The Chip Board
Custom Search
   


The Chip Board Recent Archive

Re: Clermont £100,000 gold plaque.

You can get the idea of what it looks like but it could be a lot better as it's blurry and has glare.
At least we now know the gold weight and size etc. It only has the CC logo and the denomination, no Playboy mentioned (as I had been told a few times by members of staff that had handled it) or at least it certainly looks that way.
The information/photo was found in an old Playtime magazine which was the UK Playboy staff magazine that started in 1972/3 (I think).
I bought quite a large lot of them in the hopes of finding a photo and had almost given up until I actually found it.
I will keep trying to find a better one. It's a shame that the chap who made it wasn't keen to help or supply any info at all.

Messages In This Thread

(Message Deleted by Poster)
Re: Clermont £100,000 gold plaque.
Re: Clermont £100,000 gold plaque.
Re: Clermont £100,000 gold plaque.
Re: A gold one?
Re: A gold one?
A gold one? Here's an exact description of it ~~~
Re: 1st Playboy book.
I, too, seem to recall a greater value tha £8,000
Re: Clermont £100,000 gold plaque.
Tom mentions the cost of the first £100,000 ~~~
Re: Negotiable plaque.
Re: Clermont £100,000 gold plaque.
I responded to your post you made in my thread ~~.
..and here are my responses.
Re: I responded to your post you made in my thread
Re: Thanks for spoiling the thread.
Re: Thanks for spoiling the thread.
Re: It's not that hard, surely.
Re: Thanks for spoiling the thread.
Re: Rubbish.
The best possible photos are probably right under
Re: The best possible photos are probably right un
Yep. It all confirmed Tom was 100% correct ~~~
Re: Yep.
Nope. I know "0" about the plaques except ~~~
Re: Yep, that is clear.
Nothing needed to be confirmed with what Tom said
Re: As I suspected, just speculation.
I explained the thing about the diamonds ~~~.
He clearly is responding in a PLAYBOY thread ~~~
Now I have one question for you, Garin.
Re: That's an easy one.
Re: Maybe if I explain the timeline.
Re: Maybe if I explain the timeline.
Re: Maybe if I explain the timeline.
Re: Thanks David.
...and it also appears that Tom got the info ~~~
Re: Assumptions.
I think you're on the right track with the mixup ~
That would be for either or both ChipGuide Webmast
Re: Assumptions.

Copyright 2022 David Spragg