Diamonds Are Bullshit
priceonomics.com
priceonomics.com
[0] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-yo...
Edit/Update: I was incorrect here. Please see children comments
I would hope that pricenomics at least verified the portions they quoted as still accurate, which would make it more immediately useful, as the original is now some thirty-plus years old and things might have changed in small or large ways.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moissanite [2] http://diamondssuck.com/
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/led-wedding-ring_n...
There are a few points I'd like to address:
> Only by carefully restricting the supply has De Beers kept the price of a diamond high.
This was the case a long time ago but not anymore. De beers seems to only have a 37% market share - not enough to control the market. [O]
> Diamonds, however, are not an investment. The market for them is neither liquid nor are they fungible.
Not entirely true. Diamond prices fluctuate and have appreciated in value over time, you just have to be savvy about it like any other investment. It's unfortunate that the markup on lower quality diamonds is so high but its largely due to a lack of knowledge on the consumer side. AKA do your homework and buy/sell from a wholesaler like abemor.com (wink, wink)
> You might want one because it looks pretty or its status symbol to have a “massive rock”, but not because it will store value or appreciate in value.
You can say the same thing about art. Diamonds are collectors items.
To be continued...
[0] = https://www.google.com/search?q=debeers+marketshare&ie=UTF-8...
> Not entirely true. Diamond prices fluctuate and have appreciated in value over time
Which wife wants to wear a used diamond? You probably are in first-hand sale and you don't resale. Diamond are like new cars; the moment you take it off the lot, it loses 40% of the value. You coudl truly bring it next day to same seller and he will offer you 30-45% less simply because "I have to be honest and tell new buyer its been worn before".
> You can say the same thing about art. Diamonds are collectors items.
No you cannot say the same, as Diamonds are not art. While each diamond is unique, their uniqueness does not add enough to value in order to justify holding it as a collector items. Their uniqueness is equal to each $1 dollar bill being unique because each have unique serial number.
Unless you keep very unique Diamond, majority of them will depreciate in value. Most art is unique from each other; I mean we just had few hundred millions bid on some popular paintings down at Rockefeller auctions; can you point me to any article when someone purchased diamond for X and sold it for Y, while Y > X ?
Every con in history is due to lack of knowledge on the side of the duped.
Diamonds are great for tools (single-point diamond turning is /awesome/[1], diamond is a great abrasive for non-ferric materials, etc).
[1] http://www.nanotechsys.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Nanote... (check out the feedback resolution on the X & Y axes. Then check out the maximum deviation from straightness: 0.75um/350mm X, 1.0um/500mm Y!!!) It's a lathe that can produce optical components like mirrors and lenses with no further grinding or polishing operations!
Knowing a few of the arguments that fine jewelers might make, could you help me address?
1. You may pass the diamond to subsequent generation.
2. You may insure the stone at a high value, similar to artwork.
3. What other precious metals or otherwise might be considered to be used in a similar fashion? Gold/platinum is too heavy to adorn commonly as representative of wealth to our SOs.
4. Would removing the “value” of diamonds make them appropriately used for their hardness? Watch faces, etc.
2. Why do I need to insure carbon? Its... carbon, super abundant, element 6. Present after the first generation of stars exploded in the universe. Are you investing in diamonds? They almost never go up in price, try reselling one or look at resale value before you worry about insurance.
3. What is the goal of this question? To show the Jones' that you have too much money and can pay the danegeld for authenticity? Before the 1940's diamonds weren't even a thing in marriage. If you could reproduce the Mona Lisa perfectly, would you pay N times as much for the original? Even if it was impossible to tell? Why is that so important?
4. Diamonds are already used for industrial uses, their "rarity" (they're not rare) is all due to a cartel named de beers controlling supply. They're common as hell, as noted, they're just compressed and heated carbon. These industrial uses are why we have these manmade diamonds in the first place. They're better than the originals as they're more consistent without imperfections. Just like modern steel would produce a katana infinitely better than folded crappy steel that the originals were trying to overcome.
> Just like modern steel would produce a katana infinitely better than folded crappy steel that the originals were trying to overcome
That's not an undisputed fact.
There has been a lot back and forth about the lost knowledge of previous generations and the romans supposedly used a superior cement which we can no longer replicate.
but to stay closer to your example: while the smelting of the metal has seen a lot of study, that doesn't mean that we're able to produce a superior katana.
You also need the smithing -- and need to figure out how the metal should be. That's of course possible, but hasn't really seen much study. So while we could theoretically produce an infinitely better katana -- thats not practical because of the money investment to figure out what that actually means.
Most enthusiast say that current katanas are at best on par with the old ones, often sub-par.
Could you recommend a related source I could read more about it from? It seems not that complicated to do a chemical analysis of the cement still existing in many Roman constructions.
I read a few years ago the 'secret' had been discovered and it was to do with volcanic ash which made it self healing.
Doing a quick search there seems to be a lot of articles from 2014 about this so possibly that what when the research was published.
https://archserve.id.ucsb.edu/courses/arthistory/152k/concre...
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/why-pantheon-has-not-crumbled-roma...
We can produce steels today with much better metallurgical properties by design. Japanese steel at the time used the folding technique to overcome low carbon content. Thats all my point entailed. And as to what enthusiasts think, all I can counter with is the audiophile community. I wouldn't take their view without some salt especially without some comprehensive analysis. Steel from Spain at the time was also vastly superior to the steel being used in Japan.
Ref: https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/mechanical-propertie...
Quote: The material and mechanical properties of samurai swords (Japanese swords), made using a traditional steelmaking technology (tatara), are investigated experimentally. The quality of these swords appears to be low because of the presence of a large number of inclusions, including oxide- and phosphorus-based structures; however, their mechanical properties are relatively good because of their fine-grained structure and high residual stress.
endquote
Also, take the metallurgical properties of turbine blades, there are alloys we can only recently produce based on analysis of bonds between the atoms. While its posssible a past civilization could have come up with these alloys, the neither needed them, and lacked the requisite knowledge to make them.
And the roman cement was largely a product of materials. Aka volcanic ash. We lost it only in that the inputs were largely lost. But this all digresses mostly into arguing analogies which is a bit of a rat hole.
When I proposed to my wife, she specifically requested the diamond cost a minimum of X dollars. I was unprepared and I didn't negotiate. I would imagine most potential wives also have a minimum threshold. It's basically, your down payment on a marriage.
That said, I don't envy anyone being in such a situation. I see no easy way out.
Good God!!
I'm just continuously amazed this is happening in a modern, western society.
Now this is a red flag if I ever saw one...
Blue diamonds or rarity sold/bought at Sotheby's is. Stuff sold at retail after feeding long chain of middlemen at De Beers is not.
Premium price is attached to the rarity occurring in nature + expensive post processing process, not to the intrinsic quality that is impossible to reproduce, because it is.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-18/diamonds-...