Showing posts with label De Beers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label De Beers. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Millennials and Diamonds, an Open Letter

Typically I just post about jewelry projects that interest me and try to keep my blog light and informative, but as a millennial working in the jewelry industry I am tired of being told what I want and what I should be looking for by the founding diamond companies. It’s getting too painful to ignore the broadening disconnect between iconic brands and the millennial customers they are trying to impress. It almost seems like “millennial” is a buzzword that no one really bothered to research.

I keep coming across campaigns catered to my age group, like parents talking over their children's heads, like they are not there, incapable of listening and understanding.  I see it, I hear you, and your are missing our thought process by miles.

The most recent campaign I have come across is Real is Rare, Real is a Diamond.  Released by Diamond Producers Association (DPA) trying to appeal to the millennial with a whimsical video of a carefree couple lost in the wanderlust of life.  The short video is comprised of flashes of incoherent images with a monologue detailing a topical description of their "real" relationship. DPA makes a desperate attempt to move away from the marketing archetype of diamonds = marriage, but it falls short. They are trying to loosen up and connect to millennials with a video that seems forced, insincere, and the diamonds weren't even the focal point. I lost interest in the strained story and actually ended up focusing more on the clothing in the video than the diamond necklaces that were being shown. In the end the same archaic message weakly came across, couples should solidify a relationship by gifting diamonds.


Another campaign I’ve seen recently is from De Beers. De Beers had the incredibly successful 1947 Ad campaign A Diamond is Forever by copy-writer Frances Gerety of N.W. Ayer & Son. At the time De Beers was top dog of the industry controlling the ebb and flow of diamond resources.  So of course they would be able to control the media for the diamond as well.  Now the diamond giant has been minimized due to bad press and in 2012 De Beers has shifted 85% of its ownership to another diamond company.

So now, with less clout than they had before, they tried to strike gold again with their 2015 campaign, Seize the Day.  The campaign failed to impress since it was more of the same boring concept, shoving engagement rings at the consumer so aggressively that they walk away. We live in a time where our worth is not determined by marriage, so why does the industry keep advertising that way?


Too be blunt, most of the diamonds I own I have bought myself with my hard earned money.  A treat I was proud to purchase for myself because I work with jewelry and like jewelry.  As for my longtime boyfriend, he does shower me with gifts whether it be jewelry or artwork, it does not matter, the gift was thoughtful and by no means defined our relationship.

A powerful Ad I think people would respond to would cater to the fact most millennial women buy themselves jewelry as a deserved treat.  The industry does realize that we are the bulk of the US diamond buying market, but they clearly still do not understand why.  They do not understand that we have satisfaction in working hard and earning something we desired.  It is completely gratifying to wear something you worked for. To go out with friends and say, “I worked overtime and absolutely owned my latest project, I treated myself to new earrings”.


Not at all to undermine the institution of marriage, I just went engagement ring shopping myself, but it needs to be realized engagement is not the cornerstone of the diamond market anymore, it’s a part of a whole view.  And if you keep only looking at one small facet of an idea, you are bound to miss a major amount of opportunity. I love diamonds, I love the industry, I love my job, but I am at a complete loss every time I see a new campaign catered to “the millennial”.

Saturday, April 2, 2016

Happy Easter, Let's look at the Diamond Jubilee Faberge Egg



In honor of Easter I figured I could post about a Faberge Egg that has been capturing my eye for awhile. It was created for the 2012 Diamond Jubilee, celebrating Queen Elizabeth II’s 60th anniversary as Queen Regent.  A Diamond Jubilee was only celebrated once before for the beloved Queen Victoria in 1897. 


 


In the Queen’s honor, Faberge constructed an egg utilizing 500 grams of rose gold and set it with 60 stones, a stone to represent each year of the Queen's reign.  The stones used were diamonds, rubies, emeralds, and sapphires to create a colorfully playful echo of Faberge's Matelasse Jewelry Collection. 



 


The 2012 Matelasse Collection is a contemporary design based off the vintage quilting motif found in the Romanov Palace, specifically Queen Alexandra’s Salon the Mauve Room in the Alexander Palace in Tsarskoe Selo, Saint Petersburg Russia. The Mauve Salon had a soft violet opal hue, chosen by the Empress Alexandra herself to honor a lilac that her husband Tsar Nicholas had given to her.  The room was incredibly chic for it’s time in 1896, which Faberge emulates using the soft feminine hue of rose gold metal.  The criss cross pattern used in the jewelry masterfully makes metal look like the soft cushions used in the Empress’ boudoir,  even embellishing where the lines intersect with a stone, the same as a cushion would have a button.  

                                  
                                
                                     

It was the Imperial Russian Family who originally commissioned Fabrege to create the ornate eggs in 1885, as a Easter gift,continuing the tradition yearly until 1917 (further history can be found here: http://www.faberge.com/news/49_imperial-eggs.aspx).  So it was no surprise that the brilliant goldsmithing company would draw it’s inspiration for Queen Elizabeth II’s gift from the originating egg family.




Sources:




Monday, August 4, 2014

Diamonds are running low but prices continue to grow..

So I happened upon an interesting read while on LinkedIn: Here's the article

Lately colored stones have been taking center stage in the jewelry field, particularly since the prices of diamonds and gold continue to rise, and perhaps because a certain British princess rocking a gorgeously huge natural sapphire. And let's face it, it's much more cost effective to purchase a gemstone wedding set versus the grotesquely priced diamond counter-part.



I've always defended the high price of diamonds being justified in that I understood how unique and rare each well cut stone was.  It's also an easy price to defend when you know that the retail price is typically marked up 3X, and you know you don't have to pay that price if you know where to look.  However, lately I'm having a harder and harder time explaining away the price, especially when I see the speckled gray monstrosities that the big name chain jewelers are dishing out for an outrageous price.


The big mines that were spewing out the big, brilliant, beauties are depleting and there's no new miracle mine in sight.  What I have come to love as a jeweler, is the vintage pieces that come through, because you just don't see that size, color, or quality anymore.


What's alarming about this read is that organizations, like De Beers, think that jacking up the price is really going to sell the rarity of the stones.  Yes, good quality diamonds are rare, but not diamonds themselves.  The rare stones are the natural Emeralds and Tanzanites out there that are in the same danger of depletion, but there are no companies out there interested in the longevity of those stones since the market has been built around the diamond.

I'm interested to see how this plays out in the next coming years. I've already seen a great decline in the purchase of gold jewelry, people are going for the tougher, cheaper metals. What I am seeing in people is that if they are going to spend that huge of a chunk of change, that want that piece to last.  De Beers has famously coined the idea that diamonds are forever, but gold unfortunately does not.  I've already been approached several times about setting stones in metals like steel and tungsten. So what kind of jewelry alternatives will a future with overpriced materials bring in?

Blog post on article by Vinod Kuriyan on Gem Connect: Here's the original article

Photo Cred:

Princess Kate: link
Princess Diana's Ring: tumblr
Loose Diamonds: De Beers


WJA Philly Round Table - F. Walter Lawrence & Gustav Manz Desert Brooch

 2020 has been a whirlwind of a year, but I have been thankful to be able to stay connected with my peers through a series of virtual artist...