Recently, a well-known jewelry brand has once again encountered consumer disputes, with even some “internet celebrities” who claim to “fight counterfeits” getting involved. The main point of contention revolves around the “fixed price” sales of gold jewelry. The controversial “fixed price” is actually a pricing method for gold jewelry, which means selling by piece rather than by gram weight.
Currently, there are two pricing methods for gold jewelry in China. One is pricing by weight, where the selling price is the sum of the product weight multiplied by the current gold price plus the craftsmanship fee. Such products are referred to as weight-based pricing products. The other is pricing by piece, also known as “one-price”, where the merchant sets a fixed price for the gold jewelry, which includes various costs such as gold raw materials, craftsmanship design, and brand value. Such products are referred to as fixed-price products.
The two pricing methods provide consumers with diverse options. Consumers who prioritize gold material often choose products priced by weight, while those who favor design and craftsmanship tend to prefer “fixed price” products. However, whether priced by piece or by weight, “clearly marked prices” are a basic requirement for commercial sales.
Controversy over “fixed price” gold jewelry
When examining the pricing method of “fixed price” for gold jewelry, we must first recognize that, firstly, this pricing method is prevalent in various industries; secondly, the transaction object is “gold jewelry” rather than “gold raw materials”. The creation of each piece of gold jewelry incorporates the innovative ideas of the designer and embodies the unique craftsmanship of the craftsman.
Currently, well-known jewelry brands such as Tiffany and Cartier primarily adopt the “fixed price” pricing method.
In recent years, with the rise of non-material consumption, consumers have placed greater emphasis on the emotional resonance and spiritual satisfaction that come with products. At the same time, gold jewelry has been endowed with more unquantifiable added value, such as the improvement and upgrading of design levels, the innovative development of manufacturing processes, and the cross-disciplinary integration of intellectual property (IP). Especially with the prevalence of China-Chic, more and more young consumers are inclined to purchase gold jewelry with innovative craftsmanship and unique designs to showcase their personal style and demonstrate cultural confidence. For example, jewelry pieces utilizing ancient gold craftsmanship, hard gold, inlaying, and other gold processing techniques, as well as design products incorporating traditional Chinese cultural elements, have become favorites among the younger generation of consumers. Gold brand enterprises are also constantly striving to embed cultural symbols into their products, enhance cultural connotations, and carry their inherent special value through innovative design and exquisite craftsmanship.
Therefore, cultural value, craftsmanship value, and aesthetic value constitute an integral part of the value of gold jewelry that cannot be overlooked. These additional values often entail higher production costs, which are difficult to fully reflect in the traditional pricing model based on weight. However, the “fixed price” approach can more conveniently cover these costs that are difficult to quantify.
Currently, the main reasons for the controversy surrounding the “fixed price” approach are as follows: firstly, some people believe that “the value of gold is equivalent to the value of gold raw materials”, which is obviously biased; secondly, the premise of the “fixed price” approach is that merchants must operate with integrity, clearly inform consumers of the price composition of gold jewelry during the sales process, fully guarantee consumers’ right to know, and allow consumers to understand and consume with confidence.
