here in the U.S...$4500 for the center stone.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?
Date: 4/23/2009 10:58:39 AM
Author: Dancing Fire
here in the U.S...$4500 for the center stone.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?
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?
you said it best.... agreed... yeah,,, who made up that rule anyways?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.
Date: 4/23/2009 2:03:08 PM
Author: D&T
you said it best.... agreed... yeah,,, who made up that rule anyways?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.
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.Date: 4/23/2009 1:42:32 PM
Author: EBree
Date: 4/23/2009 10:58:39 AM
Author: Dancing Fire
here in the U.S...$4500 for the center stone.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?
Source, por favor?Because that seems awfully high.
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.
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.
no different then the SMTR forum.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 $$$/€€€ you have sitting in your home/on your hand in such a readily accessible thread?
I worry about possible trolling/thefts/break ins.
methink here in the U.S. we''re getting pretty close to a 1 ct nowadys. i''m not talking high quality stone,but just the weight.Date: 4/23/2009 8:47:34 PM
Author: EBree
Date: 4/23/2009 8:42:08 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
well,i figure the avg mall store 1 ct is about $4500 and since most guys are shooting for that 1ct weight,so that''s how i came up with that number.
Maybe most men that come to Pricescope, but not most men in America. I remember reading the average carat weight is closer to .5 than a full carat, which can be a few thousand dollars difference.
I beg to differ. Lurkers & Poters would have to trawl through many poster''s threads to find out how much was spent and I think some posters have listed the costs for the first time here - esp. about older jewellery. This is a convenient thread for anybody to see how much $ is in the posters jewellery box.Date: 4/26/2009 3:25:21 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
no different then the SMTR forum.Date: 4/26/2009 12:07:55 PM
Author: Steel
I hope to be wrong on this but I do not like this thread and respectfully stand to be corrected. Where is the OP?
Folks, are you ok with having how much $$$/€€€ you have sitting in your home/on your hand in such a readily accessible thread?
I worry about possible trolling/thefts/break ins.
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 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.Date: 4/26/2009 3:44:06 PM
Author: Steel
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.Date: 4/26/2009 3:25:21 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
no different then the SMTR forum.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.
Anyway, I have raised my concern.