Well that looks like an invitation to start speaking.

The seminar turned out much like I expected it would.

I did not time any of the speakers and I have nothing to say about that except that it was unfortunate, but unavoidable that time was limited. As long as we conduct seminars only when the bourse is closed we will run into that problem.

Everyone there was polite and professional and Mr. Knapp did an excellent job of setting this up and moderating.

The rumour I had heard (and I hope that someone can confirm or deny this was that ICG had been invited to speak and either declined for failed to respond until there spot had been filled with Steve Rocchi of Collector's Universe (PCGS).

Not one of the speakers actually made the declaration that slabbing would be good for the hobby.

Mr. Hallenbeck spoke to what he claims it did for coins. Of course Mr. hallenbeck is a coin dealer slabbing probably benefits him greatly. However that does not mean it benefits collectors. Because of the significant differences between coins and chips I consider Mr. Hallenbecks statements to be generally irrelevent to the current debate.

Steve Rocchi of Collectors Universe (PCGS) basically stated that his company is not slabbing chips at this time and that they are now consulting with chip experts to determine whether there is a market and how to proceed.

Notably he stated that he himself knows nothing of chips (he is a sports card guy). He stated that when they began the slabbing of coins there was already a univerisally accepted grading standard, but that they got the 32 largest dealers to agree to a specific interpretation of the standards.

(BTW I believe that Mr. Hallenbeck indicated that the ANA began the first slabbing service but Mr. Rocchi seemed to want to take credit for it for PCGS).

Both Mr. Hallenbeck and Mr. Rocchi suggested that slabbing would not be done to common chips but gave no support for this proposition in light of what has gone on in the coin and card fields. Mr. Rocchi had the annoying habit of referring to the chip industry not the chip hobby.

CT Rodgers spoke and I believe made two major errors . . . One - he suggested that slabbing was akin to storage of a chip. Two - He makes the meaningless freedom of choice speech. I say meaningless not because freedom of choice is meaningless, but because this is irrelevent to the discussion. You see the real question is whether or not slabbing is good for the hobby or bad for the hobby. Stating that an individual collector should be free to decide for himself whether to slab his chips does not provide any insight to the question at hand, it merely is a rhetorical tool designed to avoid the question.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not criticizing Mr. Rodgers. I agree with him that every collector should have the choice of what to collect and what to do with their chips. I belive that every adult citizen should be free to decide for themselves who to vote for, but that does not mean that I should not try to persuade them to vote for the candidate who I think will be better. Mr. Rodgers position seems to be that not only are they free to have their own opinion but that they should be free from having someone try to convince they are wrong.

My point is just that this provided no insight into the question which I think was being discussed.

I really wanted to find something in Mr. Reilly's comments to criticize (thus showing me to be fair and even handed) the problem was that for the most part Mr. Reilly said exactly what i would have said and thus I can't find anything to criticize.

When the panel was opened up for questioning the bulk of the questions were to Mr. Rocchi. Mr. Rocchi deftly avoided answering the questions.

When it was pointed out that chips unlike coins do not have a universally accepted grading system his answer was simply that having a universally accepted grading system would be good for the hobby. This is the equivelent of going to a medical conference and announcing that a cure for cancer would be a good thing. While it is true, it is does not bring us any closer to a solution.

When it was pointed out that chip graders could not be truly independent and unbiased Mr. Rocchi informed us that PCGS does not allow their graders to buy sell or own the collectibles that they grade. Thus in order for them to get experts they will need to hire former collectors, I think that they will find that there is a very limited number of people who they will have to choose from (although Archie's name came up . How about it Archie . . . want a job?).

I believe that in a different type forum, one where Mr. Reilly would be permitted followup questions (cross examination basically) Mr. Rocchi would have ultimately condemned much of ICG's practices. As it stood he simply said he didn't want to comment on another grading company.