Hi… I wanted to bring up some thoughts I’ve had regarding the current state of the CCA.

First, I want to thank you for reading this, I also want to thank you for everything that you have done for the hobby. I know there are passionate voices in this group and I know that we all don’t share the same visions for what we think the future should be for the CCA. There was a time that I wanted to get involved with the club’s governance because I thought I could help, but I realized it wasn’t for me after butting heads with members about what I thought were no-brainer decisions. I will admit, I talk about the club more than I work for it, I have taken a pot shot or two at people over things I thought were not fair, but I always have what I think is the best interest of the hobby in mind. With that said I’d like to give you my thoughts on where we are right now.

As I see it… We are currently in what they call the later part of an organizational life cycle… the decline. We will have to reinvent and renew to return to the growth stage or we will eventually dissolve. This in no way means that collecting will slow down, just the organization as a 501c3 will have run its course. I see two general directions we could go from here. To stay the way the club is currently structured where we have no executive director and the bulk of the decisions are made by the BOD who run the organization through managing volunteer member efforts and try to keep it going with fewer people involved as time goes by or… The structure can be changed to try and adapt for growing the current organization into a different model. This would include restructuring the BOD and their responsibilities and changing the relationship with membership and possibly hiring a director.

I know there are current members that don’t want change, they like the old school club and don’t care about changing anything. I respect that. I am someone that came to the club when things were booming. I felt privileged to attend the convention and the club banquet where my wife and I felt a little out of place, but I was thrilled to get a glimpse into the history of the members that built the club and the hobby. For a lot of members, social interaction is what the club is all about. This happened because the members were pioneering and making new meaning through their shared experiences. But… the social activity of younger generations is different. They don’t value the same things, they would rather jump off a bridge then attend a banquet or hall of fame induction. This puts a divide in the club. You have some senior members that are digging in on aspects they don’t want to lose, but you have at the same time newer members that find the club’s activities less relevant to them.

To make the question of how we proceed more difficult, the club has also created a second organization within itself called the MOGH. This is a museum in the making with a separate board of directors from the original 501c3 and an all-volunteer staff and I’m guessing a separate budget within the organization. Talk about an organizational nightmare. I don’t see a path where either can function properly into the future without serious restructuring. I find that the way that the club was originally set up, where members control the organization’s activity through voting is not practical as we grow. For example: recently the BOD decided to move the original 501c3 location to Nevada. This was a decision by the BOD because they researched and found that the CCA would benefit from the move from a grant writing perspective. Hallelujah! They made the decision without a membership vote on the matter. Afterward, this move was brought up by membership as an infraction to the bylaws, having been decided without a membership vote. In my experience executive decisions like this are not up to a membership group. There is a reason you have a BOD. Can you imagine the Neon Museum having its membership vote on executive decisions? That would be a joke.

Why are our missions so similar but our organizational structures so different?

Is our mission to be a social club first or to execute our programming for the public first?
The structure and bylaws that the founding members set up for the CC>CC met the needs of a social club at the time and worked well as the club grew but I think the original mission needs to be reexamined at this point. Is the CCA fulfilling the mission? In my opinion, the question the CCA needs to ask itself is, who do we want to be? What is the 5 year plan? Do we strive to grow into a Neon Museum model where we are mission-driven and strategically focused on growth goals? Or is it more important to keep the all-volunteer social club aspect that we have now where members are mostly using the club to connect with other collectors and the bar for organizational growth is lowered? This is the fork in the road. At some point, the MOGH will need to be its own 501c3 or completely take over and restructure the club's original 501c3bylaws and mission. It will need a founding board of directors who pay board dues and take personal responsibility for the organization, they will put together a budget and hire an Executive Director and staff and have a clear mission and accountability.

The difference I see between the CCA and the Neon Museum is that they are focused on their mission to the general public. The CCA has been focused on accommodating its membership and less on its mission to the general public. Besides the membership, the CCA has spent the time to develop a world-class archive of information known as thechipguide.com, in my opinion, it is the most valuable piece of the puzzle here. It will be interesting to see who controls the archive in the future and how it is utilized.

I’m here for the mission first, not the members, although members are good too .

In the upcoming election, there are two outstanding candidates for president of the CCA, both have shown that they have specific strengths that the CCA can use, I’d like to see both working together but there are obviously some differences between their visions for the future. I would be curious to hear their 5 year plans and also hear from David, Jim, Charles, and other members who would like to discuss their vision for the CCA/MOGH. I’m pretty progressive and I would like to see a more professional version of a casino collectibles organization somewhere, whether it is the CCA growing up or a new organization that would take the lead. I know there has been a lot of groundwork put into the MOGH but to me, the name is a tough sell. If I were going to start a 501c3 with the mission of preserving gaming history, I would start it in Nevada and call it "HistoryNevada" or something of that nature and I would write for and receive more grant money than you would imagine. We need to be strategic about the decisions being made.

In reality, any of the topics I bring up here could be heavily debated or ruffle feathers, there are no easy solutions to our problem of an organization in decline. I love collecting and researching clubs. I love going to the convention and talking chips with other collectors, even those I may disagree with on a particular club issue. I appreciate everyone that works hard for the club and the hobby. I hope we can all get to the place where the BOD and membership are mission-focused and the mission is clear to everyone.

There was a young guy collector that posted a youtube video here not too long ago, he was reviewing his collection of casino chips that he had recently put together over a year or so. We can all remember our first years of collecting. He had good taste in chips. He is our target stakeholder. We need to understand his needs in an organization that produces programming that he finds valuable, because he will be the future if he gets involved.

I’m sorry if I'm rambling, I had two cups of coffee. happy chipping