GIA Dunks on Lab Diamonds

[glitterata]

No, I mean, is that what an LGD is? Because if the word diamond on its own is a natural diamond, then does that mean an LGD is a lab grown natural diamond? Clearly, I’m not understanding something here.

You are clearly being disingenuous, and it's very boring. You know perfectly well that people make a distinction between natural and synthetic diamonds. For some reason that upsets you, but your pretending not to understand that there's a distinction will not change anyone's opinions about or understanding of natural and man-made diamonds.

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

I think an old adage is very appropriate for all diamonds wearers now..

"It's really none of my business what you think about me." (or my diamonds or any other choices I make.)

In other words, wear what you personally love and delight in diamonds. No one should be swayed one way or the other by the opinions of other people. You are in charge of your happiness and get to pick your path. Tune out the detractors, go for the gusto.

 

[DejaWiz]

Then it sounds like a whole different name would be required for LGDs. If a diamond is a natural gemstone, then a lab-grown diamond is a lab-grown natural gemstone?

No, the "LG" in LGD is there for the differentiation of the origin.

If there is no "LG", then the word "diamond" all by itself is (legally used) in reference to a naturally formed diamond/natural gemstone of natural/earth origin.
In other words, "diamond" by itself is synonymous to "natural diamond" = Interchangeable LEGAL terms.

Put "Lab Grown" in the descriptor and it must (legally) refer to a diamond of a synthesized/human created origin.

We, as consumers, are free to refer to an "LGD" as a "diamond" as long as we aren't selling/trading an LGD since it can't just be called a "diamond" without the (legally required) descriptor of origin of it's not of natural/earth origin.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I’m not sure I would call it culturally competent to be a good consumer who is easily persuaded by marketing… in university one of our major goals is to teach people critical thinking that allows them to more readily recognize and understand persuasive efforts, whether marketing or politics. I tend to think it is important to understand not only what is expected of you in a given social context but also why it is expected and who benefits from your compliance.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I’m not sure I would call it culturally competent to be a good consumer who is easily persuaded by marketing… in university one of our major goals is to teach people critical thinking that allows them to more readily recognize and understand persuasive efforts, whether marketing or politics. I tend to think it is important to understand not only what is expected of you in a given social context but also why it is expected and who benefits from your compliance.

One of the debating tricks is to ask people which side they stand on an issue and then make them defend the case for what they consider undefendable.
It makes the mind open up.
Edward De Bono did this in a small auditorium once that I attended. He had people who hated football vs people who loved it.
The intense haters new more about the game than the lovers.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

No, the "LG" in LGD is there for the differentiation of the origin.

If there is no "LG", then the word "diamond" all by itself is (legally used) in reference to a naturally formed diamond/natural gemstone of natural/earth origin.
In other words, "diamond" by itself is synonymous to "natural diamond" = Interchangeable LEGAL terms.

Put "Lab Grown" in the descriptor and it must (legally) refer to a diamond of a synthesized/human created origin.

We, as consumers, are free to refer to an "LGD" as a "diamond" as long as we aren't selling/trading an LGD since it can't just be called a "diamond" without the (legally required) descriptor of origin of it's not of natural/earth origin.

Thank you, DejaWiz!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Wholeheartedly agree, Bryan!
However, did I come off as implying it was some weird DeBeers conspiracy theory about market manipulation?

No Sir! But other posters have made such references in this thread to DeBeers and I thought this was a good illustration that what many people like to attribute to nefarious market manipulation is just the market being driven by consumer behavior.

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

No Sir! But other posters have made such references in this thread to DeBeers and I thought this was a good illustration that what many people like to attribute to nefarious market manipulation is just the market being driven by consumer behavior.

And then there are the posters who pointed out how gullible we were back in the day. We were being drawn in by the nefarious market manipulation by DeBeers and I will be the first to admit I am one of those posters.

I remember thinking too bad for Princess Diana at her engagement because she didn't receive a beautiful diamond. The poor dear had to wear that stunning sapphire gem instead, lol.

I'm much wiser now and I hope others have their eyes wide open when making their personal decisions and ignore all the influencers and slick marketing by either side. Buy an earth grown or lab grown gem and move on with your life. There are far more important things than your jewelry on which to focus.

 

[MissGotRocks]

And then there are the posters who pointed out how gullible we were back in the day. We were being drawn in by the nefarious market manipulation by DeBeers and I will be the first to admit I am one of those posters.

I remember thinking too bad for Princess Diana at her engagement because she didn't receive a beautiful diamond. The poor dear had to wear that stunning sapphire gem instead, lol.

I'm much wiser now and I hope others have their eyes wide open when making their personal decisions and ignore all the influencers and slick marketing by either side. Buy an earth grown or lab grown gem and move on with your life. There are far more important things than your jewelry on which to focus.

Most of us have long been there - stragglers bringing up the rear!

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

While no one has ever accused me of not being gullible, when I got married in 1986 I said I didn't want a diamond, it's currency - as in, this is how much I think of you.
I got a tourmaline. Decades later (and marriage ended in death) I buy my own diamonds, thanks to online resources. and instead of feeling like an indulgence, it's been so very affirming. As in, "this is what I think of you."
(Mostly natural, only lab earrings.)

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

This has been a very interesting wiggling wobbling discussion. Thanks everyone!
BTW - even the overall diamond industry does not approve of disparaging marketing from NDC, largely funded by De Beers, and the recent AWDC gumball rubbish:

Natural-Diamond Marketing: We Asked, and Boy, Did You Weigh In

Last week, a natural-diamond marketing campaign in New York City that portrayed lab-grown in a negative light got many in the trade riled up.

rapaport.com

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

This has been a very interesting wiggling wobbling discussion. Thanks everyone!
BTW - even the overall diamond industry does not approve of disparaging marketing from NDC, largely funded by De Beers, and the recent AWDC gumball rubbish:

Natural-Diamond Marketing: We Asked, and Boy, Did You Weigh In

Last week, a natural-diamond marketing campaign in New York City that portrayed lab-grown in a negative light got many in the trade riled up.

rapaport.com

And that is an interesting article. Thank you for sharing that with us.

 

[freddyboston]

And now a Counterargument....

For years, synthetic diamonds have ridden on the coattails of natural diamonds - leveraging our industry's legacy of romance, authenticity, rarity, and emotional significance - without contributing anything to the value narrative that underpins it. They have not built their own category, nor invested in original storytelling. Instead, they've marketed themselves as interchangeable substitutes while conveniently borrowing the prestige and trust that natural diamonds took generations to earn.
As for tone - yes, campaigns should be smart and resonate with the right audience. But let's not mistake discomfort for poor strategy. The NDC and others are finally beginning to push back against a dangerous narrative. It's long overdue.

Untold Damage: Blurring the Lines Between Natural a<b></b>nd Synthetic - IDEX's Memo

 

[Sunrises Sunsets]

And now a Counterargument....

For years, synthetic diamonds have ridden on the coattails of natural diamonds - leveraging our industry's legacy of romance, authenticity, rarity, and emotional significance - without contributing anything to the value narrative that underpins it. They have not built their own category, nor invested in original storytelling. Instead, they've marketed themselves as interchangeable substitutes while conveniently borrowing the prestige and trust that natural diamonds took generations to earn.
As for tone - yes, campaigns should be smart and resonate with the right audience. But let's not mistake discomfort for poor strategy. The NDC and others are finally beginning to push back against a dangerous narrative. It's long overdue.

Untold Damage: Blurring the Lines Between Natural a<b></b>nd Synthetic - IDEX's Memo

I don't know how long lab diamonds could have ridden on earth diamonds coattails since people have wised up to the "only a diamond" means love quite a while ago. I will allow that a diamond ring on the left hand ring finger usually signals one is married but that's about it. The fairytale is just that, a fairytale.

I've never judged the amount of love in a relationship by the size of the diamond or if the wedding band is simply gold. The younger generation often choose a gem other than diamonds of either creation. The new price points in lab diamonds allow many to now have rings which sparkle and make them happy which is the same feeling I get when wearing my earth diamonds.

No big deal if DeBeers want to provide a spendy ad campaign but I think demeaning other people's choice may bite them in the butt. They may gain more ground with a gracious, classy ad for earth diamonds.

Now when I think about it, I would be fine and maybe even excited if Lab diamonds are not based on any legacy, that they would just be worn for their absolute beauty without having to be engaged or married.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I don't know how long lab diamonds could have ridden on earth diamonds coattails since people have wised up to the "only a diamond" means love quite a while ago. I will allow that a diamond ring on the left hand ring finger usually signals one is married but that's about it. The fairytale is just that, a fairytale.

I've never judged the amount of love in a relationship by the size of the diamond or if the wedding band is simply gold. The younger generation often choose a gem other than diamonds of either creation. The new price points in lab diamonds allow many to now have rings which sparkle and make them happy which is the same feeling I get when wearing my earth diamonds.

No big deal if DeBeers want to provide a spendy ad campaign but I think demeaning other people's choice may bite them in the butt. They may gain more ground with a gracious, classy ad for earth diamonds.

Now when I think about it, I would be fine and maybe even excited if Lab diamonds are not based on any legacy, that they would just be worn for their absolute beauty without having to be engaged or married.

"No big deal if DeBeers want to provide a spendy ad campaign but I think demeaning other people's choice may bite them in the butt."
100% agree
Now when I think about it, I would be fine and maybe even excited if Lab diamonds are not based on any legacy,
Fact is they are based on that legacy starting from 1947 that will last forever.
that they would just be worn for their absolute beauty without having to be engaged or married.
Moissanite out sparkles diamond lab and natural, but went nowhere!

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

From Harry Winston’s website: “The ultimate expression of true love, Harry Winston Engagement Rings feature rare diamonds, selected from only the top color (D,E, and F) and clarity grades (Flawless-VS2), expertly set in platinum, to create a superlative jewel that shines with maximum brilliance”. So do you think HW will lower their color/clarity criteria in order to distinguish their obviously posh brand of rings from lookalike rings containing D-E-F, flawless-VS2 LGDs, so that folks will know it’s an authentic Harry Winston diamond ring? And what happens to the folks who already shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars for the D-E-F flawless HW diamond rings? Not asking rhetorically.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

From Harry Winston’s website: “The ultimate expression of true love, Harry Winston Engagement Rings feature rare diamonds, selected from only the top color (D,E, and F) and clarity grades (Flawless-VS2), expertly set in platinum, to create a superlative jewel that shines with maximum brilliance”. So do you think HW will lower their color/clarity criteria in order to distinguish their obviously posh brand of rings from lookalike rings containing D-E-F, flawless-VS2 LGDs, so that folks will know it’s an authentic Harry Winston diamond ring? And what happens to the folks who already shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars for the D-E-F flawless HW diamond rings? Not asking rhetorically.

HW customers may not give a tinkers cuss what others think about them as they alight from their Bentley or Cullinan Rolls Royce SUV.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

HW customers may not give a tinkers cuss what others think about them as they alight from their Bentley or Cullinan I was asking because I know FreddyBoston has mentioned lower cut and clarity as being a sign of a “real” diamond among all the sparkly, high-color, flawless LGDs. And I’m wondering if any of these elite “ branded” jewelers are going to change their product.

HW customers may not give a tinkers cuss what others think about them as they alight from their Bentley or Cullinan Rolls Royce SUV.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I was asking because I know FreddyBoston has mentioned lower cut and clarity as being a sign of a “real” diamond among all the sparkly, high-color, flawless LGDs. And I’m wondering if any of these elite “ branded” jewelers are going to change their product.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I was asking because I know FreddyBoston has mentioned lower cut and clarity as being a sign of a “real” diamond among all the sparkly, high-color, flawless LGDs. And I’m wondering if any of these elite “ branded” jewelers are going to change their product.

I think that's a practice for people like us Chelsea.
The billionaire club have more money than they can ever spend, and buying assets is a smart way to keep the tax man at bay.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

Or is Harry Winston still so out of reach for so much of the population that it really doesn’t matter what happens with natural diamonds versus LGDs when its comes to their product? While it’s not likely that most regular folks are sporting a $30,000 diamond ring on their left finger, it’s not entirely out of the realm of the possible. But it’s definitely not likely that too many folks are sporting a $1 million diamond ring on their left finger. So anyone with a Harry Winston diamond ring already clearly looks the part and there wouldn’t be any question that they have a natural diamond on their finger?

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I think that's a practice for people like us Chelsea.
The billionaire club have more money than they can ever spend, and buying assets is a smart way to keep the tax man at bay.

That was a very good explanation, Garry.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

By the way, to clarify as far as Harry Winston, what I meant is that the folks who are wearing those diamond rings are wearing diamond rings with D, flawless characteristics. And what I meant is that people will not think they’re LGDs, even if the regular common-folk natural diamond market starts pushing lower color, lower clarity in order to distinguish their diamonds from D, flawless LGDs.

 

[snaphappy]

Recently bought my wife her dream ring. We were poor most of our lives. So it was a big deal to us. We talk about her ring 4-5 times a day. Sometimes 4-5 times an hour. We have an unhealthy obsession. Few things have ever made us this happy. Some new age spiritual people think there's a metaphysical reason why diamonds impact people emotionally. But regardless of why - this diamond makes us giddy. Especially when it shoots rainbows all over the inside of our car. We laugh out loud.

Anyway...

I asked my wife if we could get an identical lgd ring for 10x less, would she do it?

She said, "I don't believe it will be identical, mine is one of a kind and irreplaceable." (In her defense, she has an art deco ring with a transitional cut diamond and a giant weird inclusion.)

So I replied, "But this is pretend. Let's pretend there's two rings that are identical. And we could save tens of thousands of dollars. Go traveling. Remodel the house. Etc. Would you get the LGD diamond in this pretend scenario?"

She thought a long time, then she said, "No, because I'd know it was lab grown. No one else would. But I would. And it's supposed to be special. I don't want everyone else to think it's special, but I know it's not."

 

[freddyboston]

I'd know it was lab grown. No one else would. But I would. And it's supposed to be special. I don't want everyone else to think it's special, but I know it's not."

I wonder if a lot of current Synthetic E-ring wearers eventually come around to this type of thinking... once the initial novelty wears off...

 

[glitterata]

By the way, to clarify as far as Harry Winston, what I meant is that the folks who are wearing those diamond rings are wearing diamond rings with D, flawless characteristics. And what I meant is that people will not think they’re LGDs, even if the regular common-folk natural diamond market starts pushing lower color, lower clarity in order to distinguish their diamonds from D, flawless LGDs.

I have a down-to-earth friend who wears a million-dollar ring with work boots and a hard hat. I doubt most people have the faintest idea what it really is.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I wonder if a lot of current Synthetic E-ring wearers eventually come around to this type of thinking... once the initial novelty wears off...

As a current wearer for the past seven months of a 2-carat D VS gorgeously-cut LGD that I now wear in place of my 1.5 carat lovely, but not quite as spectacular mined diamond, no, the “novelty” (I don’t even know what you mean by that) has most certainly not worn off. In fact, I would go so far as to opine that the novelty of purchasing a multi thousand dollar diamond might wear off as well.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

Recently bought my wife her dream ring. We were poor most of our lives. So it was a big deal to us. We talk about her ring 4-5 times a day. Sometimes 4-5 times an hour. We have an unhealthy obsession. Few things have ever made us this happy. Some new age spiritual people think there's a metaphysical reason why diamonds impact people emotionally. But regardless of why - this diamond makes us giddy. Especially when it shoots rainbows all over the inside of our car. We laugh out loud.

Anyway...

I asked my wife if we could get an identical lgd ring for 10x less, would she do it?

She said, "I don't believe it will be identical, mine is one of a kind and irreplaceable." (In her defense, she has an art deco ring with a transitional cut diamond and a giant weird inclusion.)

So I replied, "But this is pretend. Let's pretend there's two rings that are identical. And we could save tens of thousands of dollars. Go traveling. Remodel the house. Etc. Would you get the LGD diamond in this pretend scenario?"

She thought a long time, then she said, "No, because I'd know it was lab grown. No one else would. But I would. And it's supposed to be special. I don't want everyone else to think it's special, but I know it's not."

OK, so your wife would rather spend tens of thousands of dollars on a natural diamond rather than travel and remodel your house and have an LGD instead, because it seems to her a natural diamond is special and an LGD is not. If an LGD is not special to her, then you both clearly made the right decision.

 

[Chelsea Palmer]

I have a down-to-earth friend who wears a million-dollar ring with work boots and a hard hat. I doubt most people have the faintest idea what it really is.

Yes, I realize there are some people who will be just like your friend. I’m talking about in general. I’m talking about this idea that if folks who snub LGDs want to show the world that their diamonds are “real” they will have to start wearing lower color, lower clarity diamonds. And yet the Harry Winston crowd will continue sporting their D flawless mined diamonds. There is a ridiculousness to this is what I’m trying to say.

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

Chelsea, is there any language that would cause you to abandon this crusade?