As far as a consensus on this forum regarding this set: You know what happens. We all have our own opinions, but many collectors are going to look to you as a manufacturing and chip "expert", not to mention maintainer of the Chipboard Forum and many will just follow your lead and dogpile on me, so they can feel "right" too, and some may already being doing so. We all know how that can go. You may not realize how influential your assessment of things might be, and you have drawn considerable suspicion on the provenance by implying to readers here that the paperwork had mysteriously turned up just before the auction, insinuating that it had been falsified to fool bidders in the Heritage auction. This is not true. You have jumped to a false conclusion on that, which has effected me, Heritage, and the new owner of the set.

In regards to your public comments and the timing of the auction, not possibly being able to have any negative effect on the auction result, as these comments have all been made after the auction was over. That is incorrect. You are wrong on that count too. The auction ended on December 3rd, 2016, and the thread on your forum looks to have started around November 17th, and you started to spread your suspicions on the same day November 17th with this comment:

"The owner of these chips contacted me 6 months ago looking for info. In fact he sent me one of the chips. He is a club member and found me on this bb.
The inlays are modern style paper which makes them 1980's or more recent. The initials have been stamped on since then. I gave the seller that info."

and the next day on November 18th with these two comments:

"Heritage don't exactly have a reputation for low starting bids. An item like this with any provenance to JFK would be huge, and would more than likely have ended up in Sotheby's or similar rather than Heritage"

"When asked I was told this bit "an antique dealer in Florida, that said they obtained them at a nearby thrift store where a number of items were donated from the Kennedy compound in Palm Beach FL" was word of mouth. So all of a sudden, 15+ years later, there is some paperwork. Hmmmmmmmmmmm"

All of these comments of yours were publicly made over two weeks prior to the closing date of the auction, on probably the largest chip collecting forum in the world. You put unfair suspicion on the set. Your assertion now that the discussion on the forum regarding this has all been made well after the auction ended, which clearly is not the case, further makes me question your judgement on this and the other points you have made previously regarding this chip set. Anybody can confirm the date of your comments by searching the archive and checking the dates of those posts of your on this forum.

So to set the record straight here:

The paperwork was created by Mrs. Doris Singer of Aries Antiques & Estates, established in 1949, in Dania, FL., the seller at the time of my purchase 15 years ago in 2001, and this paperwork did not mysteriously turn up recently just prior to the auction as implied by you on this forum.

You now also look to be backpeddling a bit on other issues as well saying you didn't have the chip in hand when you made the assessment about a paper inlay, and look to be using that as an excuse of some sort, but you have always made the same judgement anyway, so I don't see what difference it makes. You asked me to ship the chip to a US address, and I did. I had no idea you were in the UK, and wouldn't get the chip until much later, but regardless, you have said from the pics I sent originally, and you agree that you hold a chip in hand now, and still maintain that the inlay is paper and therefore this set dates to the 1980s, and feel the gold foil stamp was done after that, and you have shared that publicly with the chip collecting community worldwide on this forum, and many will take this to the bank as expert fact, so I am asking you to crack open your chip, and take pictures of this paper inlay to lay this to rest. You seem reluctant to do this now. Why?

If you have changed your mind about the inlay, perhaps because you have already dissected your JFK chip, and now feel you may have been wrong about your paper inlay theory, and did unfairly jump to a another false conclusion regarding this set, and are trying to save face here, and don't want to lose the bet? Then just kindly share that info with the community to set the record straight. Nobody will hold it against you, and since you didn't want to take my Gentleman's bet on this, you will not owe me anything, and I will not gloat or hold any hard feelings against you, and be truly thankful you came forward and admitted that you may have jumped to some incorrect and unfair conclusions here regarding this set. Do it in the name of chip history, and not to prove me or you right or wrong. None of this will prove the chips indeed belonged to JFK, but admitting that you have played a key role in spreading undue suspicion here, will be a big step forward in trying to correct some of what you have started. It could happen to anybody. The story is indeed almost too good to be true. I understand that.

Otherwise, crack the chip and show us all the gloss paper inlay you are convinced is inside.

Paul

PS: I have been contacted by others who may be afraid to go against you on the forum perhaps because you run things here, and they want to keep harmony. Just so you know. No BS. I have nothing against you personally David. I bet we are actually a lot alike, and if we met would probably get along like a house on fire. I wish you or anybody else any ill will, that is why I gave you a JFK chip for your collection, despite what you said. I just want more happy chipping for all of us, but what happened here is just not quite right.