A comment from Avi Krawitz on the recent “Diamond Dudes” podcast about how “De Beers equals diamonds” has led to a discussion over De Beers’ value as a brand name. Even De Beers CEO Al Cook has weighed in.
I remain skeptical that is what De Beers should be focusing on. Let me explain why:
Not all the perceptions people have of De Beers are positive. You can argue with those perceptions, but you can’t deny they exist.
More importantly, the track record of the De Beers retail chain—which is now called De Beers London (because most luxury brands are associated with a city)—is not great.
The brand has alway needed an identity and a positioning that would draw customers from better-known names like Cartier and Tiffany. In the 20-plus years De Beers has existed as a retail entity, it has never developed one. As the company’s former managing director Gary Ralfe said way back in 2006, “It clearly takes more than the name of De Beers for the diamond jewelry to fall off the shelves.”
That’s because a well-known name is not a brand. De Beers may be a well-known miner, but that doesn’t make a De Beers brand a name consumers want to buy from, unless it’s saying its diamonds are cheaper because there’s no middleman. And that doesn’t seem to be the positioning it’s going for.
Any De Beers brand would likely be limited to high-end independents, the same stores that carried its Forevermark brand—which, let’s not forget, was briefly renamed “De Beers Forevermark.” And those stores aren’t where the problem is. It’s the smaller mom-and-pops—which largely went to lab-grown because consumers liked the cost savings and retailers, the higher margins (not necessarily in that order).
Those are the stores the natural business has lost and needs to get back.
Find the full article HERE
Main image : The new De Beers London store—in Paris. Courtesy: De Beers
Source : The Jewelry Wire