As I read through this post I had to agree that the ‘fake chips’ for lack of a better term are bad for the hobby because of introduction of them to the market as ‘genuine’(as already pointed out). The reason I believe that is because they contribute nothing to the hobby or history. But on the other hand a fake or counterfeit chip is not necessarily a bad thing to the hobby if it makes a contribution to chip history. The Borland chips were a huge controversial chips that were made of the highest quality (as I understand) and impacted the hobby sending shockwaves throughout the chipping community. I can see why a collector would want a sample of one of these contriversial chips. If a person made a few fake junk chips in the garage to make a few bucks on eBay I agree they should not be there. I agree the Borlands should have never been made in the first place either but the fact is they were and not only were they made but are part of chipping history (a bad part, but nevertheless a part).

The reason I have come to that conclusion is from currency collecting. I would never waste a stamp on a fake note, and I KNOW they exist. BUT I did in fact, knowingly pay dearly for a counterfeit note that changed English currency for decades and has been featured on 60 Minutes, The History Channel and many others because of its historical impact. It is a Fake but it is a huge part of history. It was made to wreck the English economy not for a few bucks on eBay. So while fake, it has merit and represents history as other notes (maybe more so in this case).

The bottom line is that as unethical or wrong as it may be, fakes and counterfeits are and will be produced it is MY job as a collector to know the difference. We should educate new chippers, but ultimately they have to learn for themselves. Plus there should be consequences for those who commit fraud and deceit. Life’s like a box of chocolates, ya’ never know what you’re gonna’ get! LOL