# Why Haven't Diamond Prices Crashed Yet? (Or Did They?) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 4, 2009, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597 "2009-10-04T22:45:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/41 "2009-10-06T00:47:09Z")
> [@Reno\_Nevada](#): > > This is extremely interesting, but it leaves off one point–what are you \*selling \*diamonds for? Do you still sell them for 100% of Rap, and if so, why? You could make the same profit you made in the 80’s selling at 60% of Rap. I think we sell them at 90% of Rap today. Why? If you drop your price too fast and too far, you cheapen the appeal of the product. Seriously. I’m not in that part of the biz(retail), but I’m making that assumption. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/42 "2009-10-06T01:12:04Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > But the thing is, the kind of woman who shows off her rock wants… a rock. A big, clunky diamond. She doesn’t want something pretty, she doesn’t want a symbol of her mate’s love, she wants a rock to hit other women like her with. And that means a big, clunky diamond, the bigger the better and it’s got to be a diamond. Other stones are more expensive, other gifts may be more comfortable, more beautiful or more meaningful, but they’re not what those women want; they don’t want a Forget-me-not bracelet or a ruby ring any more than they want your great-grandmother’s engagement ring… because none of them is a Rock. They only want a diamond because DeBeers has conditioned them to want it. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/43 "2009-10-06T01:27:02Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > … the Linde company, later a division of Dow Chemical … Union Carbide. > [@DrFidelius](#): > > … I own a star sapphire ring. I rarely wear it because the setting says “late 70s” … If the asterism (“star”) looks like [this](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bf/Labstarsapphirering.JPG) and not [this](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Star-Saphire.jpg) it’s pretty certainly what you’ve got (if you can see the back of the stone it _might_ be marked with a L, not all Linde Stars are, mine isn’t). CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/44 "2009-10-06T02:06:31Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > They only want a diamond because DeBeers has conditioned them to want it. This is not really accurate. I have noticed that the women folk really like all kinds of sparklies. ♦ ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/45 "2009-10-06T02:55:21Z")
To be clear, **crowmanyclouds** , the distinction we’re looking at there is the precise regularity of the synthetic star, compared with the slight irregularity of the natural one? Those photos don’t do them justice, by the way. A sapphire star is actually a holographic effect, and appears (in person) to float slightly above the surface of the gem. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/46 "2009-10-06T03:22:47Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > Wrong! 😃 > > IN 1947, the Linde company, later a division of Dow Chemical, invented synthetic star sapphires. These are the ones that were used in most rings in the 1960s and 1970s. They have NO value as gems. > > [All About Jewels Glossary: L](http://www.enchantedlearning.com/jewel/glossary/indexl.shtml) > [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Union Carbide.If the asterism (“star”) looks like [this](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bf/Labstarsapphirering.JPG) and not [this](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Star-Saphire.jpg) it’s pretty certainly what you’ve got (if you can see the back of the stone it _might_ be marked with a L, not all Linde Stars are, mine isn’t). > > CMC fnord! > [@Chronos](#): > > To be clear, **crowmanyclouds** , the distinction we’re looking at there is the precise regularity of the synthetic star, compared with the slight irregularity of the natural one? > > Those photos don’t do them justice, by the way. A sapphire star is actually a holographic effect, and appears (in person) to float slightly above the surface of the gem. Yeah. The second pic [this](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Star-Saphire.jpg) is the best representation of every Linde Star(synthetic) that’s ever walked into our place. Maybe bought 300-500 the past 15 years. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/47 "2009-10-06T03:38:28Z")
> [@Huerta88](#): > > Ha. Guy I knew used to rummage through that rubbish container next to the ATM and find a few receipts showing a five or six figure balance. Kept them in his back pocket, conveniently “found” them when he was chatting up girls in bars and offered to write his number down for them. > > More than one called back. Hehehe, golddigger hunting for sport, I love it! ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/48 "2009-10-06T04:22:18Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > To be clear, **crowmanyclouds** , the distinction we’re looking at there is the precise regularity of the synthetic star, compared with the slight irregularity of the natural one? … If regularity means the asterism’s “sharpness”, the visibility and intensity of the asterism I.E. really bright, well defined rays. > [@samclem](#): > > … The second pic [this](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Star-Saphire.jpg) is the best representation of every Linde Star(synthetic) that’s ever walked into our place. … Really? [This](http://members.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=linde*trademark) is the closest I could find to match the Linde my Mother bought my late Father in 67 or 68, my rays are a bit straighter and sharper. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/49 "2009-10-06T04:23:49Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > … golddigger hunting for sport, I love it! Remember - it’s strictly catch and release. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/50 "2009-10-06T05:15:19Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > This is not really accurate. I have noticed that the women folk really like all kinds of sparklies. ♦ Yes, but while we do like all kinds of sparklies, the distinction here is between “women who like sparklies” and “women who measure their prospective mates’ worth by the size of the diamond said mate carries in a box, and it must be a diamond.” The liking sparklies is general, the diamond fixation is acquired. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2009, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597/51 "2009-10-06T06:04:29Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > This is not really accurate. I have noticed that the women folk really like all kinds of sparklies. ♦ Yes, it \*is \*accurate. Note that I was replying to a poster that said women wanted a ROCK (as in large real diamond) and no substitute would do. If we are just talking attracting to “purty” then CZ would do just as well, if not better. Nava put it better, anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-havent-diamond-prices-crashed-yet-or-did-they/512597.md?page=2)