Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson

[PrincessTrouble]

One thing I noticed that I don't think John pointed out in his thorough review is that on the US deck, the embossed KW circle logo on the outside of the tuck flap does not line up with foil logo on the inside of the tuck flap (it's offset a little bit). The "phantom" embossing on the back also bothers me. Just seems like a sloppy embossing job. The cards didn't fan well but I haven't broken them in yet, so I'll reserve judgement on that. The Printed in Taipei on the bottom bothers me if they were indeed printed in China. And I am very disappointed in the lack of foil, without which, these decks should not command a $16 price. Jackson is a fine artist though, and I give him props for his artwork.

[theCapraAegagrus]

One thing I noticed that I don't think John pointed out in his thorough review is that on the US deck, the embossed KW circle logo on the outside of the tuck flap does not line up with foil logo on the inside of the tuck flap (it's offset a little bit). The "phantom" embossing on the back also bothers me. Just seems like a sloppy embossing job. The cards didn't fan well but I haven't broken them in yet, so I'll reserve judgement on that. The Printed in Taipei on the bottom bothers me if they were indeed printed in China. And I am very disappointed in the lack of foil, without which, these decks should not command a $16 price. Jackson is a fine artist though, and I give him props for his artwork.

The embossing is one thing that worried me when reported, but I've felt the decks all-over many times, and it feels right-on-the-money.

Question: Wasn't it communicated throughout the project that the cards were being printed in Taipei and the tucks were being printed in China? I thought I caught onto that very early in the campaign. I could be mistaken.

[PrincessTrouble]

Update #8: Each Standard US & Chinese deck will have a custom numbered seal.

Update #13: Today most people in China (where the cards are being produced) are returning from their breaks for the Lunar new year.

[sinjin7]

Though this doesn't appear to be the usual work done by Expert but calling the decks printed in China to be of substandard quality is unfair. . . That said, we, still, shouldn't brand all decks printed in China of low quality with the only reason of getting decks printed there is lower cost than available elsewhere even when compared with Taiwan.

The Chinese EPCC/LPCC factory is capable of producing decent quality decks, the Legends decks were printed in China and they handle and fan semi-decently.

I never said all decks printed in China are low quality, and as far as I can tell, neither did anyone else. In the specific context of EPCC/LPCC, all their Chinese decks are of lower quality than their Taiwanese counterparts. In a general context, most cards (but not all) out of China are of low quality (and by quality, I'm not referring to art, but to stock and finish). I'm not making any of this up, this is a proven empirical fact. Therefor It's only natural for us to have some skepticism of Chinese decks given the statistical evidence of what we've seen coming out from China, especially from EPCC/LPCC.

As for the Legal Tender deck, I know many of you have chimed in stating these cards are made in China and not Taiwan, but I've messaged Jackson directly about this so I can hear it from the maker himself. Hopefully he'll answer my question this time.

On a different note, I've played poker with these last night to test the playability given the different colors on the faces of these cards. There were 8 of us seated at a round table and we played Texas Holdem for about 4 hours. About halfway in, my friend seated to the right of me, with his hold cards in his hand, reached for his drink which was next to my stack of chips that I was counting at that moment to put out a raise, and I saw a flash of purple. That told me one of his 2 hold cards was a spade. If these faces were a uniform color, I wouldn't have been able to tell the suit from the momentary flash of cards, but due to the distinctive colors by suit on the Legal Tenders, it gave away the suit. For them most part, the deck was useable, but you really had to take care not to flash your cards, whether in hand or during the deal. I announced what I saw, and the table agreed to re-deal and play the hand over and we switched out the decks.

[sinjin7]

I am honestly very appreciative of all artwork for both decks, both front and back. I like the different colored backgrounds for different suits. He designed a different background pattern for EACH suit of EACH deck and they are extremely detailed. I also have no problems with the handling of the cards in any manner. They actually dribble better than most decks fresh out of the box.

No one is knocking the art on these decks, excellent work by Jackson as usual. I'm stunned you cannot detect any problem with the handling of these decks. Any deck of cards can dribble due to gravity, but that's usually not the indicator of quality when it comes to the finish of the deck. I would like to request that you fan a deck of humble Bicycle Riderbacks, and then fan a deck of Legal Tenders. Your fanning skills shouldn't matter since this is a comparison test and your skill level will be consistent with both decks. You should very easily see and feel that the Legal Tenders are more clumpy and uneven.

The cards didn't fan well but I haven't broken them in yet, so I'll reserve judgement on that.

A new deck of cards should fan well, especially if its fresh out of the box and its a quality deck. We shouldn't have to break them in much in order for them to fan evenly and consistently. I spent about half an hour vigorously faro shuffling the Legal Tender U.S. deck over and over again and was eventually able to work out some of the clumpiness, but I still couldn't get them to fan evenly to my satisfaction.

[montenzi]

In a general context, most cards (but not all) out of China are of low quality (and by quality, I'm not referring to art, but to stock and finish).

Time will tell. Most of them uses stock from France and Germany. Cards are stiff as they use 305-315gsm paper. I think that USPCC uses 290-300gsm one. Never had problems with our factory (we'v produced 4 decks and 6 tuck boxes). And yes I want to print with USPCC ... but when I compare USPCC decks with ours I see how cheap USPCC decks are - starting from wrapping to a tuck box quality. And I don't think Jackson spent less money to print decks in China/Taiwan! The easiest and cheapest option for him was to print decks with USPCC. No foiling, no options, cheap tuck box that falling apart in hands. At least he tried to produce something better than the average deck.

[sinjin7]

Time will tell. Most of them uses stock from France and Germany. Cards are stiff as they use 305-315gsm paper. I think that USPCC uses 290-300gsm one. Never had problems with our factory (we'v produced 4 decks and 6 tuck boxes). And yes I want to print with USPCC ... but when I compare USPCC decks with ours I see how cheap USPCC decks are - starting from wrapping to a tuck box quality. And I don't think Jackson spent less money to print decks in China/Taiwan! The easiest and cheapest option for him was to print decks with USPCC. No foiling, no options, cheap tuck box that falling apart in hands. At least he tried to produce something better than the average deck.

I'm going to cheat and import my comments from another thread dealing with GSM:

As for GSM measurments, its not truly indicative of how thick a stock is, it's really more of an industrial measurement. I think this is why the USPCC and some other companies don't bother with this measurement. GSM simply means Grams per Square Meter. It does not take into account how compressed a sheet of paper is, just its weight. So if you have a deck on 310 GSM paper that measures 16.2 mm thick, one might think that another deck on 340 GSM paper will be thicker. But if the 340 GSM paper was compressed at a much higher pressure, it would result in a thinner stock, with the deck measuring only, say, 15.7 mm thick. So while it would be a thinner deck, it would be denser and heavier, with superior snap and more durable. Higher GSM doesn't always mean thicker stock, and thicker stock isn't always better. That's why I generally disregard GSM measurements, you really don't know about the quality of the stock on a deck until you can feel and measure it with your hands.

The quality of tuck boxes is a different discussion probably more relevant to collectors who never open their decks. I'm more focused on the actual cards, and any reported GSM measurement for card stock don't necessarily correlate with thickness or stiffness, and has very little to do with how cards are finished or how they handle. With all due respect to your decks, or any other designer who printed their cards in China, I've yet to find a Chinese-produced deck handle better than even a humble Bicycle Riderback. And, again, with all due respect, I suspect anyone who makes the decision to print decks in China are doing so more for economic reasons (and there's nothing wrong with that, everyone is entitled to make a living as best as they see fit) as opposed to quality reasons.

As for the Legal Tenders, I'm guessing Jackson saved plenty of money going with EPCC over USPCC, especially since he didn't pay for any of the (holo) foiling he advertised he would do. Plus, of all the tuck boxes Jackson's produced (and he usually produces fantastic tucks), I think these have the worst embossing and are easily the cheapest-feeling tucks. But as far as how much Jackson paid or saved, that's only something Jackson knows and all we're doing is speculating. What is not speculation is the quality and results of the Legal Tender cards, and they're the worst handling decks I've felt from Jackson. Hell, they're the worst handling decks I've felt from EPCC/LPCC.

[montenzi]

sinjin7, I completely agree with you and I understand the difference. But it does not matter if you want to print 1000 or 10k decks it will be always cheaper to print with USPCC than with EPCC. Just printing costs but without expensive add-ons (embossing and foiling) Then add logistics. Try to ship from China/Taiwan and compare with internal US shippping from one state to another. I think he had no other options but to go with this factory to try foiling on cards. And I think cards were stored uncut much longer than required. That's the reason why they don't handle well. I cannot comment all other issues with this deck as I don't have one.

So the reason is not pure money saving but 100% opposite - to try something new. One of the main advantage to print in China for us - they allow to print 500 decks offset as sometimes 1000 is not an option at all. But total cost of the project will be higher or equal in most cases.

[flashcards]

I'm getting my decks printed from China and it affects my market. I didn't go there due to lower cost of printing. Taiwan printer refused to work directly due to the reason a no. of you know already, and it made me look for alternate options. This deck may be an outlier and I'm sure other decks like Jody's TITANS Robber Baron will change your perception soon but any such comments in a public forum can make people skeptical of anything coming from China where new creators like myself are more affected than some established creators. WIth hand on heart, I can vouch that I've always tried to give a better deal to buyers because of getting the advantage of working directly with a printer rather than going through an intermediary.

Anyone who has got an iota of doubt towards cost of printing in China vs Taiwan can make an enquiry with Expert or Legends and I'm sure they are going to find out that the cost of the decks on comparable stock is same. You get the benefits only when you are working with the printer directly.

Sunnish,

I really like the themes and artwork of your projects. The only reason I haven't pledged for any is exactly because of the printer you chose. The handling of the cards is important to me and as others have said, a deck of inexpensive Riderbacks handle far better than Legal Tender. And I'm not even talking about cardistry- I'm just referring to hand feel. I have seen no evidence that China made decks are the equal to Taiwan made decks, which in my mind are far behind USPCC made decks. Personally, new technology on a sub-par handling deck of cards is of no interest to me. Even outstanding artwork like Jackson's doesn't make up for the poor quality. If you are just looking for art, print up a bunch of 2 1/2" by 3 1/2" photographs at home and call it a deck of cards.

As far as your argument that all the printers charge the same, this seems like a poor excuse. If they are all the same cost, I'm going with the printer that produces the best quality- in this case, USPCC or the Taiwan printer. Why would you go with an inferior printer in China when a superior Taiwanese product costs the same? Would anybody use MPC if they charged as much EPCC/LPCC? I know volume is an issue but if my project isn't worth producing at least 1,000 decks, I'm not sure I'd even bother. Of course, if I didn't care about quality, I'd just use MPC but then, in that case, even I wouldn't buy my own cards.

Other collectors have different needs and wants. These are just mine.

[guru]

As far as your argument that all the printers charge the same, this seems like a poor excuse. If they are all the same cost, I'm going with the printer that produces the best quality- in this case, USPCC or the Taiwan printer

I think you didn't follow my argument here so let me clarify it again. EPCC/LPCC charge almost the same when getting the decks printed from China or Taiwan (considering we are talking about similar stock specs). There were certain comments made against Jackson Robinson that he must have saved some part of the cost involved in printing the decks by going with Chinese rather than Taiwanese printer. This can be independently verified by asking Expert or Legends for a quote.

Now, I never said that all printers charge the same. In the spirit of full disclosure, I'm getting very good rates because of working directly with the printer. If I'd gone via Expert or Legends, I would have paid a higher amount to get the decks printed ( do remember that they act as intermediary between the buyer and the printer). I'd contacted Taiwan printer myself but they refused to provide a quote and asked me to go to Legends/Expert for the quotation request. Though, this printer has worked with Hanson Chien and another individual whose name escapes me now in an independent capacity. Hope it makes sense.

Coming back to Legal Tender, only JR can provide clarity on what happened with respect to the card stock and handling. It also depends on which card stock he chose for this deck? One thing that I found in China was that the printers there had a huge range of stock categorised by grades which are not seen elsewhere. It is difficult to tell the difference if you are not a cardist or an experienced card handler. Sample below.

[Bikefanatic]

The US is embossed, it didn't look bad. The Chinese deck has a little cute holographic title, embossing on the back and that's it. The front of could use a lil' "something", it looks too plain.

I haven't opened them but based on the not so bad looking tucks, these would've been better priced at $12.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Am I the only one that doesn't have any problems with the handling of these decks..? I don't collect cards for the primary purposes of cardistry or illusion, but I'm also no amateur. Are they as good as 1st Quality USPCC decks? No, but they feel medium-quality EPCC to me. They're definitely not the worst decks that I've ever handled (not even close). I can probably agree that they're the worst JR designed decks at handling, though.

If these came with deck seals they'd probably be a Grade-A project for me. Still really bummed about that. I would still pay $16-20 for these.

Edit: I did finally catch the embossed-foil detail on the US deck that was alluded to. Seems like a tuck-foiling problem because the outside design matches the embossed pattern. Honestly doesn't matter to me. As a collector: Sealed tuck matches the embossing. Doesn't affect display. As a player: Doesn't affect cards or disrupt storage.

Overall a for me.

Had the tuck seals been included and US tuck felt less cheap I would give it 5-stars.

[guru]

I know volume is an issue but if my project isn't worth producing at least 1,000 decks, I'm not sure I'd even bother. Of course, if I didn't care about quality, I'd just use MPC but then, in that case, even I wouldn't buy my own cards.

This reeks of an anchoring bias I believe. Why 1000? Is it because UPSCC, LPCC, EPCC are offering 1000 decks as a minimum print run? I can't see any other reason. It is not just about being economical for me but working with the printer directly makes me understand a no. of things and gain knowledge while being in control of some other variables like regular comms, faster production lead time and interface with other vendors like gilding partner, fulfillment etc., it put me at ease. Do remember that Expert, Legends etc. also started from somewhere. If I take your reasoning and extrapolate it to retail stores, then what you're saying is that no one should dare start a small mom & pop shop nowadays because they are not Walmart, Amazon etc.

I've seen your 1000 decks comments a no. of times in this forum and I can't change your perspective or thinking but we all have options. You are exercising yours, I'm exercising mine. We may agree to disagree but both of us have one common thread in between us, which is a passion for decks.....Isn't it?

If it is okay for backers/buyers to wait indefinitely for decks or irregular comms, non-responsiveness or even certain small expectations like a project creator must have done his/her homework which sometimes aren't fulfilled (as seen on a no.of projects here), I can just wish more power to them.

[sinjin7]

I spoke to Jackson and he confirmed to me the cards were made in China. He told me he worked closely with Bill Kalush on this project and felt Bill did a great job with the quality of the Legal Tender decks. I told him the quality of my decks were the worst I've seen yet from EPCC and that the cards clumped horribly and literally could not fan until I spent 30 minutes breaking them in, and even then only got a poor, uneven fan. So here's the thing that stumps me: Jackson sent me a picture of him holding a U.S. Legal Tender deck he just fanned. The fan may not have been perfect (since Jackson isn't a cardist by any stretch), but it was an acceptable, fairly even fan considering his skill level. I'm not saying I'm a great cardist myself (I'm not), but I strongly suspect I can fan much better than Jackson can, and I cannot achieve the quality of fan that he showed me in his picture with the decks that I've opened.

I've spoken with a friend of mine who ordered the Legal Tender decks and he's confirmed to me his cards were extremely clumpy. I've seen enough comments here on UC and on the Legal Tender Kickstarter comments section from other backers who reported that the quality of the finish is poor to varying degrees. It makes me suspect there are serious quality control issues going on with this deck where a significant number of decks have minor to severe issues with the quality and finish, while there may be other decks that are of typical EPCC quality. If it is indeed hit or miss, then I sincerely hope the rest of you here at UC got lucky and received a good batch, because what I received is not acceptable for cardistry.

I also pointed out that the Legal Tender tucks erroneously indicate that these cards were printed in Taipei instead saying printed in China or the PRC. I recommended that he post an update about this serious discrepancy to give full disclosure and make clear he wasn't trying to intentionally mislead anyone, and I hope he follows through with this.

[flashcards]

I don't want to derail this thread but I do want to take a minute to apologize to Sunish. I don't want there to be any acrimony between us. He has done something most us can only dream of- designing and producing an original deck of cards (soon to be two). Since I don't move in the card printing world, it was presumptuous of me to tell him how to conduct his business. In my defense I will say that, like most, I have a certain texture and production quality that I prefer. It bothers me when I see superior artwork, like Jackson's or Sunish himself, being placed on what I consider to be a medium that does not do it justice. This is short sighted and selfish thinking on my part. Sunish certainly has shown integrity in his projects and cannot be accused of using below standard printers to make a cash grab. If he says he is producing the highest quality product he can,then I will put my trust in that integrity and believe him. While I still have my reservations, which I will keep to myself from now on, I will probably end up backing the Bharata project with the hope, nay faith, that the final product will live up to its potential. Again, my apologies because, believe it or not, I am a fan and supporter. Best of luck on Bharata.

I'm not sure I can say the same about Jackson's projects at this point. I've been working with a legal tender deck and, while not the quality of a Chinese tourist deck (which I avidly collect...hypocritical much?) it is certainly not what we have seen from his work in the past.

[JuFiN]

I didnt back his first project, Divine Art, for much the same reasons, but I did end up getting a copy of the deck, and it really is excellent. As a result I backed the white version which unfortunately didnt fund, and I have now backed Bharata and have high hopes! These are all gilded decks at a very affordable price considering.

[Cbkimble]

I did a little searching on the KS updates but haven't found any info on the Legacy decks. Anyone know anything about when they are scheduled to ship. I have the decks but not the legacy cases.

[PrincessTrouble]

Looks like Gio switched the card printing of SINS from the Taipei to the China EPCC factory. So I guess we'll have another data point soon (relatively) to judge the quality coming out of the China factory.

[chach]

Got mine in the other day. I'm no cardist whatsoever, but can get a normal (for me) fan from the US deck. The China deck however clumps into about 10 different sections. Tuck boxes very underwhelming but I didn't notice any out of place embossing, though when the plastic was on there were some spots that did feel as though it was embossed, so is that what you're feeling (those that reported odd embossing).

The different colors for the suits are VERY blatant, making this deck only suitable for solitaire, uno and bridge/whist.

One thing I did notice, no weird offgassing smell like most Chinese products have. Still wouldn't want to lick them though...

Over all, for the price VERY underwhelmed. The $7 USPCC decks at Walmart are better handling. For $16 dollars or whatever the final price was, I feel burned. And I'd almost wonder if the increase was a rob Peter to pay Paul kinda thing.

[sinjin7]

Got mine in the other day. I'm no cardist whatsoever, but can get a normal (for me) fan from the US deck. The China deck however clumps into about 10 different sections. Tuck boxes very underwhelming but I didn't notice any out of place embossing, though when the plastic was on there were some spots that did feel as though it was embossed, so is that what you're feeling (those that reported odd embossing).

If you look at the eagle on the font of the tuck, you'll see a 2016 date banner next to the eagle's wings that is embossed (I'll leave the irony of the 2016 date alone...). When you look at the eagle on the back design, you'll see two eagles (to make it a two-way back design) but there are no date banners next to the eagles' wings. But when you look closely, you'll see an empty, out-of-place embossing of the 2016 date banner that's still there. Obviously, Jackson just duplicated the embossing pattern from the front of the tuck onto the back but forgot to take into account that there's no date banner next to the wings on the back design and failed to remove the embossing. It's not that major or even very noticeable, but for someone who claims to put out only the most excellent quality (and charges for it), better quality control should've been in place.

My U.S. Legal Tender deck clumped into about 10 chunks, but the Chinese deck I opened was slightly better and clumped into about 15 chunks. But with you getting a normal quality U.S. deck but bad Chinese deck just goes to show we're getting very inconsistent quality control out of these decks printed in China.

[chach]

Ok yeah, I see exactly what you're saying now. Very blatant.

[EndersGame]

What's is the official name for the finish used by EPCC on the China-produced Legal Tender deck, and is this printed on the tuck box at all?

Is it one of their two new finishes (JN Finish or Stud Finish), which they describe in this thread as follows:
JN Finish: The new JN Finish. This represents our constant efforts to duplicate the venerable Jerry's Nugget Casino cards from the '70s. Probably we, nor maybe anyone else, can get closer. These are very similar to the Master Finish cards that are so popular but these are crushed .01mm thinner and you can feel it.
Stud Finish: Our new Stud Finish. Very soft and pliable. We think they are the softest high quality cards on the market today.

Or is it called a different finish again?

[vasta41]

I recall E explaining that their original 1800 series decks fanned like absolute crap due to the excess ink used in the design so you may be onto something there. I'm not saying that's the reason and I'm also not saying that I take E's word as gospel (I'm not that bold) but there is precedence.

[chach]

JN Finish: The new JN Finish. This represents our constant efforts to duplicate the venerable Jerry's Nugget Casino cards from the '70s. Probably we, nor maybe anyone else, can get closer. These are very similar to the Master Finish cards that are so popular but these are crushed .01mm thinner and you can feel it.

I know this isn't you, Enders, but I gotta call out the marketing people on this line of BS. The thickness of a human hair is on average .04mm - .1mm. So they're saying you can tell the difference between two items where the thickness of the two is a fraction of the width of a human hair.

Wouldn't the difference between the two decks be .52mm??? I guess that would be plausible, because you could technically tell the difference with a set of calipers, but seriously? I think they're splitting hairs with their statements here.

[Bruno]

Skateboards.
Don't fit in the standard tuck ....
No-where do they mention the maker on said tuck.
But, on the project page, you may go cross eyed in the attempt to ignore the same maker reference.
Skateboards. They're great, mate, I loves 'em to bits .... and I love how they don't need to say who the heck printed the suckers if they don't wish to, afterwards.
Get yer ya ya's out, get on yer bikes, make a big sound like yas just don't care .........
Love it .... Do it .....
Tzzzzz ..................

[flashcards]

I just received my Hello Tiki deck. The creator was very up front about printing in China and I was skeptical. However, the cards feel pretty much like the Taiwan produced cards of EPCC/LPCC. The are head and shoulders above the quality of Legal Tender. I'm not sure if is the stock or finish but it makes me question even more if Jackson got lesser quality materials as a cost cutting measure or used a different printer since it is obvious that at least one Chinese printer can produce a quality product.

[sms69x]

So today I received my Legal Tender order.... What can I say... Can't regret more buying this CRAP... And the worst of it, it wasn't CHEAP, I paid a HIGH price for couple of pieces of crap... Well done JR, a great way to cash in money.. Would love to know the profit he got on these, as it must have been over $8-$10 per deck...

Let me start by saying the artwork is good, inline with Federal 52, but not as good, in my opinion. But this alone doesn't justify the price paid for these.
The tuck box is so flimsy that I was afraid to rip it when I opned the box... And the "embossing" is barely noticeable. At least the almost inexistent foil is very shiny!
The cards fell like plastic, and of course. as mentioned, you can't do shit with them, other than play, but even for that those aren't that good, because of the background colors.
The conjunction of stock and finish makes the artwork look dull, it doesn't pop. So even the good aspect of these cards is shaded by the poor quality of stock/finish/printing....

I can't help myself but copying JR from the KS page

It is my hope with Legal Tender to take what I have learned from all of the lessons and experiences over those years and create the finest deck of playing cards the I can create

How far is this from the truth... Probabily the last deck I'll ever get from Jack$on Robin$on (this project proves me that he is in the business ONLY for the $$$)

PS: Did I missed the update where he mentioned that he wouldn't include the numbered seals anymore? Because on Update 8 he says he will be including numbered seals, and I can't find anywhere else where he says the opposite..

[EndersGame]

Though this doesn't appear to be the usual work done by Expert but calling the decks printed in China to be of substandard quality is unfair ... we, still, shouldn't brand all decks printed in China of low quality with the only reason of getting decks printed there is lower cost than available elsewhere even when compared with Taiwan.

I'm getting my decks printed from China and it affects my market ... This deck may be an outlier and I'm sure other decks like Jody's TITANS Robber Baron will change your perception soon .

I look forward to seeing how your deck turns out Sunish! It's largely a matter of doing your research carefully beforehand, and I know you are quite dedicated and diligent in that respect.

Just to set the record straight on one small point here - Jody Eklund's TITANS deck was printed in Taiwan, not China, and was done by Legends in their usual Classic finish, as he himself posted here.

[guru]

Though this doesn't appear to be the usual work done by Expert but calling the decks printed in China to be of substandard quality is unfair ... we, still, shouldn't brand all decks printed in China of low quality with the only reason of getting decks printed there is lower cost than available elsewhere even when compared with Taiwan.

I'm getting my decks printed from China and it affects my market ... This deck may be an outlier and I'm sure other decks like Jody's TITANS Robber Baron will change your perception soon .

I look forward to seeing how your deck turns out Sunish! It's largely a matter of doing your research carefully beforehand, and I know you are quite dedicated and diligent in that respect.

Just to set the record straight on one small point here - Jody Eklund's TITANS deck was printed in Taiwan, not China, and was done by Legends in their usual Classic finish, as he himself posted here.

Yes, fingers crossed on that. If everything goes well, fulfillment may start in 2 weeks from now. Anyways, Jody had planned it initially with the printer in China as seen on the Kickstarter project page. I think he mentioned that he faced some issues (don't remember what where they) and switched it to Taiwan. Jody was kind enough to share his China fulfillment partner details with me though as I was also looking to evaluate fulfillment partners around that time.

[52JokesandCounting]

Anyone had any success contacting Jackson lately? I had been trying to get in contact but he doesn't seems to respond to my email.

I returned the legal tender decks, and it already arrived for almost a month, but when I asked Delanie and Jackson I didn't get any reply. This is disappointing... i wanted to use the money else where, but now I'm not sure if I will be getting it back..