I've been looking at chick charm Cosmic Candy and believe it's a strong match to S. 'Aross' (Ben Zonneveld, 1982). If anyone spots some chick charms at a nursery, look at back side of the label of Cosmic Candy. I will look to do the same except spring in Massachusetts is much further away.

Also looking for the real cultivar name for c. c. Berry Bomb and Silver Suede.

I am so happy to see that people are taking this issue seriously. I bought all my C.C. online in the winter of 2016 and they were way cheaper than what they sell for now. C.C. 'Gold Nugget" the only true C.C. at the time cost me 4.50. After I had then all I was informed of the truth about them. I was angry and disappointed and I will never buy any of Chris's plants again. That may seem harsh but buying from a breeder who steals anothers work is misleading and deceptive and it discredits the hard work of the true breeder.. Buying plants from people who do this only encourages the practice to continue. Maybe, not buying them could be the only way to stop this from happening. It doesn't matter if it is legal or not or if the true name.is listed on the tag. It doesn't make it right anyway I look at it. I consider it to be nothing but plant fraud.

I see how people might look down on this practice, but I don't think it's as bad as all that. Chris works within the law and pays legitimate royalties to the right people for their cultivars. He does the name-change thing which I don't like either but it is legal and the real name is included on the tag. Misleading perhaps, but I don't call it stealing. Not stealing money anyway. Maybe stealing credit for cultivars not created by his own work.
Seems like you know already... 'Gold Nugget' is completely Chris's. It was a sport from a plant in his greenhouse so he owns it as much as anybody. Charging a high prices for it is also quite reasonable given the demand for this particular plant.

Susan, if you've read the whole thread on this subject, you'll know where I stand on the issue, the most polite thing I can say about this practice of harvesting other people's work (and including harvesting regular species!) and slapping on one's own names, it's legal "bottom feeding", one of the most unfortunate trends in horticulture.

I don't know if I believe this: "Chris works within the law and pays legitimate royalties to the right people for their cultivars". Most of cultivars are very old and some of the hybridizers are deceased. I believe it was mentioned in this discussion of one European breeder not very happy about the use of his/her cultivar without permission. Two of the CC trademarked semps are straight up species, just think about how many plant species exist on this earth, and it's now fair game legally to slap on one's own made up trademark name on any living plant. Subsequently the plants end up having two names associated with it, the true latin binomial or cultivar name, then a new made-up trademark name, makes for a confusing mixed up nomenclature mess. It might all be legal, but it's just plain bad practice.

For me the unsavoriness of the trade mark rebranding practice, in the case of Chick Charms, all marketing of the CC product line gives the 100% impression 100% that they're his creations, and he unabashedly accepts all praise for his wondrous new varieties (and yes, I'm aware of 'Gold Nugget' being the only CC currently that's truly his own). Chris rationalizes his approach saying he's popularizing semps for the mass market, and that audience would not understand the double-naming byproduct of trademark names, might be true, but I for one could never rebrand and take credit for other people's work, including breeders who are no longer living to protect their interests.

Still seeking the true cultivars name behind CC Berry Bomb, Cosmic Candy, Silver Suede.

Thank you Antman01 I appreciate the support on this matter. Also @ testoehr I didn't say he was stealing money. But he is stealing the work of another and making money off anothers persons sweat. Legal or not, it's WRONG!
I'm an avid gardener and grower of many daylilies ,hostas semps and iris. I try to keep them all marked. Those that have no names are simply noids.
The important thing here is the history of a plant. Historical value is lost when plants are reintroduced. Most of the people buying these reintroduced plants have no idea of the history of the plant and many don't care. Well I did care and it has turned me off of the plants and the people who seem to think it is of no importance just because we may get someone interested in them. The few buyers who turn out to become avid collectors (like me) then get confused over the mess. Now whenever I'm at a nursery and I see someone eyeing those cute little C.C. tags I let them know about this issue, show them the true name on back of the tag and give them information where they can buy the true cultivar. I also give them this website in hopes of getting them to join the NGA.
It is important to keep all the facts about a plant with the plant. I believe that plant societies are important to us. As they collect and save as much data on a plant as does the NGA I think part of their purpose is to insure that reintroduction's don't occur or if one slips by that can be truly identified as a past introduction and that the correct historical data be given with the plant. Thank you NGA for doing this!
As a past member of the American Hemerorcallis Society (forgot this yrs. dues) I don't think they would take to me introducing the species plant of the wild ditch daylily and naming it 'Long Tall Wild Thang' nor do I believe that I would get by with reintroducing the wildly popular most grown daylily H. 'Stella De Oro' as "Stella No Mora" because it doesn't rebloom in my area. I evaluate plants in my garden year round but that doesn't mean I should introduce them under another name for any reason. It is a matter of respect to the true hybridzer and history of the plant.

Well let me speak as one of the hybridizers who was "ripped off": I'm not in the least offended! In contrast, what Chick Charms is doing is giving people a collection of plants where some of the less good ones have been weeded out so that you get a plant that many others consider a good one, separating it from the ones that aren't. These won't be an insipid or dirty green with purple tips. The use of the Trademark on these is a rather consistent industry practice, much like Proven Winners have been used for a bevvy of other perennials. Moreover, it gets people INTERESTED IN SEMPS AGAIN! Isn't that the bottom line??

The original names, if there are ones, are printed on the back of the label and NGA also maintains a list of these. I think it is MUCH more immoral for those who market things under no name or a wrong name. Right now there is NO registrar for semps because the registration authority was granted to the Sempervivum Society and it is no longer. Those of us who hybridize do check the lists maintained by the Germans to make sure we don't name anything the same.

I have been breeding plants for 52 years. I had a number of plants that were stolen from me, and introduced by an unscrupulous individual as his own. It took 30 years to clear this up, because he had registered (and lied) about their origin and pedigrees. So registration per se really does not protect the hybridizer. And let's face it, we do it for the love of the plant, not a great financial reward, even though the individual that stole mine did get a hefty check.

So, there are much bigger battles to fight, and if Chick Charms give us a bunch of nice semps, where the uglies have been weeded out, more power to them!

Kevin

Mark & Susan,
I take great offense to both the tone and content of your postings.
From the initial concept of the Chick Charms program it has been my intention to give absolute proper credit to the correct botanical name of every Sempervivum we have introduced under the Chick Charms brand.
It would have been MUCH easier to simply identify them all as Sempervivum hybrids and leave you to guess what their botanical names were.
However, I wanted to do the honorable thing and cross reference the correct name on the back of every single label we've printed.
There is not a single NOID in this group of Sempervivums.
My goal was to appeal to a new demographic of both kids and also non-gardeners. I began growing Sempervivums when I was 5 years old and feel strongly they are the perfect gateway plant to get kids interested in gardening. The good news is that it is WORKING and we are drawing in an entirely new group of people who are fascinated by Sempervivums. I would think this would make you all very happy and excited to have a new generation of people to carry on the interest in Sempervivums, but obviously you strongly feel differently.
It would have been extremely difficult to have a young person ask their parents to buy them a Sempervivum arachnoideum tomentosum or Sempervivum 'Reinhardt'. However, it is much easier for them to ask for a Fringed Frosting or Appletini plant. AND, we do give credit to the proper name on the back of every single Chick Charms tag.
Please feel free to not purchase any Chick Charms, but refrain from any further accusations of "stealing" or "bottom feeding".
Chris Hansen
Creator of the Chick Charms brand

Hi Kevin , First, I want to say that I have heard of you. I'm sorry to hear about the problems you've had personally on the issue of someone reintroducing your plants. I also hear your anger regarding that and you were not happy that it happened to you. I don't like that it happen to you. And that's why I feel strongly against this practice. I myself am a plant collector and it is important to me that a plants data and history stay with the plant. I don't want the added confusion that this issue brings. While you may be content with reintroduction of plants that someone has evaluated for better colors, faster growth rate, their hardiness or whatever the reason. It still does not give them the right to rename and trademark them, especially species.
As far has In the hopes that it brings more people into growing them honesty is the best policy. Simply putting the original name on the tag isn't enough. Most people have no idea what it means they only care if it grows in the sun or shade. And what happens when they start buying more and collecting them and then find out that they already own them under a different name.
I'm a small town gardener and get many visitors who want to know why I name my plants. LOL. I tell them the truth that the hybridizers are the ones who name them.
I respect plant breeders and understand the years that can go into creating a beautiful plant that they find worthy enough to introduce. Some don't make a lot of money and most do it as a side job or as a hobby.
Let me ask you and other semp growers: "Do you grow the CC's and if so, do you tag them as CC's with the new name or do you tag as the original name?"

oops

Chris Thank you for joining this discussion. I'm sorry you don't like my tone but I don't like that you don't respect another persons work nor do you understand the importance to keep the correct historical data with a plant. Yet you did understand the importance of putting a trademark on the Chick Charms name and a patent on your lovely creation of S. 'Gold Nugget.
I purchased all the C.C.'s that was available online in the winter 2016 and spring 2017. Later in the season a friend told me that the plants (except for C.C. 'Gold Nugget) were all older introductions by different hybridizers. She told look at the back of the tag. All I can say is that I was not charmed by the fact that I already owned 9 of the original cultivars that are advertised as NEW. I feel it was a huge waste of my money to purchase something I already had. I would have taken all that money to purchase another C.C. 'Gold Nugget' alone.
The advertising on C.C,'s is misleading and unfair.They have been and still are advertised as NEW both online and in catalogs. And simply putting the true cultivar name on the tag is not sufficient information. May I suggest putting on the tag : This cultivar was previously introduced as 'Reinhardt' by hybridizer Martin Haberer in 1979. Please give credit where credit is due.
As I said I never would have bought them knowing I already owned them but more importantly I wouldn't have bought them because of the fact that they are renamed, previous introductions by other people. I'm sure your C.C.'s marketing towards children is a success but your still making money off another's hard work. I agree children should learn how to garden but first we must teach morals,values and respect.
Please note that I never referred to any C.C. as a noid. I was stating that in my garden when a tag is lost or I can't remember a plants name I will mark it as a noid. By the way 'Gold Nugget' is doing wonderful for me it's quite a sport!

I love that we can have threads to discuss different topics in growing plants.
However, I am disappointed in some of the comments made in this thread. I wish I would have been available to post to this sooner, I have been away from home.

It is perfectly okay for each of us to have different opinions on this topic, however it is not okay to make inflammatory comments like "Theft", "Bottom feeding" and "Stealing".

I always read the front and back of a plant tag, and find the information on the back of the Chick Charms semps to give correct information on the original name of the semp.
For those that choose to not buy the CC semps it is your loss, as there are some absolutely stunning new cultivars that will be released next year that will be patented. Can't wait to add them to my collection.
I also have many of Chris's wonderful sedum introductions and love how they do in my garden.

Okay, the semp database has been brought up to current status on the Chick Charms series of semps.
https://garden.org/plants/sear...

Some people have very strong feelings about this situation and the "moral" aspect of what is being done. Since I don't have a dog in this fight, I am not going to comment on that.

There is one comment I would like to make about the renaming of semps. I really wish we would be more upfront about what the original name of the plant was.

My reason for this being of the 18 plants listed in the data base that are Chick Charms, I already have 10 under their original names. If I was shopping at a nursery and could look at the back of the tag, then I could eliminate purchasing a plant I already have. I checked one site on Amazon that is selling Chick Charms. Specifically I was looking at Cinnamon Starburst. No where does it say this is really Jeanne d'Arc. Which I already have. I would not have been happy had I purchased CS and found out I already had it.

I really feel more disclosure is needed with regard to original names. And I don't just mean a tiny blurb on the back of the tag.

I found the name of the last two by emailing a nursery that is selling them. They were more than happy to go look at the back of the tag and give me that information.
For me I will continue doing this until I find another original/patented NEW semp released by Chris (Chick Charms). I know there are some really amazing ones coming up and I don't want to miss out on them.

valleylynn said:Okay, the semp database has been brought up to current status on the Chick Charms series of semps.
https://garden.org/plants/sear...

Thanks Lynn for updating the last 2 chick charm entries in the Semp database. As a visual reference, here's the complete list of 18 initial chick charms and the True Cultivar name equivalencies, identifying original breeder and year introduced.
Click image for legibility.


Given the marketing of chick charms as NEW, in contrast the true cultivars are rather old, the average cultivar age is 35 years. I did not include Gold Nugget as it is new, nor did I include the two chick charms that reference straight Sempervivum species (both named in the 1800s), as I do not feel it is legitimate to trademark species.
Click image for legibility.


With identity of the last two chick charms now made known, I discovered tonight that I have both of them in my collection (Urmina & Director Jacobs).

SunSparkler said:Mark & Susan,

However, I wanted to do the honorable thing and cross reference the correct name on the back of every single label we've printed.

Chris Hansen
Creator of the Chick Charms brand

I have 6 tags from Chick Charms "Appletini" Sempervivum Reinhardt. Not one has the true cultivar name under the bar code on back. I also have Chick Charms "Berry Bomb" Sempervivum Prairie Sunset. No cultivar name on the back. Then their are the two Chick Charm labels of your "Cotton Candy" Sempervivum arach. "Emily" with no cultivar name on the back. If it weren't for this forum and the Semp DB, I would never have known that.
I haven't been around this forum long, and it didn't take long to see how much effort some of the members/moderators put in to correctly identify named cultivars. Your renaming known cultivars just adds to the confusion needlessly. Your bright yellow cups, your large, attractive labels with the correct cultivar names still would have established your brand in the marketplace. I personally feel I would have purchased your product because instead of what you consider a catchier name but the true cultivar name. You have nice product, excellent presentation, and good visibility, without having to rename your products. You claim you want to bring in new collectors, children etc., yet you're starting them off on the wrong foot with your renaming policy. I find you're disingenuous with your arguments.

Big T for what it's worth ChrisH isn't on here usually.
Also I'm pretty sure he's decided to only go with new cultivars in the future.
I think on FB Chick Charms has a page

Thanks Greg. He has nice product and I wish him well. I know if his new cultivars are as well grown and attractive, I would not hesitate to purchase them. Sadly, I think this was an unfortunate route for him to have traveled and in some minds may leave a bad taste in their mouths.

valleylynn said:I found the name of the last two by emailing a nursery that is selling them. They were more than happy to go look at the back of the tag and give me that information.
For me I will continue doing this until I find another original/patented NEW semp released by Chris (Chick Charms). I know there are some really amazing ones coming up and I don't want to miss out on them.

That's great Lynn. And you can also come here to check but I don't think we should have to go that far to find out what we are buying. I think the seller needs to be more unfront.

I don't see why they can't put on the sale page what the original name is, along with the description, price and all that other good stuff.

Ask before buying. And the original names are on the back of the tags. The only ones that will not have a name on the back of the tag are the ones that are new cultivars, like Chick Charms® 'Gold Nugget'