New way of wrapping FS books

A post from the FS about the new way in which FS books are now wrapped and presented.

https://www.foliosociety.com/row/blog/this-folio-life-it-s-a-wrap/?fbclid=IwAR0i...

I have received one shipment wrapped in the new manner and it is lovely. My only concern is humidity/weather in certain times of the year. If I have the package on my doorstep for hours without it being sealed in plastic there could be humidity damage or rain damage.

It was a bit of a welcome surprise seeing this for Book of the New Sun. I certainly find unwrapping paper a much more enjoyable and tactile experience than tearing plastic; that said, though enjoyable, I'm one of those people who suffers an annoying habit in removing any wrapping paper without crinkles and creases so that it's still good as new for what reason I don't know why since I never reuse them anyway.

I am curious tough given the potential numbers of books involved whether the people doing the wrapping might be under pressure to get through as many as possible within deadlines leading to more dents and dings to slipcases as they toss them this way and that on the wrapping table. I'm also curious how this might affect second hand sales in future whether sellers charging a premium for books still shrinkwrapped might have to start reducing that premium or whether they'll just change their tune to "paper wrapper stickers/tape still intact, never opened!"

I’m glad for this change. Not only is it better for the environment, but I also wonder if is better for long-term storage—especially for those who buy and keep books sealed until reading (not me). I’ve read on this forum how books sometimes mildew inside the plastic wrap, and suspect this will alleviate the problem. Plus, I’ve always loved how my fine press books or LE Folios come wrapped in paper and this will mimic it. For those who live in countries where the post feels it appropriate to leave boxes on the doorstep in the rain, I am horrified beyond belief and am glad I live in a country where they will deliver it at a time of your choice if you’re not there the first time around.

Nice I welcome this change. Going to be a better experience unwrapping than the usual tear the shrink wrap by finger nail / knife.

This is my first order with the paper wrapping. It looks shabby, and leaves the top and bottom exposed. The paper had torn, but thankfully the exposed edge did not suffer any scraping or scratching while shifting around after the wrapping failed. I’m happy for the environment, but I would like to feel a little more confident about the protection of my future orders.

>6 Mr.Fox: yeah that doesn’t look very effective.

There are biodegradable solutions that work. Just do a web search for cardboard void filler.

Yes, if exposed book edges, corners, and surfaces rub against each other during shipment, it could keep them from arriving in mint condition, which ought to be the goal.

If there’s a way to help the environment while also safeguarding my luxury book purchase, I’m all for it. I’m sure that it doesn’t need to be plastic, but I think it needs to be a bit more than this. I would like all edges and surfaces to be covered throughout the entire shipping process.

With any luck, the new packaging method will stop the second-hand price premium on ‘sealed books’ when many are likely resealed by the seller. Oh, and those awful posts plaguing the FB groups with shelves of sealed books!

>9 caesarofcaesars: Out of curiosity what makes you presume many are resealed and mislabeled by the seller? Maybe I'm naive but I think most people are honest, especially booksellers, and few buy machines to reseal folio books. Most books people own are never read (like a lot of the 'shelfies' people love to post on fb) and most sellers are trying to make a few bucks. I've bought more than a hundreded sealed folio books from all sorts of sellers over the years and nearly everyone that I've opened has been brand new with no blemishes. I've also bought plenty of books directly from folio with blemishes, ink stains, fingerprints etc.

>10 Joshbooks1:
I agree. I have bought quite a few sealed Folios and sold a few too. Never had a problem eitherways.

The reason why I keep some of my books sealed are so that on a day when I need cheering up, I can open a sealed book and it almost feels like having received a new FS book! It has nothing to do with trying to keep them for reselling or something.

Plus i don't live in a particularly humid place, so I don't have to worry about moisture and mould. So, I don't see the harm in keeping some books sealed. Like a few of my Josephine Tey novels, which I have no intention of ever selling. Or I am Legend...again, no intentions of selling but it is still sealed. For now.

Attributing meanness/dishonesty to people where simpler explanations are at hand is something I personally don't like to do. And I have never even heard of anybody receiving resealed FS books.

Also, I sometimes think that people go on FB just to get riled up.

Regarding the paper wrapping, I did notice that in my recent delivery, my copy of Creators, Conquerors and Citizens wasn't even fully wrapped. The top and bottom were open, with paper only enough to wrap around it's girth. There was thankfully no damage, but I did wonder if anyone else had the same experience.

>12 coynedj: The ones I bought from the spring collection were the same. So, I guess that’s the new standard...

>12 coynedj: I’ve had some all wrapped and some partly wrapped.

>16 CLWggg: that's awful

>12 coynedj: >13 Dr.Fiddy: >14 RRCBS: It's sloppy, not to say reckless, not wrapping new and expensive books properly, that is fully. I'm actually happy to know that Folio are now using paper protection rather than plastic shrink-wrap, but surely books can be wrapped fully, such that all six surfaces of every slipcased volume are fully covered.

>15 cronshaw: travelled to the future and replied to this post before I'd even posted it, accusing me of awful behaviour for posting this.

>16 CLWggg: haha so I see! I meant to refer to >6 Mr.Fox: !

PS You are awful, but I like you.

>17 cronshaw: tangentially, you can edit the previous post to fix the attribution... though now we’ve talked about it so much that editing might actually be more confusing...

>15 cronshaw:

Definitely don't like the sound of that. Frankly, I don't understand who would okay the decision to only partially wrap. Reeks of skimping on cost.

>20 Bob_Reader: I think it's good that Folio have begun to ask customers to send back books that are alleged to be faulty. This will hopefully discourage dishonest customers who would otherwise seek to make a quick buck out of re-selling the (at times negligibly) faulty copy on eBay. I personally wouldn't find any return a hassle when I know it's protecting a publisher I value.

>21 cronshaw: personally wouldn't find any return a hassle when I know it's protecting a publisher I value.

AND they will provide return labels to achieve it.

>21 cronshaw: Same. I personally would rather send damaged books back ( provided I don’t have to pay the return shipping costs) than keep them and decide what to do with them.

I had a problem with BOTNS and Plague Year and FS has not only sent replacements but has sent them express even though I was too cheap to pay express on my original order!

I see they’ve had problems with BOTNS but am Will mg to give them some grace. I will make sure that I end up with a copy in new condition.

The only thing that worries me about returning damaged books is what happens to them. But then again, why worry about receiving a refurbished book. If it isn’t mint condition, send it back either way and if it is mint condition, doesn’t really matter whether it was repaired.

>22 folio_books:

As long as returns are handled with return labels, that's fine for me. Wouldn't be keen on having to pay out of pocket and then wait around for a refund though.

I'm actually glad they're doing this and hope they continue to do this - it will certainly deter many returns and people selling their 'damaged' copies for 90% of the original price. Some of the returns I have gotten in the past I even don't know what to do with. Last year I purchased Plants of the Americas (which is as lovely as the Surinam Album and a beautiful LE,) and the solander box was improperly glued and was falling off. I simply asked if I could get a replacement solander case but instead they sent me a brand new book even after insisting that I would gladly ship the original back to the UK. I have no idea what to do with the other book and would have preferred to send it back - maybe i'll give it to my dad or a bookstore for free so they can turn a profit.

My spring order was just delivered by FedEx. An ominous start as there were two large holes in the sides of the box. Amazingly, the contents were in the best shape ever, absolutely no dents or crushed corners. I'm pleasantly surprised. Even the large and very heavy A Man on the Moon was perfect and is now ready to take its place next to Tachen's The NASA Archives and Picturing Apollo 11. Creators, Conquerors & Citizens comes in a really nice slipcase and is just a well done production. I can't wait to sit down and read it but it will have to wait until I finish my course on the Iliad.

As others have noted, some of my books were completely encased in paper while others were just in a wrap leaving the top and bottom exposed. I would prefer the books to be fully protected. Plenty of stuffed paper to prevent any of the books from moving. It has been a long time since I have had such an agreeably delivery from the Folio Society.

Personally, I’m receiving more and more damaged books from Folio Society. Most are damaged during production mind you (fallen down/mishandled and then put into slip case seems to happen most often. I had misprints too, however. Their Dorothy Parker book seems to have the latter in the whole print run, the text being slightly smeared across all pages in two copies I received).

That being said, the switch from bubble wrap to the cardboard wrapper went relatively well. The paper wrap instead of the shrink wrap however is pure virtue signalling and in fact seems counterproductive: The one book that I did receive like this (apart from being otherwise damaged anyway) had its slipcase scratched as well.

I wish people would read more statistics about the world and realize what amounts of raw materials are being produced everyday and for what purposes. That would help put certain things into much needed perspective — including the use of plastics. Having to send replacement books because of insufficiently protective packaging material and bad quality control during production is certainly worse for the environment than just doing those two things right.

As for Folio Society, I will try to avoid them from now on. Their pretentiousness (which always bugged me) combined with this new and idiotic virtue signalling about the environment is nothing I need in my life.
Especially since they can only be considered to make well made books if you never saw anything (including paperbacks!) made in Germany or Japan. Once you see that you start to wonder why on earth Folio Society books cost 3 to 5 times as much as the books made there…

Edit:
Actually, you could buy books by Everyman’s Library if you want well made books in english. Unfortunately, they don’t really have much in terms of non-fiction.

>19 adriano77: Shrink-wrapping in plastic happens fully automatically in a printing house. This paper-wrapping is actually more expensive I would guess. They *do* however count on getting points with naïve people about doing something good for the environment. They seem to hope to get positive word-of-mouth for their virtue signalling.

>21 cronshaw: That’s a horrible idea considering that they already ask criminal amounts of money for their books. I just send them photos of the damage via email. That was always enough — as it should be.

>27 nubero: As for Folio Society, I will try to avoid them from now on

So did you join today just to say that? I wish you well with your future German and Japanese purchases.

>30 folio_books: That’s all you took away from what I wrote?

>32 nubero:

That was the crux. I'm blocking you now so don't expect a continuation of this conversation.

Today, I received my order of A Man on the Moon with the new wrapping, covering all sides - there was even a slip of the paper between the volumes.

The set is perfect - I love it.

edited to correct book title

Well done, Folio.

This is neither here nor there but here we can recycle soft plastics. Maybe recycling plastic is a longer process but seems to be both can be reused? Sorry if this has been brought up!

I received a bundle today from Folio. The crumpled brown paper cushioning was very effective, no damage whatsoever. One volume (The Road) was covered on the four main sides only in paper, with the upper and lower surfaces of the slipcase exposed, though no marks. The other books were all in the old polluting shrink-wrap. I prefer seeing paper wrapping but I think it should cover all six sides, it's not technically difficult!

I was most impressed by The Alchemist. I bought this on the strength of the artwork and I have to say it surpasses my expectations, it's a truly beautiful edition, a larger than average format with a huge number of exquisite illustrations; I quite understand now why it's more expensive than other standard volumes. It's absolutely worth the extra cost in my humble opinion :)

>36 cronshaw:

Received my copy of The Road yesterday as well. Uncovered top and bottom. Didn't like that but whatever...

I'm trying to remember how they packaged their mystery books. Was it paper or plastic? If paper, then clearly they're capable of protecting all sides...

>37 adriano77: That’s a good point. It was the standard shrink-wrap book packed in a opaque paper like a christmas present.

>27 nubero: I think you are stretching the meaning of ‘virtue signalling’ to breaking point. It’s already an overused term, but is applicable sometimes. Usually for high profile brand messaging to get good PR without having to actually do anything which may incur effort or sacrifice, or more commonly, cost money.

I’d argue what FS have done is the precise opposite; they’ve taken action which they didn’t need to do, and risked damaging their quality in the process. A minor blog post and email to publicise the change hardly qualifies as ‘virtue signalling’.

Like it or not, plastic is a finite resource and for practical purposes will never decay. Maybe FS are trying to future proof their business against expected future regulation, and didn’t make this change in order to curry favour with people?

>39 Uppernorwood: This is probably accurate. Also, I'm not sure about the UK but there are tax benefits in the US for green initiatives like the one FS has done. Could be that they ran a cost/benefit analysis and found it was more cost effective to get a tax break and maybe refund a few books than to continue using plastic and get no tax break.

>39 Uppernorwood: Well, getting “good PR without having to actually do anything which may incur effort or sacrifice, or more commonly, cost money” is exactly what I had in mind when I talked about virtue signalling, thus my choice of words.

As for plastic being a finite resource… Everything is a “finite resource” if you take the laws of thermodynamics into consideration. That’s why I pointed to statistics and suggested that people try to find out where the stuff they use everyday actually comes from and which has what kind of an impact or cost/benefit.
The chapter “Unsustainable” in David Deutsch’s book “The Beginning of Infinity” is also something interesting to read in this context.

Just so you get me right: I’m all for Folio — or anybody else — switching to what one might call more sustainable packaging, but that may not come at the cost of quality. As it is, I stand by my assumption regarding their motives, namely, them being pure marketing and nothing else.

>41 nubero: I suspect that it is more to do with the UK's regulations regarding recyclable packaging. Companies will face penalties for producing large amounts of non recyclable packaging.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/packaging-producer-responsibilities#penalties

>43 Bob_Reader: If Folio was very concerned about the environment, then they shouldn't be in the business of producing books.

By this reasoning, surely you shouldn't be ordering books from their newest selection if you're concerned about the environment?

>44 cronshaw:
In this age of Kindles, all books are luxuries, even paperbacks. But, like gasoline-powered automobiles, there are some luxuries we simply aren’t willing to give up — yet. Maybe someday.

Doubt I'll ever be willing to give up physical books even if I do enjoy reading digitally.

what is the lifespan of a Kindle? can it be recycled? what is its environmental impact?

>48 overthemoon:
Exactly. It's complete fallacy to assume that modern tech solutions are low environmental impact, especially the 'designed to be replaced every 1-5 years' products of today (much as I appreciate my Kindle). My 'luxury' books, on the other hand, may perhaps be enjoyed by my great grandkids. Seems pretty environmentally friendly to me.

>45 jroger1: Paperbacks are actually the worst of both worlds - taking up resources and not designed to last. But I don't see an issue with high quality books which could have a lifespan of hundreds of years.

>47 Bob_Reader: Exactly. That’s what made me sign up here and vent in the first place. I’ve ordered from them for a couple of years now but I seem to have to ask for more and more replacements (in proportion to the amount of books I order) while they are busy trying to look good in their blog. That’s a dichotomy that shouldn’t be there.

>48 overthemoon:

These are good questions, the first of which doesn’t yet have a well known answer yet. (I consider things like Weibull life estimates from current failure rates predicting future life expectancies of not-yet failed devices to be just that - estimates.) Battery life is predictable but that’s just the battery, not the whole Kindle. Regarding the latter two questions, they’ll have some level of recyclability but it won’t be as mature or complete as something like paper recycling.

However, one measureable attribute in which a Kindle does shine is book equivalency. Very few of us, if any, have a library so sufficiently large that its text couldn’t be be completely stored on a Kindle. Only picture storage is currently an issue, but that’s driven more by eBooks not including many pictures, not a technical limitation on the ability to include sufficient storage (i.e., they could easily manufacture them with several gigabytes of storage if eBooks had a picture content that would warrant it).

As an early Kindle user, I am on my third upgraded Kindle Fire version. I use it daily and it has done well for travel. The optional complete replacement guarantee is available for 2 or 3 years. I had to use it once and received a completely new replacement promptly in exchange for returning the deficient one. It is much easier now to load your apps and records with a new Kindle. With frequent use, I wouldn't look for much more than 3 years.
I have never found storage to be an issue. Just download 3-4 books for traveling and return them to the cloud for storage and future access.

If a Kindle only lasts for 3 years with frequent use, considering the manufacturing cost together with the continual recharging costs, I'm unsure that such e-readers are necessarily better for the environment than having well made books like FS volumes that should easily last a couple of centuries.

https://thebulwark.com/actually-virtue-signaling-is-good/

>52 Forthwith: The Fire is a tablet and not an ereader though. Tablets have a lot more complexity in them and tend to be a lot more fragile (although mine is on its 6th year and doing just fine).

My regular Kindle is newer but that has nothing to do with projected life - stepping on the old one was not a very good thing for it and as it was over 5 years old, I decided it is time for a new one instead of figuring out if the old one can be repaired. :)

>54 kcshankd: Great article, thanks for the link!

>56 Bob_Reader:

We are social beings. It is all virtue signaling. My wedding band. The T-shirt of my favorite band or sports team. The car I drive. A religious symbol around my neck. Decrying virtue signaling is just another way to complain about opinions you don't like.

>58 kcshankd:

No. Virtue signaling, and when people use it as a criticism, is very specific in that it's almost always fake. Empty posturing for pats on the head and increased "social credit score" (coming soon).

I think this quite funny that a book vendor (I mean selling paper isn't really environmentally friendly) is packaging in paper to save the environment, yet they print most of their stuff now in the least environmentally friendly country....just saying I've read a lot of angry customers on instagram....feel like sending multiple copies is less enviro friendly than plastic wrapping

>58 kcshankd: there is a psychological construct called moral identity, which is the degree to which being a good person is an important component of the self-concept. Moral identity as studied empirically has two subdimensions: "internalization" (for example, being a moral person is an important part of who I am) and "symbolization" (for example, I often wear clothes that identify me as being a moral person).

Moral identity symbolization captures the lay idea of "virtue signaling" pretty well.

In the empirical literature, internalization tends to be associated with moral behavior while there is generally little to no relationship between symbolization and moral behavior. That is, people who virtue signal do not tend to follow through with moral actions. (Standard caveats regarding lab studies and unrepresentative populations, but there's enough work addressing various methodological limitations that I am reasonably confident that the effects are real and practically substantial.)

From the original link:

"Back in 2019 we began to investigate replacing the plastic shrink-wrap on our books with a sustainable alternative. As an eco-conscious business, we’re always looking at ways to make positive changes and, having already switched from bubble wrap to recyclable paper in our packaging, removing shrink-wrap was the next vital step in reducing our environmental impact."

Virtue, or virtue signaling, feel free to inhabit the world you have created for yourself.

The idea of shrink-wrap is to keep moisture out. Plastic is needed to seal. And one can recycle plastic. I am a firm believer that all packaging materials for premium items one plans to keep should be as durable as the product itself. Recyclable etc should not be a concern as it will last the life of the book essentially forever. Packaging can be simple and durable. Why not a nice sleeve around the book and slipcase rather than thin paper.

Trees are renewable. Product damage and protection should not come at a cost of using degradable packaging materials.

On Easton Press and Folio Books I am able to slit the shrinkwrap and slide off where it can be slid back on the product.

Poor Folio Society.

Although I like to get my copies pristine too, if I needed to order copy number 5/6, I think I would just stop, instead of letting the company send me 6 new editions free of charge. Either one ought to accept that all the editions have some small damage and one simply needs to learn to live with them, or one ought to simply ask for a refund.

Asking for a copy to be replaced (or simply getting a free one) more than twice should simply not be allowed.

And I really hope they make everyone return the "faulty" editions. Folio Society can definitely not afford to sell 5/6 books for the price of 1.

As for the "virtue-signalling" debate, this hardly seems like an empty gesture. The using of paper in wrapping the books and padding the boxes seems like a good thing to me. Besides, clearly the issues with BOTNS stems from quality issues at the printers and not necessarily due to damage taking place en route to customers. If the latter were the case, we would be hearing about other paper-wrapped books coming damaged all the time. However, it is still mostly only BOTNS.

https://twitter.com/CosyCIub/status/1383649897367314442?s=20

The fifth mini scenario seems particularly apt.

>65 Bob_Reader: You just received your 5th copy !!

What are you doing with all your copies ? Do Folio asks to send them back ?

The idea that people cannot abide even the most minor inconvenience (a dented slipcase for their luxury book) in order to help create a sustainable environment is disheartening to say the least. There, consider my virtue signaled. I'm assuming we all love FS and that's why we are here. We should be proud that they are walking the walk and not just sitting on the sidelines whinging like some here on this forum. There is work to be done to address the way in which human consumption creates mountains of waste. If you don't see that there is a problem, you are part of it. Sooner or later the work will need to be done. FS is taking a step in that direction and putting their money where their tweets are. Change is never easy or cheap. They will find the formula that works but it might be bumpy for the first few iterations. Until then I look forward to reading the whiny and entitled rants which are doubtless forthcoming.

>69 L.Bloom:
Quite. For what it's worth, my (first and only) copy of BotNS reached me in perfect condition, wrapped in paper, and if it had sustained any damage in transit, I can't imagine shrinkwrap providing any better protection against dents etc than the new paper wrap. And I find the scrunchy brown paper to be equally if not more robust than bubblewrap, but maybe that's just me. To me, the various issues that have been reported about BotNS seem entirely separate to the switch from plastic wrap to paper. They seem to be down to production/QA issues more than anything else.

The one area where I would worry about the new paper wrap providing less protection than the shrinkwrap is in cases where the parcels are left out in the rain by the courier, but let's face it, that's an issue with the delivery company, not Folio, and even shrinkwrapped items may not be fully waterproof if exposed to enough of a downpour (though I appreciate it can often help, especially speaking as someone who lives in a particularly damp corner of the UK).

>52 Forthwith: , >53 cronshaw:
We should distinguish between the two types of Kindles: the dedicated e-Ink reading Kindles and the "app" handling color Kindles that Forthwith implied.

I would not want to task a color Kindle with experiments of longevity or full library replacement - at least, not yet. I don't think those are designed with those goals in mind. Color Kindles are meant to be media players and basic web surfing tablets that happen to be able to display books. Based on personal experience alone, owning (or managing) a handful of Kindles and various other color tablets, I would definitely give the e-Ink readers an edge on longevity since they serve one basic purpose and are optimized for it. What's more, it takes far less power for an e-Ink reader to accomplish its function than a color tablet.

>55 AnnieMod:
Interesting use case! The paper book may have a bit of an advantage over the tablet today in terms of resilience to being stepped on but I could easily see material and design improvements pushing the tablet ahead of the book at some point. Frankly, the technology to make a tablet indestructible for home-use probably already exists; it's just not cost-effective to make/sell them that way.

>64 cu29640: "The idea of shrink-wrap is to keep moisture out. Plastic is needed to seal."
I disagree. I don't believe moisture concerns come into play when anyone decides to shrink-wrap a book. It has more to do with maintaining structure during shipping and handling operations, and indicating "newness" to the end customer. The kind of plastic anyone ever uses to shrink-wrap books is not waterproof; it's often quite permeable. At least it's recyclable, though.

>70 Bob_Reader: "...which I cannot even donate anywhere because they are scratched on the covers."
Really??

>72 treereader: On the other hand, the new kindle that replaced the dead one survived a flood in my bedroom - paper books would have been water damaged in that instance. :) I’ve stepped on the old one before - I guess it was just the worst possible place that one time - I did not really got worried until the screen kinda decided it does not like me. Oh well. :) Happens.

But the tablet and the eInk classic kindles are indeed different animals - both technologically and in terms of the ability to read from them for a long time (and not only because the tablet will run out of battery a lot faster).

Is there an emoji for 'I really need a drink right now'? That's how I feel after reading this thread ;-)

Slightly more seriously:
>41 nubero:

'As it is, I stand by my assumption regarding their motives, namely, them being pure marketing and nothing else.'

Have you any actual evidence for your accusations? Or is it mere 'assumption'?

>43 Bob_Reader:

'If Folio was very concerned about the environment, then they shouldn't be in the business of producing books.'

You are suggesting ('virtue signalling', perhaps) that you care about the environment. If so, and if books are so bad for that environment, why are you buying books from a company that you apparently dislike so much?

>62 abysswalker:

Thank you. I shall go and see what pubmed has to offer on the topic.

'Moral identity symbolization' might loosely equate to 'virtue signalling' but I have my doubts that strictly-defined laboratory terms are replicated in the real world. My personal, non-scientifically-representative experience is that people (especially politicians) have a habit of slinging 'virtue signalling' around mostly as an insult. This thread provides a good example: Folio were accused of 'virtue signalling' but this thread has offered little serious evidence of that so far. Certainly not the sort of data that one would expect in an academic paper.

Folio might be trying to be environmentally friendly, or they might be trying to protect their bottom line. Maybe they're trying to do both. And maybe there are lots of other considerations that we know nothing about. I don't know and I don't think anyone here knows either.

Go in peace, folks :-)

>75 Cat_of_Ulthar: Is there an emoji for 'I really need a drink right now'? That's how I feel after reading this thread ;-)

Aaaaaaggggghhhhhh!

That's how I feel after reading this thread.

Déjà Vu

>78 bookfair_e:

There is a certain inevitability to it.

>76 Bob_Reader:

'I'm not suggesting anything. I never said I was trying to save the environment.'

Okay, so you don't care about the environment?

I'm trying to understand here. :-)

>77 folio_books:

'Aaaaaaggggghhhhhh!'

Ah, yes, that was the word.

Thank you :-)

I am all for the best way to package something that is reusable to keep for storage of the item...that should be the only goal here.

>66 sekhmet0108: I wouldn’t be surprised if the adhesives on the scotch tape that they use on the new paper wrap is — even considering the small surface area — just as environmentally unfriendly as the plastic wrap would be.

>70 Bob_Reader: Amen to that…

From a certain perspective, all of bookmaking is packaging. The printing packages the words, preserving against vagaries of memory, the binding and covers package the text block, the slip case packages the binding, etc.

Layers of skin upon skin that all wear away with time.

Amusingly, I’ve seen the official Suntup shipping boxes with foam inserts preserved by some Suntup fans on the Facebook group.

I propose a variation on Clarke’s third law: Sufficiently sophisticated packaging is indistinguishable from product.

I don't think that there will end up being a significant difference with regards to secondary market prices for out of stock books. Look at Cthulhu, Man in High Castle, Mort, Small Gods, Agatha Christies, etc. Sealed or open, they all go for exorbitant prices.

Eitherways I am glad that they are shifting to paper. I just hope that they wrap all sides of it. And no, the tape the adhesives on the tape are not going to be just as environment unfriendly. That doesn't make much sense.

Strikes me reading this thread, that the vast majority of problems are nothing to do with the paper wrapping.

>89 Willoyd: I just received my copy of "If Not Winter" today and I can confirm that the slipcase is in pristine condition. The book inside however is inexplicable deeply dented on the front board right in center of the top. The packaging could not have caused this damage as the slipcase is not dented anywhere. Maybe a larger quality control issue if the book was put into the slipcase with the damage.

>91 Bob_Reader:

Maybe you received one that's been through the so-called refurbishment process. I'd really hope that isn't the case though. Would probably quit buying from FS altogether.

>93 Bob_Reader:
You couldn't tell with the old packaging either - just as you couldn't tell if resellers had done the job themselves.

I think I'd still prefer the shrink wrap over the new paper wrap but I haven't yet had any problem with the paper so I'm happy to be proved wrong. It appears that the multi-volume sets are now wrapped on all six sides and the single volumes only on four and I'd be much happier if all six sides were covered on every volume.

I've never had any any shipping damage as a result of the change to the brown scrunchy paper packing material. The corner-wise padding technique seems to works well although I'm in the UK and some parcels obviously travel a lot further than mine. The only transit damage I've experienced recently has been on larger orders where the some books have pressed or knocked into others within the parcel.

>90 L.Bloom: >91 Bob_Reader: I too have had problems with the Book of the New Sun, including creases and dents on the covers clearly present before the books went into the slip case and nothing to do with packing or shipping.

>94 Willoyd: Whilst I acknowledge the possibility of a reseller resealing a book I must say that I've never come across it. I have bought literally hundreds of sealed FS books on Ebay, AbeBooks and elsewhere and not yet received any book that I had doubts about.