9 Responses to “The Bling Ring”

  1. Nelly says:

    Wow, tough call. I’d have to say it really depends on their relationship and their level of communication. I have a hard time believing that the subject of a ring, or its size, never came into discussion before Ted bought it.
    There are other factors such as who’s paying for the wedding. Often when people get married in their late 30′s or older they pay for their own wedding. Or perhaps they’re saving to buy a house?

    I was engaged to another man before marrying my husband. We fought over the ring and wedding. He wanted me to have a big stone (3 carats) and barely a wedding, while I wanted a smaller (2 carat) stone and a fab wedding. The disagreements led to lots of other disagreements and I ended the engagement. Thank goodness.
    The man I married a year later, didn’t have the money for a ring at the time of our engagement, due to an unfortunate situation – although he was paying for our wedding and honeymoon. I really didn’t care. He did surprise me with a high quality 2.5 carat stone on our 2nd anniversary.

    I think Jamie and Ted have other money issues they need to work out and the ring is just the tip of the iceberg, as I have a hard time believing this issue hasn’t been discussed before the proposal.

  2. Sue says:

    I agree with Nelly but also I think that Jamie is pretty sad. The “rock” is not supposed to be the important thing but it seems to be to her. also since other than “wattage” the ring is exactly what she wanted the ring was discussed prior to his purchase. If she wanted to pick the ring she should have said she wanted to go along to pick it out.

  3. C says:

    My brother just got engaged a few months ago and his GF made it very clear that because she is over 40 anything less then a full karat is for girls not women. Yep what you are thinking is exactly what I was thinking. My brother is not well off by no means but he made it to exactly one karat for the center diamond plus a few extras.
    I think Jamie should leave the ring alone and maybe suggest an all diamond band to go with it if he has not picked something yet. You never know what he has planned for the wedding band. It may have more bling then she can handle.

  4. louie says:

    Well, I guess I’m “old school” and not only believe that the giver of the ring has placed much thought and time into it’s selection and that’s what he has decided on, or he has gone for “Stone Quality” rather than size. The Quality issue can change costs dramatically. Also, the Ring Look depends on the size of the recipient. Not all size rings and settings look the same on all ladies. Possibly this should also play into the selection process.
    Never the less, Jamie should be thankful she received the engagement ring at all. I feel sorry for her fiance. Sounds like shades of things to come.

  5. Nelly says:

    I don’t think any woman lets the groom pick out her wedding ring. I think most couples buy one another their wedding bands and it’s traditional to select them together. However, I highly doubt that Ted selected something “with more bling than she can handle”.

    I think that the initial post left out some very important facts, such as what is the actual size of the stone he gave her, and what is Ted’s financial situation.
    The general rule of thumb is that a man should spend two months salary (before taxes) on an engagement ring. So if Ted is earning, let’s say, $52,000. a year, then a month’s gross salary is $4,300. Times that by 2 and you’ve got $8.600 to spend. This amount will get you a high quality stone in the 1 carat range and a very good quality stone in the 1.5 carat range.
    If Ted makes over 50K a year and gave her a half carat stone, I can understand her feelings.

  6. carol says:

    The idea of spending two months salary is ridiculous. Not everyone can afford to do that. The engagement ring should symbolize love and the intent to marry not showy bling. If one can afford two months salary, go for it but not everyone can do that and shouldn’t feel inadequate for spending less.

  7. Nelly says:


    Of course no one should buy a ring they can’t afford.

    However, perhaps you missed the part of the post that read, “Because both she and Ted are in their late 30s and financially stable, she feels that her ring should represent “where they are at in life”.

  8. carol says:


    I didn’t miss that part. Why the need to have a “showy” ring to flaunt your wealth, status or “where you are in life” ? I guess I just don’t get. To each his own, whatever floats one’s boat etc. :)

  9. Nelly says:

    I don’t think having things that you can afford “flaunts” your wealth. Some people may, but to most of us, it merely means people can afford to have what they like.

    If you make $100,000. and enjoy designer shoes, why not have them? If you don’t care, and feel that $30. shoes are just fine, then so be it. But don’t put down the person who buys what they like because it’s not something that you want.

    As I said before, we don’t know what Ted earns, nor what size stone he bought Jamie. But if he makes $100K a year, isn’t in debt, and bought her an engagement ring that’s 1/3 of a carat, I can understand her unhappiness with it and it’s not about “wealth” or “status”.

Any Thoughts?