kbrosseau -
Thanks bro
A couple of things on this -
The indentations you refer to - I'm sorry brother, but that is just a bit too knit pick
Technically they're are on the original holster - as holes for rivets on the second version they produced
They are very shallow, surely if it bothers an individual, they can be lightly sanded out
Remember, they are on the back. This was actually a courtesy. Unfortunately, considering what went into making the mold, I simply cannot justify remaking the mold for these two little impressions.
As far as the sheath pocket is concerned - as I said in my posting about this already, there is a picture that verifies that it is cut this way - what was left to the imagination is exactly how much of a "spine" was left. It is deductive reasoning that dictates how much was left in this case. If they didn't remove the whole pocket, logic would say that it was because they were preserving the logo. Otherwise, there would be no spine at all that is evident, and 1/4 inch of the logo would be missing. If preserving the logo was in fact the case, there really is only one way to cut it allowing it to taper into the bottom of the holster to almost nothing as the picture suggests. Eventually, the picture in question will be shared publicly, but that is up to "Official Pix" as to when - sorry
But the general theory behind providing the replica as the pictures show - is to consider the possibility that it may have been cut closer, actually nipping off the logo. This leaves room for correction later, if new reference comes available that proves differently. In other words, leaving a wee bit of room to spare, so that a member can modify it further later (if even necessary), without having to purchase a new holster
Also, a courtesy
Of course we're all striving for accuracy? But when we do not have 100% proof positive reference on any particular detail, it's all "best guess work" and deduction. What else can we do? So I tend to take the safest route - I thought that it would have been more appreciated
FP