... You're welcome, Michael. As I said, I appreciated the opportunity to participate.

>> Because I was moderating the seminar, I've kept my views about
>> slabbing to myself, but now that it's over I can express them.
>> (Not that anyone cares, necessarily!)

You gotta be kidding! Your views on anything to do with chipping carry a lot of weight. No one interested in slabbing (pro or con) will be indifferent to what you think.

>> The coin hobby faced issues of counterfieting that slabbing
>> was designed to address. We don't have the same problems.

Thank goodness (though as chips increase in value, the counterfeiters will come, too, I'm afraid).

>> Coins are far more fragile than chips are ...

In some ways, that is true (though clay chips will break, nick or gouge much more easily than most coins). The "fragility" of coins is significant, however, primarily because of the 70 point grading system and the ten grades of "Mint State" coins.

>> ... so encapsulation makes more sense for high-end coins.

"Encapsulation", of course, doesn't necessarily require slabbing in the sense we are discussing. Fortunately, we can "encapsulate" our chips to protect them without having to send them out to slabbers -- airtites work great.

>> We don't face the same situation. Grading and authentication
>> were initially undertaken by the ANA itself, as a means
>> to protect its members. Not so with chips. The differences
>> are significant, I think.

One of the problems with ICG's approach to slabbing chips was that they assumed (incorrectly) that chips were just funny-looking clay coins and could be treated the same way coins are.

I agree with your comments about Steve Rocchi. As I said earlier, had they been first into the fray, with the approach he described, the reaction of many chippers might have been different (or at least less vehement).

>> Ultimately, I oppose slabbing for many of the same reasons
>> the Slab-Free Chapter has articulated.

Thanks for expressing that viewpoint, Michael. As you know, the Slabfree Chapter is receptive to all Slabfree viewpoints and does not require supporting either The List or a convention/club prohibition of slabs. If you haven't already joined the chapter, we'd love to have you do so. Lifetime dues = $5!!

>> But I am also unalterably opposed to prohibiting dealers
>> or collectors from using a service they want (slabbing or otherwise)
>> by keeping them out of our conventions or auctions.

I respect your point of view on this, Michael, albeit we disagree for reasons which I have articulated in the past.

>> I believe the marketplace will doom slabbing efforts,
>> and the withdrawal of ICG from the show before it was
>> over is a good indication of that, I think.

Please see my response to Larry's post regarding the "market". I do agree with your assessment that ICG's early departure from the convention was a good sign. They did a lousy job of market analysis before jumping into our hobby and it looks like they will pay the ultimate economic price.

>> My impression - and this isn't based on anything
>> Steve said to me - is that Collectors Universe probably
>> won't get into the chip slabbing business.
>> There just isn't enough money in it for them to bother,
>> and I think Steve learned that during the convention.

I have the same impression on both points. His response regarding the number of chips they would have to slab every month to make the process economically viable was quite revealing. There are simply not enough high-end chips available to support the process for very long, even if they were ALL slabbed. Furthermore, common chips could not be economically slabbed.

Thanks again for putting together the seminar, Michael. Look forward to seeing you again sometime soon. ----- jim o\-S