Tiffany''s offer SI1 for E-ring

[purrfectpear]

I don''t feel the SI1 issue has as much to do with Tiffany''s prestige factor as much as the overabundance of stores and the lower priced silver goods being offered.

Tiffany of old held prestige because they were exclusive. You had to travel to NY or LA to purchase a Tiffany diamond. Now they are all over the place with more than a dozen in CA alone. I realize this is a matter of economics but it was the beginning of the dilution of exclusivity. The next big change was mass silver jewelry. Tiffany did have a few less expensive items in the mid century but they were things like money clips or pearl pendants. If you wanted Tiffany jewelry you were going to pay a certain amount for that blue box.

The Tiffany of the 2000''s is more like Neiman Marcus. It''s more upscale than Macy''s but it''s not couture by any means. Tiffany has moved with the times but at the expense of the prestige factor IMO.

Louis Vuitton is all over the place.

Van Cleef and Arpels is in boutiques all over the country.

It''s name branding for the masses. Would we be as wild for Leon Mege if he had little Leon stores in every major metropolitan area?

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 2/15/2009 1:10:07 PM
Author: purrfectpear

It''s name branding for the masses. Would we be as wild for Leon Mege if he had little Leon stores in every major metropolitan area?

wouldn''t surprise me a bit. nowadays,not every piece made by LM.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

I think what I always liked about Tiffany's clarity grades is that no matter what it was, their diamonds were eye clean. I don't really care if they go down to SI1, but I would be shocked it they sold SI1's that were not eye clean. I always thought the whole point of Tiffany's was that a clueless guy could walk in and the same day walk out with a high colored, well cut (not to PS standards but better than most), eye clean diamond in a beautiful setting.

Me and my BF were talking about the fact that they were starting to cater to a more middle class market for a while now, and have gotten more aggressive in the last few months. When we went to the Tiffany's in Vegas, they had prices posted on their 1 ct diamonds. I have never seen them post prices before. It did make is seem like a more typical jewelry store to me.

ETA: I just went through the clarity part of their website. There is no longer a statement saying they only sell eye clean stones, that personally bothers me. I love their rings, but have been looking at other options for a while now. I think this is just something else that makes me less likely to want a diamond from there.

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

Doesn''t Tiffany sell VS2''s? SI1 isn''t that far away. I have always wanted a Legacy and would definitely buy one set with an SI1 if it meant I could finally afford it. Also, in my opinion, the unique cuts that they have are more important than expanding the clarity range to include SI1. That is what I think of when I think of Tiffany, their unique cuts like Lucida, Novo, and Legacy. It doesn''t diminish the brand in my eyes.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Date: 2/15/2009 10:30:20 AM
Author: anitabee
wow, the comments re: the 'decreasing of quality to SI1' are genuinely surprising! so many people here, including myself, have SI1. mine's totally eyeclean and of excellent quality. i think it's about time tiffany brroadened their horizons a bit. give the consumers more choices. i'm sure they'll remain overpriced but, hey, tiffany's is tiffany's.

i see this change less as a dropping of their standards and more as MORE OPTIONS for the consumer.

As another very proud owner of an SI1 stone, I must agree. And, I also agree with the remainder of anitabee's post, although I would never advocate buying a diamond from them.

 

[MatthewG]

Just a very casual observation... Last weekend my partner and I were shopping for E rings along Bond street. In Tiffany, we were looking at a Princess cut around 1ct VS1 E if my memory serves me right, and of all the stones we looked at that day, it was the only stone we saw that was genuinely poor. The cut was of such poor quality that we could clearly see the setting through the diamond, even with the overhead lighting. It was the worst stone we saw all day, despite reasonable clarity and good colour. I was genuinely shocked to see something of such poor cut in Tiffanys.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Date: 2/15/2009 4:03:14 PM
Author: NeverEndingUpgrade
Doesn''t Tiffany sell VS2''s? SI1 isn''t that far away. I have always wanted a Legacy and would definitely buy one set with an SI1 if it meant I could finally afford it. Also, in my opinion, the unique cuts that they have are more important than expanding the clarity range to include SI1. That is what I think of when I think of Tiffany, their unique cuts like Lucida, Novo, and Legacy. It doesn''t diminish the brand in my eyes.

I don''t think SI1''s are poor quality at all. My diamond studs are SI1s that are eye clean, and I am very happy with them. For me, I don''t care what the clarity grade of the stone is as long as it is eye clean, and Tiffany''s use to have a statement staying they will only sell eye clean stones. That statement is gone, at least on my quick search, and that is what bothers me more.

I can''t speak for princess stones, but I remember when they started selling those about a year ago. Some of the sales people were really upset about that. But every Tiffany''s ring I have seen in real life has had great sparkle, and I think their unique cuts are very nice.

 

[carebearz]

Am I reading this correctly, Tiffany now allows trade-in? Or have they always allowed trade-ins? See point 8.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/12/12/is.engagement.ring.guide/index.html

Is this only applicable to US?

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Date: 2/16/2009 8:31:19 PM
Author: carebearz
Am I reading this correctly, Tiffany now allows trade-in? Or have they always allowed trade-ins? See point 8.


http://edition.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/12/12/is.engagement.ring.guide/index.html


Is this only applicable to US?

This is not new, but you do have to spend twice the amount. I don''t know about countries outside the US.

 

[Rhea]

Date: 2/16/2009 5:08:32 PM
Author: Loves Vintage

Date: 2/15/2009 10:30:20 AM

Author: anitabee

wow, the comments re: the ''decreasing of quality to SI1'' are genuinely surprising! so many people here, including myself, have SI1. mine''s totally eyeclean and of excellent quality. i think it''s about time tiffany brroadened their horizons a bit. give the consumers more choices. i''m sure they''ll remain overpriced but, hey, tiffany''s is tiffany''s.


i see this change less as a dropping of their standards and more as MORE OPTIONS for the consumer.

As another very proud owner of an SI1 stone, I must agree. And, I also agree with the remainder of anitabee''s post, although I would never advocate buying a diamond from them.

The issue for me isn''t the SI1, that''s what I wear as well. It has more to do with Tiffany catering for the everyperson whilst still wanting to keep the blue box feeling. You can''t market agressively and put something out there that is seen as more and more afforable, while at the same time wanting to remain exclusive. It doesn''t work both ways. Selling SI1s isn''t bad, going to SI2 wouldn''t bother me either, but I do think Tiffany needs to make up it''s mind on which way it wants to head.

 

[motownmama]

They have alot of debt - where they don''t want to head is Ch. 11.