Update,
I received a roll of 25 light-blue "$10" denomination chips, and they are as I expected them to be. I also got more denominations for a tourney set so maybe I’ll update my review and post pictures once I have them all – if you want...
Weight: I really like the weight. I prefer to not have the heavy inserts. These compare to the Faux Clay.
Feel: The surface has a similar type of texture to the Faux Clay, and the exception is of course the sticker. As the reviewer in the video pointed out you can feel the transition between edge spots and core color, but the degree to which you feel it isn't consistent (goes for both top of chip and side). On most it’s noticeable, but on some it isn’t. I suppose this means the quality control is "average".
Looks: This is the light blue / white $10 chip. I really like the colors of this denomination, and the design of it, relative to the Faux Clay. The denomination sticker is much nicer than I thought, and overall the chip is simple and clean, easy to read, and basically utilitarian without being an eyesore. There is one issue however:
In four of the 25 chips there were small areas of blue on the white edge spots. They range from tiny enough to barely be noticeable, to large enough to be eye catching as a defect if one looks at it. I think the bottom line here for me is that on a table, with people yapping about god-knows-what while drinking and actually playing poker the odds aren't that high that the average friend of mine would even notice this.
Stacking: Seems fine to me. The video guy mentioned this wobbling when holding a stack and pressing down on one side and I'm not seeing that with this batch. At least not nearly to the degree where it'd be a problem.
Durability: Well, I guess get back to me in a couple of months. Clearly chips need to be put into rotation and action for a while to see if they'll hold up or not. The whole "does it break when I apply a great deal of pressure on them" test to me is sort of interesting in that it can show how “sturdy” one chip is compared to another, but it isn't really real-world testing. I do have one person in my circle of friends that I play with that is a "fiddler" and is the one guy to bend cards for example (non-maliciously for sure), and he'd be the one to break one of these. But we've played with worse chips and it never happened so far.
As for pieces of material chipping off (I honestly don't know what the word for this is) I don't see a problem here. I took two chips and banged one against the other, edge to edge, in what I felt was using more force than a player would use while carelessly abusing the chips, and there was no damage. Perhaps I'm weak. Actually, I know I'm weak. I'm weak in general, and I'm only now getting over the flu. But still, it just doesn't seem like it'll be a problem.
Conclusion:
Short version: Totally worth it if you just want a decent looking low weight chip to play with that doesn’t cost too much.
Annoyingly long version:
First of all let me say that I have limited experience with chips, and it's certainly zero experience with the true high end chips. So you have to keep that in mind. My conclusion is instead based on comparing with; low-end slugged chips that people who don't really care buy - the ones in those metal briefcases; the Milanos; the Scroll ceramics; the Faux Clay, and some other random chips I don't know the name of (likely a bit older mid-range chips).
I think these chips compare very well to the Faux Clay. Pretend you're a complete newbie to this, show up in a store, and the owner shows you the Faux Clay and these. You ask about the price, and the owner says the Faux are 4 cents a piece (what I got mine for), and the Romans 12. At this point there are some easy questions to ask yourself; What's my budget? How many do I need? Do I need denominations? Do I think the added cost is worth it? I think the last question likely would be "no" for many people. BUT, there aren't any Faux Clay available at this price any longer! The last prices I saw were for one or two colors only at 21-27 cents per chip. So, the comparison in price has to reflect this, and rather than the Romans being three times as expensive, the Faux are actually about twice as expensive in 2018. If you can find them.
My take on the value of these chips then is based on making what I think are realistic comparisons, and realistic goals and standards. If the Faux felt good enough and had good enough weight etc to play with, then these chips too are good enough. They’re totally comparable in my view. That doesn't speak to whether or not they're worth the money, but I think that's the first hurdle to get over. They're absolutely usable. To the average player, they'll be fine. Now, throw in some Milanos and Scrolls in the mix and the average Joe will notice a difference. "Hopefully" this Joe will prefer the more expensive chips, but more importantly; I can tell you that at our games nobody has ever had anything but positive things to say about the Faux, ever. I think these are similar enough to also never be a problem.
But ok, what about that price though. Well, some caveats in this thread were about durability. But again our comparison has to be realistic and 'fair'. If durability and chips not chipping is a thing, then is it also a thing when you buy Paulson? No, it probably isn't, because the idea there is that you're getting so much of something else that it's worth the fragility. Well, I think the Romans are appropriately priced then as far as that’s concerned. But then the next objection is likely to be "But there are other chips at 16 cents that look much better". I think that's subjective, but even though I agree there's then the weight to consider. I prefer lighter chips. "But there are the Milanos" you probably think. True, but now the issue is price again. To some of us money is an issue. The difference in cost would cover decks of cards, dealer buttons, cut cards, bounty buttons, racks etc. How much do those things contribute to the actual game experience relative to just getting “more chip” instead? I don’t think the answer is necessarily obvious. And finally, how about cheaper chips.... Well? I asked. I don't see any alternatives at this weight.
At the end of the day I think a chip can be looked at as a tool or as something more than that. For those looking for a tool that feels good and doesn't look bad and doesn't cost too much this seems to be a totally decent chip. I don’t see the reason for hating them given the price and also not a reason not to buy them with the aforementioned caveats.... meaning if you on the other hand are a chip "connaisseur" and care about details, consistency and quality, then these aren’t for you...