Hello Chaim,
I'm not sure yet of your analogy of two sides of the same coin... On second thought if one side of the coin (presumably the middle and small traders) cannot go their own way, then the reverse must also be true: that large players (Rosy Blue, et al.) cannot dissociate themselves from the rest of us... in other words from the market.
What is at stake is not parochialism vs globalization, it is the defense of a free, fair and competitive diamond market. We feel that the HRD has up to now almost solely played (and the outgoing director admits as much) De Beers's cards.
Again we remind your readers that we want to maintain our economic relevance against a huge company, abusing illegally its dominant position to destroy the market.
Let us be clear again: We are not against De Beers nor against the sightholders, we are against SoC because it destroys the market. We are against the obligations imposed by De Beers on its sightholders, for example the obligation of vertical integration.
A free and competitve market is still the best way to bring the best goods at the cheapest price to the jewelry manufacturer and hence the consumer.
SoC has to be stopped now because the market for diamond is extremely narrow: SoC leads to huge imbalances and wild price variations and in the end hurt the consumer.
The changes at the HRD were democratic in nature. As long as they add value, we will endeavour that all 1100 diamond companies of Antwerp prosper rather than just a few.
Best regards,
André Gumuchdjian
|
