David Kellie stepped down as CEO of the Natural Diamond Council (NDC) at the end of 2025, capping six years helming the group.
In this frank interview, Kellie discusses some of the challenges he encountered during his tenure, including a sudden and dramatic drop in funding, industry “fiefdoms,” lab-grown diamonds, and dealing with a trade where everyone has an opinion. He also gives his view of what the natural diamond industry must do to move forward.
I remember when you took over the NDC. Anything surprise you as far as how things worked out?
When I started at the NDC, we wanted a content and social media strategy [that would be] more editorial in style, with new ways of investing in media—as opposed to a campaign strategy, which is how the industry has done things traditionally.
What we didn’t anticipate was the challenges from within the industry, and the real lack of focus and recognition of what is required to make a successful market. When I joined, I thought there was a clear vision from our member companies. But that became a big disappointment, because I was taking so much time trying to reinforce and convince people of what I thought was an obvious vision.
What were the particular issues?
The prosperity of the industry has always been [tied to] consumer demand for diamonds. I think the industry is aligned on that. But with all the other huge business challenges that have come up, there was just not the focus on the singular challenge of consumer demand that would make this industry prosperous. People became focused on their own fiefdoms and the politics within their stakeholders. And that continues to damage the industry.
What do you mean by “fiefdoms”?
The challenge is [to promote] the whole market. I understand that people compete within the value chain. But the reality is, diamonds are a component part of jewelry. Nobody has really proven that you can brand diamonds in a specific way—meaning in a country-specific way, or any other specific. Diamonds themselves are a brand with their own values. And yet people keep trying to create a brand for their own subset. And that’s holding the market back, sadly.
So you’re saying that diamond “brands” were the problem? And you think origin-specific ones are unproven?
The consumer has never shown any propensity to put a value on the country of origin of a gemstone or any other natural resource. Even though that is fact, people still think they can buck that trend and do something for themselves. It just takes away from the focus on what the industry needs to do.
Let’s go through your years at NDC. Right before you came on board, lab-grown diamonds began to take off. Why do you think that sector grew so much?
My belief is that was initially driven by retailers and the high margins they were making. Consumers weren’t walking into a store in 2020 and 2021 saying, Can I have a lab-grown diamond? Retailers were very much pushing them.
Everyone understood that since synthetics are a technological product, that what would happen in terms of pricing, they would eventually hit rock-bottom. But many retailers weren’t interested in the long-term consequences for the industry and themselves.
It’s not a coincidence that lab-grown diamonds are really only a U.S. market. In other regions of the world, long-term value still appeals to them. But the idea of being showy and wanting to say, “I’ve got a big stone on my finger” without the transparency that the stone is man-made—that is unique to the U.S.
From a trade point of view, a lot of entities were working with lab-grown diamonds as well as natural diamonds. It became a very difficult pitch with the consumer press when so many people in the industry—De Beers, GIA, major manufacturers—were working with lab-grown diamonds. All those entities gave the sense that lab-grown diamonds were now an established product, rather than something sitting outside the true market.
You mentioned the higher retail margins. A lot of people have expected them to go down by now.
The retail margins on lab-growns remain very high. The challenge is that price competitiveness is related to the frequency with which we make purchases. There are commodities that we purchase weekly and we shop around. We know what the good prices are.
With goods that are bought infrequently, it takes much longer for the consumer to be aware of true prices. We all know what’s eventually going to happen and that lab-grown prices will eventually get down to fair retail margins. The big unknown is how long that will take, given the lack of purchase frequency by consumers.
Some have argued the NDC should take a more aggressive approach against lab-growns. How do you feel about that?
When I came in, we changed the group’s name to Natural Diamond Council, before the word natural had gotten into the vernacular. We figured we would need an adjective there.
We have all the research on how consumers react on social media. You can talk honestly about the difference between natural diamonds versus lab-grown diamonds. There’s no negative reaction when it’s data-driven or factual. Those messages land with consumers. They find them interesting and relevant and useful.
So you can compare natural versus lab-grown diamonds, but it’s the tone with which you speak about them. If you become derogatory in any way, people either switch off or they push back at you.
Many lab-grown companies are derogatory toward natural diamonds. What has your research shown you?
My sense, from reading social media, is that maybe in 2021, 2022, 2023, lab-grown diamonds were perceived as more “ethical” than natural diamonds, for all the wrong reasons. That was very much because the American lab-grown diamond producers were pushing that message.
Now, that really doesn’t come up in the research. There’s a much better understanding that lab-grown diamonds aren’t as green as they were once pretending to be, and that natural diamonds have strong arguments as far as their own sustainability values.
But even in 2022, I think that was more of a justification. I don’t think that consumers were buying them for that reason—but having bought a lab-grown diamond, it was a nice narrative to say I bought it for these perceived ethical values.
I also think there’s a much more honest narrative in the consumer press now. There was a time when the press was repeating the line that the lab-grown diamond producers were pushing on them. And we did a lot of work to try and bring awareness to the real values of natural diamonds and what they actually mean. We were actively chasing down journalists and saying, “You are repeating false narratives.”
And I think that’s made an impact. For the last year or two, the consumer is making their own decisions for more honest reasons. And that’s fair enough.
Anything else you want to say about lab-grown?
It still makes me angry and frustrated what was done by the lab-grown diamond industry to falsely position lab-grown diamonds [as more ethical]. Most of those companies are no longer in existence. They were just in it for the short term to make a fast buck on behalf of their shareholders, with no real care for the impact that it had on those less privileged than we are.
When you see the impact on southern Africa from the current market climate, it’s unforgivable, given it was created by people who don’t care about people who are in a far less fortunate position. Their motivation was pure greed.
Read full Article HERE
(Main Image : Natural Diamond Council)
Source : JCK online