Are engagement rings getting bigger?

[Anonymous]

I am sensing a LOT of envy in this thread. How telling...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is having a real diamond vs a lab diamond a flex?

I'm going to disagree with pps who said no.

I don't know if it will, but if you look at the market of other man-made items, the natural versions still fetch a premium. A pp used the example of pearls. Natural pearls are absolutely a flex. They are far more expensive than cultured versions, even though cultured pearls are generally what's put into jewellery. Colored stones also have man made versions, but the naturals are again worth far far more.

So who knows what the future holds. Maybe the majority of jewellery will start to be made with lab diamonds. It's certainly attractive to the jewellery who drops their costs dramatically, and to the consumer who can afford some gorgeous bling that may not have been in their budgets before. But there will always be people who prefer natural/mined diamonds, I'm just not sure who their consumer will be in the future when all the MMDs are equally as beautiful, sparkly and much lower price.

A Natural diamond loses at least half it's value or more right after it leaves a shop. A Natural diamond is also sold at a cost that depends on the seller and the buyer not much consistency. Not a good investment.

And now we have DeBeers leaving the natural stone market because Labs are kicking their butt.

Labs are not worth anything once they leave a store so I guess a natural is sort of better, but honestly given it's not a great investment spending less on a Lab makes way more sense financially.

Anyone thinking natural diamonds are better it's a slim better and now that DeBeers is selling they will be worth zip.

I'm not talking about investment purposes. Diamonds have always been poor investments. But there are still people (even on this page) who don't put lab and natural diamonds in the same category.

For me, I am an antique cut girl. For my engagement ring, I wanted this antique K OMC. These are things that can never be remade, even in labs. There is something special about antiques. There will still be people who want natural diamonds, I do not think they will be made obsolete any time soon.

I guess the people that don't really distinguish them are not interested in jewelry but more of what the rock represents. So if the lab gets the same point across, why get the more expensive natural version?
I don't think natural will be obsolete either but it will be like fur coats I think

I'm the pp you're replying to - I think you could be right with fur coat comparison. Still a flex, but in a diff way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Few people know this but a top quality ruby is more precious and valuable than a same-sized top quality Diamond. And they are much, much harder to find.

YES!
Eva longoria has a gorgeous, (but somehow modest by modern standards) ruby engagement ring, that is worth far more than many diamond rings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I bet Suzy is not going to be thrilled with a one CT natural one when she could have had a 3 CT platinum stunner for less- side by side lab and natural are identical and even have the same ratings for color, clarity etc.
You can’t tell from a naked eye -but if you would prefer the child labor origins go for it.

Everyone will know it's fake and cheap

No they won't what do you not understand about the properties of a lab diamond? They are the same as a Natural one.

I have CZ earrings because I live a high-income lifestyle people assume they are real. I get compliments all the time $32 and they are not labs. If they were lab diamonds if I took those off no one would know. The CZ's sure anyone would know.

People are just stupid. Diamonds are a bad investment.

They know.

Actually, unless the poster takes off the earrings so they can be examined, it's really impossible to tell. I prefere CZ earrings and real diamonds for rings/bracelets. CZ for earrings because the amount of times I have lost 4 carat studs on the Cotê is embarrassing. Lesson learnt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Few people know this but a top quality ruby is more precious and valuable than a same-sized top quality Diamond. And they are much, much harder to find.

+1, posted about this just above

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Few people know this but a top quality ruby is more precious and valuable than a same-sized top quality Diamond. And they are much, much harder to find.

+1, posted about this just above

I inherited my mothers ruby band -it was a 40th anniversary present from my dad - while I love the sentiment I can’t see people abandoning todays beautiful. And more affordable diamonds for a ruby because they are rare and more expensive - that’s such a DCUM way of viewing the world. Exclusive is not better - but the statement just says a lot about your character. .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am sensing a LOT of envy in this thread. How telling...

I'm sensing a lot of wasteful spending. If you have a giant engagement ring, but still have student loans and can't afford a down payment, you're doing it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Few people know this but a top quality ruby is more precious and valuable than a same-sized top quality Diamond. And they are much, much harder to find.

YES!
Eva longoria has a gorgeous, (but somehow modest by modern standards) ruby engagement ring, that is worth far more than many diamond rings.

Are you talking lab grown rubies?

[Anonymous]

I think this thread is so interesting in light of all the previous threads where people say they don’t even wear their engagement rings anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread is so interesting in light of all the previous threads where people say they don’t even wear their engagement rings anymore.

I know lots of people on DCUM say that but in my real life, I’d say the people who either wear just a wedding ring or no ring at all are fewer than 5. Most people I know seem to wear both an ering and a wedding ring.

[Anonymous]

They're not diamonds. A lot of them are cubes or moissanite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread is so interesting in light of all the previous threads where people say they don’t even wear their engagement rings anymore.

I know lots of people on DCUM say that but in my real life, I’d say the people who either wear just a wedding ring or no ring at all are fewer than 5. Most people I know seem to wear both an ering and a wedding ring.

In my circle of friends, I can think of 1 person who still wears her engagement ring on a daily basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Few people know this but a top quality ruby is more precious and valuable than a same-sized top quality Diamond. And they are much, much harder to find.

Most people know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am an umc person with a 2.5/3 (I honestly don’t remember) carat equivalent ring with a moissanite center stone. I like that I can wear it anywhere without worrying about it and am glad we didn’t spend too much on it at the time so we could travel more. I don’t wear a traditional wedding band with it in favor of an emerald studded ring.

In my wider circle, I assume rings purchased in the last 10 years are about 50/50 natural, mined diamond v. lab and moissanite. I think it’s nice that more people can achieve the look they want without having to overspend.

.

If it were a diamond you would remember the carat weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lab grown diamonds

Yep. Big and tacky.