For my part, despite my request last week, I haven't had any news since January 6. At that time, I was told that the copies were manufactured and the production was successful, but that the delays were due to Alan Lee's schedule...
In my opinion, it's only a short step from there to Alan Lee taking the blame. It's not serious.

This is beginning to be disappointing, almost 2 and a half months after going on sale.

Bergelmir wrote:

For my part, despite my request last week, I haven't had any news since January 6. At that time, I was told that the copies were manufactured and the production was successful, but that the delays were due to Alan Lee's schedule...
In my opinion, it's only a short step from there to Alan Lee taking the blame. It's not serious.

This is beginning to be disappointing, almost 2 and a half months after going on sale.

I must admit, I don't really see a problem with not having had a further update since January 6th unless they have reason to tell you something different than they already told you. I do think no updates in two months is a bit sloppy, though (just by virtue of letting people know that they are definitely on the list and haven't been forgotten).

I'm not at all bothered personally by the *overall* delay. I have a perfectly readable copy if I'm so inclined. I might balk at much longer than three months and switch to a refund, but that's more because I don't think the edition is particularly good (page block notwithstanding), so I wouldn't lose sleep by not having a copy. I would lose sleep having paid full price for the book I was initially supplied with, though!

Sorry The late Stu, I didn't make myself clear (damn English :p).
I have no problem with the waiting time: to be honest, I'd rather have a book delivered in June in perfect condition than a damaged book delivered again in January.

What I was criticizing was this way of pointing the finger at Alan Lee's schedule to explain a further delay. From the start, it seemed obvious to me that, with the end of the year and the Christmas holidays, the books could not be replaced quickly, and there was no point in looking for culprits for these delays.
So it was unhelpful (and unprofessional of them) to refer to Alan Lee here (he's not the one who made failed copies).

Apart from that, I'm lucky enough not to be affected by the unpleasant relationship with the publisher that Mr. Underhill mentioned.
As long as my copies eventually arrive, I won't hold it against Folio.

They will be signed and numbered by him so what they’re stating about his schedule is pretty reasonable 🤷‍♂️

Bergelmir wrote:

What I was criticizing was this way of pointing the finger at Alan Lee's schedule to explain a further delay. From the start, it seemed obvious to me that, with the end of the year and the Christmas holidays, the books could not be replaced quickly, and there was no point in looking for culprits for these delays.

I have no skin in the game beyond living vicariously through all of you 😅 but I agree. At no point should Alan's name be in any correspondence with customers as why it is yet to be resolved. Throwing his name in there is not fair, or professional on their part. Aside from the fact that some places on the internet are not as understanding or knowledgeable about the process as those here, people do jump to conclusions.

The only conclusion anyone should be able to make here is that Folio are doing their best to get the books to customers and they are still being produced. Alan's side of this is part of that process, so there was no reason to name check anyone at all. Their mistake, again, they need to take it on the chin.