lab grown diamonds

[SDGT3]

Originally Posted by Stud Screw

Most people understand diamonds are sunk costs. If you have to resort to selling them for whatever reason, your issues go beyond the diamond.

+1. All these comments about resale value have me LMAO...

[enjoythemusic]

Maybe the real question is, if natural diamonds at ~2 carats or less with flaws have relatively little value, why do people pay far too much for them? For those with friends / in the business in the Diamond District, you know.

PS: Pawn shops....

[jfmiii]

Originally Posted by MILGAUSS88

Oh, and DeBeers is selling lab grown diamonds as well.

Yes, DeBeers is going to flood the mkt with them and crash prices. They already have. If consumers view lab grown as “cheap” they will be more likely to view mined diamonds as the premium product.

[goldfixer21]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

Cultured pearl cores consist of natural material.
Your mentioned „thin coat of nacre“ can be quite substancial (pinctada Maxima and pinctade Margaritifera) and again - cultured pearls are not grown in a reactor - ergo your comparison with totally artificially grown lab diamonds is flawed.

You are aware that a lab grown diamond requires a slab of diamond to grow from?

[golftime]

If it were any other product they were selling DeBeers would be charged with unfair business practices and price fixing, both of which have been going on for decades. In fact until DeBeers successfully marketed them as a sign of love, diamonds were used mostly for industrial use.

[77T]

Originally Posted by goldfixer21

You are aware that a lab grown diamond requires a slab of diamond to grow from?

True - but it's a thin slice of diamond 300 microns thick and around 10x10mm square for one process and a tiny diamond seed for the other. It's an amazing set of 2 different processes.

High Pressure High Temperature (HPHT) or Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD).


CVD DIAMOND (UPPER LEFT), HPHT DIAMOND (CENTRE), NATURAL DIAMOND (UPPER RIGHT)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[2000-NJDEVILS]

Originally Posted by 77T

True - but it's a thin slice of diamond 300 microns thick and around 10x10mm square for one process and a tiny diamond seed for the other. It's an amazing set of 2 different processes.

High Pressure High Temperature (HPHT) or Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD).


CVD DIAMOND (UPPER LEFT), HPHT DIAMOND (CENTRE), NATURAL DIAMOND (UPPER RIGHT)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Thank you for the information and the pictures!!
My take away is it’s okay to buy one of the man made diamonds but expect it to be as valuable as an old Apple Watch after 7 years (basically zero)….

[2000-NJDEVILS]

Originally Posted by starwalker

they are legit pieces of crap. Who in their right mind will buy an ap or pp or rolex with lab grown diamonds? It’s the the beyond meat of jewellery.

awesome.
Hilarious..
Very accurate!!!
Loved the beyond meat analogy….……

[fozzyf18]

Yet another reason that I keep coming back to this forum. A wealth of knowledge on topics I am interested in and have read about/researched but certainly also appreciate personal opinions and experiences of the forum. Thank you for the insights!

Oh yeah, and the humor and banter- can't forget that.

[77T]

Originally Posted by 2000-NJDEVILS

Thank you for the information and the pictures!!
My take away is it’s okay to buy one of the man made diamonds but expect it to be as valuable as an old Apple Watch after 7 years (basically zero)….

In a purely intrinsic manner, yes.

But what will matter in the long run is what the item acquires in a family role. In other words the extrinsic manner.

Extrinsic value is influenced by external factors like my grandmother's ring and the many times a granddaughter admired it over a long period of time.

But intrinsic value is based on the underlying characteristics of an asset and the lab diamond won't carry much monetary value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MILGAUSS88]

Originally Posted by golftime

If it were any other product they were selling DeBeers would be charged with unfair business practices and price fixing, both of which have been going on for decades. In fact until DeBeers successfully marketed them as a sign of love, diamonds were used mostly for industrial use.

They have been.
The family has not been able to set foot on USA soil for decades and cannot directly operate out of the USA.

[rajurama]

Due to mass production, high demand and now even low price the manufacturing quality of lab diamond is going down. They might qualify as diamond with better clarity and grades but their lustre and shine somehow doesn't match as per natural diamond when compared side by side , specially if its a necklace with many stones or a bracelet with clusters.

However the difference can't be easily spotted by an untrained eye and for most engagement rings its almost same.

Its a good alternative to CZ or moissanite etc.

[Andy0331]

Originally Posted by Starwalker

They are legit pieces of crap. Who in their right mind will buy an AP or PP or Rolex with lab grown diamonds? It’s the the beyond meat of jewellery.

I'd venture to guess the younger generation with the focus on "the environment" would far prefer lab grown to natural. I'd bet that within 20 years (probably less), the overwhelming majority of natural diamonds will be just as worthless as lab grown from a resale perspective.

How much is the premium of "luxury" worth, if the product is the same? Are people who bought from gray dealers (back when there were discounts from MSRP) out of their mind too? Same product, but one costs significantly more.

A lot, if not the majority, of natural diamonds sold by jewelers are "used" as well. You're just paying for a pre-owned diamond in a new setting; the ego-driven, luxury, crowd conveniently ignores that.

Personally, I'm on the fence on lab-grown; but the logical side of me thinks if I had to buy a stone today, I'd rather purchase lab grown. I'd probably compromise and offer a natural stone at $$ or a lab grown in the same setting, plus she also gets another Rolex, or some other luxury item for the same $$. I'm pretty sure she'd pick Option 2.

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by ltmgeller

You will know, and it may weigh on you, depending on the reason why you purchased it. I bought my fiancé a real mined diamond because it was a representation of my love for her. I didn't want and a fabricated stone to represent our relationship. Just my .02 cents.

Well said, my friend, well said.

[Starwalker]

Originally Posted by Andy0331

I'd venture to guess the younger generation with the focus on "the environment" would far prefer lab grown to natural. I'd bet that within 20 years (probably less), the overwhelming majority of natural diamonds will be just as worthless as lab grown from a resale perspective.

How much is the premium of "luxury" worth, if the product is the same? Are people who bought from gray dealers (back when there were discounts from MSRP) out of their mind too? Same product, but one costs significantly more.

A lot, if not the majority, of natural diamonds sold by jewelers are "used" as well. You're just paying for a pre-owned diamond in a new setting; the ego-driven, luxury, crowd conveniently ignores that.

Personally, I'm on the fence on lab-grown; but the logical side of me thinks if I had to buy a stone today, I'd rather purchase lab grown. I'd probably compromise and offer a natural stone at $$ or a lab grown in the same setting, plus she also gets another Rolex, or some other luxury item for the same $$. I'm pretty sure she'd pick Option 2.

This is all very ironic, love how luxury products bring out the best of the irrational logic. Saving money by buying a lab grown - in order to by a 10k Rolex to tell the time. Why not a lab grown and a timex? They will serve the same purpose? Does a Rolex have more interensic value than a natural diamond? Both are tangible goods. However I do get what you mean. I have a lot of friends in the diamond industry and whilst it does put pressure on prices in the short term and the mass market does aid the growing demand trend for lab growns. In the long run, Natural stones will retain a relatively greater proportion of their value - as again people are irrational and when they went a luxury product they want th real deal.

[Moondoggy]

Goodness me......continue

[Speedbird-1]

I understand, discussion of 'replicas' ist verboten herein but, I believe, there is a parallel discussion, regarding the very high end 'copies' of our timepieces and 'the real thing.

My GMT was from an opencast mine in Switzerland, and I wouldn't want an oriental, lab grown version.

[enjoythemusic]

Chemically they are the same, so the fake meat, replica, and other comments do not apply imho. But sure, go on and believe De Beers fabled romance marketing about the 'feeling' of something natural. Research what it takes to mine diamonds, and the associated situation with mining, labor, etc.

Kay Fashion Jewelry surely loves those who are 'True Believers'.

Just be sure to check with Pawn shops, lots of great deals to be had. Buy a stone or three, then she can choose her setting/ring and get it all custom-made to her specs. This way SHE plays a part in the ring she's wearing.

Win-Win

PS: Look at your timepiece, is that a real or synthetic Sapphire? What about the jewels within your timepiece?

PPS: Those who talk of the value of natural stones, please visit a Pawn Shop or other places that buys diamonds at market value and find out the real 'value' of natural stones below 3 carats with flaws / inclusions. Would love to know what you paid versus what you were offered.

[BraveBold]

Originally Posted by Andy0331

I'd venture to guess the younger generation with the focus on "the environment" would far prefer lab grown to natural. I'd bet that within 20 years (probably less), the overwhelming majority of natural diamonds will be just as worthless as lab grown from a resale perspective.
.

“The environment” in quotes is appropriate. The younger generations that support disposable “fast fashion” that treats slave-labor manufactured clothes as disposable items, speculates rather than invests through energy-intensive crypto gambling tokens, and is willing to churn through electronics like phones (with enviro-damaging batteries) willy-nilly.

At the end of the day, the key driver is economic and ego. Fake bling is fake bling. As for store of wealth - we know there is a long list of “stuff” that you take a haircut on when selling back through wholesale channels. If you want to sell your Porsche, you don’t go to a wholesaler for max value. If you want to sell your diamonds, you’re gonna need documentation and third party validation to get closer to what retail looks like. You won’t get to retail but the effort will of course better reflect that diamonds are a store of value. Though not an investment.

I think lab grown is cool. Great alternative but still not the same thing. And that is okay. Choice is good. Usually.

[HHIslander]

I view jewelry as a sunk cost. I don’t buy it for myself, it will always be a gift for someone else. So, whatever makes the recipient happy is fine by me. Like high end watches, purses, etc., if I don’t have any idea as to what they want, I’m not buying it. I don’t care one way or another re:lab made or natural.

[MILGAUSS88]

If a jeweler can tell which is a lab grown diamond and which is a natural diamond with the use of a light, then they are not identical in my opinion.

The synthetic sapphire argument is viewed from the wrong perspective in my opinion.
Synthetic sapphires and rubies have been around for over 100 years, so their market is mature.
Natural rubies and sapphires still have considerable value if the right size and quality.
The synthetics are worthless.

[codecow]

Originally Posted by SDGT3

+1. All these comments about resale value have me LMAO...

They’re all terrible, but a high quality graded natural stone will have some value whereas the rest (even natural) are worthless.

[Watchdoyouwant?]

This is all about make believe value. Remember, the price of natural diamonds is inflated by the DeBeers cartel to a ridiculous degree.

Suppose, hypothetically, that the price of “man-made“ diamonds astronomically exceeded the price of natural diamonds. I would venture then that man-made diamonds would be “better“ than natural diamond— because what is really being measured with respect to the purchase of a diamond ring is how much the buyer is willing to spend as a proxy for an expression of their love.

Given that the price of natural diamonds could be dramatically lowered if the cartel changed the supply, favoritism of natural over “man-made“ seems entirely arbitrary to me.

[subtona]

I am fascinated by the varied well presented opinions presented here.

The question on the face of it seems so science based and straightforward?

…It’s no wonder we see such divided political opinions regarding more impactful issues.

[Watchdoyouwant?]

Also, I think some clarification is in order about how lab diamonds are distinguished from natural diamonds. I've cribbed the below from the internets because this is a good primer on the issue:

There are different types of diamonds. There are Type I and Type II diamonds. Type I diamonds are the most common. These diamonds contain nitrogen as their main impurity, while Type II diamonds do not have measurable nitrogen impurities.

These categories are further broken down into Type Ia, Type Ib, Type IIa, and Type IIb.
Type IIa diamonds have no measurable nitrogen or boron impurities. They are the most chemically pure diamonds and have the highest thermal conductivity. Type IIa diamonds are often colorless or near-colorless. They can also be gray, light brown, light yellow, or light pink. Natural Type IIa are extremely rare – only 1-2% of earth-grown diamonds are Type IIa.

Most lab-grown diamonds are Type IIa. When diamonds are tested in a lab, a major indicator that they are lab-grown is when they test as a Type IIa diamond because they are so rare in nature.

TLDR: Lab diamonds are generally identifiable not because of flaws, but because they are free from the nitrogen impurities that are found in most natural diamonds. Some natural diamonds, Type IIa diamonds, do not have nitrogen impurities. The point is these Type IIa diamonds are so rare, the assumption is that when a diamond tests as IIa, it is a lab stone.

Basically, lab stones are clones of the rarest, most pure diamonds that occur in nature.

[BraveBold]

There’s a lot entangled in the value of diamonds:
1) The underlying supply demand dynamics (and cartel manipulation)
2) The general pricing mechanism of “things” as complete, marketed retail items vs raw materials (margin / input and transformation costs)
3) The authentication and grading process (risk mitigation / reputation)
4) Liquidity and transaction cost (time, cost, effort)

Number 1 of above is what makes diamonds a generally poor investment. The supply and demand balance is highly distorted, making predictions very difficult and the general upward pricing trend of other assets less applicable.

People seem to misunderstand or underestimate how #2-4 are applicable in many areas, including things that have proven to be solid investments over long periods of time. Understanding the value of diamonds overall, really requires understanding 2-4. Recognizing diamonds are generally poor investments merely requires understanding #1.

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by subtona

I am fascinated by the varied well presented opinions presented here.

The question on the face of it seems so science based and straightforward?

…It’s no wonder we see such divided political opinions regarding more impactful issues.

In engineering I see this a lot and have found it to be because both sides are simultaneously correct given their assumption and the variables they are choosing for optimization.

Deviation from the simplest solution can usually be traced to ulterior motives / undisclosed special interests etc. Our USA tax code is a great example.

Group 1: the goal is to buy a shiny rock for the least amount of money. Optimizing size of rock vs cost only. Places no emotional weight on the distinction between the C molecule crystal if mined vs grown.

Group 2: the goal is to buy a symbol of romance made using traditional methods. Feeling confident that they did not cut cost or corners and sabotage the purity of the romantic overture is the hidden assumption. Optimizing size of rock vs cost is important but with the constraint that it must be mined via traditional techniques to retain romantic value.

Neither group will ever agree because they are buying for different reasons. Therefore each is correct and should shut the F up and get back to work, people on social security are counting on them.

[Blansky]

For my first wife, I got her diamond from a discarded drill bit used in the oil industry.

I told her it had been a mile down into the Earth's core and was far more interesting than a diamond bought at the mall.

Our relationship didn't last forever.

[BETRNSX]

Originally Posted by Farleyv1

There is a youtuber called producer Michael that did a video with a Happy Jewellers in the US, they went into depth on the pros and cons. IIRC the lab that makes the diamonds marks them somehow.

Think the takeaway of it was yes you spend 2000 or whatever on a lab grown 1.5ct diamond, and if you ever sell you basically lose the 2k, but on a 10000 equivalent diamond, you lose 50% or so (so 5k) if you want to sell. So yes you lose on both, but you lose much less overall on the lab.

Losing 100% of $2k is still (much) less than losing 50% of $10k...

[trackingtime]

Originally Posted by BETRNSX

Losing 100% of $2k is still (much) less than losing 50% of $10k...

this!