Will the diamond industry return to generic marketing, or is that a relic of the past, leaving each company and country to fend for itself in today’s market? This is the question explored by Abraham Dayan in a recent article on Rough & Polished, where he analyzes attempts at generic diamond marketing—efforts that sometimes feel like déjà vu to veteran diamantaires.
Dayan examines the industry’s struggle to unite behind a collective marketing campaign since De Beers ended its independent funding of generic diamond marketing, which was once estimated at around $200 million annually. In recent years, various stakeholders have discussed sharing this marketing burden, yet with limited results.
The closest to taking on this mission is the Natural Diamond Council (NDC). Comprised of leading diamond mining companies such as De Beers and ALROSA, the NDC promotes sustainable practices and educates consumers on the unique qualities of mined diamonds. Its main activities include promotions through celebrity endorsements and public education campaigns. However, Dayan contends that the NDC’s efforts do not reach enough people and that its impact remains limited.
De Beers has promoted collaborations but not as a representative of the entire industry. Recently, it announced a partnership with Tanishq, India’s largest jewelry retailer, to strengthen the Indian market, which has overtaken China as the world’s second-largest market for diamonds, capturing 11% of global demand. This collaboration will include outreach, staff training, customer experience enhancements, and a broad marketing campaign. De Beers also partnered with U.S. diamond jewelry giant Signet, incorporating online content, in-store experiences, sales training, and targeted marketing.
Dayan argues that achieving consensus for a joint investment in generic marketing remains challenging, as companies and countries are wary of benefiting competitors over themselves in today’s competitive market. There is also division within the industry about who should bear the costs. Some argue that India, where most of the world’s rough diamonds are polished, should take on a significant share, while others believe that major trading centers like Antwerp, Dubai, or Israel should contribute. Some contend that the largest diamond-consuming markets, such as the United States and, to a lesser extent, China, should shoulder much of the cost.
It’s important to note the conflicting interests within the industry: while some countries focus on increasing rough diamond prices, others prioritize maximizing profit margins on polished stones.
Dayan concludes that the diversity within the diamond industry has led to a lack of unity, resulting in few generic marketing campaigns over the past decade, with most efforts focused on promoting individual companies or countries. While it’s understandable for companies to seek direct returns on their investments, this approach has created a fragmented marketing landscape in terms of scope and impact.
In summary, Dayan notes that a divided market means there is little expectation of a fully financed, global generic diamond marketing strategy. It seems the industry may have simply moved beyond this stage.
To read Dayan’s full article, click here
