China’s Gen Z is ‘group-buying’ Tiffany jewelry

Get more stories like this in your inbox — SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY NEWSLETTER Young Chinese consumers have found an ingenious way to own Tiffany & Co. jewelry for just $42: they pool their money with strangers online. The practice, dubbed “shared luxury,” is sweeping social media as budget-conscious Gen Zers and millennials seek access to high-end brands without paying premium prices. The trend exploded on August 22, 2025, when Xiaohongshu user “Eat well every day” (@天天好好吃饭) posted, “Finding 23 sisters to split this bracelet,” showcasing a 7,150 RMB ($975) Tiffany Multi-heart Tag bracelet with 23 charms. Her proposal was simple: gather 23 people, each pays $42 (300 RMB), and everyone receives a charm to recreate the official piece for less than one-tenth the cost. The post garnered over 22,000 likes and sparked a frenzy of copycat group buys targeting Van Cleef & Arpels and Bulgari. “This marks a shift from ‘product group buys’ to ‘brand group buys,’” Tab Jethro Lai, founder of Tab Consultech and former strategy director at WE WestEast Media Group, tells Jing Daily. “Students and young professionals are finding ways to access the halo of luxury brands at lower costs, boosting both self-image and social visibility.” The phenomenon highlights a fundamental change in how young consumers approach luxury brands in China’s market. Rather than accepting high prices without question, they demand tangible value while still craving the status and emotional benefits that come with prestigious labels. Practical value meets status anxiety User testimonials reveal complex motivations behind the trend. Netizen “Just can’t eat enough” (@就是吃不饱) captured the prevailing sentiment: “I can’t afford full price, but I won’t buy fakes either. Spending just over 300 yuan for a real charm to wear casually feels worth it.” Others admit to superstitious beliefs, with “Xin Xinlei” (@心心蕾) confessing interest in the Tiffany charms’ supposed ability to “ward off your boss.” The grassroots enthusiasm created immediate market impact. Consumers attempting to purchase the viral Tiffany bracelet discovered empty shelves — the piece disappeared from the brand’s Tmall flagship store and showed only a “notify me when in stock” message on JD.com. Emboldened participants then targeted higher-end pieces, with one user proposing to split a $60,735 Bulgari necklace among 52 people, reducing each individual’s cost to roughly $1,158 per component. Brand dilemma: Traffic versus exclusivity The viral attention delivers significant benefits for luxury brands China operations — massive social media engagement, widespread brand awareness, and introduction to price-sensitive demographics who represent potential future customers. The shared purchases typically focus on brands’ most iconic designs, reinforcing cultural recognition of signature elements like Tiffany’s heart pendants or Van Cleef & Arpels’ clover motifs. Yet, the practice strikes at luxury’s core value proposition. Scarcity and exclusivity are not mere slogans — they are the foundation of high-end brands. When emblematic products become easily attainable through group purchases, premium pricing and carefully curated brand aura face inevitable erosion. The deeper concern involves the loss of luxury’s experiential ecosystem. From the scent that greets customers in a boutique, to one-on-one guidance from sales staff, to the ritual of unboxing — these intangible experiences are what make customers feel they’ve gotten value, experts tell Jing Daily. Shared purchases leave consumers with bare products stripped of brand context, potentially diminishing long-term brand relationships. Strategic responses must match brand positioning Lai says that brand responses should align with market positioning. Top-tier luxury labels must prioritize preserving scarcity and high-end image through cautious, defensive strategies. “Limited-edition collectibles aimed at elite clients can reinforce prestige and sustain conversation in the high-end market,” he says. Accessible luxury and contemporary brands have more flexibility to em brace the trend. They might develop entry-level pieces designed for layering, sharing, or mix-and-match customization, actively responding to market appetite for lower-cost luxury experiences. However, Lai warns brands must “carefully calibrate marketing initiatives and monitor public sentiment” to avoid sacrificing long-term brand equity for short-term engagement. Legal repercussions? Beyond the potential for counterfeits and a lack of after-sales support, the practice raises legal questions. “The act of consumers pooling purchases is not illegal,” Wang Wei, a lawyer at Shanghai Junyue Law Firm, tells Jing Daily. “Legally, it functions as one person acting as a representative to form a purchase contract with the brand, while the other participants have internal agreements with that representative.” Group-buying is treated as a private, commissioned purchase. Participants form an internal agreement among themselves and are free to resell or modify the items for personal use. But if a consumer modifies a product and resells it, especially when the altered item resembles or competes with the brand’s own products, “the risk of trademark infringement rises sharply,” says Wang. The new luxury battleground The shared luxury phenomenon reflects a far-reaching shift in consumer expectations. Young buyers still value emotional and status signals that luxury brands provide, but refuse to pay excessive premiums without clear justification. They demand proof — superior craftsmanship, premium materials, genuine innovation — that validates high prices. This evolution pushes luxury brands into uncharted territory. Success will depend on convincingly answering an increasingly pointed question: why is this expensive item truly worth its cost? Only brands that provide compelling answers will thrive in an era when consumers have weaponized collective buying power to democratize access to luxury. The implications extend beyond individual transactions. As group buying reshapes luxury consumption patterns, brands face pressure to rethink exclusivity strategies, pricing models, and customer relationship approaches. The era of unquestioned premium pricing may be ending, replaced by a more demanding marketplace where luxury must continuously prove its worth.

Sectors

Insights

Company

China’s Gen Z is ‘group-buying’ Tiffany jewelry