• This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

Wynn Casino Tourney Set & Shipping Issues - Need Your Help (1 Viewer)

My hope isn't to get people hating on Danny. My hope is to bring awareness to the importance of packing chips properly, and to increase pressure on "doing the right thing".
 
Wrong way: The chips arrived last night. Thanks for the quick shipping Danny! Unfortunately, one of the racks got destroyed in transit, and a couple chips were damaged, but nothing major. I think they probably would have survived if there was a little more padding inside the box. Don't worry, I'm not upset or anything, it's not a big deal, but just letting you know as an FYI for future shipments.

Right Way: The chips arrived last night, however because they were not packaged properly, several chips were damaged and one of the racks was destroyed. I'll eat the losses on this transaction, but please package your chip shipments more securely, it is heartbreaking to see good chips destroyed.

Extra mile: To avoid similar problems in the future please package them like this {insert BGINA method here} or similar as what you're doing is not good enough to keeps the chips secure.
 
Marvin Lewis packed the chips ?

( little off season dig at trever from Cincinnati...home of the bungles
 
trever said:
Wrong way: The chips arrived last night. Thanks for the quick shipping Danny! Unfortunately, one of the racks got destroyed in transit, and a couple chips were damaged, but nothing major. I think they probably would have survived if there was a little more padding inside the box. Don't worry, I'm not upset or anything, it's not a big deal, but just letting you know as an FYI for future shipments.

Right Way: The chips arrived last night, however because they were not packaged properly, several chips were damaged and one of the racks was destroyed. I'll eat the losses on this transaction, but please package your chip shipments more securely, it is heartbreaking to see good chips destroyed.

Extra mile: To avoid similar problems in the future please package them like this {insert BGINA method here} or similar as what you're doing is not good enough to keeps the chips secure.
Click to expand...



Completely agree, great post, it's your fault Travis. Next time you send $8k (lol 8 fucking k) to someone that has no doubt sent and received chips literally hundreds of times you need to hold their hand better. You, Travis, really failed here...
 
trever said:
Wrong way: The chips arrived last night. Thanks for the quick shipping Danny! Unfortunately, one of the racks got destroyed in transit, and a couple chips were damaged, but nothing major. I think they probably would have survived if there was a little more padding inside the box. Don't worry, I'm not upset or anything, it's not a big deal, but just letting you know as an FYI for future shipments.

Right Way: The chips arrived last night, however because they were not packaged properly, several chips were damaged and one of the racks was destroyed. I'll eat the losses on this transaction, but please package your chip shipments more securely, it is heartbreaking to see good chips destroyed.

Extra mile: To avoid similar problems in the future please package them like this {insert BGINA method here} or similar as what you're doing is not good enough to keeps the chips secure.
Click to expand...
Hope this isn't implying any blame what-so-ever on RT... if someone is willing to ship an $8000 transaction as two boxes of 1000 chips each stuffed in to MFRs you're not making them see the light by sending them a link.
 
It costs nothing to be nice to someone. It costs next-to-nothing to package chips correctly. No excuse for this packing job, none. Now, if I had experienced poor packing from this seller previously (not once, but twice), I'm not sending him eight-thousand-fucking-dollars for nothing!

I too believe that a partial refund should be an option - but again, how to price such rare chips. As I understand it, some denoms are more rare than others. If it were me @RainmanTrail , I'd pack those bitches back up and retrieve my money. It may not be an ideal solution, but it's probably your best option bro. I guess you could entertain an "insurance claim" but that could be a waste of time, I'm not sure.

It seems there is a pattern and lack of effort on the sellers part. So, I'm sure not going to be buying from him in the future - which is a shame because he offers up really rich lots.

- Tim
 
On the subject of partial refund, I believe no one is ever obligated to offer such a thing. He could probably get the full selling price for the remaining unbroken chips based on how fast these sold. The fact that rainman is keeping them supports this since he has the option of a full refund.
 
Chicken Rob said:
On the subject of partial refund, I believe no one is ever obligated to offer such a thing. He could probably get the full selling price for the remaining unbroken chips based on how fast these sold. The fact that rainman is keeping them supports this since he has the option of a full refund.
Click to expand...

Correct @Chicken Rob , I don't think the seller is "obligated" either. However, I for one would try and appease my buyer (in any way possible) if I f'ed up like that.
 
Chicken Rob said:
On the subject of partial refund, I believe no one is ever obligated to offer such a thing. He could probably get the full selling price for the remaining unbroken chips based on how fast these sold. The fact that rainman is keeping them supports this since he has the option of a full refund.
Click to expand...

If he was smart, he'd offer to make it right and ensure that I'm happy. No doubt the negative feedback I'll be leaving and the responses in this thread will end up costing him more $ in the long run than the money he'd "save" by only offering a full refund for a return instead of a partial refund. Not to mention the costs associated with returning them insured for $8k, which he seemed to indicate was my burden to pay if I wanted to return them lol.
 
Not saying this is the case at all, but has anyone considered the option that someone else offered much more than the $8k paid for the chips after they were sold?

Danny would look bad canceling the sale, but offering the refund after some chips get damaged gives home the opportunity to sell to the new buyer for even more.

Again not saying this is the case at all, but how many of us have had sellers remorse right after selling a set that is nowhere near as rare as this set?
 
I agree this looks bad for Danny, and will probably impact his future sales, but you can't deny he did the right thing by offering a full refund.

i would handle it differently, as would many others here, but he's doing the minimum right thing, and I think that deserves recognition.
 
Chicken Rob said:
I agree this looks bad for Danny, and will probably impact his future sales, but you can't deny he did the right thing by offering a full refund.

i would handle it differently, as would many others here, but he's doing the minimum right thing, and I think that deserves recognition.
Click to expand...

I do deny that he did "the right thing" though. That's my whole point. He offered a solution, but I consider "doing the right thing" to be something other than what he proposed. I think most would agree with me here.

I do see your viewpoint though, that he isn't "obligated" to handle things MY way, at least not in the legal sense. But I'm not talking about taking him to court. I'm talking about "making it right".
 
RainmanTrail said:
If he was smart, he'd offer to make it right and ensure that I'm happy. No doubt the negative feedback I'll be leaving and the responses in this thread will end up costing him more $ in the long run than the money he'd "save" by only offering a full refund for a return instead of a partial refund. Not to mention the costs associated with returning them insured for $8k, which he seemed to indicate was my burden to pay if I wanted to return them lol.
Click to expand...
The negative feedback on his trading page will be irrelevant because this thread exists.
 
People who are in the business of selling chips in bulk make a calculated risk decision when shipping them bagged loose in a box. Yes, there is a risk of damage but that is offset by the labor savings. It is labor intensive to pack chips "safely", it is not a trivial deal at all when you are shipping out chips all the time.

I got lots of stuff from the chip room packed exactly this way. In the early days, they shipped 101 or 102 chips for each 100 bought as a form of preemptive insurance. Later on, you got 100 of 100 shipped and replacement chips for damaged goods. The Chip Room looked at cost of careful packaging vs a small loss rate which they would have to replace and chose easy packing as the best method. I didn't order many mint chips this way, but I would have been a lot less casual about it due to "flea bites" on razor sharp mint edges.

I can't evaluate the offer made to resolve the issue without knowing some key terms of the offer. Is ND accepting all the risk - i.e. can RT just toss the chips in the original box, postage due and get all of his money back no matter what happens to the return shipment? The further the offer deviates from that, the less reasonable it is.

There is also some reason to say the buyer should be able to decline the full refund offer and demand specific performance. ND took the cash from RT and could be obligated to deliver the goods sold in the condition expected. While a full refund is better than being ignored, I can empathize with RT wanting his chips rather than a refund. No doubt our legal eagles can shed more light on when specific performance is an appropriate form of resolution.

It gets harder if there aren't replacement chips available. How do you value a set that doesn't completely exist anymore and can't be easily replaced, if at all?

Seem to me like everyone is unhappy with how this turned out - it didn't have to be this way -=- DrStrange

PS one of the worst bits of fallout from this could be buyers choosing a paypal option with fees to get protection from sloppy sellers or the use of credit cards as a form of payment.
 
He did not state that he would pay for the return shipping. The implication from his response was that I would be paying to send them back.
 
DrStrange said:
People who are in the business of selling chips in bulk make a calculated risk decision when shipping them bagged loose in a box. Yes, there is a risk of damage but that is offset by the labor savings. It is labor intensive to pack chips "safely", it is not a trivial deal at all when you are shipping out chips all the time.

I got lots of stuff from the chip room packed exactly this way. In the early days, they shipped 101 or 102 chips for each 100 bought as a form of preemptive insurance. Later on, you got 100 of 100 shipped and replacement chips for damaged goods. The Chip Room looked at cost of careful packaging vs a small loss rate which they would have to replace and chose easy packing as the best method. I didn't order many mint chips this way, but I would have been a lot less casual about it due to "flea bites" on razor sharp mint edges.

I can't evaluate the offer made to resolve the issue without knowing some key terms of the offer. Is ND accepting all the risk - i.e. can RT just toss the chips in the original box, postage due and get all of his money back no matter what happens to the return shipment? The further the offer deviates from that, the less reasonable it is.

There is also some reason to say the buyer should be able to decline the full refund offer and demand specific performance. ND took the cash from RT and could be obligated to deliver the goods sold in the condition expected. While a full refund is better than being ignored, I can empathize with RT wanting his chips rather than a refund. No doubt our legal eagles can shed more light on when specific performance is an appropriate form of resolution.

It gets harder if there aren't replacement chips available. How do you value a set that doesn't completely exist anymore and can't be easily replaced, if at all?

Seem to me like everyone is unhappy with how this turned out - it didn't have to be this way -=- DrStrange

PS one of the worst bits of fallout from this could be buyers choosing a paypal option with fees to get protection from sloppy sellers or the use of credit cards as a form of payment.
Click to expand...

When offered to return them, he chose to keep them. I think that says a lot.

I agree it's disappointing. I'd be tilted to hell if this happened to me. RT's experience will make me more cautious in the future. But the lawyers in the thread seem to already agree that offering a full refund is adequate, and in my opinion, the bare minimum to not be a dirtbag.

We all agree there is good reason for disappointment, but if he sent the chips back and got his money, he is made as whole as can reasonably be expected.

Going the extra mile by working out a partial refund to be sure he's happy may not be reasonable, even if many of us would do it.

Clearly RT is happier with the chips than the money. So he wins on the exchange. Not as much as he wanted, but he wins, or he'd be sending them back.
 
DrStrange said:
People who are in the business of selling chips in bulk make a calculated risk decision when shipping them bagged loose in a box. Yes, there is a risk of damage but that is offset by the labor savings. It is labor intensive to pack chips "safely", it is not a trivial deal at all when you are shipping out chips all the time.

I got lots of stuff from the chip room packed exactly this way. In the early days, they shipped 101 or 102 chips for each 100 bought as a form of preemptive insurance. Later on, you got 100 of 100 shipped and replacement chips for damaged goods. The Chip Room looked at cost of careful packaging vs a small loss rate which they would have to replace and chose easy packing as the best method. I didn't order many mint chips this way, but I would have been a lot less casual about it due to "flea bites" on razor sharp mint edges.

I can't evaluate the offer made to resolve the issue without knowing some key terms of the offer. Is ND accepting all the risk - i.e. can RT just toss the chips in the original box, postage due and get all of his money back no matter what happens to the return shipment? The further the offer deviates from that, the less reasonable it is.

There is also some reason to say the buyer should be able to decline the full refund offer and demand specific performance. ND took the cash from RT and could be obligated to deliver the goods sold in the condition expected. While a full refund is better than being ignored, I can empathize with RT wanting his chips rather than a refund. No doubt our legal eagles can shed more light on when specific performance is an appropriate form of resolution.

It gets harder if there aren't replacement chips available. How do you value a set that doesn't completely exist anymore and can't be easily replaced, if at all?

Seem to me like everyone is unhappy with how this turned out - it didn't have to be this way -=- DrStrange

PS one of the worst bits of fallout from this could be buyers choosing a paypal option with fees to get protection from sloppy sellers or the use of credit cards as a form of payment.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I see it.

I understand the desire to pack chips poorly in an effort to save money, and just replacing damaged/broken chips. However, that approach really only works with cheap sets which are easily replaceable. Sending extremely rare holy grail chips that way is different though obviously.

This is also why I paid with my credit card through PayPal. I knew I'd be protected if he sent them to me Danny style. What the boundaries of that protection are, I don't know, but I'm going to find out.
 
RainmanTrail said:
This is exactly how I see it.

I understand the desire to pack chips poorly in an effort to save money, and just replacing damaged/broken chips. However, that approach really only works with cheap sets which are easily replaceable. Sending extremely rare holy grail chips that way is different though obviously.

This is also why I paid with my credit card through PayPal. I knew I'd be protected if he sent them to me Danny style. What the boundaries of that protection are, I don't know, but I'm going to find out.
Click to expand...
Keep us posted with the PayPal resolution.
 
stocky said:
Sort of agree. Sort of don't. If it was an easy to acquire set sure a refund is a great gesture. But as rare as these are its a different story imo.
Click to expand...

I agree with stocky on this point.

@RainmanTrail, Have you made any offer to, or had any discussion with, danny for a partial refund?

If you dont want to consider the full refund offer (which I understand, irregardless of whether he offered to cover return shipping or not), you should make the counter offer back for a partial refund.

(Sorry if this was discussed already but I havent read every post in detail.)
 
I've had a few different responses typed up and deleted to this thread, I think cutting crystal meth out of my daily routine may have helped with my self control a little since I have managed to delete them all before I hit post. (Other than my slightly snarky response to trever above that is, I had a few beers at the baseball game and I just get all loopy and go buck wild. I'm sure you're a good dude @trever , I disagree strongly with the sentiment of your post though. )

I'll just say sorry about your bad luck Rainman, it is really unfortunate that this would happen to one of the sets that could be shown as an example of why people love this particular hobby. A set that is incredibly beautiful, desired, and rare sold and packed by a supposed member of the same "community" treated like this is fucking sad. The only thing sadder is the response from him. A refund? Great, that's what Costco would give you, a member of a community might start it with a "Wow I fucked this up, I am so sorry, the least I could do is offer you a refund..." type response that would make keeping the chips or taking the refund a much easier pill to swallow. I have a firm grasp of where that dude falls on the scale for me, I won't be surprised when it's a different story for other people though, this is the internet and double standards are life bruh! lol

In comparison to that you have been more than gracious and patient Trail, I think you would be right in any course of action you decide to take even though I know it has nothing to do with the money and had dude offered up even a semblance of meaculpa this thread never would have saw the light of day.

How telling and gross this thread is to me for a few different reasons, I hope it is solved amicably and wish you well in dealing with Costco chip seller Trail, as for me I'm going to stick to members of the "community"..... (y) :thumbsup: ;)
 
Last edited:
FWIW, I have dealt with ND in several high priced transactions. The first one I had similar problems as Rainman...crushed Bud Jones cases (BTW chip community, lets pad the fuck out of these BJ boxes if you are going to use them. They are brittle.) Several T5k chips were chipped and fleabitten...of course it had to be the rarer than hen's teeth T5k's. Murphy's Law I guess! I didnt ask for a refund or an exchange and chalked it up to my own bad luck. But for the next transaction, it was more of a Holy Grail set for me and I did give him extra instructions. That set came in it's original TRK boxes and arrived safely. I had some other small transactions but 1 out of 2 for big deals.

I don't know if this was discussed earlier since this is a Holy Grail set and is virtually irreplaceable in these numbers, if I was the seller, I would offer to replace the broken chips if that's possible. If ND has more of these chips, he can replace Rainman's chipped, fleabitten and broken chips with new ones (Just like what Chiproom used to do for us). Rainman can send him back the damaged chips if ND wants them. If replacement is impossible, then a negotiated rate for the broken chips can't be that difficult. They just need to work together and compromise a little.

I understand where Rainman is coming from regarding not wanting to return a Holy Grail set back. Sometimes we wait years for these HG sets...we finally purchase them and they arrive in shambles. Major letdown! But if this is a community...then they should be able to work something out where a major chip seller's name isn't tarnished and a major buyer of chips isn't left with a bad taste in his mouth and may be turned away from this great hobby. My 2 cents...
 
Last edited:
I think this thread needs a new direction... here are my first two reasons why returning them is not an option... enjoy! :whistle: :whistling:

SetA_2.jpg

SetA_1.jpg
 
Sad to hear about such great chips being ruined for the stupidest of reasons.

Surpised to see a long-time member of the community being so sloppy when shipping an extremely rare, mint and very valueable set of chips. This really goes to show the importance of careful packaging. I can understand the shipping method that thechiproom used when sending out huge numbers of not-rare chips, but for these chips it seems like a no-brainer to put some extra effort into packing.

I think the full refund offer is the minimum the seller can provide after such a screw-up, and at least makes RT financially OK, assuming it also covers shipping the chips back, and maybe even paypal-fees. I'm also curious to hear what happens with paypal/your credit card company and the insurrance.

I completely agree with RT that offering a partial refund for the broken chips is a better option.

If I buy a rack of chips from someone, but the seller only sends 98, a partial refund for the missing chips sounds reasonable. Saying that if the buyer wants to keep the chips instead of agreeing to the full refund he can no longer claim any compensation at all for the broken chips makes no sense to me what so ever. He payed 8k$ for a given number of chips, but recived less chips than what was agreed upon. In my mind he should thus be compensated for the missing chips.

Hope you guys can work it out, and that people reading this will put some more effort into packaging chips.
 
Rainman, I know its been asked a few times, but I don't believe you answered - Was there ever a discussion between you and Danny regarding a partial refund?

If Not, then why don't you ask?

If Yes, then you should also share those details. Im not saying it happened this way, but I could see a situation where Danny would offer Avg Chip price as a replacement value whereas you view the value of the high denomination chips as exponentially more $$$. If you were not able to agree on a partial refund amount, then Danny's response of send them all back for a full refund is a more logical next step.

Regardless, It still sucks that the chips were damaged, but congrats on another great set!
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

merkong
Can You Ask About Shipping Techniques?
Replies
11
Views
480
colter ripton
colter ripton
Senzrock
HELP! Shipping (23 pound) package of chips to Hong Kong (USPS refused service)
Replies
7
Views
249
Senzrock
Senzrock
C
MRCPoker for Canadian users: Monte Carlo Poker Room and Poker Club
Replies
8
Views
406
Pippa
Pippa
Timmah
What was wrong with your old chips?
Replies
18
Views
918
Sparkynutz
Sparkynutz
HiveKueen
Player consistently damages cards...
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
BigSlick4523
BigSlick4523
Back
Top Bottom