VCA ~ Van Cleef Arpels Discussion thread!

[lynne_ross]

Totally agree with you. I like and have a lot of old world classics... crystal, china, mahogany furniture. Kids hate this stuff! So kids not wanting our stuff is not limited to jewelry... it's everything! Kids these days would rather have cash for an experience or get brand new furniture at Ikea. Forgot old world classics. Lasting a lifetime and passing down to the next generation was created by marketing.

Please leave me your crystal and China. I will take my mom’s stuff for sure one day. But my kids will for sure think it is all ugly and replace it with IKEA. My mom has a 24k gold tea set that has been passed down my dad’s side (italian) for generations. I love it but it will go to my brother. My daughter thinks it is ugly so maybe good I am not getting it.

 

[mocktail]

Hi! If the Lotus ring is on your list, I would skip Socrates. Socrates is nice, but it's a bit girly and demure due to tiny size flowers, at least to me. Lotus packs a nice punch, and it can be worn casual or dressy. I do not think you will outgrow Lotus while you may outgrow Socrates. After the ring, you can then get the earrings! Planning is half the fun.

Lol thanks for the advice! I agree planning is at least half the fun The lotus is on my "dream list." With my current budget, I'd have to buy no other luxury items for like 2 years and I know I don't have that much will power! I also think it's so beautiful and blingy that I'd be self-conscious and might not wear it much. I'm going to leave it on my "dream list" and maybe someday I'll get it. But for 2022, the Socrate is within my budget and I'm confident I'd feel comfortable wearing it almost every day because it is more understated.

Maybe in like 5 years (with another promotion or two) the Lotus will be easier for me to budget for. If I can regularly wear the Socrate until then, that will be good cost per wear for me

Thank you for your help! I appreciate all of the advice you've provided to me and others! You're always so thoughtful

 

[EpiFanatic]

Stoned by Aja Raden is an interesting book. It talks more about stones than jewellery specifically but why certain ones were more valuable at various times etc. Its historical, so not advice on what to buy per se.

Great book. So fun, entertaining and educates you on the role certain pieces have played in history. She is a very clever , witty and wickedly funny writer.

 

[Brooklynite]

Lol thanks for the advice! I agree planning is at least half the fun The lotus is on my "dream list." With my current budget, I'd have to buy no other luxury items for like 2 years and I know I don't have that much will power! I also think it's so beautiful and blingy that I'd be self-conscious and might not wear it much. I'm going to leave it on my "dream list" and maybe someday I'll get it. But for 2022, the Socrate is within my budget and I'm confident I'd feel comfortable wearing it almost every day because it is more understated.

Maybe in like 5 years (with another promotion or two) the Lotus will be easier for me to budget for. If I can regularly wear the Socrate until then, that will be good cost per wear for me

Thank you for your help! I appreciate all of the advice you've provided to me and others! You're always so thoughtful

I actually like socrate more than lotus. I think it really depends on your own style. Lotus just looks wrong on me. Even though it looks gorgeous on my girlfriend.
You also mentioned Birkin...I started buying in 2009 when no one bought, so I never encountered the "quota" issue. I found it absurd and I don't have time to play that game. If you really like the bags, you can try secondary market or wait for the next recession.

 

[Brooklynite]

By the way, I think there is confusion on spending a percent of your total net worth vs spending percent of your total annual income which is a big difference. Spending on bling to me, should be based on a percent of your income, not net worth. The whole idea in saving is to preserve your base and grow it, not spend it down.

Examples:
- If your total savings is $5M and using the 4% rule to generate income to live off that $5M, your "income" off that $5M is $200K annually. This income includes all your living expenses. You should assess what percent of that $200K annual income you can spend toward luxury spending.
- However, if your total savings is $5M and you plan to spend 5% of that for luxury goods, that is $250K annually. But what about living expenses? You need to withdraw money on top of that 5% bling money for living. Let's say you need another 4%, so that's a total of 9% now that you will withdraw annually. 9% is not safe. The market is going gang busters recently, but in times of a recession (and it will happen as the market is cyclic), there could be a 10-15% or more drop and pulling 9% on top of that drop is a lot of withdrawal.

The general rule I like to live by is I never spend down that base (e.g. the $5M in the examples above). And part of that rule is to withdraw 4% annually so you can outlive that base. Hence in the example, it is living off the $200K annual income and buying bling against that.

Hope that helps, but I do want to clarify spending 5% to buy bling off your assets is very different than spending 5% to buy bling off your annual income. I am sure you already know that, but just in case.

I hope that made sense. Of course, if you have assets to allow you to spend $250K annually on bling alone, the 4% general rule will not apply to you.

Thank you for your thoughts. There are two separate ideas, I think:
1) if jewelry is part of asset allocation, what pct is "appropriate"
2) if it is not, then at what pct of income should one spend on it.
But so far I think most who answered consider it expenses rather than investments.

 

[Brooklynite]

It's interesting because my friend whose husband is middle east background gets lots of jewelry as gifts. To them, I think, jewelry is part of asset allocation. They fled certain country many years ago with the jewelry they owned.

 

[BigAkoya]

It's interesting because my friend whose husband is middle east background gets lots of jewelry as gifts. To them, I think, jewelry is part of asset allocation. They fled certain country many years ago with the jewelry they owned.

I think it would be true if you lived in a country that has been conquered or has experienced many wars/political instability. I live in the U.S., and here, one does not typically count jewelry as a liquid asset to hold or to be converted to cash in times of emergencies (e.g. war, famine). If the jewelry is 24K gold, then perhaps, as that would be similar to buying gold bouillons/gold coins which is considered an asset class.

However, to buy jewelry such as VCA Alhambra, Cartier Love... those are not typically viewed as liquid assets that can be converted easily to currency if say, America was conquered and the U.S. dollar became worthless.

Honestly, to put it bluntly, if I had to flee a country, I doubt anyone in that country is going to be buying my Alhambra during the crisis. Yes, you read about these romantic stories in history who sold their jewelry (e.g. the Russian Czars, the Mughals), but those were massive diamonds, huge emeralds, solid gold pieces. They were not VCA Alhambra jewelry which is a mass produced piece of jewelry and worthless in a war torn/politically unstable country.

That's just my opinion. For me, I would not buy jewelry as part of my investment portfolio, hoping it will grow. I would buy jewelry solely for pleasure.

 

[Changeitup]

First, we should all take serious investment advice from a qualified financial advisor and not a fun purse forum. Second, we should all enjoy purchasing and wearing what we love. But purchasing for our children, grandchildren or to make money is a fool’s errand. Unless one owns a piece that is truly amazingly spectacular, or one with great provenance - something that once belonged to, for example: Elizabeth Taylor, Diana Princess of Wales, (insert a super famous person known for their iconic jewelry here) etc. it is not going to be a great investment. Our children or grandchildren may or may not like the jewelry we want to pass down (as mentioned many times on TPF) and styles go in and out of fashion. Buy what you really like and can afford, and call it good. Insure what you can‘t bear to lose and not easily replace. Enjoy it all.

 

[lynne_ross]

Thank you for your thoughts. There are two separate ideas, I think:
1) if jewelry is part of asset allocation, what pct is "appropriate"
2) if it is not, then at what pct of income should one spend on it.
But so far I think most who answered consider it expenses rather than investments.

I have already answered this but to be more explicit:
1) I don’t see it as asset allocation
2) no one here can give you advice on this and each person’s circumstances are so different. For example, I have a number of friends where their income is secondary to their working spouse. So they see all their income as play $ - buying jewellery/bags, etc. If they did not work they would not spend that $. It is not about what % of total income they are spending. I am not a fan of generalisations and think everyone should look hard at their own circumstances and financial goals to get a sense of how much they feel comfortable spending.

 

[lynne_ross]

Lol thanks for the advice! I agree planning is at least half the fun The lotus is on my "dream list." With my current budget, I'd have to buy no other luxury items for like 2 years and I know I don't have that much will power! I also think it's so beautiful and blingy that I'd be self-conscious and might not wear it much. I'm going to leave it on my "dream list" and maybe someday I'll get it. But for 2022, the Socrate is within my budget and I'm confident I'd feel comfortable wearing it almost every day because it is more understated.

Maybe in like 5 years (with another promotion or two) the Lotus will be easier for me to budget for. If I can regularly wear the Socrate until then, that will be good cost per wear for me

Thank you for your help! I appreciate all of the advice you've provided to me and others! You're always so thoughtful

This is very sensible.
I have been going through a similar debate with myself on whether to get the frivoles Pave btf ring or the single frivoles pave ring. I already own the lotus ring and the noeud is on my dream list. I would like to add a frivoles ring to go with my. Yg pave earrings but I can not decide if I should go with the big blingy one or get a more wearable single flower one. Given I will eventually have two blingy rings in my collection. I go back and forth.

 

[Bunny_in_Love]

Hello everyone,

I started thinking of getting a WG MOP 5 motif bracelet to go with my RG hammered 5 motif.
As I cannot access the store at the moment, if anyone owns this combo, could you kindly share a mod pic? Thanks a lot

 

[Brooklynite]

This is very sensible.
I have been going through a similar debate with myself on whether to get the frivoles Pave btf ring or the single frivoles pave ring. I already own the lotus ring and the noeud is on my dream list. I would like to add a frivoles ring to go with my. Yg pave earrings but I can not decide if I should go with the big blingy one or get a more wearable single flower one. Given I will eventually have two blingy rings in my collection. I go back and forth.

i have the btf one. it's a dinner/special occasion ring for my lifestyle, but i think it looks much better than the single frivole one from a design perspective (i.e. the magnitude it looks better is more than the price differential), if it makes sense at all...

 

[Brooklynite]

I have already answered this but to be more explicit:
1) I don’t see it as asset allocation
2) no one here can give you advice on this and each person’s circumstances are so different. For example, I have a number of friends where their income is secondary to their working spouse. So they see all their income as play $ - buying jewellery/bags, etc. If they did not work they would not spend that $. It is not about what % of total income they are spending. I am not a fan of generalisations and think everyone should look hard at their own circumstances and financial goals to get a sense of how much they feel comfortable spending.

Yup. I had thought it was supposed to be part of asset allocation but i guess the answer is no

 

[missie1]

It's this time of the year and I need some advice...it's a combination of VCA and financial advice.

I just looked over my jewelry insurance bill. It's $2k per year for roughly $100k worth of jewelry, predominantly VCA. I have boys so I would image that after I die one day, all these pieces (along with all my bags and scarves from H...probably worth another 100k or so, not counting Chanel jackets etc.) will end up in the secondary market one day.

I then looked up some Christie's and Sotheby's auctions. Aside from the Alhambra collection, most VCA pieces don't appear to hold up value that well. Take this Fleurette set as an example: https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/...rpels-diamond-necklace-earstud-set-275/133743

I get the "heart" factor...we all enjoy the moments when we put on our favorite jewelry pieces. But what about the financial aspect of it? I understand that some jewelry pieces, take for example, the Alhambra and the Rolex, will appreciate over time, but others don't. So from a pure asset allocation perspective, what would be the percent of net worth one should allocate into jewelry, especially when I start to look at $50k+ pieces? I would love to hear from some of our older and wiser ladies here.

This is such great topic and I debate this with my jeweler friends that after a certain point what retains value for the long term. I think personally it’s diamonds but these are difficult to convert if your not in the business. However when one thinks in terms of assets to be passed down then that an entirely different ballgame. Also I struggle with wanting jewelry to be wearable. That definitely makes difference when you talking branded pieces vs larger diamond pieces. My jeweler has some insanely large carat tennis bracelets that I tried each stone was at least .50 points. They were beautiful if I was going to a gala every night. Great heirloom pieces yes but from wearable standpoint not so great.

 

[DS2006]

Totally agree with you. I like and have a lot of old world classics... crystal, china, mahogany furniture. Kids hate this stuff! So kids not wanting our stuff is not limited to jewelry... it's everything! Kids these days would rather have cash for an experience or get brand new furniture at Ikea. Forgot old world classics. Lasting a lifetime and passing down to the next generation was created by marketing.

I am very much the same with furniture, China, crystal and sterling flatware. I recently have started getting rid of some of it, because we likely will move one final time to downsize in a few years, and I will take me that long to pare down to necessities and favorites to keep! We do have two daughters and I know which jewelry items and china they want. They really are not interested in anything formal or silver that has to be polished! There are a few family heirloom pieces of mahogany furniture that I am hoping someone will take!

To @Brooklynite, I will say that regardless of having sons now, there’s always the chance you might have granddaughters in the future and you may get joy out of saving a few special pieces for them! You’ve been given great advice as to never considering jewelry an investment!