Qualities of diamonds

GlasweJen

My fianc! reused stones from his gran's ring to make my engagement ring. I didn't want a diamond from someone who was being exploited so his idea to recycle diamonds was really sweet, my diamonds were first used in 1890.

Pollycat

GlasweJen wrote: »

My fianc! reused stones from his gran's ring to make my engagement ring. I didn't want a diamond from someone who was being exploited so his idea to recycle diamonds was really sweet, my diamonds were first used in 1890.

Some places guarantee not to use 'blood' or conflict diamonds.
I think there's some info on the diamond geezer website about it.

DigForVictory

Out of curiosity, why diamonds? There are other lovely stones out there, plus all the fun of different metals & setting types - do not fall too far for the De Beers hype that it has to be a diamond.

A stone or stones from other family jewellery is actually far more interesting than a single rock, or chip, depending on perspective.

Says she with an engagement ring with glorious sapphires and yes, a few tiny diamonds in the setting.

KRB2725

Stevie_Palimo wrote: »

I think that is a terrible idea buying from eBay, Far to easy to be scammed and charged a premium for something worth far less than it sells for.

I bought a ring from eBay for £2200, wore it for a year or so and then sold it for £4000. Not always a terrible idea!

You need to be careful, but there are plenty of genuine sellers.

bluelass

cashewnut wrote: »

Mine was £680 I think (bought one and a half years ago). It came from Hatton Garden so you don't HAVE to spend megabucks to get a ring from there.

I thought after the hatton garden raid there wouldn't be much left?

Bobcrowther

I'm sorry if this offends, but those baulking at £3k for a ring really need to get real. £3k isn't really that much money for something that should last a lifetime and give pleasure to the wearer.
Indeed, is it not "tradition" for the ring to cost two months wages? (I accept this may be archaic now, at least according to this link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2098586/Engagement-ring-weeks-salary-instead-months-money-worries-bite.html)
People may want to argue that money doesn't equal love and "oh my friend got a £10k ring and they split up ten months later", fine, but as a man, I would feel that I was insulting my wife-to-be if I spent a derisory amount on a ring.
It's all relative, of course, £3k is peanuts to a millionaire, but, unless you're on minimum wage or working to service a mortgage beyond your means, £3k simply isn't that much to someone on an average salary.

SmlSave

My DH paid £1750 for my ring which was more than I expected but I have to say while I'm chuffed the stone is good quality if he'd picked a cheap ring I would have still been over the moon. The main thing is that he managed to pick a ring that I liked the look of.

Only the ring buyer knows how much they can afford and if there's any mention of the quality of the stone at the asking surely you'd be wondering what their priorities are?

Pollycat

Surely it's nobody else's business what somebody wants/can afford to spend on a diamond ring (or anything else for that matter).

And yes, the idea of spending £x on an engagement ring is archaic:

Bobcrowther wrote: »

I'm sorry if this offends, but those baulking at £3k for a ring really need to get real. £3k isn't really that much money for something that should last a lifetime and give pleasure to the wearer.
Indeed, is it not "tradition" for the ring to cost two months wages? (I accept this may be archaic now, at least according to this link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2098586/Engagement-ring-weeks-salary-instead-months-money-worries-bite.html)
People may want to argue that money doesn't equal love and "oh my friend got a £10k ring and they split up ten months later", fine, but as a man, I would feel that I was insulting my wife-to-be if I spent a derisory amount on a ring.
It's all relative, of course, £3k is peanuts to a millionaire, but, unless you're on minimum wage or working to service a mortgage beyond your means, £3k simply isn't that much to someone on an average salary.

It says - back in 2012 - as the headline:

Engagement ring is now three weeks salary instead of one month's as money worries bite

so even any '2 month tradition' that existed (and was created by De Beers the diamond mining company) was being eroded 4 years ago.

PenguinOfDeath

Bobcrowther wrote: »

I'm sorry if this offends, but those baulking at £3k for a ring really need to get real. £3k isn't really that much money for something that should last a lifetime and give pleasure to the wearer.
Indeed, is it not "tradition" for the ring to cost two months wages? (I accept this may be archaic now, at least according to this link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2098586/Engagement-ring-weeks-salary-instead-months-money-worries-bite.html)
People may want to argue that money doesn't equal love and "oh my friend got a £10k ring and they split up ten months later", fine, but as a man, I would feel that I was insulting my wife-to-be if I spent a derisory amount on a ring.
It's all relative, of course, £3k is peanuts to a millionaire, but, unless you're on minimum wage or working to service a mortgage beyond your means, £3k simply isn't that much to someone on an average salary.

You (and the OP) do know this is a money SAVING website, yes? Obviously the consensus is going to lean towards spending less and getting the best value for money, and quoting a daily mail article hardly gives credit to your viewpoint

Pollycat

PenguinOfDeath wrote: »

You (and the OP) do know this is a money SAVING website, yes? Obviously the consensus is going to lean towards spending less and getting the best value for money, and quoting a four year old daily mail article hardly gives credit to your viewpoint

I've added a bit to your post, hope you don't mind.