How much for Engagement Ring?

[NFS4]

What is this about lab-created diamonds and them looking like $10,000 diamonds? I'll be buying a ring within the next 6 months and I want the most bang for the buck. I've got about $2,000 set aside right now for a ring, but I don't really want to go all out. I'd rather put the money (along with the money I have in savings) towards a down payment on a house.

 

[torpid]

Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: binister
3 months salary like a good boy.

Congratulations on having bought into DeBeers propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

:thumbsup:

It's surprising how many traditions DeBeers has fabricated to pad their bottom line.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: Fmr12B
Talk her into a nice lab created diamond. Get her a nice platinum band with some side stones but the center stone should be lab created.

Spend $1000 and her ring will look like a $10,000 one. Less insurance too.

I always hear this but have yet to see places that'll sell non-yellow diamonds for cheap.

Any links?

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

If a woman needs a ring to reassure her that you're not going to dump her, then the relationship is pretty weak.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

If that was true, then the woman in the relationship has shown no commitment whatsoever financially.

This argument is a crock of sh1t. I've met plenty of couples who buy cheaper rings in the onset and replace them later during anniversaries. Their relationships were no more or less doomed to failure than people who bought big diamonds for their engagement.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

So the more money you spend, the more you are committed to a person? That's bullsh!t. If I spend $1,000 on a ring and my roommate spends $12,500 on his ring, that doesn't make my commitment any less genuine, serious or real.

Even if I were to spend $500, I don't think it should matter. My dad spent VERY LITTLE on my mom's ring and they didn't even have a honeymoon. But he did use the money he did have to buy their first house which they moved into right after they got married.

So b/c my dad didn't spend a lot of money on the ring, does his "commitment" mean less?

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

If that was true, then the woman in the relationship has shown no commitment whatsoever financially.

This argument is a crock of sh1t. I've met plenty of couples who buy cheaper rings in the onset and replace them later during anniversaries. Their relationships were no more or less doomed to failure than people who bought big diamonds for their engagement.

LOL, I was going to say the same thing. What does the male get in return to represent the woman's commitment?

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

If a woman needs an EXPENSIVE ring to reassure her that you're not going to dump her, then the relationship is pretty weak.

**FIXED**

 

[Isla]

Spend what you can afford without going into debt.

In 1993, my husband bought a $1200 dollar ring on sale for $800. The biggest diamond in it is a quarter carat, and then there are a bunch of little ones for a total of 7-8ths. He actually shopped for it for me, and paid for it with his part time job... we were both college students at the time.

If you put some thought into it but also remember that your future financial health as a couple/family is also important, that should be enough for your bride to be.

The thing I most valued is getting to stay home with my children when they were little. I stayed home with my kids for ten years, and that was worth more than any diamond ring!!!!

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: NFS4
What is this about lab-created diamonds and them looking like $10,000 diamonds? I'll be buying a ring within the next 6 months and I want the most bang for the buck. I've got about $2,000 set aside right now for a ring, but I don't really want to go all out. I'd rather put the money (along with the money I have in savings) towards a down payment on a house.

I'd prefer buying a used real diamond. At least that has some value, a lab created has nothing, IMHO. $2000 will get you a 1 carat pretty easily. FYI, I bought mine from a fellow ATOTer and just had it appraised recently. It came back at $8,600.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: NFS4
What is this about lab-created diamonds and them looking like $10,000 diamonds? I'll be buying a ring within the next 6 months and I want the most bang for the buck. I've got about $2,000 set aside right now for a ring, but I don't really want to go all out. I'd rather put the money (along with the money I have in savings) towards a down payment on a house.

I'd prefer buying a used real diamond. At least that has some value, a lab created has nothing, IMHO. $2000 will get you a 1 carat pretty easily. FYI, I bought mine from a fellow ATOTer and just had it appraised recently. It came back at $8,600.

I've heard everything now!:laugh::thumbsup:

 

[FP]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

If a woman needs a ring to reassure her that you're not going to dump her, then the relationship is pretty weak.

:roll:

It isn't to reassure her that you aren't going to dump her. It is a symbol to represent your feelings for her and your "long-term" commitment to her. A contract that you will marry her sometime in the future. I don't think it needs to be $10k or even $1k. I think it is conditional on THE GUY'S FINANCIAL SITUATION. If $1k hurts then don't do it. It is tradition and "traditionally" the woman would not be working and wouldn't have enough money to buy such a ring.

You can argue about this but again, if you personally don't want to spend the money then don't. I had no problem with it financially and wanted to buy a nice ring. Don't buy it if you really don't want to.

 

[Safeway]

A guy I know was waiting for his $15,000 student loan to hit so he could buy his soon-to-be fiancee a ring. He spent about $12,00 on it.

 

[IronWing]

Zippo, nada, zilch. Dead relatives FTW.

 

[ballmode]

I'd save up about 1-2 grand

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: ironwing
Zippo, nada, zilch. Dead relatives FTW.

LOL

 

[skywhr]

$1900 engagement ring + $1600 wedding ring

 

[NFS4]

Hmmm, I'm heading over to BlueNile.com to see what I can get for $1500

 

[skywhr]

I went to a local place, they had nicer stones than online. Both rings appraised for almost double what I spent

 

[bigdog1218]

Originally posted by: binister

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: torpid
Part of the point of an expensive engagement ring is the commitment associated with it. If you spend $10 on a ring it doesn't really show much of an actual commitment to get married. Not saying you should spend 3 months salary, but you should at least consider the idea that the ring itself represents a promise or commitment, and a $10 ring from a carnival vending machine is not really saying much.

I would rather spend the money on a custom designed ring than the stone itself, although the material value of such a ring would not be as high over time.

If a ring is only supposed to "represent" a commitment, it shouldn't matter how much it costs.

Not sure if you are missing the point or what, or just intentionally using the wrong definition of represent. Replace with constitutes if that helps. If you spend $5000 on a ring you have committed financially to the engagement pretty significantly and that clearly indicates a seriousness. If you spend $10 on a ring then you aren't really any less likely to dump her next week.

If a woman needs a ring to reassure her that you're not going to dump her, then the relationship is pretty weak.

:roll:

It isn't to reassure her that you aren't going to dump her. It is a symbol to represent your feelings for her and your "long-term" commitment to her. A contract that you will marry her sometime in the future. I don't think it needs to be $10k or even $1k. I think it is conditional on THE GUY'S FINANCIAL SITUATION. If $1k hurts then don't do it. It is tradition and "traditionally" the woman would not be working and wouldn't have enough money to buy such a ring.

You can argue about this but again, if you personally don't want to spend the money then don't. I had no problem with it financially and wanted to buy a nice ring. Don't buy it if you really don't want to.

A big ring is bragging rights and nothing more. You're delusional if you believe any of that bs you wrote.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

I intend to just buy the setting. I will be able to get a diamond from my mother.

 

[FP]

Originally posted by: skywhr
I went to a local place, they had nicer stones than online. Both rings appraised for almost double what I spent

Diamond appraisals are worthless... In fact they only hurt you.

A higher "valued" diamond will only cause you to pay more to insure it. An appraisal does nothing more than make you feel better. You will never be able to get even 1/4 of the appraisal price unless you convince someone to buy it in a private sale.

If you do insure it be sure to get a cash value policy and not a replacement policy.