Right and the tiger sales that just completely sold out were $700+ a rack. Not sure what you’re harping onRight, but if you are the only person that orders a certain style, you're hit with $80 whether you order a rack or a set of 500.
Right and the tiger sales that just completely sold out were $700+ a rack. Not sure what you’re harping onRight, but if you are the only person that orders a certain style, you're hit with $80 whether you order a rack or a set of 500.
Right and the tiger sales that just completely sold out were $700+ a rack. Not sure what you’re harping on
Tina's model is what it is. Just think if you ordered 10,000 chips you would pay $80 for the label fee. If you ordered 100 chips you would pay $80 for the label fee. I guess for her it all comes out in the end, but it is what it is.It's more than that. If you order a rack add-on, you're looking at $1.26/chip. $46.00 for the rack and $80.00 label fee. Granted, that's if nobody else is ordering that style chip. None of that is including shipping.
Don't get me wrong, what Justin is doing is incredible. I've never had the chance to acquire these types of chips at this price. What he's done is amazing. I'm just indirectly saying it would be better for Tina to charge for a label/chip fee than just a flat rate divided by the number of orders.
Bud, no one's irate, you post something, someone disagrees, and you put your heels in and defend the point. That's fine. Deep breaths. No one's mad.No, I get it. I realize it's their model.
But IMO they are damaging their sales by not just including the label fee per chip. At any rate, I didn't mean to get people so irate over that post. I'll step away now.
if you want to think about it this way, it already is a per chip fee. When you chose your order quantity you’re choosing how many chips to spread it out over. All they’re doing is encouraging larger orders each time which seems like a better sales tactic to me?No, I get it. I realize it's their model.
But IMO they are damaging their sales by not just including the label fee per chip. At any rate, I didn't mean to get people so irate over that post. I'll step away now.
Bud, no one's irate, you post something, someone disagrees, and you put your heels in and defend the point. That's fine. Deep breaths. No one's mad.
Lol at these molds damaging their sales though, while some of the old guard are saying they're game-changers.
We will need a separate art file if you want to print on washers. Also no label feeThey are absolutely game changers, I don't disagree. But I don't feel I'm wrong about their model of that fee for 100 or 10,000 chips. That just makes zero sense to me.
But like Justin said, it is what it is and eventually I'll get a set, I'm sure. But right now it doesn't make sense for me. I'm not a chipper, I'm more about the game itself, anyway. Actually, I'm more about the social aspect of the game.
Plus my goons wouldn't notice if I put out a set of washers to play with.
I believe Tina doesn’t print the labels on her end, she has another company print them. Maybe it’s that companies’ art setup fee or whatever that makes it per job.They are absolutely game changers, I don't disagree. But I don't feel I'm wrong about their model of that fee for 100 or 10,000 chips. That just makes zero sense to me.
But like Justin said, it is what it is and eventually I'll get a set, I'm sure. But right now it doesn't make sense for me. I'm not a chipper, I'm more about the game itself, anyway. Actually, I'm more about the social aspect of the game.
Plus my goons wouldn't notice if I put out a set of washers to play with.
Honestly I was just making a joke with my post and laughed because that post was the last thing I expected to see come from you based on your past sentiments, but I routinely say that I love all chips, even missing my China Clays and card molds.Revisiting these chips the following day, I’ll retract a bit of my gushing, and maybe a tip of the hat to @Rieguy - these don’t feel quite like clay chips. They’re closer than anything else I’ve handled, but yeah, I can tell they’re ceramic.
So if I give leaded Paulsons 43mm a 10 and unleaded Paulsons 43mm a 9, I’m not giving these an 8-9 like I suggested yesterday. I feel like I’m settling on a 7.5ish. Which would still be higher than most things (RHC, I’m looking at you) but not interchangeable with clay.
This doesn’t really change anything I said yesterday, except to make it clear that while these are awesome, yeah, they’re not quite clay.
Revisiting these chips the following day, I’ll retract a bit of my gushing, and maybe a tip of the hat to @Rieguy - these don’t feel quite like clay chips. They’re closer than anything else I’ve handled, but yeah, I can tell they’re ceramic.
So if I give leaded Paulsons 43mm a 10 and unleaded Paulsons 43mm a 9, I’m not giving these an 8-9 like I suggested yesterday. I feel like I’m settling on a 7.5ish. Which would still be higher than most things (RHC, I’m looking at you) but not interchangeable with clay.
This doesn’t really change anything I said yesterday, except to make it clear that while these are awesome, yeah, they’re not quite clay.
Hmm, now you’re inspiring a new project - ranking all the chips I’ve handled on a scale of 1-10. I might have to dig in to that.It’s still a raving review.
7.5 on your scale for 52c = 7c per point of quality
10 on your scale for $5, $8+ = 50c, 80c+ per point of quality
Not saying it’s directly or even comparable in this manner, but it’s a no brainer that these are high value chips.
I’m curious, what are regular cards mold on this scale?
Please do it! Here’s mine.Hmm, now you’re inspiring a new project - ranking all the chips I’ve handled on a scale of 1-10. I might have to dig in to that.
I guess my initial thought is that I’d put cards mold somewhere in the 4 range? Maybe a 3.5.
Thinking about it more after @upNdown ’s thread on Tina chips, I just don’t personally find a lot of value in upgrading from a 7.5 to 9 or 10, and that’s his scale. My scale is more like this:
Keeping track with pen and paper = 0, let’s just play something else
Dice/no denominations = 2
Plastic no denominations = 3
CPC no denominations = 3.5
Paulson no denominations = 4
Slugs/plastic/ceramic with denominations = 7/7/8
Custom slugs/plastic/ceramics with some art you enjoy =7.5/7.5/8.5
Ugly CPC with denomination = 7.0
CPC that aren’t ugly = 8.75
Paulson with denomination 9.0, 9.5 with art you enjoy
I don’t know what leaded Paulson feel like, but maybe that’s a 10. I don’t know what BCC/TRKs feel like
So I’m at 8.5 for $350. To get to 9.5 I’d probably needed to spend at least 10x+ more, and that’s for a set half the size.
Where are you finding 43mm IHC chips for $5? I just listed a few for $8, and that is pretty much the bottom for most of them. Not at all uncommon to find them at $12-20 each.It’s still a raving review.
7.5 on your scale for 52c = 7c per point of quality
10 on your scale for $5, $8+ = 50c, 80c+ per point of quality
Not saying it’s directly or even comparable in this manner, but it’s a no brainer that these are high value chips.
I’m curious, what are regular cards mold on this scale?
I’m curious, what are regular cards mold on this scale?
I’ve seen a few older NAGB IHCs sell for under $10 apiece. Off the top of my head, I think there’s a $25 43mm Aurora Star that sells for under $600 a rack.Where are you finding 43mm IHC chips for $5? I just listed a few for $8, and that is pretty much the bottom for most of them. Not at all uncommon to find them at $12-20 each.
Putting edgespots on a ceramic chip is similar to putting a front grille on an electric car.But the fact that practically everybody is trying to emulate edge spots really tells you where the acquisition goal of this hobby still is.
Someone did a pretty extensive test a year or so ago, but I don't remember who it was. They were able to break them, but it took a LOT of effort. It is highly unlikely you will ever break a Tina chip in the normal course of playing poker.now I’m curious if these Tina chips have ever broken
It’s like a phantom issue. A non-issue as far as I’m concerned. I understand that when people pay their hard earned money for a product, they’d like to have some assurances. But in the poker chip world, it’s pretty unnecessary. Poker chips are designed to be tossed into pots. They don’t break. Aside from normal wear, it’s extremely rare to hear about chips made from any material actually getting damaged through typical use.Someone did a pretty extensive test a year or so ago, but I don't remember who it was. They were able to break them, but it took a LOT of effort. It is highly unlikely you will ever break a Tina chip in the normal course of playing poker.
In my Aria's group buy of over 30K chips, there was not a single chip broken in transit. I believe @SeanGecko may have received a couple of broken chips, but he's probably had over 100K shipped to him, so again, it's very rare. And we alway recommend getting a few extras, just because you never know, and they are so reasonably priced that there is no reason not to.
I agree that it's not an issue. I was just answering someone's specific question, and adding my relative experience.It’s like a phantom issue. A non-issue as far as I’m concerned. I understand that when people pay their hard earned money for a product, they’d like to have some assurances. But in the poker chip world, it’s pretty unnecessary. Poker chips are designed to be tossed into pots. They don’t break. Aside from normal wear, it’s extremely rare to hear about chips made from any material actually getting damaged through typical use.
Good point. It was just a guess by me based on how the recent FS section prices seem to have fallen a bit. But if you raise the price, it just makes the price per “point of quality” even greater.Where are you finding 43mm IHC chips for $5? I just listed a few for $8, and that is pretty much the bottom for most of them. Not at all uncommon to find them at $12-20 each.
I love the new Tina Web mold 43mm chips and am planning a big set, but in no way would I seriously compare them to Paulson or even CPC clay. Even after I stated myself that they are "somewhat" clay feeling, more so than any other ceramic chip I've ever handled. Yes, they can be made look like a clay chip, but the big sell on these is absolutely the price. Not as a legitimate replacement for clay chips.
The only way these can be ranked against other chips like clay and high end plastics is by considering price as a major factor. Even then, I'm not really sure how I would do that. But if you only are comparing them to all other chips available at say under $1 a chip or less, then I'd say they are a solid 9, with only some cool older used vintage clay that occasionally comes available in this price range as a better chip. And those would be 39mm, so if you really want 43s at under a buck, I don't think there is anything else even available to compare these to.
Agreed. Not sure if you consider this new or not, but my current set I'm working on has all the spots in 3s and 6s. I love 8V chips, but for this set, I think I'm going to do a 6v, which I have never seen on an actual clay chip. And for another chip that was going to be a quarter pie if I had CPC make it, I might switch it to a hex pie. That one does exist, (Nevada Club $20) but I don't think Paulson makes it any more, and I don't think CPC does either, although they may have in the past.Considering the design flexibility, it would be interesting if some people came up with new edgespot patterns.
That’s the one from the Cleveland horseshoe primary $500, right? Coolest spot pattern ever, and as far as we know, the only time it appeared on a Paulson.View attachment 1318381
I have a couple unique spots on my $5 and my $100 in this set.