letter of origin

[heididdl]

Touche

 

[bunnycat]

I’ve been long surprised at how little effort goes into this. SOMEONE mined every single diamond and THEY know when and where it came from. Chances are good that their boss does too. The cutter knows who cut it, etc. Whether or not this information makes it’s way through the supply chain to you is a matter of whether it’s valuable. This is a world where they claim they can track the beef in your McHamburger to the specific Argentine cow or at least group of cows that was killed for it after all. The problem is that most people don’t care. Keeping track of this sort of thing takes effort, it takes money and it takes an incentive.

I don't know about most people, but I do care. However, in the discussion that I linked to Wink kind of expressed it. There's oil, other "blood" related items and the list of things that are socially "dirty" is inundating and goes on and on. It's a little like deciding how "vegetarian" you want to be. Do you want to be vegan? No animal products at all, no honey, no milk, no eggs? Pescatarian? Macro-biotic? Raw foods? Where do you personally draw the line? At some point trust has to be involved if you want to buy a stone, at least until someone convinces people to start keeping track of it as you suggest is possible.

FWIW, OP, if you are a store as Christina seems to think with a customer with firm beliefs that some place like BE can supply them what they want (sociologically conflict free if not environmentally so), I doubt you are going to be able to convince them otherwise. People will draw their own lines regardless of what proof you may offer otherwise. My suggestion would be to not try to sell them a stone but suggest a lab grown stone as the best ecological and socially responsible fit (if they want a diamond) and then set their stone for them graciously.

 

[denverappraiser]

Everybody has to pick their own battles. I agree that there are FAR more egregious products out there and that none of this exists in isolation. I’ve never heard of a scandal over poorly treated lab workers with a grower but it’s not conceptually impossible for example. Simulants aren’t produced by magic and they come with their own environmental and social concerns. It’s clear that the diamond business benefits a fair number of people, including a fair number of miners, cutters, traders, jewelers etc. Heck, most of my own living is derived from it. The business model of BE is to promote using this issue. I don’t see a problem with that. Others do it differently. OK. Again, I’m a little surprised they don’t have more competition at it. Most people don’t seem to care, but SOME do.

 

[marchi]

I'd like to close with this, and I appreciate that this actually turned into an intelligent conversation. Thing is, this is a company that builds it's business model on the claims we've discussed. In addition they post this on they're guarantee page:

"Flaws in the Kimberly Process Certifications
Many retailers make vague claims that their diamonds are conflict free. These retailers generally rely upon the Kimberley Process, a woefully inadequate system, which only certifies that a diamond is "conflict free,"' or that has not financed rebel groups in war-torn countries. The Kimberley Process completely ignores concerns such as child labor, torture, rape, extreme poverty, environmental harm, and violence perpetrated by governments.

For a guarantee of ethical sourcing to be credible, retailers should be able to certify, in writing that their diamonds have been mined and finished without violence, worker exploitation, and environmental devastation. Retailers should also be able to track the path taken by their diamonds from mine to final delivery. Read our ethical diamond buying guide for more information on what to look for in a guarantee regarding ethical sourcing."

My initial question hinged on whether this company was "shining a light on the problem" or rather "exploiting" it at the expense of the industry. There's more to ethics than sometimes meet the eye.

Peace

 

[Christina...]

I'd like to close with this, and I appreciate that this actually turned into an intelligent conversation. Thing is, this is a company that builds it's business model on the claims we've discussed. In addition they post this on they're guarantee page:

"Flaws in the Kimberly Process Certifications
Many retailers make vague claims that their diamonds are conflict free. These retailers generally rely upon the Kimberley Process, a woefully inadequate system, which only certifies that a diamond is "conflict free,"' or that has not financed rebel groups in war-torn countries. The Kimberley Process completely ignores concerns such as child labor, torture, rape, extreme poverty, environmental harm, and violence perpetrated by governments.

For a guarantee of ethical sourcing to be credible, retailers should be able to certify, in writing that their diamonds have been mined and finished without violence, worker exploitation, and environmental devastation. Retailers should also be able to track the path taken by their diamonds from mine to final delivery. Read our ethical diamond buying guide for more information on what to look for in a guarantee regarding ethical sourcing."
My initial question hinged on whether this company was "shining a light on the problem" or rather "exploiting" it at the expense of the industry. There's more to ethics than sometimes meet the eye.

Peace

I'm obviously not a member of the trade, but if the bolded part above is indeed the case, then I would assume that BE has found a way to do just that, and I would want them to be able to back up that claim. If they can not, then I would agree with you that they are exploiting the issue. I have never worked with BE nor have I asked them what their process is. I'm not ready to call them liars because their claims appear challenging. If they have in fact found a way to follow the stone from the mines to my finger, then they should be congratulated on their pursuit to 'shine a light on the problem', but I agree with you that if they can not, then well, I guess their claims border on fraudulent. Only they can answer how they back up their claims, so, I still contend that it's a question for them.

EDIT: If you do decide to investigate further, as a consumer I would be interested in what you find out.

 

[denverappraiser]

As I mentioned above, the information obviously exists. Any sensible mining company or even an individual artisanal miner knows what they found when, where, what techniques, tools and workers were involved etc. Anything less would just be bad business. Similarly, the cutting house knows where they got the rough, who cut it, when, where, how the results came out compared to what was expected, who they sold it to, how much they got and so on. Anything less is a road to bankruptcy. Every trader in the chain knows where they bought it, what they paid, who they sold it to, and how much they got (or what they’re asking). Every bit of the data exists somewhere but there is a strong incentive NOT to pass it along. The above list is chock full of proprietary information that sensible business people aren’t going to divulge without a significant reason to do it. That reason is money, and that money comes from consumers who care. The Canadians took a serious run at this and at providing credible ‘proof’ of provenance. Basically, its been a commercial bust. The vast majority of shoppers buy the cheapest ones and provenance be damned. Is that the end of the story? Hopefully not. BE is taking a run at it and although their ‘proof’ does look to be a bit weak, it seems to be better than most of their competitors. At least they try. Better paperwork means higher costs in the supply chain. How much more is an interesting question but the well documented Made-in-Canada stuff seemed to go for about 10% extra. That’s a tough sell and the Canadian miners find it works better for them to sell generically, even at lower prices, because it saves the headaches, costs and delays associated with the process. That’s a business decision and it’s driven by what consumers find valuable, not by evil intentions on the part of the mining companies.

 

[Karl_K]

With the newer auction type sales this is easier to do than it was before.
Some auction sales are selling all the goods from one mine only, or the company may only own mines with good reputations.
I am pretty sure they would be happy to sell the same under long term contracts also.
From there you just have to make sure your getting stones that were actually cut from your rough.
Since it would put the contract cutter instantly out of business if they didn't they track it pretty good.
DeBeers is likely the only supplier you can in no way get production information as they are all mixed and have stated they will not do so.
Everyone else if you have the cash I'm betting a deal could be made.