> There are NOT noticeable differences between a $30k diamond and a $3k moissanite stone

My wife and I felt the same way too, until we actually compared them. The sparkle and brilliance in the diamond was dramatically better than any other stone we compared it to. We went into ring shopping pretty determined to not get a diamond, and yet still bought one.

Which stones did you compare it to? The stones available in the shop? That's the problem -- there are cheaper alternatives that have a shine comparable to diamonds, but not very widely available in brick and mortar stores. You were kind of had by salesman gimmicks.

This is rich. The whitest moissanite is still going to be obviously doubly refractive, pretty limited in cut options (make terrible step cuts for example) and is generally an inferior substitute to the vastly cheaper common CZ. If you are upset that the value of diamond is all in branding, then run to moissanite, which actually IS sold exclusively by a monopoly until this August...

Do you know what double refractive is? How can it be "generally inferior" and also have more sparkle?

What's the end goal for a diamond simulant? To be sparkly, or to resemble naturally-mined diamond?

My compliments to the salesperson.

That is great that you like the product that you bought.

However, to many women who grew up in the US, there are huge differences between the two stones. One is a diamond, the other isn't. There's a cultural expectation here about diamonds that's pervasive, and women who say that diamonds don't matter and actually believe it are rare. My now wife was actually willing to go along with a no-diamond ring, but she was clearly bummed, so I ended up finding a diamond that never went through DeBeers hands (but still cost a lot due to their influence)

No there aren't. The majority of the people can't tell the difference between a man made diamond and a natural one. Most people can tell when they are in a super car instead of a Honda civic.

Moissanite has a slightly yellow color. Many diamonds do, but they are cheaper for it. It's essentially a K on the color scale of diamonds. It "shines" better but suspiciously so. I probably couldn't tell between a moissanite and a cheap diamond, but I could tell it's not a good diamond.

Lab diamonds aren't really cheaper than natural unless you are talking about pure shit quality or really tiny ones.

Moissanite doesn't even get that expensive. My 1ct stone was $400, and I compared it to $300 low quality white sapphire all the way to $15k loose diamonds of a similar size when shopping.

I think the biggest problem is that most people have not seen moissanite in person, and don't realize that it can compare very favorably (if not more so) to a diamond. Glad to say I've managed to sway a couple of my friends so far on that front ;) Here's some pics: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chix0r/sets/72157637715040063

It certainly is sparklier, but it looks "off." Which is fine. It's not a good diamond substitute. It has its own charm.

Even worse is what De Beers has done to try making synthetic diamonds inferior to "natural diamonds" - https://news.internetstones.com/de-beers-iidgr-holds-synthet... (They designed a special machine to make the synthetic diamonds fluoresce under certain wavelengths of UV light.)

Personally I think a synthetic diamond is better than a natural one, but IFLS.

I don't think it's better yet, but it's getting there. The cost is still super high, what's available on the market hasn't been great cuts so far, etc. Soon though.

Not really. There isn't a cultural significance to owning a $100 Monster cable (other than signalling you are probably not tech savvy).

Honestly I am not sure how you can't tell the difference between moissanite and diamond. It's pretty obvious. It's much harder to distinguish diamond and CZ.