De Beers' finances, big change at Zales, new 47th Street fight, and more
The diamond business faces a crossroads and how lab-grown hurt Blue Nile. It's The Jewelry Wire daily digest for March 31, 2026
Examining De Beers’ financial results
There’s no sugarcoating De Beers’ 2025 financial results, which were released last month. They were bad. The company posted a $500 million EBITDA loss, even as it also showed a slight increase in revenue.
What caused the loss? As Avi Krawitz pointed out, the hodgepodge of initiatives and services grouped under “other” has traditionally dampened the company’s results (even if one of those businesses, Element Six, has been consistently profitable).
However, this time, De Beers also pointed to “stock rebalancing initiatives in the trading business, whereby stock on the balance sheet, which was purchased at a higher price, was subsequently sold at a significantly lower effective index, generating trading losses of $424 million.”
During Anglo American’s earnings call, CEO Duncan Wanblad said those sales from “inventory … kept the business at broadly cash break-even.”
Looked at that way, De Beers’ financial condition is—well, still not great, but not as terrible as it first appeared. If you look at De Beers’ balance sheet, its Botswana, Namibia, and South African divisions all made money in a challenging market. But the “other” and trading divisions dragged down the results. And the trading division showed a loss because it sold diamonds for less than it paid for them.
Yet, those diamonds were, in most cases, from inventory, which means they were already paid for. And even though they were sold at a loss, those sales boosted company revenue. Which is why, according to Wanblad, De Beers was “broadly” able to pay its bills despite posting a massive paper loss.
Of course, selling those stones at a loss, through its controversial “side deals,” arguably depresses market prices. And, this year, having sold so much of its stock, De Beers will have a tough time pulling that trick again.
Said Wanblad:
De Beers is looking really hard at other mechanisms of cash flow preservation during the course of this year. Some of those are going to be potentially big changes in terms of overhead costs.
That likely means significant cuts. De Beers already trimmed $100 million from its bottom line in 2025; it looks like it might have to cut even more.
Not surprisingly, The Jewelry Wire hears that people at De Beers are on edge, with most people just hoping the sale gets done soon.
Change at the top of Zales (exclusive)
Signet Jewelers is looking for a new president of Zales and Banter by Piercing Pagoda, following the departure of Kecia Caffie, who headed both brands for the last four years, and worked for Signet since 2011. The Zales division now reports to Signet CEO J.K. Symancyk.
These changes follow moves at Signet’s digital division, where Corinne Bentzen has left, and at Diamonds Direct, where Tom O’Rourke was named president in December, following the departure of longtime CEO Itay Berger. Diamonds Direct now reports to Jared president Claudia Cividino.
Your view
A reader writes, regarding yesterday’s story, “What does Blue Nile’s shift mean for lab-grown online?”:
You are spot on in saying that Blue Nile was all about getting a deal. That’s now very hard to offer with LGD [lab-grown diamonds], and even if they can squeeze one out in percentage terms, the amount in real terms is tiny given the shockingly low retail prices for LGD these days. The old Blue Nile's Reason To Be disappeared.
Quote of the day
“Living in a state of instability messes with people’s mind-set. It has a psychological impact. It’s more important than ever for us in the retail sector to offer a place of respite.”
— Soraya Cayen, owner of the Cayen Collection boutique in Carmel-by-the-Sea, Calif., to Rapaport
Worth a click
Daniel Langer looks at how private equity ownership can hurt luxury brands. (Jing Daily). Notable quote:
In luxury, the product is the vehicle, not the destination. The destination is a transformation in how the client perceives themselves and how the world perceives them.
Video of the day (which we don’t really like)
We wouldn’t necessarily call this worth a click, but this seems to be the new trend in Diamond District videos—people confronting each other on camera and then posting it online. (TraxNYC got tons of publicity with a similar on-camera confrontation, which turned into a brawl.)
We don’t endorse this extra-legal way of solving a problem, nor do we think it promotes a particularly good image of the Diamond District or the industry in general. We’re even a little skittish about posting this video. There has to be a better way of resolving an issue, not to mention getting attention. But social media likes anger, and from a marketing standpoint, this seems to work. This video has already gotten 146,000 likes. So if you want to see jewelry people fighting and allegedly dropping flowerpots on each other, here you go:
Diamond news
Indian government extends re-export period for gems (Economic Times)
Botswana steps up efforts for zero tariffs on diamonds (Sunday Standard)
Lucara closes $350 million bond financing (Press release)
Paul Zimnisky: Diamond trade is at “crossroads” (Rough-polished)
Tom Moses looks back on his years with GIA (National Jeweler)
Avi Krawitz on the closure of Diavik (The Diamond Press)
The CEO of Antwerp World Diamond Centre hates “AI slop” (LinkedIn)
Retail and company news
U.S. jewelers pin hopes on high-end sales (Rapaport)
Kering finalizes acquisition of 20% in jewelry manufacturer Raselli Franco Group. Sets timetable for full ownership by 2032. (Fashion Network)
Pandora opens new distribution center in Canada, to reduce tariff exposure (Press release)
Owners of Blackhawk Plaza, an upscale Bay Area shopping mall, file for Chapter 11 (SF Gate)
69% of retail workers have considered switching careers (Retail Brew)
Birmingham Assay Office appoints new CEO (LinkedIn)
Watch news
Is the watch industry prioritizing branding over functionality? (Split Seconds)
Celebrity news
Julianne Moore is the new face of Messika (Something About Rocks)
Why Kate Middleton doesn’t always wear her engagement ring (InStyle)
Have a comment or news tip? (We love news tips!) Leave it below or email rob@thejewelrywire.com
I concur with your analysis. The interplay of side deals and the corresponding accounting treatment has undoubtedly enhanced the balance sheet and cash flow statement for the underlying fiscal year.
One key asset that remains largely underutilized is the De Beers brand. Given the sustained demand for branded fine jewelry, it is apparent that De Beers has yet to find its unique brand positioning and product strategy to generate exceptional revenue and profitability. There appears to be a conflict in brand identity that juxtaposes the company's African heritage with its European legacy. The European jewelry brand landscape is notably crowded. Asian consumers increasingly seek alternatives to overexposed and overpriced European brands. In this context, leveraging African heritage may emerge as a valuable and sustainable brand asset, if played right.
De Beers' sale prospects are not appealing. Its partnership with Botswana leaves a lot of continuing uncertainty -- the contract is renewed every 5 years and Botswana drives VERY hard bargains -- that potential investors don;t like. I am not criticizing the government of Botswana which is intent on making the best deal to benefit its populace, but that goal is at odds with corporate goal of making a profit and responding to market conditions to keep doing so. The proposal being floated to involve Namibia and Angola as investors is a recipe for disaster -at the very least they will want the same advantageous deal that Botswana has and beyond that, well lets just say that Botswana's reputation for good governance doesn't cross borders.