VVS than there was 13 years ago because the planning of cutting technology has improved. But there can be all other sorts of variables. For example there are now well over 100 diamonds above 10ct listed on Pricescope - I doubt there were very many before and I do not know if that would change the +4ct numbers? And maybe we need to extend past 99ct