A heart filled message I continue with our sets collectors and.....

[Dan M R-9148]

Some insights to share with singles collectors about the club!
A message to set collectors about the CCA (yes, it's long... you know me)

Alright... I'm going to say something that's been on my mind for a while.

And yes, before anyone says it, I already know. This is going to be long. If you've read my posts before, you knew that before you even clicked the thread. So grab a coffee, scroll down, or just read the bold parts and pretend you read the whole thing.

Now that we got that out of the way...

I want to talk to the set collectors in the hobby. I'm saying this respectfully, and I'm not trying to stir anything up, but I also don't want to sugarcoat what's going on.

The ChipGuide issue is real, and I get why people are mad

A lot of set collectors have been frustrated lately, especially with the ChipGuide situation.

ChipGuide has always felt like one of those hobby resources that belongs to everybody. It's been the go-to reference for years. And now it feels like parts of it are being locked behind "advanced features" that require a CCA membership ($40/year).

Yes, parts of the site are still open to the public. But some of the messaging floating around makes it sound like the whole thing is locked unless you're a member. Whether that's the intent or not, that's how it comes across.

So I'm not here to act like set collectors are wrong for being annoyed. I understand it.

I also understand why many set collectors don't feel like CCA membership has obvious value right now. That's not an insult. It's just reality.

But here's where I think we need to zoom out and look at the bigger picture.


The CCA is still "the organization" of the hobby

Whether we like it or not, the CCA is still viewed as the main organization of the casino chip collecting hobby.

It's where the hobby has structure.
It's where the "official" voice is.
It's where the future direction is going to be shaped.
It's where new collectors eventually land when they want to see what the hobby is "about."

And right now, the CCA has basically been defined as a singles-focused place.

Not officially, maybe not intentionally, but in practice, that's how it feels to a lot of people.

A lot of set collectors look at it and think:
"That's not for us."
"That's a singles club."
"That's not my crowd."

And I'm going to say the quiet part out loud because we all know it's true.

Some set collectors see the CCA as a bunch of crabby old folks who hate set collecting and hate how we collect.

Now, I'm not saying that's fair to everyone in the CCA, because it's not. There are good people there. There are reasonable people there. There are helpful people there.

But the perception exists, and the perception matters.

Because if set collectors stay out, the CCA stays "singles-only" by default, and the divide gets worse.

The hobby is bigger than singles vs sets

Here's something that I think gets overlooked.

The VAST majority of collectors today are set collectors, or at least set-influenced collectors. Sets are a huge part of what brings people into the hobby.

But I also want to say this clearly, because it matters.

Singles collectors are not "failed set collectors" or "set collectors who never finished." Singles collecting is its own lane. A lot of collectors start with singles and stay singles-focused their entire collecting life. And that's totally valid. It takes real knowledge and skill, and it's a big part of the history side of the hobby.

That said, for many set collectors, sets become a gateway into deeper collecting.

You start building sets, and then you start noticing variations.
You start asking questions.
You start learning manufacturers.
You start learning casino timelines.
You start learning closures, rebrands, ownership changes.
You start learning why a chip exists and what came before it.

Before you know it, you aren't "just building sets."

You're learning casino history.

You're collecting singles.
You're chasing oddballs.
You're hunting the weird stuff.
You're reading about old casinos and old racks and old runs.

So this idea that set collectors are some separate species that doesn't care about history is honestly just wrong.

Set collecting is real collecting.
It's serious collecting.
And it often leads collectors into the deeper side of the hobby, whether they planned it or not.

Some of the comments about set collectors have been insulting

This is where I'm trying to be diplomatic, but I'm also not going to pretend it hasn't happened.

Some voices in the CCA world have pushed the idea that set collectors "don't really collect."

Some have acted like we're "just card players."

Some have basically implied we don't respect casino history or casino collectibles.

That is not only wrong, it's insulting.

And it's one of the reasons so many set collectors have just said "forget it" and stayed away from the CCA.

But here's the problem with staying away.

If we aren't there to represent ourselves, then other people will define us however they want.

And if we're being honest, some of those people don't understand what we do, and some of them don't even want to.

If we want the CCA to change, we have to show up

This is the main point of my post.

If set collectors want the CCA to be better, more welcoming, more modern, more active, more transparent, and more valuable, then we can't do that from the outside.

We can complain on PokerChipper.com and PCF (and believe me, we're good at that), but it doesn't change what the CCA becomes.

The only way set collectors have a real voice in the "official organization" of the hobby is to participate in it.

Join it.
Post on the boards.
Be visible.
Be active.
Be constructive.
Be consistent.

Not to start fights.
Not to take over.
Not to disrespect singles collectors.

Just to be part of the room where the hobby is being shaped.

Set collectors can help the CCA in a big way

I'm going to say this carefully.

I'm not saying set collectors are better than singles collectors. We aren't.
I'm not saying we run the hobby. We don't.
I'm not saying we should take anything over. We shouldn't.

But I do believe this.

Set collectors can help the CCA.

The CCA membership has been declining, and part of that is because it's been seen as a singles-only place. That is not healthy for the hobby.

If set collectors showed up in numbers, we could:
Bolster membership
Bring more daily activity to the boards
Bring more new collectors into the organization
Bring a more welcoming, social feel to the CCA
Help modernize the tone and culture over time
Make the CCA feel like it represents the whole hobby, not one slice of it
And we already know how to do this, because we already do it every day.

Look at PokerChipper.com and PCF.
We have daily interaction.
We have people helping each other constantly.
We have set threads.
We have variation threads.
We have chip IDs.
We have casino history discussions.
We have real hobby energy.

That's not fluff. That's the lifeblood of a hobby.

And I honestly think the CCA could use more of it.

My appeal (and yes I'm almost done)

If you are a set collector and you care about the hobby, consider joining the CCA and participating on the boards.

Even if you're skeptical.
Even if you're annoyed.
Even if you've had a bad experience.
Even if you don't feel welcome right now.

Because if we want the CCA to be better, we need to be part of making it better.

And if set collectors don't show up, then the CCA will continue being defined as "the singles place," and set collectors will continue being defined by other people who don't understand us.

The hobby doesn't need two camps.

It needs one community.

The CCA should be a place where set collectors and singles collectors can both say:
"Yeah, I belong here."

Dan Madrigrano
CCA #R-9148

[Barry Sherwood R-9037 (admin)]

Well said, and come on in.  The water's fine.  And bring the slot machine collectors, the gaming table collectors, the menu collectors, the dice collectors, the swizzle stick collectors, the TITO collectors, and all of the other casino collectors with you.  You might need a bigger bus.  Figure it out, willya?

[Dan M R-9148]

I working on it buddy!  Im working on it.

[Bob Miksztal R-8909]

Dan,

On the chipboard you asked a question about what you interpreted as animosity toward coin collectors. There's so much noise and distractions there I figure my response may be clearer here.

Back when chip collecting became a thing a lot of chip collectors were also coin collectors. Actually the CCA is affiliated with the ANA (but I am not quite sure how). At the coin shows the CC&GTCC (CCA) sometimes had a table where we could reach out to attendees. Exactly how effective that outreach was is up for debate. As the saying goes "recollections may vary"

Keep in mind this was pre-internet, pre-ebay. Like late 80s, early 90s. Like 30 plus years ago. Some people still posting on the ChipBoard were part of that. But over time that outreach faded away.

The idea of talking to coin collectors at the shows was brought up several times in the last few years, almost exclusively by someone who himself cannot/will not execute it. Barry Sherwood several years ago went to the Florida FUN show on his own expense to represent the club. The results were minimal. His conclusion was that if a local member were willing to man a table, 'it couldn't hurt'. But the results don't justify any expense or distraction from other club activities.

Everyone thought the issue was settled. And yet the call continued 'if we only exposed ourselves at these coin collectors, we would get so many people'. Again by someone who wouldn't actually do it.

Even CCA founder Archie Black chimed in saying the results don't justify the effort. At my work we say 'the juice isn't worth the squeeze'.

And yet the call continues to this day. "Broken record". "Beating a dead horse". Pick your metaphor.

So if you see negativity in those threads, please understand it's not toward the coin collectors or that hobby or those shows. It's toward the idea that everyone needs to yet again spend limited energies considering an idea that has objectively been proven as being not worth the effort to execute.

Hope that helps, if others disagree I welcome to hear their thoughts.