NYTimes article on Engagement Rings and budget

[teobdl]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/your-money/with-engagement-rings-love-meets-budget.html

NY Times article titled, "With Engagement Rings, Love Meets Budget." It touches on that beaten to death thread recently about budgeting for an e-ring, including investment value (both monetary and as a relationship symbol), and struggling to find the right budget.

Well worth the < 5 minute read.

 

[Laila619]

Fun read, thanks!

The average budget for an e-ring outside of PS wouldn't even cover most PSers settings, lol. Crazy.

 

[Karl_K]

Fun read, thanks!

The average budget for an e-ring outside of PS wouldn't even cover most PSers settings, lol. Crazy.

In my area the average is even lower, more like 2k and many under 1k.
5k is a number that keeps coming up as a ring budget nationwide and has for years now.

 

[Polished]

“We sell the idea behind diamonds.”

Interesting! For me as well as enjoying the beauty and sparkle of the diamond itself, it's the tradition. I love that.

 

[spicyitalian]

just another...

 

[MarionC]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

 

[Circe]

I find this central premise that the 12k e-ring would be worth 41k in 30 years problematic. The 12k I've spent on, oh, getting Gouda instead of Kraft would, too, but few people seem quite as sniffy about it (well, like that, anyway). It's the part about getting the luxury goods on credit that makes me squirm, but I don't think that's endemic to diamonds and the fault of cultural brainwashing: I have the sneaking suspicion that choice is generally made in line with feeling like one has to fulfill a whole slew of other obligations as well, capital or no capital.

The comments section seems to be the usual crowd of either self-righteous people who would like to point out that it's all still a scam, or the aggrieved dudes who feel put out that they "have" to get a ring. To the first group, all I can say is, what, unlike electronics with planned obsolescence? To the second group, dudes, you don't have to do anything! Talk to your lady-friend or gentleman friend if you feel the proposer gets a bad deal as compared to the proposed-to! But whining about it makes you like worse than not getting one at all, IMO.

 

[GeorgeStevens]

The Bain report referenced in the article is worth a read. Bain are known as long-standing consultants to DeBeers going back to when DeBeers switched business models from constraining supply to stimulating demand, thereby increasing the price of diamonds despite their cartel being broken.

http://www.bain.com/Images/BAIN_REPORT_The_global_diamond_report_2013.pdf

 

[ChristineRose]

I wouldn't compare electronics to diamonds. For example, I can get a souped up Alienware for $3,000, or I can get a low-end Dell for $450 and the Dell provides about 70% of the functionality and 0% of the geek cred. On the other hand I can buy a diamond for $3,000 or I can get a CZ for about $4.50 and the CZ provides about 70% of the functionality and nobody knows if I'm a good liar...but I'm toast if I'm caught. While there is definitely a subculture that knows what Alienware is and is suitably impressed, the primary use of the diamond is to impress people. It doesn't surprise me at all that people get more divisive over this than over an iPhone.

 

[teobdl]

I wouldn't compare electronics to diamonds. For example, I can get a souped up Alienware for $3,000, or I can get a low-end Dell for $450 and the Dell provides about 70% of the functionality and 0% of the geek cred. On the other hand I can buy a diamond for $3,000 or I can get a CZ for about $4.50 and the CZ provides about 70% of the functionality and nobody knows if I'm a good liar...but I'm toast if I'm caught. While there is definitely a subculture that knows what Alienware is and is suitably impressed, the primary use of the diamond is to impress people. It doesn't surprise me at all that people get more divisive over this than over an iPhone.

Rephrase this before you get hammered. This is a board full of people whose hobby is diamonds.

I'd say that the primary use of the diamond in an engagement ring is as a symbol of commitment. It's used as that symbol because its fire and sparkle reflects the flame of love between people, its pressured creation and resulting enduring hardness reflects the durability of love, etc etc...

That a diamond's size is used to impress is a cultural byproduct of all that. It's also marketing taken to the extreme, which says that the size of one's commitment is inversely proportional to the size of the hole left in one's wallet. Diamonds as e-rings should be bought for their rarity and beauty and symbolic gesture of love.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My goodness, those comments with the article are pretty self-righteous! Guess what??!!! There are plenty of us on PS who have been married 20 and 30+ years and have good marriages even though we have and like diamond rings!!! Good for those who hate them...it's more for US!

I will say that people's motives about diamonds differ. When I was 21 and getting engaged, I did want to fit in with my peer group who mostly were getting .75-1.0 ct stones (mine was 1 ct). But when it came time for a new ring for an anniversary many years later, I was absolutely almost paralyzed worrying about other people thinking it was too extravagant! So I will have to say that my ring is absolutely NOT to impress anyone and is solely for my own pleasure!

 

[ame]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

Most jewelers have my photo plastered to their wall like the FBI Most Wanted list. They don't want me anywhere near their customers.

 

[denverappraiser]

Humbug. I hate articles that churn statistics and then the get the numbers wrong. The Rap index is mostly voodoo, but at least it’s decently long term voodoo so let’s go ahead and use it. It’s examining ‘wholesale’ consignment asking prices of a basket of diamonds over time. The problem here that most people can neither buy nor sell at prices anywhere near what’s represented in this theoretical basket. Buy at, say, 25% over and sell at 25% under, numbers that are actually fairly conservative, most people do worse than this on both ends, and you need 15 years just to even break even with that 4% ROI they’re talking about! Since engagement rings are rings, not just diamonds, there’s also the mounting, labor and paperwork which have basically zero residual value so there’s another 5 years or so to get back up to even.

I’m a big fan of diamonds. They are extraordinarily cool little things and engagement rings are a terrific tradition but their math on the investment component is all wet.

As usual.

 

[ChristineRose]

I wouldn't compare electronics to diamonds. For example, I can get a souped up Alienware for $3,000, or I can get a low-end Dell for $450 and the Dell provides about 70% of the functionality and 0% of the geek cred. On the other hand I can buy a diamond for $3,000 or I can get a CZ for about $4.50 and the CZ provides about 70% of the functionality and nobody knows if I'm a good liar...but I'm toast if I'm caught. While there is definitely a subculture that knows what Alienware is and is suitably impressed, the primary use of the diamond is to impress people. It doesn't surprise me at all that people get more divisive over this than over an iPhone.

Rephrase this before you get hammered. This is a board full of people whose hobby is diamonds.

I'd say that the primary use of the diamond in an engagement ring is as a symbol of commitment. It's used as that symbol because its fire and sparkle reflects the flame of love between people, its pressured creation and resulting enduring hardness reflects the durability of love, etc etc...

That a diamond's size is used to impress is a cultural byproduct of all that. It's also marketing taken to the extreme, which says that the size of one's commitment is inversely proportional to the size of the hole left in one's wallet. Diamonds as e-rings should be bought for their rarity and beauty and symbolic gesture of love.

You don't think that symbolizing a commitment is impressive?

 

[msop04]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

Most jewelers have my photo plastered to their wall like the FBI Most Wanted list. They don't want me anywhere near their customers.

Ame, you crack me up!!!

 

[msop04]

My goodness, those comments with the article are pretty self-righteous! Guess what??!!! There are plenty of us on PS who have been married 20 and 30+ years and have good marriages even though we have and like diamond rings!!! Good for those who hate them...it's more for US!

Seriously, WTH is up with all these self-righteous people these days??!! <puke>

 

[ame]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

Most jewelers have my photo plastered to their wall like the FBI Most Wanted list. They don't want me anywhere near their customers.

Ame, you crack me up!!!

It's a gift.

 

[Todd Gray]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

Most jewelers have my photo plastered to their wall like the FBI Most Wanted list. They don't want me anywhere near their customers.

Another keyboard ruined... when will I learn to stop taking swigs of coffee while reading PS?

Amy you crack me up, but I do recall seeing your picture posted right next to mine the last time I walked into Tiffany & Co

 

[teobdl]

You don't think that symbolizing a commitment is impressive?

Perhaps. For me, I think an e-ring makes an impression--first and foremost that she is definitely not single. As far as being impressive, I guess I'm not impressed by many rings I see in person, so I've rarely thought that an e-ring itself is supposed to be impressive, as in, more impressive than another's.

In any case, I think the difference might just be semantics.

 

[Laila619]

I have to say I think that couple in the article made a bad financial decision. They are 24 and 28, just starting out, he has $80,000 in student loans, and they spent $6300 on a ring. I know it's sacrilege to say this sort of stuff around here, but I don't think it was the smartest use of funds. But hey, their money, their life.

I got engaged to my ex fiancee when we were both 22, and we were both just starting out with no money. I received a 0.33 ct from him and he paid cash.

 

[ame]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

Most jewelers have my photo plastered to their wall like the FBI Most Wanted list. They don't want me anywhere near their customers.

Another keyboard ruined... when will I learn to stop taking swigs of coffee while reading PS?

Amy you crack me up, but I do recall seeing your picture posted right next to mine the last time I walked into Tiffany & Co

Oh, they probably have us labeled "shoot to kill". I'm certain that's what's on my photo, anyway!

 

[teobdl]

I have to say I think that couple in the article made a bad financial decision. They are 24 and 28, just starting out, he has $80,000 in student loans, and they spent $6300 on a ring. I know it's sacrilege to say this sort of stuff around here, but I don't think it was the smartest use of funds. But hey, their money, their life.

Agreed. Unfortunately, it's the reality we live in, and I think they chose the couple because they're representative of the majority of young couples out there. In fact, a good friend in grad school has over 50K in undergrad loans and just spent 2 summers of savings on an e-ring. As the article points out, there's a a lot of pressure to give the perfect ring that you only give once, and which we (men) think she'll wear for the rest of her life.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I don't think Tiffany has your picture, Ame, after all, you finally found a great wedding band there! They LIKE you!!!!

My wedding band came from there, too, I should add. But most of my shopping there is to decide what I want to replicate or buy second hand. It still is my favorite relatively local jewelry store.

 

[JulieN]

I have to say I think that couple in the article made a bad financial decision. They are 24 and 28, just starting out, he has $80,000 in student loans, and they spent $6300 on a ring.

This is the NYT we are talking about. Not the average couple at all. Just wait until their wedding is featured in the Style section.

 

[ame]

I don't think Tiffany has your picture, Ame, after all, you finally found a great wedding band there! They LIKE you!!!!

My wedding band came from there, too, I should add. But most of my shopping there is to decide what I want to replicate or buy second hand. It still is my favorite relatively local jewelry store.

Oh they definitely DO NOT like me. I might have found my band there, but I rejected double-digit quantities of this style band before I selected this actual band. I 30x'd and scoped them all before I was willing to take the one I have. They were like "get this freak out of here."

 

[Circe]

I wouldn't compare electronics to diamonds. For example, I can get a souped up Alienware for $3,000, or I can get a low-end Dell for $450 and the Dell provides about 70% of the functionality and 0% of the geek cred. On the other hand I can buy a diamond for $3,000 or I can get a CZ for about $4.50 and the CZ provides about 70% of the functionality and nobody knows if I'm a good liar...but I'm toast if I'm caught. While there is definitely a subculture that knows what Alienware is and is suitably impressed, the primary use of the diamond is to impress people. It doesn't surprise me at all that people get more divisive over this than over an iPhone.

Rephrase this before you get hammered. This is a board full of people whose hobby is diamonds.

I'd say that the primary use of the diamond in an engagement ring is as a symbol of commitment. It's used as that symbol because its fire and sparkle reflects the flame of love between people, its pressured creation and resulting enduring hardness reflects the durability of love, etc etc...

That a diamond's size is used to impress is a cultural byproduct of all that. It's also marketing taken to the extreme, which says that the size of one's commitment is inversely proportional to the size of the hole left in one's wallet. Diamonds as e-rings should be bought for their rarity and beauty and symbolic gesture of love.

You don't think that symbolizing a commitment is impressive?

I dunno ... while I don't think it's ALL of it, I think CR makes a good point, and I don't find it offensive at all (and I'm a complete diamond obsessive). If anything, I think it's an interesting starting point for discussion ....

I suppose it depends on the degree of internalized acculturalization, as well as the degree of social dependency one has. I think a lot of people - what are the stats on the breakdown between the five "love languages?" I keed - do genuinely believe that the nicer the symbol, the more serious the emotional investment. And I think that's why women who are in no way and no wise braggy will get really upset about being proposed to with an engagement ring that isn't what they were expecting, either because it's too small, or because it's the wrong style, or whatever ... to them it implies that their future life partner doesn't know them/value them. It's not that they want to impress other people: it's that they want their potential spouse to want to impress them.

Do friends and family contribute to that? Hells yeah! But I don't think it's the sort of thing we can condemn out of hand, when half the people out there seem to praise women's rings by saying things along the lines of "he must love you a lot!"

And to go back to the tech analogy ... I've yet to meet the person who, a) commits to their Alienware for life, or, b) carries it with them everywhere in a society that tends to use that as a primary social cue.

And to go outside to another post ... I'm with DS on this one. With my original e-ring, I had some baseline hopes for what we could find in-budget. Every piece of jewelry since then is a delightful bonus, and since my standards are v. different from most people's (vintage rarities 9/10s of the population won't recognize), it really is just a weird hobby. Not many people are impressed, but I'm happily mesmerized!

 

[LLJsmom]

I just love the sparkle of a beautiful diamond. Is that ok?? Can I do that without some of these posters calling me unreasonable and ridiculous? When I was buying my diamond, I was more worried that my family would nail me to the wall for being superficial and materialistic, and stupid. So I am not trying to impress anyone. Most of my friends think I have Lost My Mind.

Sigh. I just really loved this board cause it felt safe, well, most of the time. D Thanks to all the PSers who stand up and defend when attacked. I sometimes just don't have the energy to do it.

 

[SouthernSunset]

That article wasn't that rough considering! Then again I float around a wedding message board and those girls over there can be ROUGH on people who spend a lot on diamonds, especially a big diamond.

People should just buy to be happy, congratulate others when engaged and then let it be. Unfortunetly, that's not the case and people end up throwing fits over something that should just be a sentimental, enjoyable luxury.

I was engaged once before. It was a smaller, very modest diamond ring. It was around 1500 I believe. I didn't think twice about how other people thought of me or the ring I was just happy and engaged.

While I'm not engaged again yet, I know my SO is preparing. I have zero idea what my ring will look like(heirloom) but based on hints he has thrown out I believe appraisal wise, it won't be in the same market as my previous engagement. Either way, unless the ring is the total opposite of my personality, I'm sure I'll love it, probably ten times more since I love the one giving it to me this time around better haha.

^Even with that said, (and this might be a sin here in rocky talk XD) Down the road I'll be getting a 'second' ering, because really all I've wanted was a gorgeous purple sapphire artfully set. However SO has several heirloom rings to choose from and he even admitted he feels pressure to provide me with the best, which he feels a diamond is so he preferred to propose with a diamond and then spend more money later to add my sapphire as a rotation ring. So maybe there's something to diamonds being socially programmed into us to a degree.

 

[MarionC]

Read this and posted it in the "supply and demand thread".
It just about breaks my heart when I'm in a jewelry store and see a young couple trying to come to grips with spending a whole lot on a merely average diamond. Maybe we should become lurkers outside B&M's to get the word out about PS.

Most jewelers have my photo plastered to their wall like the FBI Most Wanted list. They don't want me anywhere near their customers.

ha! I love it. You're an inspiration!

 

[MarionC]

You don't think that symbolizing a commitment is impressive?

Perhaps. For me, I think an e-ring makes an impression--first and foremost that she is definitely not single. As far as being impressive, I guess I'm not impressed by many rings I see in person, so I've rarely thought that an e-ring itself is supposed to be impressive, as in, more impressive than another's.

In any case, I think the difference might just be semantics.

I'm single and I wear my diamond on my left hand so I don't scratch the shift knob on my 6-speed.
I hope everyone is impressed by the commitment I've made to my car.