Posted Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:01 pm GMT by yeltzen
Here's two more listings for anyone interested:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=6167059087&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=6167060135&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT
I was thinking about offering them here first... but last time I tried to sell the Suits here the homeless guy near my work offered me more. So I'll use the fee-raping eBay.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:11 pm GMT by TenPercenter
Nice, snagging HoldemPokerChips.com's photos to sell pokerchips that he sells...
.
Posted Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:03 pm GMT by yeltzen
Exactly.
Posted Wed Mar 30, 2005 12:33 pm GMT by gmunny
So it's okay to "lift" an image and use it in your auction, but it's not okay to include "not-paulson" in the title? Not to give you a hard time, but.. 
G$
Posted Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:15 pm GMT by dgold41
I think a photo is fair game, it just is showing the product. What is the difference if it saves time and energy. It's the same product and if yeltzen took the photo himself, would it matter?
Actually on eBay, you'll see the same photo for for many of the same items.
Using a misleading term is a little different. Even if the intention is to draw more traffic, there are people out there who mislead those who are less informed....a.k.a. FRAUD
Posted Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:22 pm GMT by TenPercenter
| dgold41 wrote: | I think a photo is fair game, it just is showing the product. What is the difference if it saves time and energy. It's the same product and if yeltzen took the photo himself, would it matter?
|
COMPLETELY disagree. That may just be one photo to you, but a site that sells chips must take hundreds of photos. It's a lot of work to have someone use your work to sell the same product that you sell.
ON TOP of that, we are a tight knit community here, we all (most) know each other. The owner of holdempokerchips.com is a friend of this and other boards. It's just not right.
Actually Yeltzen himself agrees with me. He PM'ed me that it was his friend that used his ebay account, and that Yeltzen would be taking that photo down tonight. Good man.
Posted Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:15 pm GMT by yeltzen
| TenPercenter wrote: | | Actually Yeltzen himself agrees with me. He PM'ed me that it was his friend that used his ebay account, and that Yeltzen would be taking that photo down tonight. Good man. |
I never said I agreed with you. I'm taking the photo down so you stop giving me grief.
I do agree with you about using someone else's work to sell a product that they sell. After all, my friend ambushed ChipCo's shipment of the "Suits" to HEPC and plans to put them out of business by selling thousands of stolen sets on eBay for a HUGE discount. Just to piss HEPC off even more, he also stole his PICTURE to help sell these stolen sets. I love being a part of the poker chip mafia. 
Posted Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:20 pm GMT by breakbeat46
so it was you who stole the paulson group buy chips! geeze just becuase you like nj's better....you must be biased.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:53 pm GMT by PinataUT
Whether you took the picture down to 'avoid grief' or because it was the right thing to do: good for you.
Btw, you could have asked Michael if you could use it.
He would have been reasonable to refuse.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:22 pm GMT by dgold41
I'll clarify my point that it depends on the photo, because someone selling an item on eBay, in the case of myself ,Yeltzen and others it does not constitute our primary business. It's just a personal sale. Perhaps, if another business took the photo, there could be infringement issues there, but it's a one-time sale.
If the photo is generic in nature, such as the photo Yeltzen used and there is nothing proprietary about it, the photo is fair game, meaning no copyright.
Anyway the board is for poker stuff, not legal interpretations of photos.....so it's a good price, I like the Sands chips, cool design, but I am one of those, who wished the edge spots matched the chip face. Those ceramics put the edge spots on afterwards, I believe?
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:07 pm GMT by yeltzen
The whole thing is just asinine.
My friend BOUGHT the chips from HEPC, giving HEPC x profit.
He is now selling the chips on eBay for much less than what he paid. He is LOSING money. There is no profit to be made. There is nothing to be gained by losing your ass on a set of chips.
I could understand if he jumped in on the group buy and bought like 100,000 at the discounted price and was now jacking up the price and selling them, using HEPC's photo to help.
In any event, LIKE I ALREADY SAID 25 TIMES, I got ahold of the chips today and took a picture and replaced HEPC's. Now go buy some tampons or something.
The Sands are nice chips, no dought. The chip itself is really good (same as the NJ Skulls), but they did botch the design a bit. The edgespots a) don't match up with the face like all home ceramics, but b) the edgespots don't even match the style of the edgespots on the face. They have an extra line in the middle. Kinda weird. The marbelized sides work great on the Skulls, but not on the Sands, and the graphics from the top of the chip sometimes bleed down onto the side, etc, etc. The face of the chip is just great, but the sides kinda ruin it.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:40 pm GMT by Nanook
Yeltzen,
I never noticed that extra line in the middle of the Desert Sands, but you are exactly right. They did screw it up! They also don't have the same number of edgespots on the rolling edge as on the face. 6 vs 3. This is kind of screwed up too.
Even with these design flaws it is probably the best 40 cent chip out there.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:51 pm GMT by yeltzen
| Nanook wrote: | | Even with these design flaws it is probably the best 40 cent chip out there. |
What can I say, I'm very observant. 
Anyways, aside from the NJ Dead Man's chip which is designed flawlessly (IMO - if you like the artwork), they are by far the best 40 cent chip out there.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:00 pm GMT by Nanook
I'm just not a big fan of the artwork on the NJ's Dead Mans. Not a big fan of any chipco or chipco style either for that matter. If I could not afford clays I would buy one of these two though.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:01 pm GMT by Nanook
I'm just not a big fan of the artwork on the NJ's Dead Mans. Not a big fan of any chipco or chipco style either for that matter. If I could not afford clays I would buy one of these two though.
Posted Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:23 pm GMT by yeltzen
Well the artwork is the Achille's heel of the Dead Man's chips. I personally love it, but most people don't. However, beyond that, it is by far the most well-designed ceramic there is. Nothing on the face for the edgespots to line up with, and there is very little of the "flat color" on the face of the chip, so the marbel sides look great. On the Sands the marbel sides look stupid becuase there is so much of the base color on the face of the chip. So it's like "lots and lots of green... now marbellized green".
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:28 am GMT by dgold41
Definitely agree with Yeltzen. I love the graphics on the Dead Man chips, which is why I own them too. The chips kind of give an old-west feeling to the game of poker. All my friends who play (are are not obsessed like I am) love them too and I guess that's all that matters- BUT if I had to choose all over again, the Dead Mans would be runner up to either a Paulson set or NJ clays (probably the Martini's because I like the design and colors)- I've played the scenario out a thousand times about which set I would get, based on my "I've got a problem" list, I did contemplate about making this purchase.....hmmm but how? My girl will find out and I'll be the DEAD MAN.
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:37 am GMT by Always_Bored
| yeltzen wrote: | | Well the artwork is the Achille's heel of the Dead Man's chips. I personally love it, but most people don't. However, beyond that, it is by far the most well-designed ceramic there is. Nothing on the face for the edgespots to line up with, and there is very little of the "flat color" on the face of the chip, so the marbel sides look great. On the Sands the marbel sides look stupid becuase there is so much of the base color on the face of the chip. So it's like "lots and lots of green... now marbellized green". |
I agree too. They are all around nice chips. The edge spots dont need to line up because they dont go onto the face. The artwork is good (the skull im not a huge fan of but its grown on me). In my opinion they are superior to Chipco in feel and look (no white ring aroung the edge). Plus they are cheaper. I think they are the most overlooked chip on the market. Obviously i would prefer a set of Paulsons but as for ceramics no one beats NJ.
edit: i just remembered I did got 4 sample chips. Paulson James bond, Nevada Jack Skull, Desert Sands and a chipco chip. I asked everyone i know, people who like poker and people who dont like poker to put them in order of favourite to least. at leat 90% of people put them in this order... Paulson, Skull, Desert sands, chipco. Everyone either picked the paulson first or the skull first and chipco was everyones last choice.
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:58 am GMT by yeltzen
| Always_Bored wrote: | | Everyone either picked the paulson first or the skull first and chipco was everyones last choice. |
Come on man, what did I tell you about blaspheming on this board!?
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 12:18 pm GMT by SCV15
I do like Nevada Jacks ceramics but simply conducting a 10 person poll does not mean they are better than Chipco. I certainly prefer the Desert Sands or Dead Man NJ's to Chipco's Crystal Oyster (besides edge spots of course) or Classics, but the Chipco Egyptians or WSOP chips are better than NJ in my opinion. Try the same poll with a Chipco Egyptian perhaps and see if the results are the same (I'm assuming a Crystal Oyster or Classic was used).
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 12:30 pm GMT by yeltzen
We aren't talking about the design of the chip. We're talking about the chip itself. The feel, the sound, etc. Just because you make a nice custom design for a chip doesn't mean it's a better chip. The Egyptian ChipCo is the exact same chip in terms of feel, sound, stackability, whatever, as any other ChipCo.
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 12:52 pm GMT by Always_Bored
| SCV15 wrote: | I do like Nevada Jacks ceramics but simply conducting a 10 person poll does not mean they are better than Chipco.
|
first off it was way more than 10 people. Second I was just stating the outcome of my little survey, I was not stating that it was a scientific fact that NJ's are better. Plus stating my opinion that NJ are better than Chipco. I will stick to the fact that when you weigh out the pros and cons of NJ vs Chipco the NJ Skulls are better. Included in my comparison are cost, feel, quality, sound and styling. I pay half as much for the NJs and they have a good feel, sound and look.
| SCV15 wrote: | | I certainly prefer the Desert Sands or Dead Man NJ's to Chipco's Crystal Oyster (besides edge spots of course) or Classics, but the Chipco Egyptians or WSOP chips are better than NJ in my opinion. Try the same poll with a Chipco Egyptian perhaps and see if the results are the same (I'm assuming a Crystal Oyster or Classic was used). |
Crystal Oyster was used. But to get dead last by every single person is pretty bad. And yes you are right the egyptians or the WSOP ones are supperior to the crystal oyster.
Posted Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:32 pm GMT by dgold41
It is tough to balance looks and feel when considering chips. Some chips are really good at one and not the other and some chips nail them both. Even the new home Paulson's did not get it right. It was actually surprising to me that Paulson would use the same inlay as in the past? I do not like the James Bond inlay, the denominations written on the chip are slanted funny and sized irregularly. The inlay was also too small for the chip
I like the Crystal Oyster design, but it's not a completely compelling chip to me. I guess it all comes down to personal feel, there are no right chips but there certainly plenty of bad one's. All that matters is a) you are happy (never the case for compulsive chip buyers) and b) your friends enjoy playing with your chips :D
|
|
