February 2, 2015
comment 0

Winning Bling: Super Bowl Ring – Which is the winning design?

What’s everyone talking about? Sunday’s, February 1, the Seattle Seahawks and the New England Patriots game — baby! The teams are set to play in one of the most anticipated Super Bowl games in NFL history.

And while the media is all abuzz about the strange saga of deflate-gate, Seattle Seahawks running back Marshawn Lynch’s interaction with the Press and his incurred league fines, the halftime show airing Katy Perry, or be it, the release of national commercials, this post is about the something FAR more interesting — the winning Super Bowl ring!

You’re asking what about the ring? I respond (possibly with a slap to your face), “It’s all about the BLING”.

Yeah, sure, naturally, fans prefer their routing team’s ring. Remove the sentiment, and from a pure style perspective, which ring do you prefer?

Seattle Seahawks Super Bowl XLVIII Ring: The 14K white gold Seahawks Super Bowl XLVIII championship ring features a three-dimensional Seahawks logo of 64 round diamonds with a vibrant emerald hue tsavorite eye. The iconic logo is outlined in blue and is framed by 12 diamonds. The Vince Lombardi Trophy, comprised of one marquis diamond, stands in the background amongst a sea of 107 round diamonds with a border reading “WORLD CHAMPIONS”. Forty blue sapphires surround the ring top flanked by two “12” flags.

The shank (or sides of the ring) tells the story of the championship season. One shank includes the team’s final record of 16–3, a southward view of CenturyLink Field with the “12” flag and Mt. Rainier, highlighted with the individual player’s name and number. The other shank features the Seattle skyline, Vince Lombardi Trophy with a marquis diamond, the Super Bowl XLVIII logo and the NFL shield.

The ring band features 12 feathers, similar to the markings on the team uniforms. The phrases “LEAVE NO DOUBT”, “24/7″, “SEA 43- DEN 8″ and “WHAT’S NEXT?” are engraved inside each ring.

New England Patriots Super Bowl XXXIX Ring: 14k solid white gold, adorn with 111 diamonds and weighing approximately 100 grams. The tops of the rings pay homage to the football’s distinctive shape. To commemorate the team’s three championship wins marquise-cut diamonds (echoing the shapes of three Vince Lombardi Trophies) are set with. The Patriot logo is emblazoned on the front with blue and red enamel.

The ring is larger than the Super Bowl XXXVIII ring and is the largest ring ever produced (only the Ravens Super Bowl XLVII comes close.

With specifications in mind, which design celebrates your ascetic taste? Which design best highlights the storytelling through intricate designs?

Seattle Seahawks Super Bowl XLVIII Ring Vs. New England Patriots Super Bowl XXXIX Ring

 

Ask not of which final team is worth Super Bowl XLIX’s win, but ask which Super Bowl ring design blings brightest.

January 29, 2015
comment 0

Sen. Mark Warner on Target Data Breach

Sagely Response: Target Data Breach

It’s without question that our Western credit card “swipe” vs the European “Chip and Pin” practice is an inferior method to offset credit and identity theft.

And while we all advocate for higher credit and identity security, it is my hope that legislation is set to protect individuals more so than to protect financial institutions.  As of now, victims of theft hold few liabilities against fraudulent transactions.  A victim is hurt in the form of headaches while reclaiming their financial good standing but is reimbursed for unauthorized transactions.

You see, the Chip and Pin implementation was designed to reduce the liability of banks in cases of claimed card fraud by requiring the customer to prove that they had acted “with reasonable care” to protect their PIN and card, rather than on the bank having to prove that the signature matched.

Before Chip and Pin, if a customer’s signature was forged, the banks were legally liable and had to reimburse the customer.

That was until November of 2009 when such laws protecting consumers from fraudulent use of their Chip and Pin transactions; with banks now using the voluntary Banking Code as guidance on how to settle a dispute.  While the Banking Code states that the burden of proof is on the bank to prove negligence or fraud rather than the cardholder having to prove innocence, there has been an increase of banks refusing to reimburse victims of fraudulent card use – claiming that their systems could not fail under the circumstances reported; despite several documented successful large-scale attacks.