Ceramic vs. China Clays (3 Viewers)

[Legend5555]

Your products - in particular the Royals are the best on the market at their price point. But it's just like anything else - if you're used to a Cadillac, you're probably not going to enjoy test driving a Chevy Cruze.

Not saying you are guilty of this, but the Cadillac mentality doesn't do a very good service to those just getting into the hobby. I just think way too often people try to upsell people into getting some "cheap" RHC or ceramics even if it means pushing up the budget a decent bit. I think overall value is important. Durability and resale are just part of a larger equation.

There are lots of products out there. Not everyone needs to get "the best" to be satisfied. This is the Poker Chip Forum, not the Paulson and ABC forum it sometimes seems to act like.

 

[Moxie Mike]

Not saying you are guilty of this, but the Cadillac mentality doesn't do a very good service to those just getting into the hobby. I just think way too often people try to upsell people into getting some "cheap" RHC or ceramics even if it means pushing up the budget a decent bit.

I'm not really sure where this is coming from - I don't care what people buy, nor do I have any interest in influencing their purchasing decision. I was just trying to contribute to the discussion.

I think overall value is important. Durability and resale are just part of a larger equation.

Questions about durability were literally part of the OP's opener to this entire thread. People new to this hobby don't even know where to begin in terms of all the various attributes that differentiate little discs that at their core perform the exact same function.

This is where the car metaphor comes in. The Chevy Cruze is a fine automobile that will reliably serve it's owner well. They're a nice car that's affordable to purchase and cost of ownership is low. And as a generalization - their owners love them (this was all meant as a compliment BTW, @Apache). But the Cruze is not 'the best' car on the market nor to they claim to be. So if you want the prestige (and whatever else) that comes with owning a Cadillac, you'll need to buy a Cadillac.

There are lots of products out there. Not everyone needs to get "the best" to be satisfied. This is the Poker Chip Forum, not the Paulson and ABC forum it sometimes seems to act like.

Once again - people new to this hobby have a lot to learn before they're comfortable making a purchase decision. And there are a lot of people here who graciously donate their time to answer the same questions over and over again from people who stumble upon this forum. But part of that newbie education is expressing an opinion as to why one product is better than another. I think I speak for most people here when I say that it's not about influencing their choice - it's about contributing to their experience by helping them make the most informed purchase decision as they can.

 

[hdgeno]

Agreed - honestly you get 1000x better value when you compare genuine quality vs purpose with Apache.

All depends on a player/hosts price range. Yes Paulson > "china clays" in quality, but china clays have better value by a long shot.

I haven't gotten my hands on Royals yet but I've heard fantastic things - and wayyy better than the minimum $4/chip (often $10-$20+) you'll pay for Paulson 43mm

Paulsons have a better value by a long shot, you will rarely lose money on them, you and I clearly think of value in different terms.

CC are better for those on a budget or those want cheaper chips with no plans to upgrade.

 

[Legend5555]

Paulsons have a better value by a long shot, you will rarely lose money on them, you and I clearly think of value in different terms.

CC are better for those on a budget or those want cheaper chips with no plans to upgrade.

Value is more than just resale. Value is also hours of use per money spent, while also taking budget into consideration. Not everyone buys chips thinking they are going to resell them.

 

[BirdCage]

Paulsons have a better value by a long shot, you will rarely lose money on them...

After considerable background research, I will state again, that this is a PCF myth. I'll quote myself with the following current example, many more are available by perusing the PCF classifieds.

Financial pretzel logic isn't a good reason to buy Paulsons. The fact that your heart tugs as you to do so or that you desire the pinnacle of chip manufacture artistry are good reasons. Buy them for the right reason, if you buy them at all.

This thread has a great (perhaps extreme) example that clearly shows a 30% plus decline in Paulson (PCA $500 chip) pricing over the past several months (based upon sales in the PCF market price) --> https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/168-x-pca-500-secondaries-by-the-barrel.51270/

These chips have been listed multiple times, with multiple price reductions. PCA $500's have sold in excess of $30, but now are being offered at $20 and haven't sold in several weeks. One member commented "Yep $30-$35 chips being sold for $25 Each!!!!!!!!!! " and another has offered $15 per chip.

Versus an entire set of 500 China Clays, you would have lost more by purchasing just three single chips a few months back. Caveat emptor!

Perhaps "better value" means tying up $1000+ on poker chips that you'd be lucky to use a dozen times per year (if at all) with the hope that one day you can sell them for the same price or more than you paid. A higher cost of entry and greater risk do not equate to better value, IMHO.

I'll buy Paulsons when I want them for their quality and design, no other reason.

 

[Lemonzest]

Some of you guys are really bashing my products. Not sure if you know how much time we work with the makers of these chips to improve quality over the years.
The Majestic, Dunes, Pharaoh’s, and Royals are incredible chips for people that can’t afford casino quality items.

I didn't mean any disrespect Josh. I think you are a solid vendor with many good products. I personally am not a fan of China Clays. I have heard the Royals are the best versions yet but I don't know and have never seen them.

I DO think the Monacos and GPI Elite chips are great value and nice chips indeed.

 

[72o]

The OP asked for comparing similar price point china clays and ceramics. Just sharing my opinion...that’s all. Certainly didn’t mean to steer anyone from any particular product per se.

 

[pltrgyst]

100% full of shit....
Lol not trying to be a dick....
That said china clays or ceramics seem like the nuts to 99.9 percent of the population. But we are that .1% thats why we are here.

So despite your best efforts to not be a dick, there are a good number of us who disagree with you, and we shouldn't be here. Got it.

 

[pltrgyst]

....A quality ceramic chip will last many, many years in a home game environment. Can't say that about most china clays.

Agreed. I've never seen any ceramic chips flake and chip like some PCF-bought China clays.

 

[allforcharity]

New CC $0.40 per chip
Minty Paulson THC $2-$4 per chip
New Bud Jones S2 $0.70 per chip

Doesn't that third option deserve a little consideration?

 

[grantc54]

New CC $0.40 per chip
Minty Paulson THC $2-$4 per chip
New Bud Jones S2 $0.70 per chip

Doesn't that third option deserve a little consideration?

Minty RHC Starting at $1
Casino used RHC Starting at $0.69 (Lots of options)

Big take away is that chips are VERY subjective! If you are lucky you are satisfied with a less expensive option OR just stay away from mint Paulson chips, then you never have to worry about it (and by stay away, I mean stay AWAY from ALL mint Paulsons, never touch/shuffle/feel them).

 

[sem0030]

I love the DDLM. Ceramics are to me the best option. Don't have to worry about damage and will last nearly forever with my use. If there is ever another sunfly hybrid buy I'll probably jump on that as well as I love the shuffle stack that I have.

 

[BirdCage]

Minty RHC Starting at $1
Casino used RHC Starting at $0.69 (Lots of options)

Which is why this is such a tough decision for many. $125 for a minty used, 500 chip Milano set or $500 for a good used Paulson RHC set.

Once you set your sights above the 30 cents per chip mark, I think you have to seriously consider Paulsons.

The 69 cent casino used (a.k.a. rather worn/flea-bitten) chips aren't for everyone either, especially when comparing to minty CCs or ceramics, IMHO.

Not sure there's a wrong decision (other than slugged).

 

[Marhault]

Some of you guys are really bashing my products. Not sure if you know how much time we work with the makers of these chips to improve quality over the years.
The Majestic, Dunes, Pharaoh’s, and Royals are incredible chips for people that can’t afford casino quality items.

I think the problem with the majority of the "CC's are brittle" crowd is that they haven't had any of the new offerings in hand. I mean to any of you guys complaining about the quality of CC's when was the last time you had any in hand? I've had them all in hand and can attest to the quality. They're nice chips. Also to anyone complaining about CC's not being "clay" because they have plastics in them, you obviously haven't researched paulson chips. They also use plastics in their process.

The amount of chip snobs around here is amazing to me. I love paulsons, but I love ceramics and cc's too. Preference is one thing, but most of the statements here aren't prefernce, they're stated as definitive facts that are not actually facts but opinions.

Get samples, play around with them, see what you like the feel of. Then decide from there if you want customs, or exisiting casino chips etc. Because at the end of the day what you want can sometimes affect your choice of feel especially regarding customs simply because custom poker chips can be cost prohibitive when looking at the higher end clay options.

 

[allforcharity]

Which is why this is such a tough decision for many. $125 for a minty used, 500 chip Milano set or $500 for a good used Paulson RHC set.

Why are these the only choices? Why not $300 and change for 500-chip Brand New BJ set? vs. $200 for a 500-chip Brand New CC set? vs. $1200-$3000 for a minty Paulson THC set?

 

[BGinGA]

After considerable background research, I will state again, that this is a PCF myth.

No offense, but no matter how many times you shout out your newly-discovered 'truth', it will not make it so. Paulson sets retaining value is NOT a myth, unless you are spending stupid money prices for them that is above their actual market value in the first place.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, Paulson sets will either retain value or increase in value. This has proven to be true across many different sets, and over many years of sales, both public and private.

The very few times this is not true is almost always due to somebody overpaying in the first place when making a purchase -- and often due to an inflated selling price in an auction that was above the actual market value of the chips, or somebody desparate enough to willingly pay above market value to get whar they want right now at any cost.

Just because somebody wants something badly enough to overpay for it (only to find later that nobody else is also willing to overpay) does not mean that the chips were suddenly 'worth' that artificially-inflated price in the market, nor that they have suddenly 'dropped in value' when attempts to resell at the artificially high price fails to attract any buyers.

Other ways incorrectly-perceived value can disconnect from reality is when people attempt to roll their shipping costs into a projected resale value, particularly if expensive overseas shipping is involved. If a rack of chips is sold at a $200 market price with $10 shipping, they are not suddenly 'worth' $210 to the next buyer.

This is especially true if overseas shipping was $30 or more, and then resold to a different desparate overseas buyer for $230 plus $30 shipping -- that rack still has a general market value of $200 (not $260). And even though the latest owner may claim his $220 asking price is 'below his cost', it's still above the actual market value of $200 (which has never changed), just because he overpaid at $230 plus shipping.

 

[allforcharity]

No offense, but no matter how many times you shout out your newly-discovered 'truth', it will not make it so. Paulson sets retaining value is NOT a myth, unless you are spending stupid money prices for them that is above their actual market value in the first place.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, Paulson sets will either retain value or increase in value. This has proven to be true across many different sets, and over many years of sales, both public and private.

The very few times this is not true is almost always due to somebody overpaying in the first place when making a purchase -- and often due to an inflated selling price in an auction that was above the actual market value of the chips, or somebody desparate enough to willingly pay above market value to get whar they want right now at any cost.

Just because somebody wants something badly enough to overpay for it (only to find later that nobody else is also willing to overpay) does not mean that the chips were suddenly 'worth' that artificially-inflated price in the market, nor that they have suddenly 'dropped in value' when attempts to resell at the artificially high price fails to attract any buyers.

Other ways incorrectly-perceived value can disconnect from reality is when people attempt to roll their shipping costs into a projected resale value, particularly if expensive overseas shipping is involved. If a rack of chips is sold at a $200 market price with $10 shipping, they are not suddenly 'worth' $210 to the next buyer.

This is especially true if overseas shipping was $30 or more, and then resold to a different desparate overseas buyer for $230 plus $30 shipping -- that rack still has a general market value of $200 (not $260). And even though the latest owner may claim his $220 asking price is 'below his cost', it's still above the actual market value of $200 (which has never changed), just because he overpaid at $230 plus shipping.

Hey, I agree 100% with this post! Maybe that's means I've actually learned something in the last 2 years!

 

[Vintage1974]

Some of you guys are really bashing my products. Not sure if you know how much time we work with the makers of these chips to improve quality over the years.
The Majestic, Dunes, Pharaoh’s, and Royals are incredible chips for people that can’t afford casino quality items.

I'm getting samples of the Royals tomorrow and leaning toward getting a set for my tournament chips. I really like your Dunes, Pharaohs, and Majestics too. A few years ago when I got Nexgen chips and put my own labels on them, I thought they were amazing...a huge step up from non-denominated dice chips! But compared to your CCs, the Nexgens are marginal at best. Thank you for your excellent customer service too...very much appreciated.

AC

 

[Vintage1974]

As far as resale value goes, I never even factored that into my equation. I just want cool looking functional chips that feel and play good for my cash and tournament sets -- AND that won't cost me $1,000+. It's not a priority for me to spend that money on poker chips. I'd rather invest it in stocks, precious metals, and bitcoin. Then when I'm wealthy, I'll revisit the Paulsons...maybe

AC

 

[BirdCage]

No offense, but no matter how many times you shout out your newly-discovered 'truth', it will not make it so. Paulson sets retaining value is NOT a myth, unless you are spending stupid money prices for them that is above their actual market value in the first place.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, Paulson sets will either retain value or increase in value. This has proven to be true across many different sets, and over many years of sales, both public and private.

The very few times this is not true is almost always due to somebody overpaying in the first place when making a purchase -- and often due to an inflated selling price in an auction that was above the actual market value of the chips, or somebody desparate enough to willingly pay above market value to get whar they want right now at any cost.

Just because somebody wants something badly enough to overpay for it (only to find later that nobody else is also willing to overpay) does not mean that the chips were suddenly 'worth' that artificially-inflated price in the market, nor that they have suddenly 'dropped in value' when attempts to resell at the artificially high price fails to attract any buyers.

Other ways incorrectly-perceived value can disconnect from reality is when people attempt to roll their shipping costs into a projected resale value, particularly if expensive overseas shipping is involved. If a rack of chips is sold at a $200 market price with $10 shipping, they are not suddenly 'worth' $210 to the next buyer.

This is especially true if overseas shipping was $30 or more, and then resold to a different desparate overseas buyer for $230 plus $30 shipping -- that rack still has a general market value of $200 (not $260). And even though the latest owner may claim his $220 asking price is 'below his cost', it's still above the actual market value of $200 (which has never changed), just because he overpaid at $230 plus shipping.

No offense taken, but really then, what is the correct advice for newbies, because every newbie is hit with some version of "buy Paulson because they don't lose money"?

Even reading between the lines of what you've written, is the proper thing to tell people that if 1) they know the difference between primary and secondary and bike tire condition, 2) the difference between RHC & THC and other clays, 3) know about rare colors and spot patterns, 4) know about inlay sizes and features, 5) know the rarity of the denomination and set, 6) know the true market prices of all chips they're considering, and 7) be comfortable spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on poker chips, then they shouldn't (most of the time) lose any money in the future?

Should some analytics company automatically tag each classified as priced market, above or below - with a confidence rating? Telling newbies to just buy Paulson isn't good advice without a lot of hand-holding. However, it is helpful for those looking to unload chips above market. Again, IMHO.

 

[RichMahogany]

No offense taken, but really then, what is the correct advice for newbies, because every newbie is hit with some version of "buy Paulson because they don't lose money"?

Even reading between the lines of what you've written, is the proper thing to tell people that if 1) they know the difference between primary and secondary and bike tire condition, 2) the difference between RHC & THC and other clays, 3) know about rare colors and spot patterns, 4) know about inlay sizes and features, 5) know the rarity of the denomination and set, 6) know the true market prices of all chips they're considering, and 7) be comfortable spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on poker chips, then they shouldn't (most of the time) lose any money in the future?

Should some analytics company automatically tag each classified as priced market, above or below - with a confidence rating? Telling newbies to just buy Paulson isn't good advice without a lot of hand-holding. However, it is helpful for those looking to unload chips above market. Again, IMHO.

The search function is your, and other noobs, friend

 

[BirdCage]

Why are these the only choices? Why not $300 and change for 500-chip Brand New BJ set? vs. $200 for a 500-chip Brand New CC set? vs. $1200-$3000 for a minty Paulson THC set?

Fine choices, but my point was that from what could be considered minimally acceptable, a used CC set, to a even a worn Paulson set is multiple of four times the cost. And many newbies are coming from slugged chips, so $125 could be an eye-opener.

 

[hdgeno]

No offense taken, but really then, what is the correct advice for newbies, because every newbie is hit with some version of "buy Paulson because they don't lose money"?

Even reading between the lines of what you've written, is the proper thing to tell people that if 1) they know the difference between primary and secondary and bike tire condition, 2) the difference between RHC & THC and other clays, 3) know about rare colors and spot patterns, 4) know about inlay sizes and features, 5) know the rarity of the denomination and set, 6) know the true market prices of all chips they're considering, and 7) be comfortable spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on poker chips, then they shouldn't (most of the time) lose any money in the future?

Should some analytics company automatically tag each classified as priced market, above or below - with a confidence rating? Telling newbies to just buy Paulson isn't good advice without a lot of hand-holding. However, it is helpful for those looking to unload chips above market. Again, IMHO.

The correct advice for noobs is to post less and read more...and get samples.

 

[BirdCage]

The search function is your, and other noobs, friend

I have used the crap out of search and 1) have seen many people selling Paulsons for less than they have paid and/or selling for less by site vendors, and 2) still have no idea what market price for any type of Paulson chip would be.

So, what is the correct buying advice for a newbie with regard to Paulson chips? Exactly what should they search for and what should they read?

(Nobody disagrees with obtaining samples, the more the merrier, too!)

 

[CdnBeerLover]

I’m getting a ton of samples this week so I can make a decision on what kind of chips to purchase for my tournament set. Someone gave me this advice, “Go with the clay chips. The more you play with ceramics the face of the chips becomes smooth and eventually the picture will disappear.”

Is there any truth to this? I gotta believe that you’d have to play every day for many years in order for the ceramics to smooth out and fade. What does the community say?

AC

I bought these in 2013, and used them in our tournaments up until last year (about 8-10 games per year).

(I really have to learn to stack chips neatly)

They still look like new in my opinion. I do have some sample ceramics that I shuffled 4-5 days per week for a few hours in my home office for 1-2 years, and those started showing wear on the edge. Still, that took a lot of shuffling...if they were clay, they'd have rounded edges.

Now I alternate them with a clay BCC solid set. If I have to sell a set, the BCC set will go first (sacriledge, I know), as I simply am less concerned with chipping / wear / damage with the ceramics than I am with the clay chips. And I simply love the feel and sound of Chipco ceramics...once I had a sample of the chips in hand, I bought a set. No regrets whatsoever.

So
- get samples
- determine what you like in a chip
- buy whatever you like and enjoy them

 

[BGinGA]

This was an excellent post well worth repeating:

people new to this hobby have a lot to learn before they're comfortable making a purchase decision. And there are a lot of people here who graciously donate their time to answer the same questions over and over again from people who stumble upon this forum. But part of that newbie education is expressing an opinion as to why one product is better than another. I think I speak for most people here when I say that it's not about influencing their choice - it's about contributing to their experience by helping them make the most informed purchase decision as they can.

 

[JeepologyOffroad]

I have used the crap out of search and 1) have seen many people selling Paulsons for less than they have paid and/or less then they sell for currently from site vendors, and 2) still have no idea what market price for any type of Paulson chip would be.

So, what is the correct buying advice for a newbie with regard to Paulson chips? Exactly what should they search for and what should they read?

(Nobody disagrees with obtaining samples, the more the merrier, too!)

It can seem overwhelming at first. Hell when I first got here I was so lost. How does one learn the fair market price within any niche? Just as with any other hobby on the planet if you really want to know then you'll take the time to learn.

 

[Mojo1312]

Fine choices, but my point was that from what could be considered minimally acceptable, a used CC set, to a even a worn Paulson set is multiple of four times the cost. And many newbies are coming from slugged chips, so $125 could be an eye-opener.

Each of us gets to decide what is minimally acceptable. Frankly, I have no issue with slugged chips that are worn and stained as long as the bank comes out right. Paulson poker chips aren't going to make you a better poker player. So what is their real value?

In short, buy whatever will make you happy.

 

[Moxie Mike]

This was an excellent post well worth repeating:

High praise from the true 'PKoPCF'

Thank you sir.

 

[BGinGA]

So, what is the correct buying advice for a newbie with regard to Paulson chips?

I typically advise new forum members looking to buy chips to:

• learn to use the search tool
• read as much as possible
• ask questions regarding chip values and set breakdowns
• get samples before you buy anything
• buy the best chips you can afford, in the correct amounts that work for your needs

All of those will help newbies avoid costly mistakes, make informed decisions, and end up with sets that better match their expectations.

The last item is a partial nod towards chip enjoyment, and also a partial nod towards overall financial expenditure including resale value. Playing with better chips (and equipment) produces a more enjoyable gaming environment, while sets with better breakdowns sell easier and for more $$, and better quality chips typically hold value better than cheaper ones.