GIA Dunks on Lab Diamonds

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The "specialness" that some feel toward earth diamonds is just that, their mindset. That's fine and I encourage them to enjoy their perceptions, that doesn't bother me.

For many buyers earth diamonds are nonstarters when it comes to diamond selection and I'm very often seeing condescending remarks in the threads toward lab diamond owners. Suggesting they are imposters and their choices must be judged is an irritation to me, an owner of earth diamonds. Now there are ads being developed to encourage the superiorty posture of earth stones that are the true indications of love. Yuck! Live and let live while enjoying one's personal choices. Why does anyone care what others are wearing in terms of diamonds?

I think many of us were conned by DeBeer's ads years ago.

Sunrise you may not be aware but you have sipped a fair bit of cool-aid.
I would love to be able to set the world straight about the De Beers myths and vaults full of diamonds, but that is like asking a person to change religion. Simply, it s a myth.
Secondly, a lot of natural diamond sellers say bad things about synthetic diamonds. But lets look at where the first massive marketing stones were thrown from by the nascent LGD industry when they had massive marketing budgets.
They changed the official name from synthetic to laboratory, dumped mined, earth grown and earth mined onto the official name - natural diamond.
They played up blood diamonds from the 1990's as a today thing, the environmental damage (bad in both camps, but everything you own was mined or grown on a farm).
Etc

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Doesn't work with diamonds.
The same people create the art from the rough material.
The crystal is not the painting the polishing creates the art, the rock is the canvas.
So your arguing that a painter painting on a nature based canvas is superior to the same painting by the same person on a synthetic canvas identical except in origin to the natural.
Doesn't work....

Different. Not necessarily superior. The original is a one of a kind. Copies can potentially be made in unlimited quantities, and can be identified as copies. The rarity factor is completely different and thus the market value.

But a well done replica of a Rembrant can still grace a wall very nicely. A replica may actually be visually superior to a faded and worn original. But it's still a replica, not an original.

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

Sunrise you may not be aware but you have sipped a fair bit of cool-aid.
I would love to be able to set the world straight about the De Beers myths and vaults full of diamonds, but that is like asking a person to change religion. Simply, it s a myth.
Secondly, a lot of natural diamond sellers say bad things about synthetic diamonds. But lets look at where the first massive marketing stones were thrown from by the nascent LGD industry when they had massive marketing budgets.
They changed the official name from synthetic to laboratory, dumped mined, earth grown and earth mined onto the official name - natural diamond.
They played up blood diamonds from the 1990's as a today thing, the environmental damage (bad in both camps, but everything you own was mined or grown on a farm).
Etc

Good morning, Garry! We're very hot in our neck of the woods today and some cool-aid may be delicious but I haven't had any.

When growing up in my early teens and following years, I remember all the DeBeers ads and how it was only love if you were getting a diamond on your hand when engaged or married. I can still picture those big, full page, color ads in so many magazines.

The scarcity of diamonds was a controlled facter to keep those prices nice and high for the dealers. Sixty five years ago the earth's population was much lower than today since the count has more than doubled in the past 60+ years. I'm not an idiot and don't believe there were endless vaults of diamonds but there were plenty. Blood diamonds, sadly, were a fact. Now I hope and don't believe that is an issue.

My bone of contention is the subtle effort of some posters to make owners of lab diamonds feel less worthy than the owners of earth diamonds, which I own. We, as fellow citizens in this world, need to support choice. I think it's lovely so many earth diamond owners have a connection with the source of their stones. That doesn't bother me even though I don't have that same mindset. But I'm sure you have seen some of the remarks, slights and innuendo by a few toward the lab diamond population. I'd like to see us rise above that pettiness and that we all feel good in our efforts and intentions to live our best lives.

Discussion is good and now more than ever, we need kindness in this world.

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

and if you're the owner of diamond mines or the president of an African country depending on diamond sales to lift your nation from poverty and you are watching the synthetic's take over the Bridal / e-ring stone Market then you also need fight back against the Asian factories cranking out the cheap $ knock off D/E Vvs goods....

Saying that the African nations will only survive if they can mine diamonds is like saying the USA should have collapsed when we stopped growing all that cotton. Countries evolve and shouldn't be shoe-horned into the thought that is the best they can ever do is dig for diamonds. What happens when the diamonds run out?

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

And knock offs of paintings of the masters ARE paintings.

Garry, this is the attitude and rhetoric which disturbs me the most. Why is it so important for some to classify lab diamonds as knock offs and unworthy? WHY do they care what others wear or choose for their gems?

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

Could it not possibly be due to the fact that someone who spent $30,000 for a beautiful diamond could be upset that someone else has an equally beautiful diamond for a 10th of the cost? I understand that a lot of folks with natural diamonds say they don’t care that a lab grown version exists of what they have, But I can’t help feel that that might be part of the reason for all the vitriol. Or maybe the feeling is that after having spent $30,000 for a beautiful diamond, and realizing an equally beautiful diamond can be had for a 10th of the cost, folks regret their purchase. Personally, I know I would certainly be upset if, a couple years ago, I had in fact bit the bullet and shelled out $30,000+ for the beautiful 2-carat diamond I always wanted, and then realizing that a couple years later I could’ve gotten something equally impressive for less than a 10th of the cost. Because if not for either of these two reasons, then, Sunrises and Sunsets, I too would have to wonder.

 

[freddyboston]

Garry, this is the attitude and rhetoric which disturbs me the most. Why is it so important for some to classify lab diamonds as knock offs and unworthy? WHY do they care what others wear or choose for their gems?

the problem for the Natural's is they have been sitting on their hands for a couple years and allowed the Lab producers to move into and takeover the Bridal space...

LGB lobbied successfully to remove the "of natural origin" from the definition of diamond and they continue to promote a false equivalency and push a deceptive greener / more ethical message to consumers....

so those on "team" Natural (Miners/Africa/ GIA etc..) need to reclaim the space.... and if that means pointing out that the Synthetics are not real / not rare / not natural than so be it....

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

the problem for the Natural's is they have been sitting on their hands for a couple years and allowed the Lab producers to move into and takeover the Bridal space...

LGB lobbied successfully to remove the "of natural origin" from the definition of diamond and they continue to promote a false equivalency and push a deceptive greener / more ethical message to consumers....

so those on "team" Natural (Miners/Africa/ GIA etc..) need to reclaim the space.... and if that means pointing out that the Synthetics are not real / not rare / not natural than so be it....

The folks on team natural can certainly point out that LGDs are neither rare nor natural, but to say LGDs are not real is simply not the case.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The folks on team natural can certainly point out that LGDs are neither rare nor natural, but to say LGDs are not real is simply not the case.

I agree with this and do not think the use of the term "real" has much meaning in the age of synthetics. It was arguably more appropriate as a term distinguishing between diamond and simulants such as rhinestones in an earlier time.

 

[Matata]

The folks on team natural can certainly point out that LGDs are neither rare nor natural, but to say LGDs are not real is simply not the case.

They aren't naturally natural; they're artificially natural. I kid, I kid. Knowing our species as I do, I foresee a time when inclusions in mined diamonds will be seen as an asset and something that distinguishes special stones from all the boring IFs and eye cleans because humans are fickle.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

They aren't naturally natural; they're artificially natural. I kid, I kid. Knowing our species as I do, I foresee a time when inclusions in mined diamonds will be seen as an asset and something that distinguishes special stones from all the boring IFs and eye cleans because humans are fickle.

That’s pretty much what I said in a previous post. Which is so ironic. So the wearer of an obviously-included diamond will now have bragging rights.

 

[freddyboston]

They aren't naturally natural; they're artificially natural. I kid, I kid. Knowing our species as I do, I foresee a time when inclusions in mined diamonds will be seen as an asset and something that distinguishes special stones from all the boring IFs and eye cleans because humans are fickle.

I think so too..... I think Fluor could actually switch from being Discounted/Avoid to Desired/Premium in high color high clarity....

 

[diverg]

I think so too..... I think Fluor could actually switch from being Discounted/Avoid to Desired/Premium in high color high clarity....

That would be very beneficial for you. You blue fluorescent lover.

 

[Matata]

That’s pretty much what I said in a previous post. Which is so ironic. So the wearer of an obviously-included diamond will now have bragging rights.

It's all about the marketing and the vulnerability of the audience.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I agree with this and do not think the use of the term "real" has much meaning in the age of synthetics. It was arguably more appropriate as a term distinguishing between diamond and simulants such as rhinestones in an earlier time.

Responding to my own post on further reflection, while the "real" terminology that is part of the NDC ad campaign does not resonate with me, it may not be unreasonable from a marketing perspective. It seems that there is a strong association between the term "real" and natural in common parlance. It's used in the context of real vs artificial, not real vs imaginary! We see it every day in all kinds of products and we think nothing of it, such as real mayonaise, made with real fruit juice, 100% real maple syrup.

Since that connection baked in to the consumer market mindset, it makes some sense for natural diamond marketing to leverage it. It may not resonate with everyone, but it might for a lot of consumers. And since the synthetic product cannot be advertised as a "real diamond" without the qualifiers (lab grown, lab-created, man-made) and natural diamond can be, it seems logical and probably smart that they do so.

 

[freddyboston]

That would be very beneficial for you. You blue fluorescent lover.

not always - I changed sides after reading what Garry H has to say on the topic and now with the inert Labs floating around... actually upgraded 2 old diamonds from circa 2011 / 2013 @ BN from Inert/Faint to Larger weight Strong's...

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I think so too..... I think Fluor could actually switch from being Discounted/Avoid to Desired/Premium in high color high clarity....

Then I still just don’t understand. If highly-fluorescent diamonds are possibly going to become desired/premium, why weren’t they ALWAYS desirable? Are you saying folks who are determined to prove that the diamond on their finger is natural and not *gasp!* man-made/synthetic/lab grown/cultured etc. are now going to buy diamonds they wouldn’t have considered in the past solely for that reason? Why wouldn’t they have purchased them before the possibility of them becoming desirable? They could’ve saved a lot of money I would suppose.

 

[freddyboston]

they used to be highly desirable - then they generally fell out of favor where they currently remain.... it's a long story.... you can search the forum archives / google the topic for more......

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

they used to be highly desirable - then they generally fell out of favor where they currently remain.... it's a long story.... you can search the forum archives / google the topic for more......

But they will potentially become favorable against simply because they will be “proof” of being natural? And not because people suddenly decided they like them again?

 

[Karl_K]

But they will potentially become favorable against simply because they will be “proof” of being natural? And not because people suddenly decided they like them again?

A lot of people always have liked them.
I am one.
I think its really neat and adds another fun thing to play with in a diamond.
However:
There was some fraud involved with them that pushed them into being discounted.

Thread 'The old "blue white" diamonds from the 60s'

Sep 3, 2017

My mother's "blue white" diamond from 1964ish popped out of her setting (had done it once before but she had it fixed-- she found it on my sister's car floor). This was two weeks ago and she can't find it. It isn't insured. My father died 6 years ago.

Isn't one of the hallmarks of these diamonds is that they have blue fluro?

My daughter wondered if mom bought a black light, and searched in the dark maybe the stone would glow and it would be easier to find?

What do you think? Might this work? She is pretty sure it is in the house. It is .75. Thanks!

ETA: were these diamonds a...

• whitewave
• Replies: 17
• Forum: RockyTalky (Diamond Discussion)

• 

There were also complaints of over grading:

Over Grading of Blue Fluorescent Diamonds Revisited

Nineteen years ago the Gemological Institute of America, (GIA), published the results of a human experiment in the observation of diamonds with various amounts of blue fluorescence. The article was […]

www.pricescope.com

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

Fluorescence has a political history, popular then discounted. My best diamond was affordable to me because it's an L with fluor. The L embarrassed me for a few years but now I love the diamond with its indoor and outdoor colors. It's attained "Pry it from my cold dead fingers" status.
Any gem I buy gets the UV torch and it's SO much fun.

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

the problem for the Natural's is they have been sitting on their hands for a couple years and allowed the Lab producers to move into and takeover the Bridal space...

LGB lobbied successfully to remove the "of natural origin" from the definition of diamond and they continue to promote a false equivalency and push a deceptive greener / more ethical message to consumers....

so those on "team" Natural (Miners/Africa/ GIA etc..) need to reclaim the space.... and if that means pointing out that the Synthetics are not real / not rare / not natural than so be it....

I don't think "sitting on their hands" made one iota of difference, freddy. The impetus of lab diamond sales has a direct correlation between beauty and price. Being mined from the earth doesn't bend many ears these day with those two facts in the mix. At this point you could probably call lab diamonds glass peanuts but with their fine characteristics and price, sales will only continue to increase.

There will also be a market for earth diamonds, they just won't have the corner on the diamond market any longer.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I don't think "sitting on their hands" made one iota of difference, freddy. The impetus of lab diamond sales has a direct correlation between beauty and price. Being mined from the earth doesn't bend many ears these day with those two facts in the mix. At this point you could probably call lab diamonds glass peanuts but with their fine characteristics and price, sales will only continue to increase.

There will also be a market for earth diamonds, they just won't have the corner on the diamond market any longer.

Yes. BEAUTY and PRICE.

 

[empliau]

Yes. BEAUTY and PRICE.

Are you in the lab diamond industry?

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

Are you in the lab diamond industry?

No, I am not.

 

[empliau]

I ask because, while I completely understand your wanting to value your diamonds as diamonds, you are keen to imply, even openly state, that those who bought expensive earth-mined diamonds regret their purchase:

Could it not possibly be due to the fact that someone who spent $30,000 for a beautiful diamond could be upset that someone else has an equally beautiful diamond for a 10th of the cost? I understand that a lot of folks with natural diamonds say they don’t care that a lab grown version exists of what they have, But I can’t help feel that that might be part of the reason for all the vitriol. Or maybe the feeling is that after having spent $30,000 for a beautiful diamond, and realizing an equally beautiful diamond can be had for a 10th of the cost, folks regret their purchase. Personally, I know I would certainly be upset if, a couple years ago, I had in fact bit the bullet and shelled out $30,000+ for the beautiful 2-carat diamond I always wanted, and then realizing that a couple years later I could’ve gotten something equally impressive for less than a 10th of the cost. Because if not for either of these two reasons, then, Sunrises and Sunsets, I too would have to wonder.

If you don't want partisans of earth-mined diamonds dunking on your diamonds, then perhaps you shouldn't dunk on their stones/expenditure. In general, for someone who doesn't want other people to tell her what to think of her stones, you seem very eager to tell those with "natural" diamonds that, essentially, they are fools who overpaid and their attitude is rooted in shame and envy.

Why are you like a dog with a bone with this? Why do you care?

And "they started it" isn't a good answer. If you don't profit from the sale of lab diamonds, I can't imagine why you won't let this go.

For the record: I have spent exactly $100 dollars on diamonds in my life. I have no dog in this fight.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Good morning, Garry! We're very hot in our neck of the woods today and some cool-aid may be delicious but I haven't had any.

When growing up in my early teens and following years, I remember all the DeBeers ads and how it was only love if you were getting a diamond on your hand when engaged or married. I can still picture those big, full page, color ads in so many magazines.

The scarcity of diamonds was a controlled facter to keep those prices nice and high for the dealers. Sixty five years ago the earth's population was much lower than today since the count has more than doubled in the past 60+ years. I'm not an idiot and don't believe there were endless vaults of diamonds but there were plenty. Blood diamonds, sadly, were a fact. Now I hope and don't believe that is an issue.

My bone of contention is the subtle effort of some posters to make owners of lab diamonds feel less worthy than the owners of earth diamonds, which I own. We, as fellow citizens in this world, need to support choice. I think it's lovely so many earth diamond owners have a connection with the source of their stones. That doesn't bother me even though I don't have that same mindset. But I'm sure you have seen some of the remarks, slights and innuendo by a few toward the lab diamond population. I'd like to see us rise above that pettiness and that we all feel good in our efforts and intentions to live our best lives.

Discussion is good and now more than ever, we need kindness in this world.

Agree that being mean to people who chose different to you is wrong.
Disagree about diamond rarity as an investor in several diamond mining and prospecting companies and close friends who negotiated with De Beers for marketing the main share of Argyle Diamonds.

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

Beauty AND price (switching your caps). Re: the aforementioned L, if you found me a larger whiter better performing Asscher at 5% of the price I paid, I would not replace mine. (Might take you 20 min. - it's an Asscher and not a branded one.) This is the mind-set of many of the posters here. We are illogical, we love our unique diamonds because the earth made them, and it's no use trying to convince us to move to labs or replace them with labs. And yet some of us own both!
Why argue with crazy people?

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I ask because, while I completely understand your wanting to value your diamonds as diamonds, you are keen to imply, even openly state, that those who bought expensive earth-mined diamonds regret their purchase:



If you don't want partisans of earth-mined diamonds dunking on your diamonds, then perhaps you shouldn't dunk on their stones/expenditure. In general, for someone who doesn't want other people to tell her what to think of her stones, you seem very eager to tell those with "natural" diamonds that, essentially, they are fools who overpaid and their attitude is rooted in shame and envy.

Why are you like a dog with a bone with this? Why do you care?

And "they started it" isn't a good answer. If you don't profit from the sale of lab diamonds, I can't imagine why you won't let this go.

For the record: I have spent exactly $100 dollars on diamonds in my life. I have no dog in this fight.

I don’t mind who dunks on what. Nor did I say anybody overpaid for anything. How would I know what anybody paid for their diamonds? I questioned if that might be a reason for all the vitriol against LGDs. Based on your response, I guess that’s not the case.

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

Agree that being mean to people who chose different to you is wrong.
Disagree about diamond rarity as an investor in several diamond mining and prospecting companies and close friends who negotiated with De Beers for marketing the main share of Argyle Diamonds.

Agree diamonds may be rarer now but they weren't 65 years ago when DeBeers were splashing their spready ads. I wish you good luck in your ventures and as I stated earlier, I believe there will be a market for earth diamonds but that share of the market has definitely shrunk.

I wonder whether the earth diamond resale market will flourish since rarity seems to be here and many would love to recover more of their initial investment in earth diamonds than they can now. A crystal ball can't tell us and that turn of events would probably occur when I'm long gone.