The information, while no doubt factual (you are an honest sort) lacks enough detail to be properly applied. The info is without context.

For example you note 3083 chips were sold, of which 160 were $100 chips. The implication is that the $100 chips are severely diminished in value. However, since as many of these as 2923 could be $1 chips, it is a inadequate comparison. The chips could be of a poor quality, the chips could have been sold by a person who lacked knowledge of their true value and the buyer took unfair advantage of the seller (this scenario is precisely why our clubs ethical rules prohibit doing so). There is no suggestion that these are a new find, altering the know (or estimated) quantity out there. Were they even the same issue as the chip beig sold?

Would it be fair to say a person is a killer and say nothing more, when in fact all they did was inadvertently run over a defenseless rabbit (wabbit for the boston crowd )? The info may be helpful, but without context, fair? It could be debated.