You are totally correct! It's a business! (And business follow rules--like in any game.) And like any business, it makes decisions on how it treats its customers. Collectors/Investors in the chip world comprise a group of customers. If it gives those groups low priority, that's a choice the business makes---and risks alienating
that group.
Mr. Stone indicated in his statements that he has several customers he is concerned with (and rightfully so):
His boss (es)
The Gaming Commission
The Barriss/Kustoms folks
People who buy limited edition chips at issue time only to resell them to others.
People who collect such chips for the sake of collecting.
People who collect chips for fun and profit.

His job is to juggle his customers as best he can within the scope of his business.
It appears to me that his decision only created an upset for one group of these customers. Yes, some of these groups overlap---but the bottom line
is that some of us believe better decisions might have been made so that NONE of these groups would
be upset. Of course, we don't know the whole picture, so all we can do is bellow at each other in the vacuum of these pages.
It would have been nice if the people making the decisions in this matter woul dhave had more respect for the "limited editions" label they slapped on their packaging. A very basic definition of that term would not have allowed this re-issue.
The risk for them is that some of the customers hurt here may react with their feet. That is a reaction any business deals with when they make a decision of this kind. For their sake, I hope it was worth that risk.