DeBeers diamond monopoly - Page 2 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Friday, May 06, 2005 2:50 PM on j-body.org
i think since the early 1900's or late 1800's. i can't be sure though...


Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Friday, May 06, 2005 3:19 PM on j-body.org
Niceguy4186 wrote:[quote=Keeper of the Light™]considering that diamonds are usually found around extinct volcanoes...

I'm amazed people haven't started looking in Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, the eastern cascades, and southern BC.

Hell, Alaska might have some as well. That alone might end their monoply.


i believe the latest and biggest threat to the Debeers cartel are mines recently discovered in north westeren Canada. They were bought by an american company who by law can't join the cartel.

You're right. Canadian Diamond (IIRC that's the name) isn't bound by the Cartel, there are about 6 companies that are prospecting Kimnberlyte pipes in the NorthWest Territories and Nunavut.

Niceguy: Looking there is a bad idea... if you want to make money... the rock in those areas are not igneous (IIRC), and you need that kind of rock to have Kimberlyte pipes, which carry volcanic diamonds. The only area like that in North America is in the Canadian Shield of Northern Ontario, Northern Quebec, Northern Manitoba and NWT, Nunavut

Weasel: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've read about the making of ariticial diamonds, and they are not Jewellery Gem Grade... they're industrial grade.

There were attempts to thwart Cartel prices in the 60's and 70's for making Jewellery quality Gems, but they never really panned out. You're right that there are ways to alter a gem's structure, but they are detectable with X-rays, and even harmonic resonance. There are very few that are doped that cannot be uncovered. The larger the gem, the harder it is to alter... It's not like Superman is going to pick up a lump of coal and squish it into a perfectly formed Diamond




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Friday, May 06, 2005 5:07 PM on j-body.org
Almost, GAM---you're right in reality but theory is what I was going on...

Nunavit and the northwest territories (and some of the yukon) have the remains of volcanoes that existed before the Farallon plate was almost fully subducted into N. America (what remains of the Farralon plate is the Cocos, Nazca plates to the south, and the Gorda, Explorewr and Juan De Fuca plates to the N.). As such, those areas, and possibly Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Arizona, and California *could* have diamond pipe formations--if one knows where to look. Ideally, Stratovulanism is the best condition for diamond formation, and the vulcanic pipes deliver them to a mineable depth. This means that diamonds can exist wherever there is direct evidence of past stratovulcanism. the Paeleo-cascades are a good place to start--which means anything from Guatemala to the Yukon. However, this doesn't mean that they *are* there, but they could be there. Looking at the diamond puipes in Canada, though, they do correspond with past stratovilcanism.


Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Saturday, May 07, 2005 6:16 AM on j-body.org
Diamonds; That'll shut her up...For a minute.




Currently #4 in Ecotec Forced Induction horsepower ratings. 505.8 WHP 414WTQ!!!
Currently 3rd quickest Ecotec on the .org - 10.949 @ 131.50 MPH!!!

Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:36 AM on j-body.org
Keeper: if they were there, they'd have been prospected by now



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Sunday, May 08, 2005 11:41 AM on j-body.org
if they could find them. remember that a lot of diamond pipes are buried and faulted over

it's not exactly like you can swipe a metal detector over it and find them.


Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Sunday, May 08, 2005 2:51 PM on j-body.org
True, but most of the pipes that have been faulted over aren't going to be found anytime soon either... how many people want to drill through a tectonic plate?



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Sunday, May 08, 2005 3:49 PM on j-body.org
heres a good question? do you think that governments should get involved? basically telling DaBeers to stop the monopolies all over the world.....

..kind of what they are doing to Microsoft..




Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Sunday, May 08, 2005 8:37 PM on j-body.org
John Lenko wrote:Here's a question... how long have diamonds been associated with marriage? Is it a recent thing? Or has it gone on for centuries?


diamonds for marrage is pretty much a marketing ploy from Debeers... Hense there slogan, "diamonds are for ever"
a hundred years ago, it was the common thing. I believe up to 50 years ago, it wasn't the common thing in japan, but they have been pushing that market big time.
Debeers is great at two things, controlling supply, and marketing.



Promise that forever we will never get better at growing up and learning to lie

Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Monday, May 09, 2005 2:38 AM on j-body.org
^^^ True.

They've had a stranglehold on the diamond market for the last 150 years IIRC. At least when better industrial diamonds could start getting made in blast furnaces, they lost their grip on that part of the market.

Upstate:
I think they should because they have more or less choked off the greater supply for so long that they are basically dictating prices. Notwithstanding their inability to follow a moral imperative (ie, paying for an army to keep villagers in their employ scared and in-line) to making money.

Diamonds have been a traditional gem of marriage or at least betrothal for the last 2-300 years (Started originally in the renaisance IIRC). However, it was usually a small diamond set in a band, and it was usually silver, as gold was reserved for royalty... As people got more and more money, they began to be able to afford better and better items, so the bands went from silver to gold, and then the gems began to get bigger. Now, I swear the size of gems is comical. It's like one of those ring-pop sucker candies.

Japan didn't really have a prescribed marriage ceromony where rings were exchanged IIRC. I might be wrong on that, but Japan became extremely americanised in the post WWII environment.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Monday, May 09, 2005 8:46 AM on j-body.org
yeah GAM i agree with you, i wonder if the E.U. would fine them more like they did with Microsoft or if the U.S. would make them pay the bigger fine for antitrust practices... its weird that this is not being shown in the news, unlike Microsoft's monopoly trials.

wonder how this will play out in the future...





Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Monday, May 09, 2005 5:11 PM on j-body.org
I'd like to know how many people actually know where their gem stones come from



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Monday, May 09, 2005 8:29 PM on j-body.org
yeah, well i dont think gold or gemstones are worth the blood that a 10 year old might spill.

i only wish that expensive stones werent part of this whole engagement and marriage thing. however their marketing campaign is so deep in our culture that one will find it hard to escape that fact. it would help if the females let go of the shalowness of this whole part of life. it disgusts me to see how some people drool over stones that are worth $400k a piece...

i have never, and will never wear any gaudy and big jewelry pieces on my body.

some of these "religious" people wear huge gold crosses and see nothing wrong with it.... is it against Christianity to wear and expose such things? i know that in Islam gold is prohibited, thats not why i dont wear it, its mostly because of my moral reasons.




Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 3:25 PM on j-body.org
Well, Islam preaches living simply, correct?

No outward excess, eat simply, be humble, pray 5x a day, charge and pay no interest...

I know that some of those things are nigh impossible in western society, but I don't think your spot in heaven is guarenteed by the size or shinyness of your crucifix.



Yeah, Diamonds are forever... and the payments for them are at least as long.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:13 PM on j-body.org
Quote:

Yeah, Diamonds are forever... and the payments for them are at least as long.


man, that's sig-quote worthy! Nice

As for me, i'm a simple man...pewter and amethyst are just fine with me.


Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Wednesday, May 11, 2005 7:20 AM on j-body.org
Roofy wrote:Diamonds; That'll shut her up...For a minute.

I like the Family Guy spoof "Diamonds; She'll pretty much have too" and then shows the female figure going down on the guy. rofl







Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Wednesday, May 11, 2005 8:21 AM on j-body.org
Again though... what value is there in reducing the value of diamonds? Who will benefit from diamonds being made cheap and plentiful? You're kidding yourselves if you think women will be just as happy with their ring if it now costs $500 instead of $5000.

Artificial gem-quality diamonds: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html






Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Wednesday, May 11, 2005 8:30 AM on j-body.org
Wild Weasel wrote:Again though... what value is there in reducing the value of diamonds? Who will benefit from diamonds being made cheap and plentiful? You're kidding yourselves if you think women will be just as happy with their ring if it now costs $500 instead of $5000.

Artificial gem-quality diamonds: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html


I'm a little confused by you asking what value there is to making them cheap and then posting a link to why it would be better to make them cheap...

?




---


Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Thursday, May 12, 2005 6:31 AM on j-body.org
I posted the link because someone previously said they couldn't make gem-quality diamonds artificially.






Re: DeBeers diamond monopoly
Thursday, May 12, 2005 8:38 AM on j-body.org
I didn't think it was possible... I've heard of coking gems that are fractured, but I didn't think it was possible otherwise.

Either way, you can still tell through Gem Scan that they're artificial/manufactured.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search