Aftermarket fracs - does it matter? (1 Viewer)

upNdown

upNdown

Royal Flush
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
21,635
Reaction score
36,740
Location
boston
Background thoughts first:
One of the reasons I don’t like murder/relabels is that it can create market confusion. If you post a rack of horseshoe Cleveland fracs for sale, I know they’re relabeles, because I happen to remember that there weren’t any Cleveland fracs. But a newbie wouldn’t know that. Hopefully the seller would disclose it, but maybe the seller doesn’t know. Same issue with a lot of those cheap ceramics people are creating.

Here’s my question/issue:
A rack of PCA fracs just sold, minutes after listing. Nowhere in the ad did it say, “these were customs, ordered from Apache, so they’re not technically authentic PCA chips.” Please understand, I’m not accusing anybody of deception. I don’t know if the seller even knew the history of the chips, and honestly, his price was more than fair. But I guess I’m just curious in hearing people’s opinions - DOES IT EVEN MATTER?
I mean, in this case, they’re genuine Paulson chips, so maybe that’s all that matters to people? To me, personally, if they didn’t come from the casino, they’re not authentic. But I have some strange ideas about chips.
Does it matter? If it matters, do we, as a community, have a duty to inform?
2EF3B365-0AB7-46F4-8373-DF0338EDCBDF.jpeg
 
Last edited:
It certainly would not hurt to put in the sales ad if they are relabeled etc. But like you say if the seller dosent know any better then how can you stop it? Personally i think if you had bought them with fracs or without then you may end up looking for fracs to murder anyway just to get some into the set. The only difference this would make is the fact that a rack of fracs is included in a set for sale and it bumping the price up due to it being a "complete set"
 
These are somewhat of a unique situation. They aren’t “canon” but they are Paulsons made exactly this way by Paulson. They aren’t replicas and there are no other fracs available so it’s not like they are getting confused with the real thing. There also some PNYs like this I believe. You also have WTHC and Avalon and PCR chips special ordered by Apache in unique denoms and color combos that weren’t original to the sets but still made by Paulson. But those are fantasy chips to begin with so I see absolutely no issue there at all.

These don’t even say President Casino on the Admiral or even PCA. Nor does the PNY say President Casino of New York although it does say PNY.

I don’t feel like there is a need to disclose anything on these and there seems to be an established market for these. Although I think this falls under the buyers responsibility to know what they are buying here they can always resell them easily at similar pricing.
 
Last edited:
I think that the general assumption is that the buyers of things like PCA fracs or PNY fracs know that they are customs. This info is easily obtainable through the chip guide. However, if for example I sold my custom relabeled fracs for HSI and didn't disclose that they were relabels I think that would be a misrepresentation and wouldn't be fair to the buyer who may assume that they came with the casino. But, much like every other hobby the new guys are gonna have to research and understand they products before buying or else they might get a misrepresented product.
 
Short answer, yes. I believe it should definitely be mentioned in a For Sale add that these are not actual chips from the casino. They are a semi-custom chip purchased as a group buy on CT to be used with the casino lineup. This is common knowledge to most sure but why not disclose it for what it is?

And, like you @upNdown , I don't think anything nefarious is being done but let's be honest at least if your taking someone's money.
 
Someone ship me the chips and I’ll make the decision on whether or not it matters. It will take a year or two to evaluate so stay tuned. ;)
 
When I started shipping and looking for my first set of casino chips, I always asked to the sellers if all were authentic or if some were relabels and in case of relabels, my interest dropped.

At the time, I thought that relabel was just a sticker over an existing inlay. I did not know that inlay replacement with laminated label or milling + laminated label was possible.

So I think it's always better to be explicit in the ad anyway. More transparency is always better.
 
In all seriousness, there needs to be some transparency, but I think intention matters. If the intent is truly to deceive, then yes, this is a problem. However, if you are just selling them as they are (or were sold to you), I guess it’s okay.

I’d also say that as a buyer you should know what you’re looking for and there are plenty of resources here to help you find that. Not to mention, you can post a question in the sales thread if it matters to you.

I understand how this can be a sticky situation.
 
I think that, for dissemination of knowledge purposes, particularly at a time when the forum's membership has exploded with tons of clueless new members, all facts and history about chips should be stated, upon the occasion of selling.

It's not about deceiving; people could anyway give their money if they like something, whatever the history behind it.
 
Never thought of this because I know exactly what these are. I do agree that we should probably disclose these things.
 
As the buyer, I'll chime in.

At certain (price?) points for all collectibles, I believe the "responsibility of knowledge" naturally begins to shift from "seller only" to more of a balance between buyer, seller, and community -- and that's typically right around when acronyms are introduced.

I mean, what is a PCA anyways?

In this particular case, the buyer didn't need a history report ... however, I don't think either party would have been offended had the community provided additional details in the sales thread.

If transparency is the goal, one of three things could have happened:
  1. The seller could have provided more details, and maybe should have.
  2. The buyer could have asked questions or researched the chip prior to pulling the trigger, and maybe should have.
  3. The community could have offered more details they felt were pertinent in the thread, and maybe should have.
Like three branches of government, there are safeguards in place when we all share some responsibility.

But it doesn't really matter because these chips are just gonna get murdered* anyways o_O


*just kidding but maybe not
 
I think people shouldn't be buying items on the internet without doing a little research first. If you are worried about legitimate casino issued chips then you should be doing research before buying said chips not just buying on a name/branding on a chip.

Too many people jump into chip collecting not wanting to do the research first. Can't just throw the blame on the seller. These were legitimate custom made on the Paulson Suits Home Mold and ordered through vendor/Paulson so they are legitimate (to say). Just as much as the other PCA which were ordered through the casino/Paulson (and never actually were in play in a casino anyway).
 
aggie said:
As the buyer, I'll chime in.

At certain (price?) points for all collectibles, I believe the "responsibility of knowledge" naturally begins to shift from "seller only" to more of a balance between buyer, seller, and community -- and that's typically right around when acronyms are introduced.

I mean, what is a PCA anyways?

In this particular case, the buyer didn't need a history report ... however, I don't think either party would have been offended had the community provided additional details in the sales thread.

If transparency is the goal, one of three things could have happened:
  1. The seller could have provided more details, and maybe should have.
  2. The buyer could have asked questions or researched the chip prior to pulling the trigger, and maybe should have.
  3. The community could have offered more details they felt were pertinent in the thread, and maybe should have.
Like three branches of government, there are safeguards in place when we all share some responsibility.

But it doesn't really matter because these chips are just gonna get murdered* anyways o_O


*just kidding but maybe not
Click to expand...
Please don't murder those. I don't remember how many were produced but not too many. I sold my PCA set but would buy these from you and start the set back up just to save these.

With that said, they are obviously your chips and you can do whatever you want with them. :tup:
 
72o said:
Please don't murder those. I don't remember how many were produced but not too many. I sold my PCA set but would buy these from you and start the set back up just to save these.

With that said, they are obviously your chips and you can do whatever you want with them. :tup:
Click to expand...
Just adding some levity to the discussion :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 72o
Personally to me it makes no difference.

If you list LCO fracs and it's a worn out white chip with a label, and it matches my set, I'll buy.

I believe it's up to the buyer to do the research and decide if it's important to them.
 
Here's a nice test:
After my passing away (obviously), if my widow or godchildren were to sell these, how should they describe them?
Horseshoe_4127.jpg
 
aggie said:
But it doesn't really matter because these chips are just gonna get murdered* anyways o_O


*just kidding but maybe not
Click to expand...

I would have picked these up if I saw them first and 100% I would have murdered them.

Yesterday I got my hands bloody as a mater of fact...

0B3CEEAE-9B06-49EE-BF7D-49BB20D51607.jpeg
 
Coyote said:
The correct answer was "fantasy over-labelled, Casablanca $100 leaded Paulson chips".
Minus 10 points for you, dear:p
Click to expand...
The correct answer is, “I’m going to buy them no matter how they are listed cause they are beautiful!” Lol
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

FestiveKnight
  • Poll
How much does condition variation matter?
Replies
6
Views
439
Rhodeman77
Rhodeman77
Jimulacrum
Rockingham Park Fracs and Hundos
Replies
0
Views
427
Jimulacrum
Jimulacrum
sm1leycanadian
Custom Chips / Custom inlays
Replies
21
Views
1K
JayRocker420
J
TheJestyr
Opinions for Horseshoe Cleveland fracs
Replies
0
Views
220
TheJestyr
TheJestyr
JWJ
  • Locked
Traded Tiger Palace Primary $20s for Tiger Fracs
Replies
16
Views
860
JWJ
JWJ
Back
Top Bottom