I agree with the general differences discussed between a "retired" chip and an "obsolete" chip. Those differences being that a chip is obsolete if a redemption notice was issued, and retired if it was simply removed from play with the possibility of returning in the future.

However, I don't think it's been discussed that an obsolete chip as well a retired chip can resurface in a casino and be "in use". Barry used an example of just such a situation where an obsolete chip (assuming there was a redemption notice) was brought back into the gaming area years later to be used in tournaments. The Stardust, as well as other older casinos, have done this on many occasions.

The Stardust in particular has a history of bringing out chips previously thought to be long gone. One such example is when the HHR roulette chips from the 70's and tri-clubs mold roulettes from the late 50's were used during their craps lessons. Circus-Circus has done the same.

It is the term "in use" that can haunt use. In the above discussion, the chips can be used in the casino and hence be easily acquired by a collector, even though they are not available from the cage. I would think the true key to the term obsolete should be if the chips can be acquired at the casino.

In the same realm, should a chip be considered "obsolete" if the casino is closed? In the past it has, but I'm not so sure this would be a correct way of thinking. Just because the casino closed doesn't mean the chips were destroyed. They could resurface at any time.

So now, I would expect the discussion to evolve to the next step, and we could explore the question of "should the term obsolete be reserved for only if a chip has been destroyed".

Destruction of the chips along with the number destroyed, is the only pure definition of obsolete.

I know that in general discussions and chipper interactions we have become lax in our use of the term obsolete. We have become complacent in our free use of the term obsolete.