Mike Ratledge wrote: If you can pay EPCC $4 for the same deck/tuck that USPCC charges you $6, that's a significant difference. I'll leave direct comparisons to the experts at card handling - which I am not, but the consensus is that the latest paper and finish updates for Expert (and Legends) is very comparable to that used for years by Bicycle brand / USPCC. Bicycle and USPCC was right there with those side tucks, just like Expert/Legends.
Spoken like a collector. A $4 EPCC deck is not the
same as a $6 USPCC deck. The only definitive thing you can say is that its cheaper, but you can't say its the same because they're not. I actually like the paper stock EPCC uses, and we all know about the superior printing registration. Please don't perpetuate the myth that EPCC finish is comparable to USPCC. Just stop. The most accurate comparison I can make is that the EPCC finish reminds me of an Air Cushion/Magic finish that's unevenly powdered with fanning powder. This is a huge difference (for cardists, not collectors), it does not make the decks the same.
What is this consensus you keep bringing up? Kalush? Boyer? Asher? All are magicians and all with economic, professional, or personal stakes in the EPCC, so not the most unbiased opinions. Tell me Jerry Cetowski, any of the Virts, E Kent, Jonas, Jaspas, Jason Soll, Dimitri Arleri, Brian Tudor - hell, even D$D or Andrei Jikh - say your consensus is among people in this group and you'll have credibility. Problem is, these are cardists of the highest level and they won't say the EPCC finish is comparable to Air Cushion/Magic.
As for those side tucks, yes, the USPCC has a few decks with side tucks as well, but the huge difference is they glue the bottom flap instead of tucking it into the box. EPCC has to figure out that their version of side tucks are inconvenient to use, and can possibly damage cards if you don't put them back in carefully.
The designers that were allegedly close to tears when finding out how cheap the EPCC is should take solace in this fact: They probably wouldn't have sold as many decks if they went with EPCC. Its clear USPCC made decks carry greater credibility on Kickstarter. As for the couple of dollars difference in price, collectors and cardists will pay more for high quality, well designed products. Look at Aquila on KS. Its a solid deck and even though it eventually funded, it should be doing better. I'm convinced if it was a USPCC deck, a lot more people would be pledging, even at a higher price point. Just ask Jackson, all his USPCC decks are doing just fine, so wipe away those tears.
Again, I like the Heretic deck, wish it was USPCC. Lorenzo outlined the reasons he went with EPCC and they're all legitimate points and I wish him the greatest success. Look, the USPCC is a huge corporation and their bread and butter are the major casinos, not little deck designers scraping together $10K to make a dream come true, so dealing with them is frustrating with a lot of bureaucratic red tape and rigid rules. The EPCC is a small company in a 3rd world country with low overhead, so they have the ability to be flexible and cheaper. So if Lorenzo, or any other designer, wants to go with them, more power to them. Deck designers need to make a profit too, its not a dirty thing for them to *gasp* make money. We need them to make money off of us. That's the only way they can keep doing what they do so we can get our wonderful card addiction fix. Just be truthful about it. EPCC makes good quality cards and you can make more money with them = truth. EPCC and USPCC are the same or comparable = false.
