Talk:The De Beers Group of Companies
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The De Beers Group of Companies article.|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 30 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
[[Talk:The De Beers Group of Companies/Archive index|]]
no archives yet (create)
|This page is archived by.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article uses South African English dialect and spelling (colour, realise, analyse), and some terms used in it are different or absent from American, British, and other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
This article would benefit from a criticism section, including, but not limited to its monopoly and artificial scarcity. User:Stargate70
http://apscuhuru.org/ has some interesting critical information regarding De Beers and the diamond industry in general.
Why have the US Court links been removed in this edit? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=De_Beers&diff=101373864&oldid=99909618 Also, most part of the edit seems biased to me, another example would be the removal of the part which said that artificial diamonds can be closer to perfection than natural ones.
"The Kimberley process has helped restore the reputation of the industry, as well as eliminating sources of excess supply." This is self serving nonsense by De Beers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure if anyone else is having this problem, but the infoboxes at the top of the article are doing bad things. There are multiple solutions for this, but I don't know enough about templates to make appropriate suggestions. superlusertc 2007 August 24, 09:26 (UTC)
It says that the Cullinan diamond was teh second largest diamond ever discovered it is infact the largest ever discovered — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 08:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
"Diamond Monopoly" needs clarification
In 2000, the De Beers model changed, due to factors such as the decision by producers in Russia, Canada and Australia, to distribute diamonds outside of the De Beers channel, thus effectively ending the monopoly. Current major players in the diamond industry are the African producers Debswana and Namdeb, De Beers, Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, Lev Leviev, Harry Winston, and Alrosa.
In the "Family of Companies" section, below that quote from the article, it lists among De Beers family companies both "Debswana" and "Namdeb".
It seems a little disingenuous to list those two companies as "current major players" in parallel with De Beers when they are also a member of the De Beers family of companies (and the other companies listed are apparently NOT).
- http://www.kitco.com/ind/Zimnisky/2013-06-06-A-Diamond-Market-No-Longer-Controlled-By-De-Beers.html • Sbmeirow • Talk • 15:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Michaelphillipr: I've added an archive box, which should have been done when archiving was started. Sadly, it looks like some previous conversations may have been lost. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppenheimer Dynasty End?
It seems inaccurate to say, "In November 2011, the Oppenheimer family announced its intention to sell the entirety of its 40% stake in De Beers to Anglo American plc thereby increasing Anglo American's ownership of the company to 85%. The transaction was worth £3.2 billion (US$5.1 billion) in cash and ended the Oppenheimer dynasty's 80-year ownership of De Beers." when earlier on the page it says Ernest Oppenheimer founded Anglo American plc! De Beers is still under control of an Oppenheimer-founded business.