Quoted from High_End_Pins:

If you have to wait ten months or even ten weeks you are not using the right product for the application.
For a playfield a product that is installable in 2 weeks is appropriate.
If it is not then it’s the wrong product.
Hardening takes place in a short window. Say 4-8 hours. Curing takes place in a longer period. It can be 2-4 months depending on many factors such as hardner,climate,application thickness and even humidity.
Most manufacturers of these coating materials say wait six months before waxing to insure you don’t seal a surface before full cure but that is because they are factoring in worst case scenarios and potential unknowns to be in the safe side for warranty concerns.
If a finish is no good that is instant. It might become evident in an hour,a week or six months.
No amount of cure time past true hardening or waiting through that two week window will change that. If the finish is appropriate for its intended use it will perform properly as intended. If not it just won’t.
I hate to keep going on and on here .I don’t really care about JJP playfields at all but I know about coatings and playfields in general and there is just so much misinformation when it comes to the subject when it comes to pinball that it can be tough to keep my knowledge on the subject to myself.

Quoted from mbwalker:

Interesting you bring up the UV inks, I just posted this in the JJP/Stern PF thread:
This is interesting:
Just for the heck of it, I looked up printers for large areas (i.e. a PF). Looks like 'UV ink' printers seem to be the trend to use nowadays. Apparently UV is used to instantly cure the ink, eliminating the solvent based ink problems of running/soaking in/etc., allowing for the vibrant, well defined colors. But UV ink is essentially an adhesive, unlike solvent based inks (that immediately caught my attention).
So I googled a little more about UV ink adhesion problems. One web site even mentions putting down a clear undercoat to improve adhesion: https://www.rolanddga.com/blog/2016/06/06/19/18/improve-adhesion-with-a-clear-undercoat
The UV lamp itself can be an issue, but I would think that could easily be resolved if that was the case. There's various UV inks too that can affect the outcome. Wood prep (i.e. flatness, contaminants) is an issue too.
A quick blurb on UV printing: https://www.perfectcolours.com/blog/2015/08/03/what-is-uv-printing/
I wonder if Mirco boxed themselves into a corner with a very expensive UV printer that can only handle proprietary UV inks, perhaps ones that aren't as well suited for wood? Just like your printer at home, probably none use a standardized print cartridge. And given the cost of a large UV printer - likely switching to an alternative ink other than the manufacture's products is a big 'no go'.
Here's a quick SnipIt of a random large UV flatbed printer:
[quoted image]

Quoted from Dr-pin:

Dont you have any consumer laws in the us?
Amazing.

Quoted from NeilMcRae:

I typically would agree with and I always try to see the positive as I think people do the right thing, but in this case someone is saying ignore this or do nothing and the BS from JJP about tightening posts on my issues and the lack of any real comment is just not acceptable.
JJP said this issue was fixed
Mirco said this issue was fixed.
It's not even close.
Neil.