Another Angle

[pricescope]

There is a trend here when people are getting too obsessed with angles, ideal-scopes, and other technical stuff (not that there is anything wrong with that)

There is another angle though: Dreams - Gabi Tolkowsky. Check it out. It shows another approach to enjoying diamonds - as a unique creation of the nature and the artist.

 

[Serg]

Great article. How did you find it?

 

[pricescope]

I've read it 4 years ago and now it has a new meaning for me

I hope to see Gabi' stones soon.

 

[Serg]

You are lucky. I have read just now

 

[WinkHPD]

This is the part I particularly liked...

A diamond is 2 billion years old. It has been studied for 25 to 30 years and people say I know everything? I can't believe it. We still need more time and we still discover very interesting subjects. What is sad is that many people say there is no future in the diamond trade, and I say the future is much bigger now than ever.

Wink

 

[strmrdr]

imho the diamond trade as we know it today has no future but one will grow to take its place.
The current model can not survive mass communication and a worldwide market.
The days of having to buy local are over and the mine owners if they wished could cut and sell the diamonds directly to the consumers.
DeBeers will fight it every step of the way but they will either change or become a niche player then die.
More sources of diamonds are being found all the time just wait until someone decides to apply the same tech the oil companies are using to locating the deposits.

 

[WinkHPD]

I believe that DeBeers and others have been doing that for many years.

It is incredibly expensive to enter into the business at the mining level and very cash intensive to enter into it at the Manufacturing level. I think the DeBeers control of the markets will shrink. as it has for the last thirty years, but I do not think that I will live long enough to see DeBeers ever become unimportant in this market.

Because of our extreme interest in diamonds, we internet vendors and buyers tend to forget that we are as yet a small part of the market. Yes, we are growing, but the vast majority of the market wants to be able to touch and feel their jewelry, not look at numbers. I am to a certain extent dragged kicking and screaming into the numbers game myself. I prefer to look at the stone and see its beauty, not depend on numbers to tell me it is special. My internet clients want the numbers, so I have searched out those vendors who can provide them to me.

I have been incredibly lucky to know several fine people who can provide the numbers and the stones that are beautiful. Richard von Sternberg, Paul Slegers, Cary Horowitz come quickly to mind as suppliers, as well as many of my wonderful competitors who share knowledge with consumers and fellow vendors such as Todd and Jonathon. (My apologies to the myriad of important people I am not mentioning here, these are meant to be examples, not a comprehensive list.) More important than having the numbers though, is having the beauty that these numbers generate. The numbers may change, just as stated in the article, what must remain is the beauty and the excitement of owning a diamond. If diamonds ever become just about the numbers, then the excitement will die and THAT will be a serious blow to the business.

Wink

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 5/29/2004 10:16:11 AM Wink wrote:



If diamonds ever become just about the numbers, then the excitement will die and THAT will be a serious blow to the business.

----------------

It might not be great business to sell diamonds to mathematicians and engineers only: besides, those guys may end up just wanting the numbers! Joking, of course: I only got two mathematicians talking diamond cuts over coffee since December

Something is telling me that neither is interested in acquiring a sample !

It would be nice if buyers could enjoy choosing from a good selection at hand, but it doesn't always work that way, does it? I lost track of how many times "bait and switch" was applied in THIS case, right here...

Could there be a way to still talk quality "by numbers" but not limit the choice to some narrow "ideal" set? At least to me, such middle ground between romancing and measuring diamonds to death shouldn't be too far away to imagine

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

It is not popular these days to report on girls numbers, but one of my favorites is Elle McPherson. (36:24:35)

I particually like it when the crown # is larger than the pavilion width.
I believe the ideal average for the girdle diameter is between 66% and 75% of the pavilion width.

Gabi would agree about these proportions I am sure, because he too enjoys all forms of beauty.

 

[valeria101]

35-24-35 ...

 

[WinkHPD]

Gary,

Being a guy I clicked on your link, expecting nothing untoward. Took me several minutes to clean out the pop ups and adware that came with your link.

I know you did not do that intentionally, but it is not a clean link.

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Wink get Alexa.com tool bar (really cool) and it blocks pop-ups.
So i never knew there would be a problem (sorry).

 

[csk1975]

WRT Alexa Toolbar here is a different view of it

I would recommend Ad Aware and SpyBot S&D - they'll delete most adware/spyware/junkware and they are free and work really well. Unlike lots of "free" software which purports to block spyware they aren't spyware themselves! Its worth downloading and running them just to rid your system of unwanted junk even if its not acting up.

 

[WinkHPD]

I actually upgraded my Ad-Aware this morning so that it is always on. The free version is great at cleaning things, but does not seem to catch them coming in. Supposedly the Ad-Aware pai version will keep a real time watch on things...

Wink

 

[strmrdr]

The google toolbar blocks popups and you can turn the spying function off and it works very well and is stable.
Or you can just do what I do and use mozilla.