D'Beers

sunandaC

New member
DeBeers Policy for India:

Now before we move further let’s refer Varda Shine, M.D. DTC, AFNS quote her on February 05: ‘She denied that the company had deliberately targeted Indian companies when it recently cut its list of sight holder clients from 93 down to 79 for the new two and a half year contract period ending in 2011.’ Varda also added: ‘The quantity supplied to India will actually be the same as or even greater than before.’
Since the DTC completed the selection, Varda is saying that they have gone fair-n-square. Even in the party she said so. And, if even one glance over the fact and figures that says she is right! Say, out at 93, Indian sight holders total is of 34 that is about 36.56% share. Theoretically if the list is cut at 79 and if Indian share is 36.56% constant, allocation of Indian sight holders should be around at 28 or 29! I think the total number of Indian sight holders is 26+3 out of 79. That means, what Varda says is all right!


While Varda knows, she is right then why she started defending herself equally the simple calculation could have been worked out by any Indian then why Indian players feel that they have cut to size & again now the point is on 5th , why she said so? Or simply one has to believe that as soon as she noticed Indian sentiments she gets expressed! Is all these so simple! I think she must know Indian sentiment earlier especially when GJEPC organized the press conference on January 02! If so, she could have been said in the cocktail party that the company has not targeted Indian! And I said, theoretically she is right. If so, then why the GJEPC said: DeBeers move to affect adversely! Well, now the point is; where the target is & where do both the players fire.

This is to understand what DTC has cut’& what may affect adversely. Therefore let’s understand little about DeBeers policy of in being. Let’s refer Nicky Oppenheimer: “While DeBeers may no longer the dominant player it once was and there are many new sources of rough diamonds for cutting centers be they Russia, BHP, Rio or the myriad players do not think for one second that we intend being anything other than the best diamond mining & marketing company in the world.” Delivered in cocktail party’08.


Varda Shine, “Helping our producer partners to achieve their legitimate aspirations to create sustainable downstream diamond industry in their country. I have heard questions asked about our policy towards our producer partners. But it is not a question of policy or even about doing what we feel is right.

It is about facing our commercial realities…” Delivered in cocktail partry’08.


How domination could be achieved in diamond industry? That could be achieved by establishing the best mining & marketing company in the world! Controlling mining in the one hand and marketing in the other, the dominant qualities pass through monopoly!
I think D. Murali, in ‘Monopolies are forever’ quote Frederick Boyle- who injected the need of monopoly in 1871, now is in the being of DeBeers. Boyle inked: “You cannot drown the market with an article only appertaining to the highest luxury without swift & sudden catastrophe…”


Another writer Martin Meredith inked in ‘Diamonds, Gold and War’ that several attempts at amalgamation since been made. “Two companies had emerged by 1885 as the most likely nuclei for a diamond mining monopoly: Kimberley Central & DeBeers.” “Both set about crushing smaller rivals by producing as many diamonds as possible, in the other words of a standard bank report, ‘Swamping them with production” “By September 1889, DeBeers achieved a complete monopoly of all Kimberly’s mines 90% of the world’s production.”
Along with the several policy-plays I think catastrophic policy paid DeBeers well.


A catastrophic act put rivals under a catastrophe that cause in bearing rivals catatonia! In shorts, catastrophic led monopoly. Mining monopoly enabled DeBeers to hide-away rich diamond deposits and where some of these are located! And, marketing edge-up allowed the company, just how diamonds are fixed to make them more expensive! Now, in the 21 century the transforming diamond industry is not permitting to go strengthen monopoly. Say, how to manage monopoly need in a nerd situation! Yet, a force in being to go catastrophe against those who challenges monopoly policy!


Affect Adversely: That means something… ‘obstructed–wave’, must have been passed through the corporate psychology of DeBeers about India Else, why do they cut more players.

Defacto while DTC cut eight players and added three to the list, though theory is right; but in number, indeed five players said that are less! Not only, this, while they cut three players from Antwerp; All together DTC could derive and calculate virtually a loss of eight players.
No need to say to DeBeers or DTC, collectively strength of eight sight holders in India is equal to what?!!!


No need to say a single line about huge-n-vibrant diamond market in India and the impact now! On the contrary I could believe that, the swift move is a part of policy, ‘let Indian diamond industry calculate the adverse effect!’ ‘Let cut’ players bears major investment losses on their mega expansion & investments which were undertaken to integrate manufacturing facilities while were sightholders!’ ‘Let those, who want to cut-n-polish diamonds in India, buy costly rough which may lead financial crunch if could not sale in order!’


Not only this, immediately deducted four more players under the BPP, the movement Brenig- judgment announced! Immediately Chaim Even Zahar inked on January 10; by referring similar case and after widely explaining ‘opschorting’ under the head: ‘Inconsistent behaviour by courts…’:

“There is something else that bothers me. In these years, the DTC (then still called CSO) did similar book balancing, similar invoicing, exporting & re-importing of the same goods with different values. At some point tax authorities (in England) found out about it & levied a fine.”


No doubt, DTC lifted laid suspension, and India get four players back as a sightholders else, number of less sightholders could be 8+4 is equal to 12 players & a victim of catatonia!
DeBeers move:


It’s part of their policy. Even if Varda says, she has not done deliberately, is true…! But, theory is theory & action is action. Sometime action speaks louder than speech! Otherwise, everybody know the significance and strategic position of India to live up diamonds! No need to say a word about skill to strength, faceting to realize in a factual sale!


As on today Indians and the industry can’t think & don’t want to think, what if the ‘suspension’ was not lifted! What if in a second, the rough supply gets freezed by losing five plus four and three (Belgium) players! On the Macro view, I said Varda had cut proper percentage and in that way she could refuse that ‘Indian artisans may loose jobs!’


But, on the Micro view, immediately units get shut down. Again! Artisans are searching their boss who could accommodate! It’s a mobilization of over two lakhs of Artisans! I’m sure the three new players could not be able to absorb all these skills! I know them; they on the contrary will behave wisely! By viewing these all as, the chairman Sanjay Kothari -GJEPC said, “The concern is on the impact of DTC’s business decision on the industry as a whole.” The GJEPC said, suddenly pulling a plug triggers a massive loss of trust and business confidence throughout the industry!

Defacto, catastrophe thy name is to act sudden and a part of policy. It’s sever effect catatonia could lead victim a schizophrenia, that could affect on victim one, that could experience a period of unconsciousness or two, react over-active!

Dilemma to India Diamonds:

I think in the era of BPP, DeBeers have just reacted not attacked, is my understanding on the issue of the ‘cut!’ But, it is sure, today Indian diamond industry is a victim of catatonia; let’s understand the past case history.

Details could be read in the Book of ‘Glitter & Greed’ by Janine Roberts, published in the year 2003. Well she has inked huge about Indian diamond industry but, I wish to quote few lines:

“Despite the arrival of DeBeers in India around 1975, MMTC, the government owned company continued to try to get independent supplies throughout the 1980s.

In September 1987, they singed agreements with Ghana, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tanzania & Angola for joint exploration & mining rights.
This alarmed the CSO, so in 1988, it shaked 20 Indian sightholders, including several whom had joined with the MMTC in seeking non-cartel supplies of diamonds.”

Since then, Indian diamond industry gone unconscious’! In the year 2006, get back consciousness, about 61, diamond companies including 16, DTC sight holders, 05-Rio Tinto select and 02 BHP clients formed a DIL (Diamond India Ltd) silently.

Apart from the several aim-n-objectives one of aim & object get set to source rough directly from producers or mines! In the mean time the DIL source successfully the two auctions of Alrosa.

Later in the IIJS-2007, the DIL inked MoU with Thai. Prior to this MoU, it was declared that DIL could go inking producer nations or mines, initially invested of Rs. 2.25bn could be more by one or two billion if they could source rough directly!
 

bhautik.kawa

New member
DeBeers Policy for India:

Now before we move further let’s refer Varda Shine, M.D. DTC, AFNS quote her on February 05: ‘She denied that the company had deliberately targeted Indian companies when it recently cut its list of sight holder clients from 93 down to 79 for the new two and a half year contract period ending in 2011.’ Varda also added: ‘The quantity supplied to India will actually be the same as or even greater than before.’
Since the DTC completed the selection, Varda is saying that they have gone fair-n-square. Even in the party she said so. And, if even one glance over the fact and figures that says she is right! Say, out at 93, Indian sight holders total is of 34 that is about 36.56% share. Theoretically if the list is cut at 79 and if Indian share is 36.56% constant, allocation of Indian sight holders should be around at 28 or 29! I think the total number of Indian sight holders is 26+3 out of 79. That means, what Varda says is all right!


While Varda knows, she is right then why she started defending herself equally the simple calculation could have been worked out by any Indian then why Indian players feel that they have cut to size & again now the point is on 5th , why she said so? Or simply one has to believe that as soon as she noticed Indian sentiments she gets expressed! Is all these so simple! I think she must know Indian sentiment earlier especially when GJEPC organized the press conference on January 02! If so, she could have been said in the cocktail party that the company has not targeted Indian! And I said, theoretically she is right. If so, then why the GJEPC said: DeBeers move to affect adversely! Well, now the point is; where the target is & where do both the players fire.

This is to understand what DTC has cut’& what may affect adversely. Therefore let’s understand little about DeBeers policy of in being. Let’s refer Nicky Oppenheimer: “While DeBeers may no longer the dominant player it once was and there are many new sources of rough diamonds for cutting centers be they Russia, BHP, Rio or the myriad players do not think for one second that we intend being anything other than the best diamond mining & marketing company in the world.” Delivered in cocktail party’08.


Varda Shine, “Helping our producer partners to achieve their legitimate aspirations to create sustainable downstream diamond industry in their country. I have heard questions asked about our policy towards our producer partners. But it is not a question of policy or even about doing what we feel is right.

It is about facing our commercial realities…” Delivered in cocktail partry’08.


How domination could be achieved in diamond industry? That could be achieved by establishing the best mining & marketing company in the world! Controlling mining in the one hand and marketing in the other, the dominant qualities pass through monopoly!
I think D. Murali, in ‘Monopolies are forever’ quote Frederick Boyle- who injected the need of monopoly in 1871, now is in the being of DeBeers. Boyle inked: “You cannot drown the market with an article only appertaining to the highest luxury without swift & sudden catastrophe…”


Another writer Martin Meredith inked in ‘Diamonds, Gold and War’ that several attempts at amalgamation since been made. “Two companies had emerged by 1885 as the most likely nuclei for a diamond mining monopoly: Kimberley Central & DeBeers.” “Both set about crushing smaller rivals by producing as many diamonds as possible, in the other words of a standard bank report, ‘Swamping them with production” “By September 1889, DeBeers achieved a complete monopoly of all Kimberly’s mines 90% of the world’s production.”
Along with the several policy-plays I think catastrophic policy paid DeBeers well.


A catastrophic act put rivals under a catastrophe that cause in bearing rivals catatonia! In shorts, catastrophic led monopoly. Mining monopoly enabled DeBeers to hide-away rich diamond deposits and where some of these are located! And, marketing edge-up allowed the company, just how diamonds are fixed to make them more expensive! Now, in the 21 century the transforming diamond industry is not permitting to go strengthen monopoly. Say, how to manage monopoly need in a nerd situation! Yet, a force in being to go catastrophe against those who challenges monopoly policy!


Affect Adversely: That means something… ‘obstructed–wave’, must have been passed through the corporate psychology of DeBeers about India Else, why do they cut more players.

Defacto while DTC cut eight players and added three to the list, though theory is right; but in number, indeed five players said that are less! Not only, this, while they cut three players from Antwerp; All together DTC could derive and calculate virtually a loss of eight players.
No need to say to DeBeers or DTC, collectively strength of eight sight holders in India is equal to what?!!!


No need to say a single line about huge-n-vibrant diamond market in India and the impact now! On the contrary I could believe that, the swift move is a part of policy, ‘let Indian diamond industry calculate the adverse effect!’ ‘Let cut’ players bears major investment losses on their mega expansion & investments which were undertaken to integrate manufacturing facilities while were sightholders!’ ‘Let those, who want to cut-n-polish diamonds in India, buy costly rough which may lead financial crunch if could not sale in order!’


Not only this, immediately deducted four more players under the BPP, the movement Brenig- judgment announced! Immediately Chaim Even Zahar inked on January 10; by referring similar case and after widely explaining ‘opschorting’ under the head: ‘Inconsistent behaviour by courts…’:

“There is something else that bothers me. In these years, the DTC (then still called CSO) did similar book balancing, similar invoicing, exporting & re-importing of the same goods with different values. At some point tax authorities (in England) found out about it & levied a fine.”


No doubt, DTC lifted laid suspension, and India get four players back as a sightholders else, number of less sightholders could be 8+4 is equal to 12 players & a victim of catatonia!
DeBeers move:


It’s part of their policy. Even if Varda says, she has not done deliberately, is true…! But, theory is theory & action is action. Sometime action speaks louder than speech! Otherwise, everybody know the significance and strategic position of India to live up diamonds! No need to say a word about skill to strength, faceting to realize in a factual sale!


As on today Indians and the industry can’t think & don’t want to think, what if the ‘suspension’ was not lifted! What if in a second, the rough supply gets freezed by losing five plus four and three (Belgium) players! On the Macro view, I said Varda had cut proper percentage and in that way she could refuse that ‘Indian artisans may loose jobs!’


But, on the Micro view, immediately units get shut down. Again! Artisans are searching their boss who could accommodate! It’s a mobilization of over two lakhs of Artisans! I’m sure the three new players could not be able to absorb all these skills! I know them; they on the contrary will behave wisely! By viewing these all as, the chairman Sanjay Kothari -GJEPC said, “The concern is on the impact of DTC’s business decision on the industry as a whole.” The GJEPC said, suddenly pulling a plug triggers a massive loss of trust and business confidence throughout the industry!

Defacto, catastrophe thy name is to act sudden and a part of policy. It’s sever effect catatonia could lead victim a schizophrenia, that could affect on victim one, that could experience a period of unconsciousness or two, react over-active!

Dilemma to India Diamonds:

I think in the era of BPP, DeBeers have just reacted not attacked, is my understanding on the issue of the ‘cut!’ But, it is sure, today Indian diamond industry is a victim of catatonia; let’s understand the past case history.

Details could be read in the Book of ‘Glitter & Greed’ by Janine Roberts, published in the year 2003. Well she has inked huge about Indian diamond industry but, I wish to quote few lines:

“Despite the arrival of DeBeers in India around 1975, MMTC, the government owned company continued to try to get independent supplies throughout the 1980s.

In September 1987, they singed agreements with Ghana, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tanzania & Angola for joint exploration & mining rights.
This alarmed the CSO, so in 1988, it shaked 20 Indian sightholders, including several whom had joined with the MMTC in seeking non-cartel supplies of diamonds.”

Since then, Indian diamond industry gone unconscious’! In the year 2006, get back consciousness, about 61, diamond companies including 16, DTC sight holders, 05-Rio Tinto select and 02 BHP clients formed a DIL (Diamond India Ltd) silently.

Apart from the several aim-n-objectives one of aim & object get set to source rough directly from producers or mines! In the mean time the DIL source successfully the two auctions of Alrosa.

Later in the IIJS-2007, the DIL inked MoU with Thai. Prior to this MoU, it was declared that DIL could go inking producer nations or mines, initially invested of Rs. 2.25bn could be more by one or two billion if they could source rough directly!

Hey Buddy,

Please check attachment for De-Beers Insight Report.

Thank you!
 

Attachments

  • De-Beers Insight Report.pdf
    5.7 MB · Views: 0
Top