Well, folks, this set finally sold for $66. Guess there is some justice in the world, though -- the buyer was Chris Lubrano, the seller of the $36 Bond set discussed earlier! I guess he liked Miller's C.O.A. better than his own.

I had a lengthy (again) email exchange with Miller, which I will reproduce below (forewarned, it is really long -- 11 pages in plain text format). Interestingly, Lubrano showed up as a CC on Miller's mail to me early in the exchange.

Having made no headway with sellers despite extensive attempts (and what I think was a reasonable approach to them), I now plan to simply notify any bidders of lots like these regarding cheaper alternatives.

CeCe, did he retaliate with negative feedback?

My email exchange follows:

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:36:12 -0700
From: runtam <runtam@pacbell.net>
To: rjmgrfx@msn.com
Subject: Ebay item 17665492

Dear rjmgrfx -- what is the nature of the COA associated with these chips?

Paul-Son Gaming Supplies of Las Vegas, manufacturer of these chips, has continued to make them by the thousands. They are available at the Paul-Son store for 60 cents each, or from reputable chip dealers for as little as $5 for the set.

Thanks for your reply. ----- jim o\-S

----------ooooo----------

From: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
To: <runtam@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Ebay item 17665492
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:47:04 -0300

Dear runtam

Please e-mail me your : Name, Address & Phone #, ( after you I receive your info, I will do the same) I will then contact you with all of the info I have on these chips. If you don't want to send me your info , you will not be able to participate in this auction, but I require this info due to all of the "unusual" people who have contacted me about other auction items in the past several months. I find that when both parties understand they don't have the anonymity of computer e-mail to stand behind, there is a much more honest exchange. (Though, I can tell you that I did not obtain these chips from the original manufacturer)

Also, can you give me an explanation for your recent Negative Feedback.

Again, if you feel that you cannot provide your info, I totally understand, but I will not be able to give you any more info than is contained in the description on ebay .

When I receive your info, I will verify it and I will call you, (at my own expense) or e-mail you.

Thank you for your interest in my auction.

Bob

----------ooooo----------

Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:17:42 -0700
From: runtam <runtam@pacbell.net>
To: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Ebay item 17665492

Dear Robert -- reasonable requests. Jim Reilly, PO Box 1338, Mill Valley CA 94942-1338; business phone 415-789-8655 (not dealer/seller of chips -- I am an attorney and writer).

Negative feedback related to dispute over Bond chip ad placed by5 bookdealer, who refuses to identify himself. He ran an ad (eBay item 16031449) which read:

[Here I repeated the ad and email exchange with "bookdealer" which I posted previously here on the BB.]

----------ooooo----------

From: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
To: <runtam@pacbell.net>
Cc: <chrislubr@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: ebay chips
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 15:49:14 -0300

Hi Jim

The C.O.A. is mine and guarantees the chips to be what I represent them to be, or the purchase price will be refunded. This guarantees the buyer against any financial loss, ever. (I have checked this out with my attorney and a good friend at the Philadelphia Bar Assn.. in Phila.,PA) It is also in keeping with the common business practices of auction entities such as Christie's, Southeby's and others. (I recently had to return a high profile item to a CA auction house because three of their in house experts authenticated a fake, even the big boys make mistakes) If I, in the continuing research I do in connection with my collecting, turn up proof/evidence that these chips were merely part of an additional run or complete fakes, I will contact the winning bidder and offer to buy them back, just as the person who sold them to me has agreed to take them back if a problem develops. ( I have a good friend who does imaging work in D.C. taking a look at the tape and LD at this moment to see if a good clean image can be bought up to determine if these chips are identical to those used in the casino shots, although it won't help in the matter of being one hundred percent certain that these chips I have here were used, it would shed some more light) This is the way I conduct all of my affairs. My good name is more important than money. As to similar chips being available for less than a dollar each, they are replicas, they should sell for less.

Next is the fact that when I bought the two sets in my possession (one is for my personal collection of movie memorabilia), I was aware that they had made additional runs of the chips.(I checked the site that you suggested before my purchase) I made my purchase based on reseach that I did regarding info supplied by the original source for these particular sets, independent of the info from that person. I know several people very active in the movie business.

Based on what I was able to learn, I purchased two sets of casino chips that were used somewhere in the production of the film "License To Kill". Now, that being said, I have no irrefutable proof/evidence to back that up, but neither does a major auction company when they offer a chair once used by JFK or whoever, if they don't have the proof/evidence, but only anecdotal evidence. But, there are enough consistencies in the information I have turned up, to be comfortable with the purchase I made. (and offering the other set on ebay) I realize that each of us have different "comfort levels"with this type of purchase, and I am wary of the fraud that is committed, especially with "a real movie prop".

If there is anything in my description that makes you feel it is fraudulent/deceptive, please let me know and I would be more than happy to amend it. (providing that you have proof/evidence that I can verify).

If, for any reason, you feel the need to contact anyone who may bid on the chips, do so with my blessing. I have always felt that the more info a potential bidder/buyer has, the less
chance of problems after the sale. As long as any statements you make are accurate and based on fact, not only opinion, although feel free to voice yours, everybody has one.

I telephoned you, but your answering machine picked up. Feel free to call or e-mail if you want to talk.

Bob

Robert Miller
222 Roesch Ave.
Oreland, PA 19075

----------ooooo----------

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:06:31 -0700
From: runtam <runtam@pacbell.net>
To: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
CC: chrislubr@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: ebay chips

Hi Robert ----- sorry for the delay in responding to you. Major litigation problem at work has required my undivided (and time consuming) attention this week. I did receive your phone message, too (though I maintain that number as a business phone, it is in my home and
I work outside home as corporate counsel for a family-owned business).

Based on your email response, you seem like a reasonable, responsible and honest person, unlike "bookdealer". I notice that you CC'd with your message, so I am doing the same. He and I had a lengthy exchange of messages; perhaps he has shared them with you. If not, and if you are interested, I will provide you with copies.

This is a personal opinion (not in any way a legal opinion and not meant to either contradict or criticize the legal advice you received from your attorney): given the nature of the item involved, the practical truth of the matter is that your C.O.A. is virtually, if not completely, worthless. Perhaps a C.O.A. from someone directly associated with the movie, attesting that these particular chips were actually used, would be of some value, but (as I said to Chris), you really can't do antyhing more than guarantee that someone else told you that these chips were really used in the movie, which isn't much of a guarantee at all (especially since the manufacturer of the chips can't even provide such a guarantee).

I recognize (all too clearly) that there is a degree of uncertainty in dealing with collectibles (and that "even the big boys" can make mistakes). I was, at one time, a collector of sports memorabilia and my brother is a high value collector of both coins and sports memorabilia. I know that much of what passes as authentic sports memorabilia is fake (especially autographs) -- and can't help suspecting that something similar takes place with respect to movie memorabilia.

My particular concern with respect to these chips is that what you call "replicas" (the later runs of the same chips) are in fact indistinguishable from the so-called "originals" (in this context, I'm
not sure the term "replica" is truly applicable or even has any meaning [the original run was returned to Paul-Son and put on sale at 60 cents each; I doubt that even they know whether any of the remaining stock came from the original run]). It is therefore impossible for anyone, no matter how expert, to ever definitively state that any particular chip came from the original production run. Worse yet, as I understand information provided by manufacturer Paul-Son, not all of the chips from the original run were used in the movie (that is, assuming that ANY
were, which appears to remain an open question).

I will be interested in hearing what your friend finds from his imaging scan of the movie (though, as you noted, that won't entirely solve the problem).

I do not feel that your lot description was deceptive, though my "comfort" level would only be met if they potential bidders were aware that the exact same chips are available at a small fraction of the bids you have now received (particularly since your two high bidders appear to be, at least as far as eBay is concerned, novices and a price of $50 for a set of these chips is distressing).

That being said, I was particularly impressed by your willingness to have me contact your bidders with any factual information that I have (a willingness not all sellers share, as you have seen at least from my correspondence with bookdealer). I have done this in the past and several people have retracted high bids based on this information.

I have decided not to contact anyone regarding your lot and will leave this to your sense of honesty & fair play. Nor will I leave negative or neutral feedback.

On the other hand, I am working with a group of chip collectors to acquire a quantity of these chips, which we plan to offer on eBay on a continuous basis and at a reasonable cost based on their availability from the manufacturer for 60 cents each. Once we have done this, interested bidders will at least have full knowledge and a choice to make based on whether they want to spend more for chips which may or may not have actually been used in the movie.

Sincerely, Jim Reilly

----------ooooo----------

From: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
To: <runtam@pacbell.net>
Subject: Some final thoughts...
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:14:34 -0300

Jim

As a final thought on this matter, since you (and your "friends") are not bidding on, and therefore have nothing personal at risk, I was curious as to why you (and your "friends") would be so concerned about this item. Surely, a successful attorney would have better things to do than waste time attempting to be the "chip sheriff" of ebay over a relativlely insignificant matter, as some chip collectors have made known on their BB. Though, as was pointed out to me, some attorneys make their living painting houses. I suppose the same thing goes for writers. ( does writng e-mail count?)

But that doesn't apply to you. You have bee very busy with a "major litigation problem".

As to my C.O.A. being virtually worthless. It makes a promise that I am prepared to honor. Surely you do not doubt that, do you? Since the motto of ebay is "buyer beware", and I have given an accurate and honest description of the casino chips, then it falls to the buyer to make their own choice about the info and the seller. They must decide to ask questions that they feel that they need answered. If there is a concern that there may be no way of proving or disproving the history of the origin of these particular chips, then they must decide whether the guarantee has worth, no one else.

You have an opinion about these particular chips, but in the end, not one shred of proof has been offered. None, not by you, not by your "friends", not by anyone, so your opinion is wothless when it comes to being useful in sorting out the facts of these paticular chips. I've been made aware of the fact that you know of the original source for these patricular chips. Are you accusing that person of being a liar regarding these particular chips? If so, please state this clearly (and for the record) in an e-mail and I will glady pursue this matter further with this other party. If you can not or will not do this, then I hope you'll begin to see where your opinion (and others) take us. Opinions are worthless, unless it is based on fact. Proveable fact. At this point I do not believe you have even attempted to use any facts ,other than a similar chip can be purchased from a different source than me for a fraction of the cost. If the other chips that are available, were being sold as a used movie prop then your facts would be accurate. That isn't the case (I 've been to the site) they are said to be "like" the chips from the fantasy casino. I have collected memorabillia for as many years as you say you have been an attorney. I have been the in the buyers position many times and always place myself in their position when I'm the seller . I want them look back on their purchase with joy, not regret, hence the offer to take back the chips if they (or I) feel the description is/was incorrect. I do not suffer fools glady, but nor do I
worship the almighty dollar.

As to your point about listing these other chips on ebay, Since you initialy were just attemping to make people aware of your opinion of the "Bond" chips, and make them aware of what, in your opinion, were the same chips at a lower price, I had no problem with your "Quest". But now inlight of this new info about you and your "friends" acquiring chips and offering them on ebay, it begs the question: "Were you and your friends really interested in "preventing less knowledgeable chip collectors from being taken advantage of" or was something else motivating you and your "friends". I suppose this question can never be fully answered until all parties involved are willing to be more truthful and stop hiding behind their keyboards. (by the way, care to give me your street address, you sent only your P.O.Box #, I'm into CA on busines/pleasure several times a year and perhaps we could meet)

In closing on this matter, I wish you and your "friends" well in your future "chip" venture (though, as you well know, the Net is filled with all sorts of unpredictable twists and turns, I sincerely hope all goes well) My own is drawing to a close and appears that they have found a new home (the reserve has been met) with whom I hope is a, now, fully informed chip buyer, having been alerted to the info you or your "Friends" have so tirelessly devoted some much on you Net time to disemminating.

It's been an interesting look into the world of gambling chip collectors.

Thanks and Farewell

Robert

P.S. I'd like to reserve the right to listing any feedback on you (neg,pos,neutral) for the future. I may need more info to completely resolve the matter of you and your "friends" now planning to offer your own chips on ebay. And by the way since we all sort of know of each other, I'm sure you won't mind if I share your letter with any interested parties. Thanks, again.

----------ooooo----------

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 02:31:53 -0700
From: runtam <runtam@pacbell.net>

To: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Some final thoughts...

> As a final thought on this matter, since you (and your "friends") are not bidding on, and therefore have nothing personal at risk, I was curious as to why you (and your "friends") would be so concerned about this item.

If you REALLY want to understand the motivation (and if you are interested in knowing who else shares it), visit Greg Susong's CyperGuide Casino Chip Collectors Bulletin Board and review the various threads on "Big Chip Find" and/or James Bond chips. (www.chipguide.com or specifically http://208.233.94.75/cgi-bin/config.pl)

> Surely, a successful attorney would have better things to do than waste time attempting to be the "chip sheriff" of ebay over a relativlely insignificant matter, as some chip collectors have made known on their BB.

We all get to spend our spare time as we see fit.

> As to my C.O.A. being virtually worthless. It makes a promise that I am prepared to honor. Surely you do not doubt that, do you?

Well, I have no specific reason to doubt it. I also have no reason to believe that, given the nature of the Bond chips, that you would ever be called upon to honor it (unless, of course, it is determined that NONE of these chips were ever used in the movie).

> Since the motto of ebay is "buyer beware", and I have given an accurate and honest description of the casino chips, then it falls to the buyer to make their own choice about the info and the seller. They must decide to ask questions that they feel that they need answered.

It seems to me that we as a society can do better than "caveat emptor", and in many areas of consumer affairs, we do. You (Chris Lubrano and bookdealer, whoever he is) seem to feel, however, that it is inappropriate for potential buyers to share their knowledge (whether it be in the form of hard facts or simply opinions). Objecting to the statement of opinions (as opposed to "facts") is nonsense -- everything about determining the worth of a collectible is based on SOMEONE's opinion.

> If there is a concern that there may be no way of proving or disproving the history of the origin of these particular chips, then they must decide whether the guarantee has worth, no one else.

Ultimately, I agree with this -- it IS up to the buyer to decide. My point is simply that I think any one of us has the right to advise any other potential buyer that there is a (far cheaper) alternative available. My primary concern is for chip collectors (as opposed to movie memorabilia collectors), though the difference is a matter of degree, not kind.

> You have an opinion about these particular chips, but in the end, not one shred of proof has been offered. None, not by you, not by your "friends", not by anyone, so your opinion is wothless when it comes to being useful in sorting out the facts of these paticular chips.

The only "proof" necessary HAS been offered -- that identical chips can be purchased for a fraction of the cost. The only "opinions" I have are that a potential buyer has the right to know about this alternative and that I (or anyone else) has the right to advise buyers of this
alternative.

> I've been made aware of the fact that you know of the original source for these patricular (sic) chips. Are you accusing that person of being a liar regarding these particular chips? If so, please state this clearly (and for the record) in an e-mail and I will glady pursue this matter further with this other party.

I have no idea what you mean by this. I do not know the original source for these particular chips and have no way of forming an opinion as to whether that person is or is not lying about them. If you purchased these chips from John Johannes (as Chris Lubrano did) and are referring to John as the "original" source, you are simply mistaken. I have no reason to doubt that John is telling the truth about WHAT HE WAS TOLD BY THE PERSON FROM WHOM HE RECEIVED THE CHIPS. Which is the point I was making about your C.O.A. But, he was not the "original" source. Do you even know who the truly ORIGINAL source was (that is, the person who actually removed the chips from the movie set)? It seems to me that only this person could give a meaningful C.O.A. Otherwise, it isnothing more or less than hearsay upon hearsay.

> If you can not or will not do this, then I hope you'll begin to see where your opinion (and others) take us. Opinions are worthless, unless it is based on fact. Proveable fact.

Upon what "proveable facts" are you basing your claim that these chips were actually used in the movie? As I understand it, they cannot be seen in any scene in the movie (perhaps your friend in Washington can prove otherwise; perhaps not). The chips which CAN be seen are demonstrably not these. The manufacturer did not get the promised credit for providing the chips, which certainly implies that they were NOT used. And, after no credit was given, the manufacturer demanded their return; all (or at least most) of the original chips WERE returned, which also implies that they were never used in the movie. Please state any one PROVEABLE FACT that shows that your chips WERE in fact used in the movie and I will gladly share that with my chip collecting friends (with whom, BTW, I have as yet shared absolutely nothing about our correspondence, though I probably will now).

> At this point I do not believe you have even attempted to use any facts ,other than a similar chip can be purchased from a different source than me for a fraction of the cost. If the other chips that are available, were being sold as a used movie prop then your facts would be accurate.

My facts are accurate. The chips ARE available at a fraction of the cost. I never said they were being sold as "a used movie prop". If it is your opinion (not a proveable fact) that actually having been used in the movie makes your chips more valuable than other, identical, chips which were not used in the movie (and if others share that opinion), so be it. I have no problem with that opinion and might even share it if I was satisfied that they actually had been used in the movie. So far, nothing anyone has said convinces me that there is demonstable proof that they were.

> That isn't the case (I've been to the site) they are said to be "like" the chips from the fantasy casino.

As I sit here writing this, I am looking at advertising flyers from Paul-Son (of which I will send you copies, if you like). One has color reproductions of five Casino de Isthmus chips. The other is a written description which says (verbatim):

"Paul-Son has manufactured three different sets of "Fantasy Casino Chips" for retail sales; Scandia Casino of Norway, Casino de Mexico, and Casino de Ishmus (sic) (used in a James Bond movie). Each casino has its own series of denominations ranging from $1 to $500. Each casino has its own colors, inlays and set of edge spots."

Note the phrase "used in a James Bond movie". Why their advertising makes no reference to the $1000 chip, I have no idea (though one of my "friends" did go to Paul-Son's show room this week and has told me that the $1000 chip is there and available in quantity, just like the others).

> As to your point about listing these other chips on ebay, Since you initialy were just attemping to make people aware of your opinion of the "Bond" chips, and make them aware of what, in your opinion, were the same chips at a lower price, I had no problem with your "Quest". But now in light of this new info about you and your "friends" acquiring chips and offering them on ebay, it begs the question: "Were you and your friends really interested in "preventing less knowledgeable chip collectors from being taken advantage of" or was something else motivating you and your "friends".

Well, we certainly won't get rich doing this, if that's what you mean. I'd have to sell 66 sets at double their cost to make the equivalent of my fee for a single hour of legal services. Some of the chip collectors involved think we should turn the profits over to the chip collector club to fund an informational program for new collectors. My ownpersonal thought, originally, was to offer them with a MAXIMUM bid equal to my cost. I realized, however, that this wouldn't be fair to reputable dealers who must realize at least some profit on their offerings to stay in business. And believe me, I have no problem with dealers making a profit. I have completed almost 100 eBay chip transactions since December. I assume that most, if not all, of the sellers profited from these transactions. [For what it's worth, I recently won a chip from John Johannes at a price less than what he paid for it. When I found out about that, I sent him a check for his cost, plus postage, even though it was more than I had bid. If you are still in contact with him, feel free to confirm that if you like. In return, he sent me a "bonus" chip in addition to the one I had bid on. That's my "opinion" of how I would like to see my hobby operate.]

> I suppose this question can never be fully answered until all parties involved are willing to be more truthful and stop hiding behind their keyboards. (by the way, care to give me your street address, you sent only your P.O.Box #, I'm into CA on business/pleasure several times a year and perhaps we could meet)

Like many experienced collectors, I have a post office box specifically so that I do not have to give out my home address over the internet. If you are sincere in wanting to meet,, you can call me anytime you are in the San Francisco Bay Area and we can get together. You can do that by leaving a message on my answering machine at 415-789-8655 or by calling the company for which I am house counsel (A&J Electric Cable Corporation of Hayward, California -- phone 510-786-2700) and asking for me.

> In closing on this matter, I wish you and your "friends" well in your future "chip" venture (though, as you well know, the Net is filled with all sorts of unpredictable twists and turns, I sincerely hope all goes well) My own is drawing to a close and appears that they have found a new home (the reserve has been met) with whom I hope is a, now, fully informed chip buyer, having been alerted to the info you or your "Friends" have so tirelessly devoted some much on you Net time to disemminating.

If you buyer has been "alerted" to anything, it was not by me, or to my knowledge, by any of my chip collecting friends. As mentioned in my previous email, I decided not to contact your bidders (though I will say that you last email made me somewhat less sanguine about the matter).

> I'd like to reserve the right to listing any feedback on you (neg,pos,neutral) for the future. I may need more info to completely resolve the matter of you and your "friends" now planning to offer your own chips on ebay.

Seems to me that's something you need not "reserve". You have the right (and the power) to make any feedback you like any time you like. I have no particular fear of either neutral or negative feedback. I am what I am, say what I think and bear the consequences, if any, accordingly. I am comfortable explaining my position on this issue to anyone who asks. BTW, at least one regular chip dealer (Bob Mera of Gaming Emporium) was already offering these chips on eBay with no reserve and a very modest opening bid (I haven't checked, but I think it
was something like $5).

> And by the way since we all sort of know of each other, I'm sure you won't mind if I share your letter with any interested parties.

In keeping with my previous comment, not at all (though I would prefer that you share it in its entirety, rather than in edited or summarized form, as I provided my bookdealer correspondence to you). Or, in the alternative, let me know who wants additional information and I will provide the complete text of our exchange.

Sincerely, Jim Reilly

----------ooooo----------

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 03:48:02 -0700
From: runtam <runtam@pacbell.net>
To: "Robert J. Miller" <rjmgrfx@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Some final thoughts...

Robert -- one thought that I forgot to mention in my earlier response: if you saw someone stealing candy from a child, would you intervene? Or try to stop a purse-snatch from an old lady? Or, if you had the means, would you try to prevent a robbery of a store. Or prevent any other crime you saw in progress? I would (in fact, have), even though I might have (had) "nothing personal at risk". While I would not characterize your particular ad as fraudulent (and therefore criminal), I have seen others on eBay that I think were (there are two other recently finished auctions which I think were blatantly fraudulent). I have no qualms at all about intervening in such auctions. And as far as I'm concerned, the difference between outright criminal fraud and the taking advantage of an uninformed buyer is one more of degree than kind. And if all that makes me the "chip sheriff", well, hi-ho silver. ----- jim o\-S

----------ooooo----------

NOTE: Apparently, this is too big to fit in a single message, so I am putting the final email I received from Miller in another post.