Just bought a new blazer name plate with captains rank from Vanguard. Was pleased when I learned it was shipped within 24 hours being a custom order. hen I go tit and took out of the packaging I noticed what looked like hot glue around the captains rank. I grabbed an exacto knife to trim up the edges and the whole rank fell off the nameplate! Upon further notice the hot glue wasn't hot glue at all but double sided tape.... And not heavy duty 3m type tape but the scotch brand type you would use for paper. Threw me for a loop because the last two ranks for the plate I ordered had a pin on the back and this one doesn't. Guess I am going to have to find the super glue.
I have two embroidered commander's badges from Vanguard sitting here on my desk. They look horrible.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517g9r09IDL._SL500_SS500_.jpg)
Available at Lowes, Home Depot, etc. This stuff is load-bearing, I've used it to repair my Tie Pilot costume. Takes a bit to get a good solid set, it's like rubber cement, CA glue, and epoxy all rolled into one but without the mixing. If you get it somewhere you don't want, you can rub it to roll it off before it sets like rubber cement.
Screw that, make them do it right or do it again.
Quote from: NIN on February 04, 2014, 06:10:29 AM
I have two embroidered commander's badges from Vanguard sitting here on my desk. They look horrible.
I was browsing their site yesterday. The cloth command badge looks like a bird dropping.
The triangle in the middle of the bullion command pilot wings is crooked. Very.
There is at least one illustration for "pilot wings" that actually depicts "observer wings."
I still don't understand why they came out with the t-shirts and caps with the "weeping willow" wings.
Amateurish presentation of amateurish products. Probably an inevitable result of exclusive contract with no competitors.
Send a pic of the crappy item to the Sales Manager at the California address. That's the company headquarters, and might get attention that complaining to the Virginia location.
Goop works. Very well.
The rank on the blazer name tags used to have screw backs, allowing replacement when promoted, except captain to major, due to configuration differences. That also made the item more expensive.
Vanguard quality is too often a contradiction in terms.
It wasn't this way with the old CAP Bookstore.
For those who are interested, here is a review of their A-2 jacket:
http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_reviews_info&products_id=7829&reviews_id=27 (http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_reviews_info&products_id=7829&reviews_id=27)
I did not get mine from VG. The regulations do not say you must.
Quote from: CyBorg on February 04, 2014, 08:35:37 AM
I did not get mine from VG. The regulations do not say you must.
Don't give them any ideas...
The grade insignia on the black nametag is not supposed to be glued on, it's supposed to be a screw-back insignia
that can be swapped out (for all but Captain, unfortunately).
When I went to swap out the gold oak for the silver, I dropped the new one from about 4 feet onto concrete and
the poorly-soldered pin broke off. Ridiculous.
I haven't bothered to order a new one yet, assuming I do at all.
Beware using superglue. The "plating" on most of the new stuff is going to come right off with most superglue
these days. Epoxy might be better, but regardless, you won't be swapping it out if that's an issue.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 04, 2014, 03:56:41 PM
The grade insignia on the black nametag is not supposed to be glued on, it's supposed to be a screw-back insignia
that can be swapped out (for all but Captain, unfortunately).
Well, it's not anymore. Vanguard now makes the blazer nameplate with stick-on garbage. When I ordered a new one after changing Wings, I ended up drilling my own holes and reusing the pins from my NY nameplate.
So they expect you to buy a new nameplate every time you get promoted?
Now that you mention it, I suppose I could use double-face tape to fix mine instead of the Portland cement I
was intending to try.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 04, 2014, 09:58:48 PM
So they expect you to buy a new nameplate every time you get promoted?
Now that you mention it, I suppose I could use double-face tape to fix mine instead of the Portland cement I
was intending to try.
Buying a new nameplate set up for each promotion can be a PITA for those in the company grades.
Don't use Portland cement. Try covalent bonding.
Quote from: Brad on February 04, 2014, 06:12:12 AM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517g9r09IDL._SL500_SS500_.jpg)
Available at Lowes, Home Depot, etc. This stuff is load-bearing, I've used it to repair my Tie Pilot costume. Takes a bit to get a good solid set, it's like rubber cement, CA glue, and epoxy all rolled into one but without the mixing. If you get it somewhere you don't want, you can rub it to roll it off before it sets like rubber cement.
This stuff is awesome!!!!!!!!!! ;) :p
..and it's relative: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Shoe_GOO_3_7floz_carded_tube.jpg/322px-Shoe_GOO_3_7floz_carded_tube.jpg)
Fixes all kinds of shoe problems.
BTW, the aforementioned Commander's Badge:
[attachment deleted by admin]
Would it be bennificial to us, since we pay so much for this stuff, to put a petition forward to National asking for improvement on the quality of items being sold to us??
Quote from: Shawn W. on February 05, 2014, 04:15:33 PM
Would it be bennificial to us, since we pay so much for this stuff, to put a petition forward to National asking for improvement on the quality of items being sold to us??
Since I have never considered using it, but would it be more appropriate not for a "petition" but for a "Ask the National Commander"?
Quote from: LSThiker on February 05, 2014, 04:25:50 PM
Quote from: Shawn W. on February 05, 2014, 04:15:33 PM
Would it be bennificial to us, since we pay so much for this stuff, to put a petition forward to National asking for improvement on the quality of items being sold to us??
Since I have never considered using it, but would it be more appropriate not for a "petition" but for a "Ask the National Commander"?
There is a person at NHQ who is CAP's contact with Vanguard. Call them. Also call Vanguard tell them what happened and tell them you want a replacement ASAP, or you will have your Credit Card reverse the charge.
Quote from: NIN on February 04, 2014, 06:10:29 AM
I have two embroidered commander's badges from Vanguard sitting here on my desk. They look horrible.
That's true of many of their other badges. The quality of my embroidered Observer and Master Ground Team Badges is awful. I ordered several sets of embroidered Major grade insignias last year and there were visible inconsistencies between the sets of insignias they shipped.
I'm also not impressed with the quality of their gray epaulet slides; it doesn't compare with that of the Air Force blue epaulet slides, which cost less in AAFES/MCSS. And let's not get started with the blue polos.
I understand Vanguard needs to make money to stay in business and that CAP is just a fraction of that business, but quality should not be compromised.
Quote from: MSG Mac on February 05, 2014, 04:59:25 PM
There is a person at NHQ who is CAP's contact with Vanguard. Call them. Also call Vanguard tell them what happened and tell them you want a replacement ASAP, or you will have your Credit Card reverse the charge.
Who? All I see on NHQs website is a general email address for Vanguard and it's phone number.
Quote from: LSThiker on February 05, 2014, 07:14:46 PM
Quote from: MSG Mac on February 05, 2014, 04:59:25 PM
There is a person at NHQ who is CAP's contact with Vanguard. Call them. Also call Vanguard tell them what happened and tell them you want a replacement ASAP, or you will have your Credit Card reverse the charge.
Who? All I see on NHQs website is a general email address for Vanguard and it's phone number.
vanguard@capnhq.gov
The phone number is VG's the e-mail is CAP. If they don't work let Don Rowland know that they are high in price and rock bottom on quality
So I went by Military Clothing on base to pick up some rank and they were out of the "AAFES brand" but had the Vanguard brand.
Cost difference:
AAFES: $5.55
Vanguard: $20.50
They look exactly the same!!!!!
Threads like this make me really miss The Hock Shop...
Quote from: Stonewall on February 05, 2014, 08:57:49 PM
So I went by Military Clothing on base to pick up some rank and they were out of the "AAFES brand" but had the Vanguard brand.
Cost difference:
AAFES: $5.55
Vanguard: $20.50
They look exactly the same!!!!!
I've noticed that Vanguard seems to be worming its way into the clothing sales store too. First, the Ira Green (decent quality) stuff started disappearing. Then Vanguard brand came in a little at a time in its place. Now they have computer systems with rackbuilders (with the Vanguard brand all over) creeping in.
So weird, I'm being slowly forced to pay more for less quality.
Quote from: THRAWN on February 05, 2014, 09:23:45 PM
Threads like this make me really miss The Hock Shop...
Just for the record, they weren't any cheaper and a lot of their stuff was lower quality then the official sources.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 05, 2014, 10:07:02 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on February 05, 2014, 09:23:45 PM
Threads like this make me really miss The Hock Shop...
Just for the record, they weren't any cheaper and a lot of their stuff was lower quality then the official sources.
Tom's prices were competitive, and yeah, his Taiwanese insignia with the heavy duty backing was a bit of a pain (why won't someone sell pre-folded insignia? I mean, 1/8" is 1/8".. just fold it!), but I could order something on a Tuesday and have it in my hot little hand on Thursday via 1st class mail.
I don't get how the quality can be so vastly different between "customers." My cloth stuff for the CGAUX is not that bad. Though I have seen pins break off more than once on the metal stuff. CAP should have just found a way to tack the stuff on to an Air Force contract from the start. I mean compare the CAP stuff to the CGAUX and similar items for the rest of the military etc.
I have to agree with NIN here. Why can't they fold and sew the badge/rank/whatever to the correct size? It would make everyone more "uniform" with everything the same, correct dimensions. I would even pay an extra buck to have that trouble eliminated!
Had a cadet come in to the office last night looking for some help.
Seems he'd gotten gigged for having "two different chevrons."
"Two different chevrons?" I asked. "What do you mean? Are you wearing C/A1C on both sides?"
"Yessir, but my chevrons are different."
So I had him take them off, and sure enough, they were different! (see pic #1)
Normal USAF chevrons have a curve to the actual chevron part. CAP chevrons used to be USAF metal chevrons with the shield glued on top of them BITD (a Wednesday it was, then), and several years ago, Vanguard started manufacturing our chevrons as one piece. The look was the same, but the 3D effect was lost (not a big deal).
But now, it appears, they've started manufacturing the chevrons without the curved USAF-style chevrons and the chevron part is, in fact, essentially straight. It is also not as apparent in this first picture, the blue color in the chevrons is not a USAF dark blue, but more of a lighter blue.
Plus, the silver part of the chevron itself is, well, not even. Look closely at the A1C chevrons, especially the left side, and you'll see the lack of "parallelness" between the two silver parts.
I looked in our supply box and didn't see much in the way of difference. We did not have a huge stash of A1C, and on my cursory inspection I did not see another corresponding chevron. Which means some poor A1C in the unit has a similar set of mismatched chevrons. :)
Later that night another cadet came in to trade in some rank insignia. Having recognized the chevron issue from earlier, I looked more closely at the chevrons he was trading in. One of the C/SrA chevrons was similarly "weird" (see pic #2)
The color difference jumped out at me then, and the stripes, well, they look even WORSE than the A1C! At least there was a *tiny* bit of a curve to the chevron itself, but only a little bit more than the A1C and still not as much as the older USAF-style (I should have flipped the insignia over, as they straightness of the chevrons is obvious from that view without the colors to visually disrupt).
I'm a little disturbed that the quality of the chevrons coming out of Vanguard is slipping this badly.
Many years ago, my old Sq had a patch that had an F-15 Eagle on it. Over the years, the original artwork had been lost and the patches had been re-ordered using a patch as the guide, with the expected loss of fidelity. Eventually, the F-15 looked more like an F-14 with a really bad problem in the wing-sweep mechanism. This looks like the same kind of thing.
What happens when ribbons start showing up and the colors don't match from one ribbon to the next? Like, say, the red in the Loening looks more orange than the red in the Yeager (my Loening and Yeager are atop one another. It would be obvious). Or it becomes easier/cheaper to manufacture the bronze clasps without the raised tri-prop, so now they're just little bronze triangles with an imprint.
We've already seen how poorly the embroidery looks.
I want to know where Vanguard manufactures our stuff. Is it off shore? Are we buying Chinese-made chevrons? We were joking around about The Hock Shop's Taiwanese-made insignia, but are we right there with Vanguard having our stuff made elsewhere and not paying a lick of attention to the quality they're getting back because now they're getting them for pennies on the dollar?
Eventually, we'll have these:
The upshot of all this is...VG's quality stinks like a roomful of people who have just had a big meal of baked beans, and CAP members are getting ripped-off.
Those cadet chevrons are awful.
Monopolies in most forms are usually detrimental to the buyer; VG has nobody to compete with so of course they can slough off on their "quality" because they know we cannot go anywhere else for most of the insignia we need.
NIN- even the center of the propeller has changed back and forth between having the central hub/circle thingy to being just blades meeting (in your second picture) so there's yet another variant.
Quote from: UH60guy on February 07, 2014, 02:52:56 PM
NIN- even the center of the propeller has changed back and forth between having the central hub/circle thingy to being just blades meeting (in your second picture) so there's yet another variant.
Totally!
In the 2nd pic there are two "new" insignia (the A1C & the far right SrA) and the only good consistency is inconsistency.
Annoying.
Quote from: NIN on February 07, 2014, 10:00:33 AM
What happens when ribbons start showing up and the colors don't match from one ribbon to the next? Like, say, the red in the Loening looks more orange than the red in the Yeager (my Loening and Yeager are atop one another. It would be obvious). Or it becomes easier/cheaper to manufacture the bronze clasps without the raised tri-prop, so now they're just little bronze triangles with an imprint.
Over the years I've already seen differences in colors depending on who was manufacturing the ribbon. The Unit Citation and Arnold Achievement Ribbons immediately come to mind. I've seen Unit Citations ranging from dark pine green to bright lime green. The Arnold has ranged from dark navy blue (almost black) to a brilliant sky blue.
Poor quality and high prices; what an awful combination!
I think it's time for NHQ to appoint a QA person to monitor and ensure the quality of Vanguard's products. If they can't deliver quality products at a reasonable price, perhaps we need a new vendor.
Its not just quality - its misleading.
Vanguard carries a series of $40 "Tactical Polo Shirts".. Why? These aren't uniforms. By using the word "Tactical" they make it sound like they are. Members buy these "Leisure Wear" items and then show up at a SAREX wearing them. Usually these are new members who don't know any better.
And getting booted out of the exercise because they aren't in an actual uniform when probably everybody they can see is wearing something different doesn't make them want to come back later either.
Great pics. Now send them, with a non-hostile description of the problem, to the Sales Manager at the Carlsbad address.
..and typically when an owner/company/something places an order for something, there's some SQC in place that makes sure what was manufactured matches the order.
Just like the ID card being modified by the vendor at their behest, and not because the customer says "can you do this?" .. we have apparently the Big V making changes to our devices.
Yes, that thing looks awful, and even the propeller in the blue section looks just nasty.
Is anyone at NHQ actually in charge of what we order, because if we got that back at the unit level, you can bet that would be raised with the supplier and the order refused.
NHQ should be sampling each batch somehow, against a spec and reference piece. Not, "looks good enough" to one person, who may not care.
Is there really another company out there other than Vanguard that wants our business? Whenever Col Lee speaks on the subject, it sounds like our contractual requirements to produce everything in our catalog, including the items that don't really sell at all causes issues with most potential vendors.
Is Vanguard keeping us "hostage"? We're already paying a premium on all our CAP uniform items. Is it too much to ask to have some sort of quality control in place?
Last year I ordered Major gray male epaulets and the ones I got were too small. I called them to explain and they replaced them thinking they had shipped female ones instead. The second set was also small. Now I'm thinking there's a difference in sizes between male epaulets (odd). It wasn't until the third time that I got a set that seemed to be the right size. They were polite and helpful, but it shouldn't take three tries. On another occasion, I ordered a blue polo with a Cadet Programs Badge and the embroidered badge was huge; not proportionate with the embroidered CAP seal. They again replace my shirt but, shouldn't have someone caught that before shipping?
I have more examples like that. I don't mind doing business with Vanguard (and I place orders with them several times a year), but I would like to get quality and accurate products for my hard earned money. My Air Force uniform items are definitely of higher quality and I pay much less for them.
And I think it's important to consider that from what I'm hearing it's getting worse, but it's incidents here and there.
If there is an across the board change in the new 39-1s (patches redesigned, or ABUs (not to start a discussion this is just an example)) then in the massive, CAP-wide scramble to get with the new regs, if QC like this goes on unchecked then it is going to go from some people here and there to all members everywhere and result in one big step down in our appearance of professionalism and basically looking like second-rate cheap crap as an organization.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 07, 2014, 08:56:00 PMI ordered a blue polo with a Cadet Programs Badge and the embroidered badge was huge; not proportionate with the embroidered CAP seal.
I've seen a fair number of people walking around with these - the insignia is bigger then the SARDog patches.
It looks utterly ridiculous.
I just sewed a wing patch on for someone a minute ago (not my wing, long story) and it is of the "disc with arcs" variety.
It took me a minute to realize that they were actually arcs, because where the disc and arcs meet, it was more like a downhill slalom than anything: zig this way, zag that way, no straight lines, no 90 degree turns.
Thats pretty... weak.
[attachment deleted by admin]
I'm actually surprised that no one made the obvious vanguard/quality oxymoron joke. or did I miss something? >:D
Quote from: Garibaldi on February 07, 2014, 09:48:24 PM
I'm actually surprised that no one made the obvious vanguard/quality oxymoron joke. or did I miss something? >:D
Well I do a get a chuckle every time I check this and this thread is right above the thread about the pubs for comment page being gone.
Quote from: Garibaldi on February 07, 2014, 09:48:24 PM
I'm actually surprised that no one made the obvious vanguard/quality oxymoron joke. or did I miss something? >:D
You know, I don't even think its anything to do with "doesn't care," or even worthy of an oxymoron joke. I've gotten fantastic quality stuff from Vanguard too. I was skeptical of the new fabric strip nametapes and now I'm like "pffft, I even put up with those old woven ones for all those years?"
Its just a matter of making sure things are up to snuff, and stay up to snuff.
Like I said at one point, my old unit had a patch that wound up being reproduced several times over from each previous generation of the patch to the point where someone asked me what kind of plane that was, and I said "uh, dunno.. F-14?" and then I realized "Oh, yeah, 'Eagles'.. its an F-15!" But nobody thought to QC that, or find the original artwork.
My current squadron has had its patch for over 10 years now. We've gone back to the same manufacturer for successive runs (I think we're in our 3rd run). I dug up the original graphics files that we had sent to the company 10 years ago and made sure they're on a thumb drive at the squadron, on the unit laptop, etc. But thankfully, we have that ability to use the same manufacturer and they have the sewing files still, so we don't have to send someone a patch and say "Can you make this?" No matter what, if you do that, you introduce weirdness and change into the mix.
I recently had an opportunity to talk with our partners at Vanguard about some of the concerns expressed here. I found that they were extremely interested and responsive.
First, we should remember that Vanguard is a very large organization that is extremely experienced in supplying quality insignia and devices not only to CAP, but to countless other customers including AAFES. They have many suppliers that provide the thousands of items that they sell.
That said, they agree that the embroidery quality on the command badge was not up to their standards and have changed suppliers to ensure a high quality product. We should see the new "version" within just a week or two.
The take away here is that once the problem was pointed out to them, they checked, wholeheartedly agreed, and took immediate action to improve the supply. While they do watch CAPTalk from time to time, it had been a while since they had checked. They were simply unaware of the problem.
They *want* to know when they can improve their quality. They have member survey link right on their home page. (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-c-6.html). If any of us notices a quality control issue, we can simply either call the toll free number listed right on the home page, or complete the member survey to let them know there is a problem.
That said, the cadet chevron issue is a little more complicated. They were simply doing their best to copy the samples given to them by CAP, which came from the bin in the old CAPMart. They see the difference now that CT members have posted some detailed pictures, and will do their best to correct the issue. Ultimately, however, there is no written "standard" for the cadet chevrons. In contrast, the USAF metal chevrons have a detailed written standard issued by the AF logistics folks.
It sounds like things would be better for both them and us if they didn't have to "eyeball" an insignia sample, and I suspect that between Vanguard and the NUC somebody is about to get tasked with taking the USAF standard and modifying it to provide a written standard for the cadet chevrons.
I guess the bottom line is to that is not only "OK," but actually helpful for each of us to contact the customer service folks at VG when we see an issue. It does relatively little good to complain about it here, but a lot of good to actually contact VG.
Ned Lee
On the polo shirt badge size issue - multiple people complained to Vanguard at the Nat Conf in Denver. Supposedly, they were going to get the badges re-digitized to a more appropriate size, as well as get some they are missing (Logistics is one). That being said, I've been given the run-around on this issue before until they started ignoring me.
The membership should not be, and in many case can't be the QC - they don't know any better, nor do many know what the insignia is supposed to
look like. And the comments about volume are irrelevant, or perhaps indicative of why there is a problem. Being a supplier to
"countless other customers" means nothing if our stuff looks like junk, or is priced too high, or both.
Seriously, it took a complaint and a post here for someone at VG to noticed how bad that command insignia looks?
How about the person running the machine?
Good companies don't earn reputations "responding to customer complaints".
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2014, 12:07:09 AM
The membership should not be, and in many case can't be the QC - they don't know any better, nor do many know what the insignia is supposed to
look like. And the comments about volume are irrelevant, or perhaps indicative of why there is a problem. Being a supplier to
"countless other customers" means nothing if our stuff looks like junk, or is priced too high, or both.
Seriously, it took a complaint and a post here for someone at VG to noticed how bad that command insignia looks?
How about the person running the machine?
Good companies don't earn reputations "responding to customer complaints".
I pretty much agree.
VG has a QC process, and probably should have seen the issues before the products hit the field.
That said, however, some defects are more subtle than others and military customers like us can be very quick to point out deviations and errors that might have been missed by the manufacturer and VG. When that happens, we should help each other out by bringing the problem directly to VG's attention.
And while good companies don't earn reputations soley by responding to customers' concerns, it is important to respond quickly and decisively when customers bring matters to the company's attention.
That appears to have happened here.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
That said, they agree that the embroidery quality on the command badge was not up to their standards and have changed suppliers to ensure a high quality product. We should see the new "version" within just a week or two.
Ned, do you know if this means that in 3 weeks when we order, we will get a better one or will we need to wait for them to run out of current stock?
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
I recently had an opportunity to talk with our partners at Vanguard about some of the concerns expressed here. I found that they were extremely interested and responsive.
Every time I've had a problem and called them, they've been responsive and courteous as well. The problem is that, as a customer, I shouldn't have to call with problems so many times, about so many different products.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
First, we should remember that Vanguard is a very large organization that is extremely experienced in supplying quality insignia and devices not only to CAP, but to countless other customers including AAFES. They have many suppliers that provide the thousands of items that they sell.
All that means is that they should know better. I've seen some of their other products in AAFES/MCSS and the quality is much higher than with the CAP products they sell. Just compare a set of Air Force epaulet slides with CAP ones. The difference is obvious when compared side to side.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
That said, they agree that the embroidery quality on the command badge was not up to their standards and have changed suppliers to ensure a high quality product. We should see the new "version" within just a week or two.
In the mean time, all the customers that have bought embroidered badges from them are stuck. Or are they going to replace the ground team badges, observer wings, etc. that I've bought over the last couple of years?
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
The take away here is that once the problem was pointed out to them, they checked, wholeheartedly agreed, and took immediate action to improve the supply. While they do watch CAPTalk from time to time, it had been a while since they had checked. They were simply unaware of the problem.
Apparently, there are too many problems they're unaware of. That's why NHQ has to be more proactive about ensuring their official supplier complies with required/established standards.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
They *want* to know when they can improve their quality. They have member survey link right on their home page. (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-c-6.html). If any of us notices a quality control issue, we can simply either call the toll free number listed right on the home page, or complete the member survey to let them know there is a problem.
I have; in multiple occasions. Whenever they could help, they did. However, it doesn't do me any good if the replacement item looks just as bad as the one returned. And worse, it's not like I have another option to get these CAP specific items from.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
That said, the cadet chevron issue is a little more complicated. They were simply doing their best to copy the samples given to them by CAP, which came from the bin in the old CAPMart. They see the difference now that CT members have posted some detailed pictures, and will do their best to correct the issue. Ultimately, however, there is no written "standard" for the cadet chevrons. In contrast, the USAF metal chevrons have a detailed written standard issued by the AF logistics folks.
No standard? Hmm... I've seen many graphics that could constitute design standard. Either way, this is something that must be resolved between NHQ and VG, not by the CAP membership.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
It sounds like things would be better for both them and us if they didn't have to "eyeball" an insignia sample, and I suspect that between Vanguard and the NUC somebody is about to get tasked with taking the USAF standard and modifying it to provide a written standard for the cadet chevrons.
I sure hope so. And not just for the cadet chevrons, but for all CAP insignias as well.
Quote from: Ned on February 07, 2014, 10:52:48 PM
I guess the bottom line is to that is not only "OK," but actually helpful for each of us to contact the customer service folks at VG when we see an issue. It does relatively little good to complain about it here, but a lot of good to actually contact VG.
I agree, to an extent. I shouldn't have to call every time I purchase something. That said, I don't mind calling (and I have) if it's something they can correct (i.e. shipping me a different item). But when the current design is not up to standard, I'm stuck with it if it's required item. Otherwise, my only option is to return it.
The other side of this is when their poor design becomes the "standard". An example of that is the CAP seal on their blue polo shirt. That design (with the black stars, etc.) doesn't comply with current approved CAP seal design standards, yet that's the official CAP polo. I've seen members with polos embroidered by local embroideries with better looking and more accurate CAP seals. Unfortunately, while the colors and design are more accurate, they look odd compared to other members wearing the "official" polo from VG.
As I said before, if VG is going to be the sole, official CAP uniform supplier, then they need to do a better job of meeting CAP design specifications. They should also do a better job of ensuring they ship high quality products (especially at those prices). Otherwise, CAP may need to take its business elsewhere.
Two things that have irked me are the quality of Vanguard's badge dies (horrid) and quality control measures with ribbons. I should not have to buy another ribbon bar because the first one I ordered is a cm too short compared to my other ribbons bars. The dress medals have ribbons that vary in length over a cm from one dress medal to another. I suppose I could pay more money to have them mounted and adjusted, but one should not have to if the initial product is of standardized quality.
Another gripe are the buttons on the golf shirt. Go to a meeting and you can spot brown, blue, light blue, purple, black, and a myriad of variations. We can spend a conference call discussing the language for the style of black shoe to be worn with the uniform, but yet the uniform items we purchase from Vanguard are so poorly made that uniformity is a dream at best. One could retort that the member should then change the buttons to ensure they are a particular color and style, but why should they if buying a uniform item?
If Vanguard needs CAP to provide better examples and more detailed drawings and plans for insignia all they need to do is ask. There are storage units filled with examples of insignia and in some cases the original dies. If they in turn cannot, however, take this data and use it to produce a product of quality comparable to that of the USAF, then the organization best consider other options. The Soviet Union had better quality control than Vanguard, and that is really not saying much as considering my almost two decades of collecting such items.
If no spec is provided, you don't make the thing until the spec is provided.
A vendor concerned with quality is not going to WAG things.
There should be an officer or team assigned to QC everything any vendor makes for CAP.
It's not cricket to be C&D'ing other businesses and then not insuring the monopoly you create is
held to the proper standard.
It's one thing if NHQ was paying for this stuff, but this is member money. It makes me happy that
I don't really have much to buy anymore and that I was lucky enough to find a "kit" on eBay of NOS
bookstore stuff for my last click-up.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2014, 12:07:09 AM
How about the person running the machine?
That is similar to what I used to tell people back in my previous life as an IT guy.
When I would make a complaint about a defective product/not recording a bill I had paid/whatever and the person I was talking to would blame "the computer," I would tell them that the computer is only as good as the human being running it.
What really stinks about this is that unless one is fortunate enough to find things on EvilBay (which I have done many times), we are subject to a monopoly.
VG has no-one to compete with, so what incentive do they have to produce higher-quality product?
I hated the berry boards, but my 2nd and 1st Lt ones I got from the CAP Bookstore were of far better quality than many of the current grey ones from VG.
Can I ask why they went away from the in-house bookstore to Vanguard?
Quote from: shuman14 on February 08, 2014, 08:31:21 PM
Can I ask why they went away from the in-house bookstore to Vanguard?
NHQ felt it was more economical to outsource.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2014, 08:34:19 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on February 08, 2014, 08:31:21 PM
Can I ask why they went away from the in-house bookstore to Vanguard?
NHQ felt it was more economical to outsource.
OK, I can see that, but who produced the actual products for the bookstore?
What I'm saying is maybe CAP should go back to that company or maybe ease up on their trademark policies so that the free market will solve the quality control problems that currently exist.
Various, some was done in-house, some outsourced. I believe VG was actually a supplier as well.
NHQ didn't want to keep the people on the payroll who were responsible for sourcing / ordering / inventorying, etc.
Personally, that sounds like an excellent job for volunteers.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2014, 08:54:00 PM
Various, some was done in-house, some outsourced. I believe VG was actually a supplier as well.
NHQ didn't want to keep the people on the payroll who were responsible for sourcing / ordering / inventorying, etc.
Personally, that sounds like an excellent job for volunteers.
I can see that but when your volunteers take days off and orders get backed up... that could be a problem.
Paid employees take time off, too, and if it's an issue, make sure you have enough coverage so no one
is overworked.
I would be willing to be that members would trade higher quality and lower price for instant-shipping.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2014, 09:04:09 PM
Paid employees take time off, too, and if it's an issue, make sure you have enough coverage so no one
is overworked.
I would be willing to bet that members would trade higher quality and lower price for instant-shipping.
I'm sure they would too.
I'm pretty sure if they could legally buy what they wanted from anyplace other than Scamguard they would do that too.
The flip side of this is part of the contract means they need to have the stuff available, be it something that 6 members need, or 6,000.
The free market won't support the six people ..
Quote from: a2capt on February 08, 2014, 10:29:16 PM
The flip side of this is part of the contract means they need to have the stuff available, be it something that 6 members need, or 6,000.
The free market won't support the six people ..
No it will, it just means those six will just have to pay more.
I'll give you an example. Have a friend who earned a Combat Action Badge (CAB) in Iraq. He's also a USCGAux member.
Wear of the CAB by Auxies is approved... but no one made a white/silver thread on blue sew-on badge for his Operational Dress Uniform (ODU).
(ODU is about the same as BBDU's that CAP uses.)
He looked far and wide and found one of the online nametape vendors/producers to make him a few sets as a custom order. Cost him a bit more, but to him it was worth it.
Now, as to CAP and Scamguard, it use to be that there were numerous online venders that carried CAP badges and/or Military badges in CAP colors for BDUs, BBDUs and flightsuits. Once Scamguard got the "exclusive" rights to produce these items, they threatened to file lawsuits against these other producers for "trademark infringement".
Now you have a monopoly that doesn't do quality control and really only cares about making money.
The better answer is to let all these other vendors make CAP stuff as they like and if it doesn't meet standards and specifications let that be enforced by the buyers (i.e. Hey these ICS Badges look like crap, I'm sending them back.) and those buyers' local commander. (i.e. Those wings are way to big in size, sorry you can't wear them on a CAP uniform.)
Quote from: shuman14 on February 09, 2014, 12:02:52 AM
I'll give you an example. Have a friend who earned a Combat Action Badge (CAB) in Iraq. He's also a USCGAux member.
Wear of the CAB by Auxies is approved... but no one made a white/silver thread on blue sew-on badge for his Operational Dress Uniform (ODU).
I'm not sure your friend's example is on point. He found it was expensive to have a non-USCGA badge produced to USCGA standards. Many CAP members have the same sort of issue with Army (or other military) badges or devices for their BDUs that are not normally available in "white on ultramarine blue."
But the subject we are discussing is VG, our supplier of "CAP specific" insignia, badges, and devices.
The difference is that VG is contractually obligated to produce all of CAP's currently authorized insignia, and make them available to our members at a reasonable price. And in an efficient, customer-friendly manner. If your friend had had difficulty obtaining a USCGA award or insignia through their authorized supplier(s), then that would be a problem for both your friend and the USCGA. But my guess is that the USCGA, just like CAP, the BSA, and the Knights of Columbus, and almost any other organization that has distinctive uniforms and insignia, contracts with a supplier to make sure that all of the insignia is available to their members at a good quality and a good price.
To answer your earlier question, CAP outsourced our insignia business after literally decades of doing it ourselves and losing buckets of (members' hard-earned) money in so doing. Even after multiple reorganizations and tweaks to the business model. Our leaders wisely decided that perhaps running a retail insignia business and associated warehouse was not one of our core competencies and set up a competitive bidding process for that function that VG eventually won. As part of that contract, VG pays a license fee for CAP-specific items back to CAP which is fenced for training. Usually something over $100,000 a year, which so far has been returned directly to regional training centers and the regions directly. Last year each region CP shop received a sizable grant.
We stopped losing buckets of money, and the members have received the same or better service at roughly the same prices. Win - win.
QuoteNow, as to CAP and Scamguard, it use to be that there were numerous online venders that carried CAP badges and/or Military badges in CAP colors for BDUs, BBDUs and flightsuits. Once Scamguard got the "exclusive" rights to produce these items, they threatened to file lawsuits against these other producers for "trademark infringement".
Sort of, but not really. VG does not own any of the rights to CAP's intellectual property. If and when a "cease and desist letter" needs to go out to a business attempting to make money from the trademarks and other intellectual property assigned by public law to CAP by the US Congress, the letter goes out from our own Corporate Counsel, not VG.
Any business model that involves pirating somebody else's trademarks for fun and profit is probably not a sustainable model in any event.
QuoteNow you have a monopoly that doesn't do quality control and really only cares about making money.
Again, not really. As I mentioned earlier, exclusive supplier arrangements are pretty much the norm for this kind of situation. Try buying Girl Scout uniforms or other items from anyone other than an authorized supplier. Or NFL merchandise. Or a full sized replacement Army Achievement medal.
If we allowed anyone, anywhere to make our insignia it would be a rapid "race to the bottom" as every off-shore supplier in the world competed to make the crappiest merchandise that an uniformed cadet or parent would buy off the internet. Plus we would lose the licensing fees which in a very real way reduce the dues that we all pay.
That fact that VG is a "for profit" business in America is not a sin. Every business is organized to make money for the owners.
But contrary to your assertion, they have every motivation to perform well on their contract and provide good service and prices for our members. For the pragmatic business reason that every contract ends at some point, and if they are making money they are going to want to renew it. And crappy customer service is just the kind of thing that will make our leaders consider a different supplier.
So, if you are unhappy with the service or quality from VG, contact them directly. They will make it good. If you are still unhappy, contact your chain of command. Ultimately it is the senior leadership who decides who gets the next contract for this service, and it is important that they hear from you whenever the service is either poor or exceptionally good.
Not the same.
Authorized by, but not a CAP award/device/thing is definitely a -his problem- where as an award that CAP has in it's regulations, that is governed by it, needs to be available like everything else.
As well, the military versions of authorized badges are able to be worn on the AF style uniform, in their available versions.
CAPM 39-1para 6-7, Table 6-4, item 18, & Table 6-5. No need to get white on ultramarine versions created.
Ned,
Why is NHQ C&D vendors of generic products like nametapes and name tags which do not have any CAP indications
except the generic words like "CIVIL"?
In these cases the product was better, cheaper, faster, and NOT something CAP owns.
But thanks to those lawyer letters, we're cut off from that, simply because the vendor doesn't want to be bothered.
..and the air crew badges that the Big V makes just pale compared to what Hollicks and other vendors offered in both quality and price.
But that's all we get now. 4 pieces for $20, that lasted a few years, vs. the edge peeling jokester product that Vanguard ships. :(
Quote from: Eclipse on February 09, 2014, 02:43:28 AM
Ned,
Why is NHQ C&D vendors of generic products like nametapes and name tags which do not have any CAP indications
except the generic words like "CIVIL"?
In these cases the product was better, cheaper, faster, and NOT something CAP owns.
But thanks to those lawyer letters, we're cut off from that, simply because the vendor doesn't want to be bothered.
Bob,
I'm not sure I can agree with your premise.
Basically, we will C&D any improper production or use of our property.
The reverse is also true, we will not C&D production of something that is not our property.
My experience in the business world is limited, of course, but it is my impression that business owners normally have a pretty good sense of whether they are entitled to make or sell a given product, and are rarely discouraged by letters that have no basis in fact. On a related note, I hope that all business owners are discouraged when they receive a C&D letter from the owners of the IP in question.
No company is going to bother even responding to a lawyer letter if it doesn't make economic sense, even when they are right.
In this case, we had no issue accepting them as a sponsor, but then decided they couldn't make generic items, even though
they were superior quality, less expensive, and easier to get.
It's at least understandable when we're talking about things which are clearly CAP indices, but stuff like this just makes us
look overbearing and as if we have a vendor's interest over the membership's.
Quote from: shuman14 on February 08, 2014, 08:40:09 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on February 08, 2014, 08:34:19 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on February 08, 2014, 08:31:21 PM
Can I ask why they went away from the in-house bookstore to Vanguard?
NHQ felt it was more economical to outsource.
OK, I can see that, but who produced the actual products for the bookstore?
What I'm saying is maybe CAP should go back to that company or maybe ease up on their trademark policies so that the free market will solve the quality control problems that currently exist.
As stated elsewhere, Vanguard was the major supplier. I had a long chat with the Sales Manager at the California location, not long after they got the contract, and got a lot of information about the operation. One of my Qs was availability of CAP items at the CA location. Answer - since The Bookstore was in their east coast marketing region, that's where the CAP stuff would be handled.
Quote from: shuman14 on February 09, 2014, 12:02:52 AM
<snippage>
Now, as to CAP and Scamguard, it use to be that there were numerous online venders that carried CAP badges and/or Military badges in CAP colors for BDUs, BBDUs and flightsuits. Once Scamguard got the "exclusive" rights to produce these items, they threatened to file lawsuits against these other producers for "trademark infringement".
Now you have a monopoly that doesn't do quality control and really only cares about making money.
The better answer is to let all these other vendors make CAP stuff as they like and if it doesn't meet standards and specifications let that be enforced by the buyers (i.e. Hey these ICS Badges look like crap, I'm sending them back.) and those buyers' local commander. (i.e. Those wings are way to big in size, sorry you can't wear them on a CAP uniform.)
There were many variants in online vendors. Some were excellent. Some were not. Tom at the Hock Shop had some hit-or-miss stuff with his insignia. Example: the very, very tough backing that his embroidered insignia was made with. Ugh, what a pain that stuff was.
OTOH, IMHO the folks at Spur Nametags made some really solid CAP & name tapes. My unit used to order our basic training kits from the Bookstore and we switched (prior to the rampant C&Ds) to getting nametapes and CAP tapes from Spur, partly due to cost and partly due to service (I think Spur's cost was about $1 cheaper per cadet than thru the Bookstore and their turn around time was significantly shorter).
BTW, getting white-on-ultramarine versions of military insignia produced (jump wings, air assault badges, air crew wings) is not similarly controlled by Vanguard or CAP. CAP does not have an intellectual property lock on the color ultramarine.
You can surely wear the "subdued on OD" versions of insignia per the 39-1, but honestly, I think that looks awful (I did it for years when "other services aviation badges" were authorized on the right side, over the CAP tape.). After the first couple years, I built up a stash of "white on OD" badges in my supply box that I picked up at various militaria shows. That, to me, was a *little* less jarring than full-on subdued along with full-color.
Like this
(http://archive.cadetstuff.org/images/ninness_5.jpg) (still on the right side back then. That was 1992)
and
(http://archive.cadetstuff.org/images/ninness.jpg) (1998)
and
(http://archive.cadetstuff.org/images/nin/nin48.jpg) (2000)
and
(http://archive.cadetstuff.org/images/nin/nin_enc.jpg) (2005)
Eventually, I had Spur make me some wings white-on-ultramarine. I think they look a MILLION times better than either subdued-on-OD or white-on-OD on the CAP uniform.
(http://archive.cadetstuff.org/images/nin_uni.JPG)(2007 or so)
and this past November (attached)
What is that specialty? A new one?
Ground Team Assault, to guard crash sites?
:P
Flyer
Quote from: Eclipse on February 09, 2014, 02:43:28 AM
Ned,
Why is NHQ C&D vendors of generic products like nametapes and name tags which do not have any CAP indications
except the generic words like "CIVIL"?
In these cases the product was better, cheaper, faster, and NOT something CAP owns.
But thanks to those lawyer letters, we're cut off from that, simply because the vendor doesn't want to be bothered.
That was the point I was trying to make, you've summed it up much better.
Quote from: a2capt on February 09, 2014, 02:55:44 AM
..and the air crew badges that the Big V makes just pale compared to what Hollicks and other vendors offered in both quality and price.
But that's all we get now. 4 pieces for $20, that lasted a few years, vs. the edge peeling jokester product that Vanguard ships. :(
Another good point... barely meeting specifications or better than specifications... I'd take better then specs every time.
LTC Ninness, I have to agree the matching white on blue look much better.
Quote from: shuman14 on February 09, 2014, 05:33:48 PM
LTC Ninness, I have to agree the matching white on blue look much better.
I should point out:
If you look at my most-recent photo and the one from 2007-2008 or so, look closely at the Civil Air Patrol tapes and compare them.
Vanguard started doing nametapes as the fabric strips vs the webbing that nametags were originally made with for the last ~35+ years. I was *very* skeptical when I got them in the mail this last time around. Fabric-strip name tags were very popular when I was in Korea for locally-sourced name tags and they did weird things (fading, etc).
I have to say, so far, that I'm fairly happy/impressed with these. They sew on nicely, they seem to be very dimensionally stable, and in comparison to the "old" style, they're far, far more regular in their shape.
Quote from: NIN on February 09, 2014, 06:07:45 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on February 09, 2014, 05:33:48 PM
LTC Ninness, I have to agree the matching white on blue look much better.
I should point out:
If you look at my most-recent photo and the one from 2007-2008 or so, look closely at the Civil Air Patrol tapes and compare them.
Vanguard started doing nametapes as the fabric strips vs the webbing that nametags were originally made with for the last ~35+ years. I was *very* skeptical when I got them in the mail this last time around. Fabric-strip name tags were very popular when I was in Korea for locally-sourced name tags and they did weird things (fading, etc).
I have to say, so far, that I'm fairly happy/impressed with these. They sew on nicely, they seem to be very dimensionally stable, and in comparison to the "old" style, they're far, far more regular in their shape.
AAFES sells CAP tapes:
https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search (https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search)
and name tapes:
https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search (https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search)
I must admit ignorance to their quality as I've haven't ordered any yet, but they appear to be embroidered on the traditional "webbing" type strip.
Quote from: LegacyAirman on February 09, 2014, 07:47:01 PM
Quote from: NIN on February 09, 2014, 06:07:45 PM
Quote from: shuman14 on February 09, 2014, 05:33:48 PM
LTC Ninness, I have to agree the matching white on blue look much better.
I should point out:
If you look at my most-recent photo and the one from 2007-2008 or so, look closely at the Civil Air Patrol tapes and compare them.
Vanguard started doing nametapes as the fabric strips vs the webbing that nametags were originally made with for the last ~35+ years. I was *very* skeptical when I got them in the mail this last time around. Fabric-strip name tags were very popular when I was in Korea for locally-sourced name tags and they did weird things (fading, etc).
I have to say, so far, that I'm fairly happy/impressed with these. They sew on nicely, they seem to be very dimensionally stable, and in comparison to the "old" style, they're far, far more regular in their shape.
AAFES sells CAP tapes:
https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search (https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search)
and name tapes:
https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search (https://shop.aafes.com/shop/Product.aspx?dept_id=15025&PFID=X800X2&gid=&AskReturn=search)
I must admit ignorance to their quality as I've haven't ordered any yet, but they appear to be embroidered on the traditional "webbing" type strip.
Same quality as the other tapes they make. You can see their product on just about any set of ABU's you see on base.
Quote from: NIN on February 09, 2014, 03:26:46 PM
(http://archive.cadetstuff.org/images/nin/nin_enc.jpg) (2005)
One of Mark Sinicki's rubber ducks?
Oh, and the Michigan wing patch with the NH-032 squadron patch is a nice touch.
Quote from: Slim on February 10, 2014, 04:39:46 AM
One of Mark Sinicki's rubber ducks?
Oh, and the Michigan wing patch with the NH-032 squadron patch is a nice touch.
dunno. They just "appeared" outside the commandants office one day.
And yeah, that was my "old" set of BDUs that never had the wing patch removed. I just put a sq patch on and headed west.
Quote from: Ned on February 09, 2014, 02:27:55 AMTo answer your earlier question, CAP outsourced our insignia business after literally decades of doing it ourselves and losing buckets of (members' hard-earned) money in so doing. Even after multiple reorganizations and tweaks to the business model. Our leaders wisely decided that perhaps running a retail insignia business and associated warehouse was not one of our core competencies and set up a competitive bidding process for that function that VG eventually won. As part of that contract, VG pays a license fee for CAP-specific items back to CAP which is fenced for training. Usually something over $100,000 a year, which so far has been returned directly to regional training centers and the regions directly. Last year each region CP shop received a sizable grant.
We stopped losing buckets of money, and the members have received the same or better service at roughly the same prices. Win - win.
Who's the we? I'm paying more, getting worse quality and worse service. Also, I don't necessarily think its a value add that money from their overpriced crap goes to CP. I'd rather see it go to AE or ES myself. If cadets want to participate activities, let their parents pay for it, or raise the money themselves. Don't gouge me for "required items" and then turn over part of your bloated prices to your co-conspirator and act like you are doing a good thing. The only people winning here are Vanguard and some cadets IMHO.
Yeah, never mind half the membership or so.
Quote from: NIN on February 10, 2014, 02:37:49 PM
Yeah, never mind half the membership or so.
All cadets do not participate in region activities, and you make it sound like cadets don't participate in AE or ES
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:42:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on February 10, 2014, 02:37:49 PM
Yeah, never mind half the membership or so.
All cadets do not participate in region activities, and you make it sound like cadets don't participate in AE or ES
You make it sound like supporting about half the membership is a bad thing.
Region CP shops don't necessarily just run region activities. There can be region-level CP initiatives that could be funded that affect all cadets in a region, not just ones who attend an activity.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:42:08 PM
All cadets do not participate in region activities...
Not, not all cadets do participate in regional or national activities. However, more of them are able to participate thanks to the funds. This is done through offsets of participation fees as well as facility upgrades that expand an activities capacity. Of course there are also region level programs that are directed at individual activities, but rather at making the CP better for all cadets.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:42:08 PM
...and you make it sound like cadets don't participate in AE or ES
Well, not all cadets participate in ES, nor do all senior members. But, at least some of these funds go to ES and AE related cadet activities and initiatives. So, while these funds are centered on cadets, they are being used to help all 3 missions in one way or another. Just because you still have to pay the full price for a CAP aircraft to go fly doesn't mean that the monies are being used to help build up our ES and AE missions.
Quote from: NIN on February 10, 2014, 02:44:01 PM
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:42:08 PM
Quote from: NIN on February 10, 2014, 02:37:49 PM
Yeah, never mind half the membership or so.
All cadets do not participate in region activities, and you make it sound like cadets don't participate in AE or ES
You make it sound like supporting about half the membership is a bad thing.
Region CP shops don't necessarily just run region activities. There can be region-level CP initiatives that could be funded that affect all cadets in a region, not just ones who attend an activity.
I think people should have the option of supporting what they wish. I think that if cadets want to participate in activities then they should either fundraise, or have their parents pay. Which is how every youth activity I ever participated worked (Boy Scouts, Explorers, Sports, Academic Olympics, Math Team). I got a job, my troop fund raised. Our local uniform store didn't overcharge for lousy quality and then kick-back the money to the Scout Council.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:54:42 PM
I think people should have the option of supporting what they wish.
And by joining CAP, you are choosing to support all 3 missions, of which CP has by far the largest participation.
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2014, 02:54:37 PM
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:42:08 PM
All cadets do not participate in region activities...
Not, not all cadets do participate in regional or national activities. However, more of them are able to participate thanks to the funds. This is done through offsets of participation fees as well as facility upgrades that expand an activities capacity. Of course there are also region level programs that are directed at individual activities, but rather at making the CP better for all cadets.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:42:08 PM
...and you make it sound like cadets don't participate in AE or ES
Well, not all cadets participate in ES, nor do all senior members. But, at least some of these funds go to ES and AE related cadet activities and initiatives. So, while these funds are centered on cadets, they are being used to help all 3 missions in one way or another. Just because you still have to pay the full price for a CAP aircraft to go fly doesn't mean that the monies are being used to help build up our ES and AE missions.
And making things better is nice, but not at the expense of the membership by pawning off overpriced, poor quality "required" items on them. Is there anyplace that we can access real numbers as opposed to anecdotes on what Vanguard does or doesn't do. I have a finance and accounting background and would like to see real numbers.
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2014, 02:57:16 PM
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:54:42 PM
I think people should have the option of supporting what they wish.
And by joining CAP, you are choosing to support all 3 missions, of which CP has by far the largest participation.
So you're saying that members of Senior Squadrons are not members of CAP?
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2014, 02:57:16 PM
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:54:42 PM
I think people should have the option of supporting what they wish.
And by joining CAP, you are choosing to support all 3 missions, of which CP has by far the largest participation.
No I'm not at least not equally, and neither are most people. I know plenty of CP people who do no ES. Plenty of ES types who don't do AE or CP. Don't really know any pure AE types. I support CP by doing those tasks such as Admin, Finance, and PD so that people who want to work with cadets don't need to worry about it.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:00:08 PM
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2014, 02:57:16 PM
And by joining CAP, you are choosing to support all 3 missions, of which CP has by far the largest participation.
So you're saying that members of Senior Squadrons are not members of CAP?
Now you're putting words in my mouth. If you'll read what you quoted, you will see that they are, or should be, supporting all three missions of CAP. They should be helping their community through ES. They should be conducting both internal and external AE by having classes and sponsoring lectures. And they should be teaching AE to the local Cadet Squadron and flying O-Rides for them. Now if they aren't doing all these things, if instead they are just a GOB flying club, then they aren't doing a very good job at accomplishing their missions, but they're still members.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:02:06 PM
No I'm not at least not equally, and neither are most people.
I don't even understand what you're trying to say with this sentence.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:02:06 PM
I know plenty of CP people who do no ES. Plenty of ES types who don't do AE or CP. Don't really know any pure AE types. I support CP by doing those tasks such as Admin, Finance, and PD so that people who want to work with cadets don't need to worry about it.
I also know plenty of CP people who never touch ES, but they help those who want to do ES accomplish their goals. I also know some AE people who only do AE and they are the best at what they do; but they don't try to detract from the CP folks or the ES gurus. Another thing I know, which you seem to enjoy ignoring, is that more than half of our membership is made up of cadets. When you factor in the number of senior members whose primary focus is CP, regardless of whether they also do ES, you get back to the fact that CP has by far the largest participation.
None of this changes the fact that Vanguard is overpriced for the quality they seem to offer us, but you seem to want to blame everything on the cadets and CP instead of contacting Vanguard and working to get higher quality goods for the price paid. Considering that most of the problems result from a lack of QA/QC, a few calls/emails/letters ought to help matters a whole lot more than coming on CAPTalk and whining about cadets getting a few extra dollars.
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2014, 03:27:09 PM
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:00:08 PM
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2014, 02:57:16 PM
And by joining CAP, you are choosing to support all 3 missions, of which CP has by far the largest participation.
So you're saying that members of Senior Squadrons are not members of CAP?
Now you're putting words in my mouth. If you'll read what you quoted, you will see that they are, or should be, supporting all three missions of CAP. They should be helping their community through ES. They should be conducting both internal and external AE by having classes and sponsoring lectures. And they should be teaching AE to the local Cadet Squadron and flying O-Rides for them. Now if they aren't doing all these things, if instead they are just a GOB flying club, then they aren't doing a very good job at accomplishing their missions, but they're still members.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:02:06 PM
No I'm not at least not equally, and neither are most people.
I don't even understand what you're trying to say with this sentence.
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:02:06 PM
I know plenty of CP people who do no ES. Plenty of ES types who don't do AE or CP. Don't really know any pure AE types. I support CP by doing those tasks such as Admin, Finance, and PD so that people who want to work with cadets don't need to worry about it.
I also know plenty of CP people who never touch ES, but they help those who want to do ES accomplish their goals. I also know some AE people who only do AE and they are the best at what they do; but they don't try to detract from the CP folks or the ES gurus. Another thing I know, which you seem to enjoy ignoring, is that more than half of our membership is made up of cadets. When you factor in the number of senior members whose primary focus is CP, regardless of whether they also do ES, you get back to the fact that CP has by far the largest participation.
None of this changes the fact that Vanguard is overpriced for the quality they seem to offer us, but you seem to want to blame everything on the cadets and CP instead of contacting Vanguard and working to get higher quality goods for the price paid. Considering that most of the problems result from a lack of QA/QC, a few calls/emails/letters ought to help matters a whole lot more than coming on CAPTalk and whining about cadets getting a few extra dollars.
I'm not blaming anything on the cadets, I just think they should be more financially self sufficient. Also, until I see some actual numbers on real financial statements, I have no idea how much money Vanguard kicks back to CAP, if any; and how much of that goes to any particular area. As for why you think complaining to a sanctioned monopoly would actually do any good is a mystery, though I have indeed sent written complaints to Vanguard. Also, since you seem worried about proper quoting, my section of this began with a response to Ned, and his statement that going to Vanguard was a win-win see below:
"To answer your earlier question, CAP outsourced our insignia business after literally decades of doing it ourselves and losing buckets of (members' hard-earned) money in so doing. Even after multiple reorganizations and tweaks to the business model. Our leaders wisely decided that perhaps running a retail insignia business and associated warehouse was not one of our core competencies and set up a competitive bidding process for that function that VG eventually won. As part of that contract, VG pays a license fee for CAP-specific items back to CAP which is fenced for training. Usually something over $100,000 a year, which so far has been returned directly to regional training centers and the regions directly. Last year each region CP shop received a sizable grant.
We stopped losing buckets of money, and the members have received the same or better service at roughly the same prices. Win - win."
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 03:00:08 PM
So you're saying that members of Senior Squadrons are not members of CAP?
I do not think
anyone is inferring that.
However, having been a member of all three types of CAP squadrons (including one Cadet that switched to Composite status), including a Senior squadron for almost two years, I
can say that, in my experience at least, there are many in Senior squadrons who want nothing to do with CP, or, in fact, AE.
Example: when the subject of cadet O-rides would be brought up in my former unit, one could almost hear the groans.
Quote from: CyBorg on February 10, 2014, 04:57:24 PM
Example: when the subject of cadet O-rides would be brought up in my former unit, one could almost hear the groans.
My Cadet Squadron inherited a senior squadron in 1997 to form a Composite Squadron.
Seniors in cadet & composite squadrons groan in a similar way when confronted with a senior squadron.
8)
I just had a very nice conversation with Mr. Bostwick, who is the program manager for CAP at Vanguard.
I think Ned already said it, but I'll reiterate: CAP apparently never provided Vanguard with a legit set of drawings/specs for grade insignia when they took over from CAPMart. Unlike the USAF and all the other military services, which have an exhaustive set of specs (they don't call it "mil-spec" for nothing!) for every single bit of bling-bling that goes on the uniform, we don't have similar. No color specs, to-scale drawings with measurements, specifications for things like pin configuration, etc.
So all Vanguard got was a box of "CAP-specific" insignia and "Here's what its supposed to look like."
That's probably a serious oversight on CAP's part, but it happened years ago, and the question is, how do CAP and Vanguard move forward without placing undue burden on the membership, and without increasing costs due to loss.
Would be bad to be the cadet who gets "new made" chevrons that meet a printed/established standard, but don't match "what we've been buying for years" (ie. "going the other way"). Imagine how some units would go overboard on 'making sure its all matching'.
(As an aside: I had a funny thought pop into my head today. Did my unit buy insignia from the Hock Shop years ago before Tom shut down? Could these chevrons be left over Hock Shop-made metal insignia that somehow were floating around in our supply box? I mean, I didn't even THINK about that possibility, since its been years since the unit bought anything from the Hock Shop, probably 5-6 years? I couldn't imagine that we'd have any C/A1C and C/SrA floating around that long, based on the amount of cadets we have cycle thru our program and who leave in Phase I, but I suppose its a possibility... That would be embarrassing on my part.... <GRIN> I would have to eat some serious crow.)
It's very simple.
They make these:
http://www.vanguardmil.com/enlisted-rank-enameled-c-4_300_305.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/enlisted-rank-enameled-c-4_300_305.html)
... just swap the prop shield in for the circled star.
(Though, cadets do get a -much better- deal on their insignia.. )
I just don't understand how making it straight vs. curved is any more expensive.
No, it's what happens when you don't give your vendor a spec.
However.. a great specimen can also be a specification, too. "Here, they need to look like this."
Get back something with straight edges? Nope, not the same. You didn't do what we asked.
Instead you've got vendors giving you what they want, not what you want. Like the ID card with the barcode, which I still find ironic, in that they put barcodes on the CAPF 101, but "had no idea" one on the ID card would have been used by anyone, despite having been there for a little over 10 years.
Quote from: NIN on February 11, 2014, 05:55:44 PMhow do CAP and Vanguard move forward without placing undue burden on the membership, and without increasing costs due to loss.
We task a small working group to create the specs ASAP - volunteer members.
As to go-forward, if we match colors shapes and sizes, there should be little to no difference, at least in a pair.
A small group of people with 1/2 a clue should be able to knock this out in a couple weeks.
Like I always say "you can't fix yesterday, but you can fix next time".
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:54:42 PM
I think people should have the option of supporting what they wish. I think that if cadets want to participate in activities then they should either fundraise, or have their parents pay. Which is how every youth activity I ever participated worked (Boy Scouts, Explorers, Sports, Academic Olympics, Math Team). I got a job, my troop fund raised. Our local uniform store didn't overcharge for lousy quality and then kick-back the money to the Scout Council.
Oh my. I bet you wish you could do that with your tax dollars as well? Ever look at what some CAP activities cost? Outside of scholarships, no cadets get free rides for anything, really. Sure CAP is cheaper than Cheerleading or Football team, or a myriad of other things, but there are costs still present, and I dare say at times CAP is the option for THOSE kids who simply CAN'T afford any of those expensive "school" programs. As much as we shedog about stuff at times, is the stuff really that bad? I've seen some embroidery that wasn't the best, but we get stuff that looks like other stuff, and in pictures today or 10 years ago, it's hard to tell it apart.
All vectored..
The stripes are using Air Force chevrons as an example, though appear "thicker" than what we have, in that the background is greater for ours. So, make them thinner..
Once there's one, just subtract the stripes and move the prop shield accordingly, to get all the way back to airman.
.. DXF, whatever one wants can come from that.
DXF? Easy conversion into AutoCAD DWG format.
Autowhat now?
I don't see that option in my Paint program.
Here's, with the stripes to background ratio evened up a bit:
When I send for CNC, I used DXF, unless Illustrator is ask for specifically. I needed the center portion done vectorized anyway, I figured just make the whole insignia, make the biggest one first, and then remove elements to make the smaller ones as needed.
OK, a question:
I would guess those are stars across the top of the shield but why 16? I could understand the symbolism of 13, 48, or 50 but 16 escapes me.
13 The original colonies/States
48 The number of States when CAP was created.
50 The current number of States.
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf)
Page 3(b)(3) says 13 for 13 colonies and the other 3 were for the departments under the DOD- Army, Navy, and AF
Quote from: Cliff_Chambliss on February 12, 2014, 02:03:52 AM
OK, a question:
I would guess those are stars across the top of the shield but why 16? I could understand the symbolism of 13, 48, or 50 but 16 escapes me.
13 The original colonies/States
48 The number of States when CAP was created.
50 The current number of States.
Quote from: Jaison009 on February 12, 2014, 03:29:36 AM
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf)
Page 3(b)(3) says 13 for 13 colonies and the other 3 were for the departments under the DOD- Army, Navy, and AF
That actually refers to the 13 stars on the CAP seal, not the 16 on the cadet chevrons. It was always my understanding that the 16 stars represented the 16 achievements of the cadet program.
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 12, 2014, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Jaison009 on February 12, 2014, 03:29:36 AM
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf)
Page 3(b)(3) says 13 for 13 colonies and the other 3 were for the departments under the DOD- Army, Navy, and AF
That actually refers to the 13 stars on the CAP seal, not the 16 on the cadet chevrons. It was always my understanding that the 16 stars represented the 16 achievements of the cadet program.
Yeah letting any documentation to the contrary, that's what I would expect too. 16 achievements, 16 stars
Quote from: NIN on February 07, 2014, 02:17:03 PM
Eventually, we'll have these:
Of course, what do you expect when the stuff is made in China.
Kinda makes you miss when NHQ adopted this rank insignia and only pinned the center on a set of AF pin-on rank. Makes you wonder what mess they will make out of the new NCO insignia.
As for Ira Green, the company still exists in R.I. and pumps out a bunch of military insignia.
Anyone at NHQ ever consider rebidding the contract?
Quote from: usafaux2004 on February 11, 2014, 08:55:31 PM
Quote from: Alaric on February 10, 2014, 02:54:42 PM
I think people should have the option of supporting what they wish. I think that if cadets want to participate in activities then they should either fundraise, or have their parents pay. Which is how every youth activity I ever participated worked (Boy Scouts, Explorers, Sports, Academic Olympics, Math Team). I got a job, my troop fund raised. Our local uniform store didn't overcharge for lousy quality and then kick-back the money to the Scout Council.
Oh my. I bet you wish you could do that with your tax dollars as well? Ever look at what some CAP activities cost? Outside of scholarships, no cadets get free rides for anything, really. Sure CAP is cheaper than Cheerleading or Football team, or a myriad of other things, but there are costs still present, and I dare say at times CAP is the option for THOSE kids who simply CAN'T afford any of those expensive "school" programs. As much as we shedog about stuff at times, is the stuff really that bad? I've seen some embroidery that wasn't the best, but we get stuff that looks like other stuff, and in pictures today or 10 years ago, it's hard to tell it apart.
We COULDN'T afford it either, which is why we fundraised and I got a job, which allowed me to participate. I've seen what CAP activities cost, and if people want to participate they should come up with the funding. I'd like to go to some special activities, and in order to do so, I need to budget and save, not expect someone else to pay too much for poor quality stuff so my participation can be subsidized. Isn't self-sufficiency one of the things we are supposed to teach these kids? And yes the stuff is really that bad.
Quote from: flyboy1 on February 12, 2014, 12:55:46 PM
Quote from: NIN on February 07, 2014, 02:17:03 PM
Eventually, we'll have these:
Of course, what do you expect when the stuff is made in China.
Actually, no. During my chat with Mr. Bostwick yesterday, he mentioned that all of Vanguard's metal insignia is manufactured by their subsidiary "International Insignia" in Providence, RI. (their website is a little "1998", but the videos on the "Process" page are interesting. Take a look: http://www.internationalinsignia.com/ (http://www.internationalinsignia.com/))
I believe International Insignia was part of N.S. Meyer, which Vanguard purchased in 2000.
QuoteKinda makes you miss when NHQ adopted this rank insignia and only pinned the center on a set of AF pin-on rank. Makes you wonder what mess they will make out of the new NCO insignia.
As for Ira Green, the company still exists in R.I. and pumps out a bunch of military insignia.
Anyone at NHQ ever consider rebidding the contract?
Ira Green not only exists in RI, but is literally around the corner and down the block from Vanguard's International Insignia location. Like 2/10th of a mile.
BTW, an interesting aside: Ira Green owns Brigade Quartermaster. So any time you're buying BQM stuff at AAFES on the "hooah gear" rack, you're supporting Ira Green.
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 12, 2014, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Jaison009 on February 12, 2014, 03:29:36 AM
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf)
Page 3(b)(3) says 13 for 13 colonies and the other 3 were for the departments under the DOD- Army, Navy, and AF
That actually refers to the 13 stars on the CAP seal, not the 16 on the cadet chevrons. It was always my understanding that the 16 stars represented the 16 achievements of the cadet program.
Thanks for clarification.
Quote from: NIN on February 12, 2014, 01:17:11 PMActually, no. During my chat with Mr. Bostwick yesterday, he mentioned that all of Vanguard's metal insignia is manufactured by their subsidiary "International Insignia" in Providence, RI. (their website is a little "1998", but the videos on the "Process" page are interesting. Take a look: http://www.internationalinsignia.com/ (http://www.internationalinsignia.com/))
I believe International Insignia was part of N.S. Meyer, which Vanguard purchased in 2000
Interesting that they list the 5 "major" uniformed services, and even an insignia from the CGAUX but no love for CAP.
It also appears that they produce some really nice insignia, at least as much as what is shown.
They didn't have any issue with this:
(http://static.squarespace.com/static/5256ecfde4b07afbd0191fb1/52588e19e4b0daa056ce70b9/5269a04fe4b0ba0188c82f86/1382654032075/168080_199534340059546_3774894_n.jpg)
You are probably right on that one. It also could be the 16 numbered air forces; however, I would think that the achievement number makes more sense. I am curious have there always been 16 achievements? What year did the shield come about?
Quote from: NIN on February 12, 2014, 12:20:41 PM
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 12, 2014, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Jaison009 on February 12, 2014, 03:29:36 AM
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf)
Page 3(b)(3) says 13 for 13 colonies and the other 3 were for the departments under the DOD- Army, Navy, and AF
That actually refers to the 13 stars on the CAP seal, not the 16 on the cadet chevrons. It was always my understanding that the 16 stars represented the 16 achievements of the cadet program.
Yeah letting any documentation to the contrary, that's what I would expect too. 16 achievements, 16 stars
Quote from: Jaison009 on February 12, 2014, 04:38:24 PM
You are probably right on that one. It also could be the 16 numbered air forces; however, I would think that the achievement number makes more sense. I am curious have there always been 16 achievements? What year did the shield come about?
Quote from: NIN on February 12, 2014, 12:20:41 PM
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 12, 2014, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Jaison009 on February 12, 2014, 03:29:36 AM
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf)
Page 3(b)(3) says 13 for 13 colonies and the other 3 were for the departments under the DOD- Army, Navy, and AF
That actually refers to the 13 stars on the CAP seal, not the 16 on the cadet chevrons. It was always my understanding that the 16 stars represented the 16 achievements of the cadet program.
Yeah letting any documentation to the contrary, that's what I would expect too. 16 achievements, 16 stars
There are a lot more than 16 NAFs. My money is on the achievements.
Enlisted cadets transitioned from cloth sew-on chevrons to the metal insignia with shield in 1978.
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 12, 2014, 06:02:28 PMEnlisted cadets transitioned from cloth sew-on chevrons to the metal insignia with shield in 1978.
My time as a cadet ended in 1976 so I never wore those. I was under the impression cloth rank lasted a lot longer than that.
1978 was the transition. The metal chevrons were in full use when I came on board in 1983.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E88RUqyjts (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E88RUqyjts#)
NIN and Stonewall featured as 1:21.
Until the introduction of the Eaker Award, Feik and Armstrong achievements and the upgrading of the Wright Brothers achievement to milestone award status there were only 15 achievements.
Quote from: AlphaSigOU on February 12, 2014, 09:09:21 PM
Until the introduction of the Eaker Award, Feik and Armstrong achievements and the upgrading of the Wright Brothers achievement to milestone award status there were only 15 achievements.
Oh, snap. Chuck caught us. :)
You are 100% correct. I had a brain fade.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 12, 2014, 07:07:04 PM
NIN and Stonewall featured as 1:21.
That was disturbing. Plus, Stonewall is quite a bit taller than I am.
True...only 15 achievements until around 1998. So one star for each achievement and one star for the Spaatz Award. ;)
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 13, 2014, 02:45:22 PM
True...only 15 achievements until around 1998. So one star for each achievement and one star for the Spaatz Award. ;)
Or.......
They put 16 stars on it and, when asked the symbolism at some later date, made something up.
Kind of like that whole "the second fold of the flag stands for..." thing, which was added on after the fact, but which people are convinced was designed that way.
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on February 13, 2014, 10:04:20 PM
Quote from: MHC5096 on February 13, 2014, 02:45:22 PM
True...only 15 achievements until around 1998. So one star for each achievement and one star for the Spaatz Award. ;)
Or.......
They put 16 stars on it and, when asked the symbolism at some later date, made something up.
Kind of like that whole "the second fold of the flag stands for..." thing, which was added on after the fact, but which people are convinced was designed that way.
I just got an order from Vanguard and I'm not happy at all. The miniature IC badge is too small; much smaller than the miniature ground team badge and not at all proportionate with other miniature badges. The embroidered IC badge, on the other hand, is much bigger than the embroidered ground team badge. Do they not QC these before manufacturing? >:(
Orders over $35.00 are shipped free and you can use their monthly coupon to save 10%.
20% of the time, I get the wrong items or I get items I don't need. I just go tan order today, and sure enough, I got the wrong items again. The invoice was correct, but I was shipped different items. I just don't understand how they do not have a quality check on orders.
In other news, I always get free shipping, get it quickly, and never have a problem with my order.
I've had problems with orders before. Vanguard staff has always been helpful and accommodating when I've called with a problem.
What I'm talking about here is about the quality and lack of standardization of their products vs. the high prices they charge. The quality of their CAP products just don't compare to those I buy for my Air Force uniform.
Just ordered a bunch of ribbons so I could have a new set for a presentation I am making tomorrow. Paid extra for 2nd day shipping, was told it shipped Tuesday just checked on the shipment its on the way back to them due to improper address. Checked the invoice and the address is correct there so they must have screwed up (again) the label
Quote from: Alaric on March 08, 2014, 04:23:10 AM
Just ordered a bunch of ribbons so I could have a new set for a presentation I am making tomorrow. Paid extra for 2nd day shipping, was told it shipped Tuesday just checked on the shipment its on the way back to them due to improper address. Checked the invoice and the address is correct there so they must have screwed up (again) the label
Labels aren't printed by hand...
I placed an order on Monday. It just shipped on Friday. It was for 5 items, nothing exotic.
It is for this reason that if I *must* order from them, I do it WELL in advance of need, and I am always looking to cultivate alternate options for the items they carry.
Quote from: usafaux2004 on March 08, 2014, 05:31:59 AM
Quote from: Alaric on March 08, 2014, 04:23:10 AM
Just ordered a bunch of ribbons so I could have a new set for a presentation I am making tomorrow. Paid extra for 2nd day shipping, was told it shipped Tuesday just checked on the shipment its on the way back to them due to improper address. Checked the invoice and the address is correct there so they must have screwed up (again) the label
Labels aren't printed by hand...
Have no idea then, its the same address that has been on my account for 2 years, I've gotten every other order (albeit in their own time)
How was this sent? If by UPS, there is a very specific format the USPS recognizes.
Letters sent by USPS to the address I lived for 29 years, and where my brother still lives, this house has been there for 61 years now are lost.
Likewise if I enter my address in a certain way I get an error message. I have been living here for about 9 years.
This started happening only the last five years. Before there were no problems...
Flyer