Re: CAM 2017 Information Thread
Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:18 pm
GEOCOIN UPDATE
I'm sure many of you are becoming itchy about the CAM coins, and rightly so. I must say again how impressed and grateful I am that everyone has been so patient. But the amount of time this is taking is bordering on the absurd, and I wanted to bring everyone up to speed by sharing the 2017 CAM Coin Production Timeline with all of you. The names have been redacted to protect the guilty.
2017 CAM Geocoin Production Timeline
I'm sure many of you are becoming itchy about the CAM coins, and rightly so. I must say again how impressed and grateful I am that everyone has been so patient. But the amount of time this is taking is bordering on the absurd, and I wanted to bring everyone up to speed by sharing the 2017 CAM Coin Production Timeline with all of you. The names have been redacted to protect the guilty.
2017 CAM Geocoin Production Timeline
- 31 Jan - Blueprints submitted to first mint for a quote
- 12 Feb - Still no response from first vendor
- 13 Feb - Design submitted to new vendor (Cache Advance); response received the same day
- 20 Feb - Response from first Chinese mint
- 24 Feb - Quote received from mint
- 26 Feb - Mint promises photos of samples from factory ready in 20 days
- 28 Feb - First factory blueprint arrives with several errors
- 1 Mar - Designer identifies errors, and corrections are submitted to mint
- 6 Mar - Second blueprint arrives from factory; still some issues
- 10 Mar - Third blueprint arrives from factory; closer, but still a few errors (south arrow)
- 14 Mar - Fourth blueprint arrives from factory; south arrow fixed, but some letter spacing issues introduced
- 20 Mar - Artwork approved
- 22 Mar - Quantities and finishes confirmed; texture alterations submitted by designer
- 3 Apr - Updated drawing (with texture alterations) received from mint
- 4 Apr - Updated drawing approved by designer and MGS
- 6 Apr - Invoice for deposit received from mint and paid by MGS
- 28 Apr - Informed that factory had computer issues, but samples are in production
- 14 May - Informed that factory had not yet begun production due to enamel issues and language barrier
- 19 May - Informed that mint needs to move project to different Chinese factory because first factory could/would not move forward with project due to unresolvable design issues; essentially starting from scratch with new factory
- 31 May - MGS received update on someone else's project
- 1 June - MGS requested update on our project; informed project supervisor is on holiday
- 9 June - MGS requested project update
- 11 June - Vendor pinged factory for project update
- 12 June - Mint sent photos of bare metal samples; problem detected on reverse side
- 20 June - Updated mold still requires adjustments; promised photos of enamelled samples within the week
- 25 June - Vendor pinged factory for project update
- 27 June - New sample being enamelled; photos of new samples promised before weekend
- 30 June - Five-month anniversary; still waiting…
- 12 July - Sample pictures (metal with enamel) received
- 13 July - Designer identifies errors in enamel work and NEW ERRORS in metal. (?!) Factory contacted, new sample requested. The vendor now refers to our coin as "The Haunted Project". We are not amused
- 21 July - New photos arrive. Errors in metal design and levels corrected, however yet another enamelling error has been introduced
- 23 July - Mint contacted again, new sample requested. Concerns are raised over the appearance of the translucent-enamel-filled areas. (Is the factory using the more reflective brass-alloy specified in our price quote, or a cheaper, less reflective zinc-alloy?) Too difficult to tell from photo; we are waiting for a physical sample to arrive from China
- 8 August - CacheAdvance (our vendor) received samples from factory. For some reason they sent the bad samples with the errors that had already been corrected. Seeing the physical samples (rather than photos) revealed to CacheAdvance that the factory was not using the correct blue in the wherigo icon (they used PMS-646C instead of the specified PMS-7690C). Also, the samples are clearly zinc-alloy, not brass-alloy. Color error reported to factory. Requested confirmation that coins will be produced with brass-alloy.
- 17 August - Factory acknowledged color error and confirmed it has been corrected. No mention of the alloy concerns.
- 18 August - Mint is informed that mass production cannot begin until the alloy issue is resolved.
- 23 August - Another request is submitted to mint for clarification on alloy issue
- 1 September - Update requested from CacheAdvance