i don''t mean to pry, but how much did you spend on your e-ring and w-band?

[Dannielle]

My stone plus custom setting was $6,200.

My wedding band will be roughly $1,500.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/22/2009 6:15:17 PM
Author: upgrade
He spent about 3% of his annual income on my ering- not even 1 month''s salary for us. I don''t think the 2 months salary rule of thumb is all that common- that''s a lot of money for a ring! If you can do it and both be comfortable with it, then I say go for it (and good for you!

), but if that money is needed elsewhere then you certainly shouldn''t feel bad about that. There are a LOT of women out there happily wearing plain gold bands. PS diamonds are certainly not the norm.

DF- Interesting that the average PS diamond is around $7000. Do you know what the average ''real world'' diamond costs?

here in the U.S...$4500 for the center stone.

 

[vespergirl]

Hey there, I just wanted to chime in on the "two months salary" thing. My DH spent two months of his salary (at the time) on the ring, but we were older, and he had lots of cash savings, so he just wrote a check for the ring - it wasn''t purchased on credit.

I think that for people getting married in their early 20s, when they are just starting out in life, that 2 months salary needs to be used for practical things. When I first got married, I was 23 and ex-husband was 27. He paid $800 for my ring, and I loved it and it was a beautiful ring. It was perfect for us because we were just starting out in life.

When DH & I got married, we were 29 and 34. We both already owned our own homes, and DH actually had a couple of roommates living with him, so their rents paid his mortgage. We were both very successful with high salaries, and DH had tons of savings, so it wasn''t a hardship for him to spend 2 months salary on a ring.

I totally think that people should spend what they could afford, and also get what fits their lifestyle. One of my good friends is very petite, and doesn''t wear a lot of jewelry. Her husband makes about a million a year (partner in a law firm). When they went ring shopping, she could have gotten a humongous ring, but she wanted something smaller, dainty and delicate - she has a 1 ct stone in a micropave setting, and it looks great on her size 3.5 finger (told you she was tiny!) So, just because someone can afford a 2 months salary ring, that doesn''t mean that they need to spend that much if that doesn''t suit their style.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/23/2009 10:58:39 AM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 4/22/2009 6:15:17 PM

Author: upgrade

He spent about 3% of his annual income on my ering- not even 1 month's salary for us. I don't think the 2 months salary rule of thumb is all that common- that's a lot of money for a ring! If you can do it and both be comfortable with it, then I say go for it (and good for you!

), but if that money is needed elsewhere then you certainly shouldn't feel bad about that. There are a LOT of women out there happily wearing plain gold bands. PS diamonds are certainly not the norm.


DF- Interesting that the average PS diamond is around $7000. Do you know what the average 'real world' diamond costs?

here in the U.S...$4500 for the center stone.

Source, por favor?

Because that seems awfully high.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/22/2009 6:15:17 PM
Author: upgrade

DF- Interesting that the average PS diamond is around $7000. Do you know what the average 'real world' diamond costs?

I'm not sure of the center stone alone (if we're talking about engagement rings), but People Magazine reported the average cost of an engagement ring at $2,100 in 2007. Average cost of a wedding band? $650.

(More fun wedding stats at the source: It's a Wedding, Wedding World! People Magazine)

 

[D&T]

Date: 4/23/2009 1:40:56 PM
Author: vespergirl
Hey there, I just wanted to chime in on the ''two months salary'' thing. My DH spent two months of his salary (at the time) on the ring, but we were older, and he had lots of cash savings, so he just wrote a check for the ring - it wasn''t purchased on credit.

I think that for people getting married in their early 20s, when they are just starting out in life, that 2 months salary needs to be used for practical things. When I first got married, I was 23 and ex-husband was 27. He paid $800 for my ring, and I loved it and it was a beautiful ring. It was perfect for us because we were just starting out in life.

When DH & I got married, we were 29 and 34. We both already owned our own homes, and DH actually had a couple of roommates living with him, so their rents paid his mortgage. We were both very successful with high salaries, and DH had tons of savings, so it wasn''t a hardship for him to spend 2 months salary on a ring.

I totally think that people should spend what they could afford, and also get what fits their lifestyle. One of my good friends is very petite, and doesn''t wear a lot of jewelry. Her husband makes about a million a year (partner in a law firm). When they went ring shopping, she could have gotten a humongous ring, but she wanted something smaller, dainty and delicate - she has a 1 ct stone in a micropave setting, and it looks great on her size 3.5 finger (told you she was tiny!) So, just because someone can afford a 2 months salary ring, that doesn''t mean that they need to spend that much if that doesn''t suit their style.

you said it best.... agreed... yeah,,, who made up that rule anyways?

 

[E B]

Date: 4/23/2009 2:03:08 PM
Author: D&T

Date: 4/23/2009 1:40:56 PM

Author: vespergirl

Hey there, I just wanted to chime in on the 'two months salary' thing. My DH spent two months of his salary (at the time) on the ring, but we were older, and he had lots of cash savings, so he just wrote a check for the ring - it wasn't purchased on credit.


I think that for people getting married in their early 20s, when they are just starting out in life, that 2 months salary needs to be used for practical things. When I first got married, I was 23 and ex-husband was 27. He paid $800 for my ring, and I loved it and it was a beautiful ring. It was perfect for us because we were just starting out in life.


When DH & I got married, we were 29 and 34. We both already owned our own homes, and DH actually had a couple of roommates living with him, so their rents paid his mortgage. We were both very successful with high salaries, and DH had tons of savings, so it wasn't a hardship for him to spend 2 months salary on a ring.


I totally think that people should spend what they could afford, and also get what fits their lifestyle. One of my good friends is very petite, and doesn't wear a lot of jewelry. Her husband makes about a million a year (partner in a law firm). When they went ring shopping, she could have gotten a humongous ring, but she wanted something smaller, dainty and delicate - she has a 1 ct stone in a micropave setting, and it looks great on her size 3.5 finger (told you she was tiny!) So, just because someone can afford a 2 months salary ring, that doesn't mean that they need to spend that much if that doesn't suit their style.

you said it best.... agreed... yeah,,, who made up that rule anyways?

DeBeers, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[jstarfireb]

I''ve been quoted that the average engagement ring in the US is about $3500-4000. Not sure about the wedding bands.

PS estimates of "average" are going to be *highly* inflated.

FWIW, mine cost $6000 for the e-ring (1ct princess, platinum custom setting) and $1000 for the w-band (platinum bezel-set eternity).

 

[partgypsy]

I can think of at least 3 people I know who received a hand me down diamond or ring and so their cost is 0. Many people never get a reset, so again reset price=0. What would be more useful to you is to see how much something akin to what you want cost pricescopers to see if it is a reasonable cost (plus get ideas of where to go for what you want

)

Original e-ring (emerald-cut emerald ring) $640, wedding band $100
10 year anniversary ring $3200

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/23/2009 1:42:32 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 4/23/2009 10:58:39 AM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 4/22/2009 6:15:17 PM

Author: upgrade

He spent about 3% of his annual income on my ering- not even 1 month''s salary for us. I don''t think the 2 months salary rule of thumb is all that common- that''s a lot of money for a ring! If you can do it and both be comfortable with it, then I say go for it (and good for you!

), but if that money is needed elsewhere then you certainly shouldn''t feel bad about that. There are a LOT of women out there happily wearing plain gold bands. PS diamonds are certainly not the norm.


DF- Interesting that the average PS diamond is around $7000. Do you know what the average ''real world'' diamond costs?

here in the U.S...$4500 for the center stone.

Source, por favor?

Because that seems awfully high.

well,i figure the avg mall store 1 ct is about $4500 and since most guys are shooting for that 1ct weight,so that''s how i came up with that number.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/23/2009 8:42:08 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

well,i figure the avg mall store 1 ct is about $4500 and since most guys are shooting for that 1ct weight,so that''s how i came up with that number.

Maybe most men that come to Pricescope, but not most men in America. I remember reading the average carat weight is closer to .5 than a full carat, which can be a few thousand dollars difference.

 

[MakingTheGrade]

Haha, sometimes I feel like I'm the only one on Pricescope whose fiance wouldn't tell her the price of the ring (I asked, he wouldn't tell, lol).

Unfortunately for him, he had left his "diamond homework" laying around on the floor, which I found while I was cleaning, lol, so I have a pretty good estimate of what it cost. He did good It wasn't so much that it put him in debt, but enough that he's proud to have me show off my ring to our friends.

 

[partgypsy]

Must be dyslexic today.
Anniversary ring cost $2300 (not 3200)

 

[MakingTheGrade]

Date: 4/23/2009 8:47:34 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 4/23/2009 8:42:08 PM

Author: Dancing Fire


well,i figure the avg mall store 1 ct is about $4500 and since most guys are shooting for that 1ct weight,so that''s how i came up with that number.

Maybe most men that come to Pricescope, but not most men in America. I remember reading the average carat weight is closer to .5 than a full carat, which can be a few thousand dollars difference.

Heh, it was cute. My fiance seemed almost apologetic when he proposed because the diamond wasn''t a full carat (it''s a .9 F VS). I thought it was cute, and quite silly. I love my ring, no plans to ever upgrade it unless I break the setting somehow, and even then, I''d only get a new setting. I''m sure in the future I''ll own jewelry that cost more than the ring, but it''ll always be my one and only Ering because I''m too sentimental to upgrade (I still have the first teddy bear I was given at age 3...yeah).

 

[luv2sparkle]

my original e-ring in 1980 was $250.00. When my 30 year upgrade is done, it will probably total about 30,000. One thousand for every year of marriage. I find
this fair, dont you?

 

[Steel]

I hope to be wrong on this but I do not like this thread and respectfully stand to be corrected. Where is the OP?

Folks, are you ok with having how much $$$/€€€ you have sitting in your home/on your hand in such a readily accessible thread?

I worry about possible trolling/thefts/break ins.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/26/2009 12:07:55 PM
Author: Steel
I hope to be wrong on this but I do not like this thread and respectfully stand to be corrected. Where is the OP?

Folks, are you ok with having how much $$$/€€€ you have sitting in your home/on your hand in such a readily accessible thread?

I worry about possible trolling/thefts/break ins.

no different then the SMTR forum.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/23/2009 8:47:34 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 4/23/2009 8:42:08 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

well,i figure the avg mall store 1 ct is about $4500 and since most guys are shooting for that 1ct weight,so that''s how i came up with that number.

Maybe most men that come to Pricescope, but not most men in America. I remember reading the average carat weight is closer to .5 than a full carat, which can be a few thousand dollars difference.

methink here in the U.S. we''re getting pretty close to a 1 ct nowadys. i''m not talking high quality stone,but just the weight.

 

[Steel]

Date: 4/26/2009 3:25:21 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 4/26/2009 12:07:55 PM
Author: Steel
I hope to be wrong on this but I do not like this thread and respectfully stand to be corrected. Where is the OP?

Folks, are you ok with having how much $$$/€€€ you have sitting in your home/on your hand in such a readily accessible thread?

I worry about possible trolling/thefts/break ins.

no different then the SMTR forum.

I beg to differ. Lurkers & Poters would have to trawl through many poster''s threads to find out how much was spent and I think some posters have listed the costs for the first time here - esp. about older jewellery. This is a convenient thread for anybody to see how much $ is in the posters jewellery box.

Anyway, I have raised my concern.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/26/2009 3:30:11 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

methink here in the U.S. we're getting pretty close to a 1 ct nowadys. i'm not talking high quality stone,but just the weight.

I don't think so, DF. Most of what I'm finding says the average is less than .50 ct (which would line up with People Magazine's $2100 average).

 

[E B]

Oops- double post.

 

[Definitely. Maybe]

Date: 4/26/2009 3:44:06 PM
Author: Steel

Date: 4/26/2009 3:25:21 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 4/26/2009 12:07:55 PM
Author: Steel
I hope to be wrong on this but I do not like this thread and respectfully stand to be corrected. Where is the OP?

Folks, are you ok with having how much $$$/€€€ you have sitting in your home/on your hand in such a readily accessible thread?

I worry about possible trolling/thefts/break ins.

no different then the SMTR forum.

I beg to differ. Lurkers & Poters would have to trawl through many poster''s threads to find out how much was spent and I think some posters have listed the costs for the first time here - esp. about older jewellery. This is a convenient thread for anybody to see how much $ is in the posters jewellery box.

Anyway, I have raised my concern.

I don''t think it is any different then the SMTR or the threads that ask ''How big is your E-Ring?''... If someone is lurking or posting on PS then they most likely know how to use the search part to figure out how much diamonds, settings, etc cost.

I think I would be a little worried if people were posting how much their ring was followed by their full name and address... And again to find information similar to that they''d still have to search many posters threads.

 

[Steel]

I didn't post for the good of my health.

I don't agree that a thread where posters cumulatively post these values in a readily searchable title of "how much did you spend on..." is the same thing as searching all posters individually to find the most expensive loot in SMTR.

It is great if some don't agree with me but I will always raise an issue if I see one. And I see one.

I am happier to be wrong by result rather than by opinion.