I appreciate Meg’s transparency in answering the question about converting "women of a certain age" into lab diamond customers and this product being seen as a future heirloom.
Meg's is an approach the industry could use more of when it comes to lab-grown vs. natural diamonds. I also love that she isn’t trying to convince anyone, even though I have a slightly different view on lab-grown stones as heirlooms. To me, whether lab-grown can be considered an heirloom depends on one’s definition: if it’s something sentimental, then yes, it certainly can be. But if an heirloom is something that holds intrinsic value in the secondary market—something I’d pass to my daughter or granddaughter with lasting value there—then lab-grown may not meet that definition.
This is an interesting perspective that I haven’t heard before and haven’t given much thought to.
Hm I’d argue that natural diamonds don’t necessarily have intrinsic value in the secondary market either though. They currently do, but the market of natural diamonds was artificially concocted by DeBeers in the 1950s by actively suppressing supply - they are not actually rare in the same way of other gemstones. The fact that it’s not a ‘real’ rare good leaves its assumed value susceptible to disruption by a threat like…lab grown diamonds. Granted this is unlikely and/or would take a long time due to the way the diamond industry has been able to entrench itself in culture. But anyway, if you’re looking for a heirloom that has real long term value in the secondary market, rare gemstones would be a better bet than natural diamonds.
I like where you’re going with that, Anu. I’d take it a step further and argue that there’s no such thing as intrinsic value at all. “Value” is simply a proxy for how much an individual or a group likes and desires a thing; your DeBeers example illustrates how a company capitalized on individuals’ intrinsic desire for prestige to *manufacture* a desire for diamonds. And if desire can be manufactured, it can also be dismantled.
I'm so impressed by Meg and everything she has built/is building! For a deeper dive into her background, her interview with Hillary Kerr on Second Life was a great listen: https://www.secondlifepod.com/episodes/meg-strachan
All of this resonates and I think there is one more additional point to make - the power of Meg Strachan in building Dorsey. She developed and designed a really cool product that is excellent quality and that others wanted. So partnering and building an affiliate program with the content creators, influencers, editorials etc that make us want cool things helped the brand. Meg continues to show up as her honest and authentic self and that resonates. She engages on the platform where her customers are. So when she shares that she thinks affiliate marketing is where fashion brands should invest (I agree) if the brand has a product that others want and can build an affiliate program that is right for their brand.
Meg's candor is really refreshing. She's a favorite follow on substack and instagram, the way she shares content makes you want to respond and connect with her. I've had my eye on the Lucien earrings for weeks!
Love my Dorsey earrings and I love the winter collection. Definitely sending hints. Thanks Meg for sharing your process! Loved the focus on the changing face of D2C and consumer marketing in general. We’re in for a wild ride on this front!
Nice piece! Loved one thing in particular. Meg has clearly set up a culture that preserves the core to founder success - team candor and safety to tell their boss and founder that they don’t think her ideas were good. Right or wrong, so many founders lose that critical input and build a team of compliance which can widen blind spots. And coupled with that, she also shows how critical it is to maintain a belief in something despite doubters. It’s better than the “fail fast” mentality. It’s conviction in the unconventional. 👏🏼👏🏼
Thank you so much for this kind and thoughtful note, Shaun. I trust my team and they are not afraid (at all!) to tell me when they think I’m wrong. I’m wrong a lot.
I appreciate Meg’s transparency in answering the question about converting "women of a certain age" into lab diamond customers and this product being seen as a future heirloom.
Meg's is an approach the industry could use more of when it comes to lab-grown vs. natural diamonds. I also love that she isn’t trying to convince anyone, even though I have a slightly different view on lab-grown stones as heirlooms. To me, whether lab-grown can be considered an heirloom depends on one’s definition: if it’s something sentimental, then yes, it certainly can be. But if an heirloom is something that holds intrinsic value in the secondary market—something I’d pass to my daughter or granddaughter with lasting value there—then lab-grown may not meet that definition.
This is an interesting perspective that I haven’t heard before and haven’t given much thought to.
Hm I’d argue that natural diamonds don’t necessarily have intrinsic value in the secondary market either though. They currently do, but the market of natural diamonds was artificially concocted by DeBeers in the 1950s by actively suppressing supply - they are not actually rare in the same way of other gemstones. The fact that it’s not a ‘real’ rare good leaves its assumed value susceptible to disruption by a threat like…lab grown diamonds. Granted this is unlikely and/or would take a long time due to the way the diamond industry has been able to entrench itself in culture. But anyway, if you’re looking for a heirloom that has real long term value in the secondary market, rare gemstones would be a better bet than natural diamonds.
I like where you’re going with that, Anu. I’d take it a step further and argue that there’s no such thing as intrinsic value at all. “Value” is simply a proxy for how much an individual or a group likes and desires a thing; your DeBeers example illustrates how a company capitalized on individuals’ intrinsic desire for prestige to *manufacture* a desire for diamonds. And if desire can be manufactured, it can also be dismantled.
And this is the reason I personally would never want a diamond engagement ring lol.
I'm so impressed by Meg and everything she has built/is building! For a deeper dive into her background, her interview with Hillary Kerr on Second Life was a great listen: https://www.secondlifepod.com/episodes/meg-strachan
Thank you!!!
agree! this is one of my favorite episodes of second life
All of this resonates and I think there is one more additional point to make - the power of Meg Strachan in building Dorsey. She developed and designed a really cool product that is excellent quality and that others wanted. So partnering and building an affiliate program with the content creators, influencers, editorials etc that make us want cool things helped the brand. Meg continues to show up as her honest and authentic self and that resonates. She engages on the platform where her customers are. So when she shares that she thinks affiliate marketing is where fashion brands should invest (I agree) if the brand has a product that others want and can build an affiliate program that is right for their brand.
My Meglet, always the smartest girl in the room
Meg's candor is really refreshing. She's a favorite follow on substack and instagram, the way she shares content makes you want to respond and connect with her. I've had my eye on the Lucien earrings for weeks!
I wear my earrings from Dorsey almost every day, really makes me feel a little more glamorous even when I’m running errands
Thank you so much, Ruthie.
One of my favorite Guest Lectures. Seems like people will buy lab-grown and along with natural the way most people drink NA and alcohol
Meg is beautiful inside and out — she’s always had her finger on the pulse and is incredibly bright and kind. Great read!
Love my Dorsey earrings and I love the winter collection. Definitely sending hints. Thanks Meg for sharing your process! Loved the focus on the changing face of D2C and consumer marketing in general. We’re in for a wild ride on this front!
We are absolutely in for a wild ride! Thank you for taking the time to write this not. It’s nice to meet you.
Nice piece! Loved one thing in particular. Meg has clearly set up a culture that preserves the core to founder success - team candor and safety to tell their boss and founder that they don’t think her ideas were good. Right or wrong, so many founders lose that critical input and build a team of compliance which can widen blind spots. And coupled with that, she also shows how critical it is to maintain a belief in something despite doubters. It’s better than the “fail fast” mentality. It’s conviction in the unconventional. 👏🏼👏🏼
Thank you so much for this kind and thoughtful note, Shaun. I trust my team and they are not afraid (at all!) to tell me when they think I’m wrong. I’m wrong a lot.