Jim, thanks once again for taking time to participate in the seminar and for your thoughtful comments.

Because I was moderating the seminar, I've kept my views about slabbing to myself, but now that it's over I can express them. (Not that anyone cares, necessarily!)

I thought the historical perspective Ken Hallenbeck gave us was instructive, for a couple of reasons. The coin hobby faced issues of counterfieting that slabbing was designed to address. We don't have the same problems. Coins are far more fragile than chips are, so encapsulation makes more sense for high-end coins. We don't face the same situation. Grading and authentication were initially undertaken by the ANA itself, as a means to protect its members. Not so with chips.

The differences are significant, I think.

Steve Rocchi did a very good job, IMO, of showing us that Collectors Universe (PCGS) is a serious business with multiple layers of safeguards built into its processes, and unlike ICG, is not about to barge into the chip collecting hobby without careful study. He was at the convention on a fact-finding mission, not to shove anything down our throats.

Ultimately, I oppose slabbing for many of the same reasons the Slab-Free Chapter has articulated. But I am also unalterably opposed to prohibiting dealers or collectors from using a service they want (slabbing or otherwise) by keeping them out of our conventions or auctions. I believe the marketplace will doom slabbing efforts, and the withdrawal of ICG from the show before it was over is a good indication of that, I think.

My impression - and this isn't based on anything Steve said to me - is that Collectors Universe probably won't get into the chip slabbing business. There just isn't enough money in it for them to bother, and I think Steve learned that during the convention.

Michael