PDA

View Full Version : So who is dripping in Diamonds?


Rubber Duck
17th May 2006, 04:58 PM
We have these two in Hindi but I am not sure either means very much:


xn--t2brqg.net हीरा adamant diamond
xn--11b7c0a2a.com हीरक diamond

Someone must have done much better than that?

bwhhisc
17th May 2006, 05:28 PM
We have 'diamonds' in Arabic- الماس
xn--mgba0b1df.net

passengerpigeon
17th May 2006, 05:48 PM
I have ダイアモンド.com, which seems to be the secondary form of "diamond".

thefabfive
17th May 2006, 06:19 PM
None over here. The thing is in many languages 'diamond' is not an IDN. Whoever owns diamant.com has got it made. I count at least 9 languages (obviously the latin based languages) where diamant means diamond. Although the total population of those nine is probably dwarfed by that of Chinese, Japanese, Russian, Arabic, and Hindi speakers.

bwhhisc
17th May 2006, 08:22 PM
And today came across IDNF member Touchring in this Japanese diamond mine:
xn--eckvc2a7gj5g.net ダイヤモンド ovt 39788
good one!

drbiohealth
18th May 2006, 12:10 AM
I have transliterated form diamond.com in hindi. This form is pretty commonly used.

Olney
18th May 2006, 12:58 AM
I got Pink Diamond(s) in Japanese...

touchring
18th May 2006, 06:23 AM
I got ダイヤモンド.net.

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 09:36 AM
I got ダイヤモンド.net.

Bill had already blown your cover, but Congratulations!

alpha
18th May 2006, 10:26 AM
Well I'm afraid to say I haven't got any diamonds :mad:

but I do have

Ruby ルビー.net
Sapphire サファイア.net
Topaz トパーズ.net
Alexandrite アレキサンドライト.com


google trends in the following order: Diamond, Ruby, Sapphire, Topaz, alexandrite

http://www.google.com/trends?q=%E3%83%80%E3%82%A4%E3%83%A4%E3%83%A2%E3%83%B3%E3%83%89%2C+%E3%83%AB%E3%83%93%E3%83%BC%2C+%E3%82%B5%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%82%A2%2C+%E3%83%88%E3%83%91%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BA%2C+%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AC%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B5%E3%83%B3%E3%83%89%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%83%88&ctab=1&geo=all&date=all

take a look at the view by cities. This Google Trends is fascinating..

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 10:44 AM
Well I'm afraid to say I haven't got any diamonds :mad:

but I do have

Ruby ルビー.net
Sapphire サファイア.net
Topaz トパーズ.net
Alexandrite アレキサンドライト.com

google trends in the following order: Diamond, Ruby, Sapphire, Topaz, alexandrite

http://www.google.com/trends?q=%E3%83%80%E3%82%A4%E3%83%A4%E3%83%A2%E3%83%B3%E3%83%89%2C+%E3%83%AB%E3%83%93%E3%83%BC%2C+%E3%82%B5%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%82%A2%2C+%E3%83%88%E3%83%91%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BA%2C+%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AC%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B5%E3%83%B3%E3%83%89%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%83%88&ctab=1&geo=all&date=all

take a look at the view by cities. This Google Trends is fascinating..

Yes, interesting. But when I introduce the English term all the Japanese terms tend to zero. Either the Japanese is not interested in Diamonds or Google Trends is total b*ll*cks!

Further to previous, the order of the searched terms seems to change the results. You get a more sensible result if you put the English term in second position. Still doesn't provide much confidence.

Olney
18th May 2006, 10:51 AM
Maybe over the weekend I can write up some on how to use it better.

You should realize Diamonds & Precious minerals aren't bought everyday online by many. It's the info on a store that you can go to that's important.

I don't expect many searches for diamond in Japanese compared to other terms.
Luxury item domains aren't sold at all by search value...

alpha
18th May 2006, 10:55 AM
I think its that google trends doesnt like mixing up languages.

if you put "diamonds" last, then it returns results, but only shows Japanese in the languages tab.

something is not right.. guess thats why its a "beta"

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 10:56 AM
I don't expect many searches for diamond in Japanese compared to other terms.
Luxury item domains aren't sold at all by search value...

I entirely agree with that. Overture and Google are essential for verifying whether or not you have a primary term. Valuations are probably best done by benchmarking against the ASCII equivalent, or similar, where possilbe.

Bigtm
18th May 2006, 12:46 PM
Please give all your diamonds to me,

as I having the best way to cut diamonds ---- AmsterdamCut.com

"it is not a IDN" Jeff would say , hehehe

jaik
18th May 2006, 01:52 PM
We have these two in Hindi but I am not sure either means very much:


xn--t2brqg.net हीरा adamant diamond
xn--11b7c0a2a.com हीरक diamond

Someone must have done much better than that?
you have a हीरा ! WOW

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 02:57 PM
you have a हीरा ! WOW

So it that a good term? What about the other one is that worth keeping?

alpha
18th May 2006, 03:01 PM
So it that a good term? What about the other one is that worth keeping?

if you reg enough names, amongst all the lumps of coal will be a diamond or two.

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 03:15 PM
if you reg enough names, amongst all the lumps of coal will be a diamond or two.

Yes, but the scary bit is knowing the difference. हीरा still only get 1880 pages of Google and my records show it only getting 504. It is therefore probably that it is still too early to start sifting the wheat from the chaff with Hindi. This is one of about 100 terms that are showing less than 1000 pages in Google that I am just too scared to let go of.

Olney
18th May 2006, 03:15 PM
When using Google Trends currently there is a benchmark for the amount of searches that will show up.
Trends is a comparison tool.

The first term has to have a certain amount of searches.
The second term can be below that limit.

The languages don't matter too much but your first term is the primary thing you are comparing.

Luxury items fall below that scale in Japanese. Even in overture there may only be 2,000 searches a month registered looking for a mink coat. But just those 2,000 searches might bring in over a million dollars in sales.

So the way I see it diamonds in many languages might not make it as the primary term. You have to compare it against a base term.

You guys should all have base terms that you are one word in your stock that ranks by itself in Trends. You can either use a high term or a low term. I usually use Anime because it's the second highest in my collection.

touchring
18th May 2006, 03:18 PM
I think its that google trends doesnt like mixing up languages.

if you put "diamonds" last, then it returns results, but only shows Japanese in the languages tab.

something is not right.. guess thats why its a "beta"


The languages part will only work for the first term. If you want to compare traffic between different languages, you can do so from the chart.

blastfromthepast
18th May 2006, 04:30 PM
You should realize Diamonds & Precious minerals aren't bought everyday online by many. It's the info on a store that you can go to that's important.

Maybe not in Japan, but in the US they are. Even raw diamonds, not only jewelery. The diamond industry has made a huge effort to keep fraud out of it, and the level of trust building that has gone into online shopping for diamonds has paid off.

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 04:37 PM
Maybe not in Japan, but in the US they are. Even raw diamonds, not only jewelery. The diamond industry has made a huge effort to keep fraud out of it, and the level of trust building that has gone into online shopping for diamonds has paid off.

Most of the real effort has gone into differentiating natural diamonds from synethetic ones. The natural ones are now laser etched to show their provinence as the only way that synthetic ones now give themselves away, is that they are too perfect.

Frankly, I think the whole thing is a bit of a con. If you need that level of technology to different the flawed real thing from the perfect synthetic thing, then it smacks to me of marketing over substances. It is little different than paying 5 x a much for a Coke because it comes with a red label. To me all Colas taste ghastly, so I fail to be convinced of the cost benefit of buying the red label.

blastfromthepast
18th May 2006, 04:42 PM
Most of the real effort has gone into differentiating natural diamonds from synethetic ones. The natural ones are now laser etched to show their provinence as the only way that synthetic ones now give themselves away, is that they are too perfect.

Yes, this is the real story in diamonds these days. But right now the public has very low awareness of synthetic diamonds.

But the real value of synthetics is in electronics, since they can reflect light perfectly, unlike natural diamonds which can't be used in computing at all.

gammascalper
18th May 2006, 04:48 PM
There was a great article in Wired a few years ago about the secrecy, danger and profit in the synthetic diamond industry:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html

kenne
18th May 2006, 04:52 PM
Diamond in jewelry seems relatively new phenomenon maybe just 200 years also.

While the love of all shiny bitty stones come from our bird/reptilian ancestors, diamond is in
a different class of stupidity just by itself. It's beyond me, why anyone would want to wear
a piece of coal on their fingers; all I wanted was to set them on fire...

[My wife reads this board sometimes, but not often enough :]

blastfromthepast
18th May 2006, 04:52 PM
There was a great article in Wired a few years ago about the secrecy, danger and profit in the synthetic diamond industry:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html

Last I checked a few months ago, these were making their way to the market, online.

kenne
18th May 2006, 05:00 PM
I hope they succeed. DeBeers is evil. Look at Sierra Leonne and Liberia, so many people maimed and killed,
though diamond industry is not to directly blame, but this vanity trade, just like drug trade, brings inherent
instability to small backwater economies, because of the huge unearned profit it brings.

thegenius1
18th May 2006, 05:07 PM
Yup im not a Fan Of BLOOD Diamonds myself :mad:

I hope they succeed. DeBeers is evil. Look at Sierra Leonne and Liberia, so many people maimed and killed,
though diamond industry is not to directly blame, but this vanity trade, just like drug trade, brings inherent
instability to small backwater economies, because of the huge unearned profit it brings.

blastfromthepast
18th May 2006, 05:10 PM
I predict that they diamond business as we know it is over due to synthetics.

But, just as silver is cheap, but you still have Cartier charging a couple thousand for their designer silver peices, you will still have designer diamonds at current prices. The run of the mill diamonds though, the kind the masses buy for engagement rings, are going to be completely devalued.

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 05:16 PM
Last I checked a few months ago, these were making their way to the market, online.

Won't make a huge difference to the jewellers. Lets face it the cost of the raw materials that goes into the average trincket is minimal. Most of the costs are associated with the high profile location, the fancy displays and the staff that stand around looking pretty all day long. Synthetic diamonds won't do anything to change that. You won't trick me into bad mouthing De Beers though. Just too damned scared!

gammascalper
18th May 2006, 05:18 PM
Your sentiment is echoed kenne, but I'll bet you still have the 3-Cs and your wife's stone stats memorized and you probably bought the authenticity certificate too.

All of the married folk can probably empathize.

Rubber Duck
18th May 2006, 05:37 PM
Your sentiment is echoed kenne, but I'll bet you still have the 3-Cs and your wife's stone stats memorized and you probably bought the authenticity certificate too.

All of the married folk can probably empathize.

That's as maybe, but possibly not as much as those who are now divorced!

JColson
18th May 2006, 06:13 PM
Diamonds are yet another expense of divorce - next time I must remember not to throw diamonds at the departing ex along with all other presents! Difficult to permanently maim with meaningless trinkets.

kenne
18th May 2006, 06:20 PM
I just finished reading the wired article, what these people are doing is very cool :) I envision a diamond dagger for the divorcers, now that is forever.

It's true that most of the price of jewelry is markup from the jeweler, but the cartel certainly get an important slice, and pooled from 80(?)% of all diamond jewelry sold worldwide, a huge profit margin. This profit margin will be eroded by "cultured" diamond and they should be scared.

Another big vanity jewelry is gold, I don't even want to get started on the terrible environmental damage it causes, mining with acenic/mercury and all. Of course women are not entirely to blame here since many men stockpile gold to assuage their insecurity complexes.

Gamma, guilty as charged. But I plan to get back on her someday (or maybe I am already).