|
|
View Poll Results: If I knew a card for sale had stains removed with chemicals | |||
The stain removal aspect WOULD influence my purchasing decision | 121 | 57.08% | |
The stain removal aspect WOULD NOT influence my purchasing decision | 91 | 42.92% | |
Voters: 212. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Poll for Buying Cards with Chemically Removed Stains
As a follow-up to the Gone With the Stain thread, I'd like to take a poll regarding you STRICTLY AS A BUYER and NOT YOUR BELIEFS AS A SELLER regarding the purchase of a sports card with chemically removed stains.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I went with "would', but for me it's more complicated.
If it was done professionally or in a way that I felt was proper then it would not affect my decision much. If it was done poorly or in a way that I thought would do more damage over time Then it would. Steve B |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
What chemical?
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If it's a card that never comes up...and I "need" it...it wouldn't matter as much to me...as opposed to a card that commonly appears...I'd be more inclined to pass. I did not respond to the poll as the answers are too general for my response! Oh...and what about water? IS that a chemical? Last edited by ullmandds; 04-01-2014 at 09:03 AM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I voted it would influence me but there does need to be more info.
But the way I looked at it was...if I had the choice between the exact same card that had been chemically cleaned or one that wasn't, I would pick the one that wasn't.
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
But what if the chemical was an undetectable preservative that prevented the card from turning yellow in the future and even guarded against the terror of pyrolysis.
__________________
FRANK:BUR:KETT - RAUCOUS SPORTS CARD FORUM MEMBER AND MONSTER NUMBER FATHER. GOOD FOR THE HOBBY AND THE FORUM WITH A VAULT IN AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION FILLED WITH NON-FUNGIBLES 274/1000 Monster Number Nearly*1000* successful B/S/T transactions completed in 2012-24. Over 680 sales with satisfied Board members served. If you want fries with your order, just speak up. Thank you all. Now nearly PQ. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Now if the chemical was ONLY water, or a mark had been erased with a plastic eraser, it wouldn't influence my decision...but that is just me.
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Last edited by WhenItWasAHobby; 04-01-2014 at 10:01 AM. Reason: Added photo |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
It would be good to know if the whiter borders and back, shown in the 'after' scan, are accurate - also, if the pink really was washed out of Plank's face. I have owned a few T206's over the years that displayed that strange look, and I knew there was something wrong with them, but of course couldn't pinpoint it, as I wasn't present at the 'cleaning', but as Barry pointed out in the other thread, it almost certainly had nothing to do with pure water. Again, let's use common sense here.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ Last edited by Runscott; 04-01-2014 at 10:10 AM. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
chemical
dr. frank's engaging argument regarding the terror of pyrolysis was a mind-changer for me.
best, barry |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
It probably got lost in the other thread, but my opinion of that particular cleaning is that it's sloppy amateurish work that goes beyond what's appropriate. And since they couldn't do it well enough to avoid lightening the card overall they probably were too sloppy to neutralize whatever they used. So the card will probably be in for long term damage. Even if I could afford it, that would greatly influence my decision. Steve Birmingham |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Some good questions would be:
1) If you purchased this card all cleaned up and later discovered the before scan on this forum, would you be pissed? 2)Would you want your money back? 3)Would the seller/auction house/TPG be obliged to give you your money back? JimB |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
2) Yes. 3) I've never dealt with an auction house, so not sure how to answer that one.Maybe someone with more experience could explain who would ultimately be responsible. But- herein lies the problem when someone who cleans cards with ANY type of unknown (unknown to everyone but the "cleanser") chemicals, and thinks just because it can pass through the graders that all is well-just look at the Plank. It crossed over and got a .5 bump. But, when you see the comparison scans, to me, it screams "altered". Should be graded "A". Will this card degrade 10-20 years from now? Sincerely, Clayton |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Did Kendrick get mad when he found out that his Wagner was trimmed? Probably not. Did he ask for his money back? Probably not. If finding out purchasing a $2+ million trimmed card didn't upset Kendrick, why should purchasing a cleaned card bother me? I have too many other important things to worry about in life. The questions also infer that the card (Plank) loses value now that is publicized that it's been cleaned. Did the Wagner lose value after it was publicized it's been trimmed? Again, probably not. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I just can't imagine ever being upset and thinking "DANG IT! I wish this card still had a coffee stain!"
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums Last edited by bn2cardz; 04-04-2014 at 08:22 AM. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
I don't buy restored comics.
I wouldn't buy a restored/ chemically aided card. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
...
Last edited by Rollingstone206; 10-10-2014 at 09:42 PM. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
I would prefer that the hobby didn't care, and that, as a result, the TPG's didn't care, but we do and they do.
No, the TPF's apparently can't detect chemical-cleansing today, but there was a time when they also couldn't detect the trimming of the T206 Wagner, or at least chose to ignore it, and there's nothing to say that chemically-cleansed cards won't get the same selective results. It was amazing to me how many of our forum members weren't convinced the Wagner was trimmed and we might have heard from some of them in the Dick Towle thread.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
It seems like a lot of the concern people have about soaking or cleaning is that the cards may be sold without disclosure in the future. I address this problem by keeping a detailed excel spreadsheet.
The sheet lists my collection with the purchase price and notes on condition. Among the condition notes are if I soaked the card or suspect that it has been trimmed in the past. I find this system to be very helpful because it helps me know which cards to upgrade. Also it gives me some peace of mind in knowing that it would help my wife sell my collection if (really when) I die.
__________________
Tackling the Monster T206 = 213/524 HOFs = 13/76 SLers = 33/48 Horizontals = 6/6 ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Sincerely, Clayton |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Clayton, I'm not sure that the chemically cleaned plank should have been numerically graded and I'm sure the tpg's did not test for such a thing, but what if nothing shows up on the card as being altered? I mean, I clearly see that the card has been treated one way or another, but other than the pics, what proof is there that this card has been altered? Water can change the appearance of a card, but most people have no issue with it and I definitely see two sides of the spectrum on this debate...does water/chemicals clean a card or alter it? Are you ok with a card that has received a numerical grade that has been soaked in water? I don't soak cards myself, but I have never looked down on people for doing so with water and I'm not ready to say it's 100% ok to clean a card with chemicals...but where do we draw the line?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
T206's Graded low-mid 219/520 T201's SGC/PSA 2-5 50/50 T202's SGC/PSA 2-5 10/132 1938 Goudey Graded VG range 37/48 |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
In my opinion, you can clearly see the Plank has been altered by chemicals. If you just look at the uniform, you can see this. It didn't just remove a stain, it removed shading in the uniform and also color in other areas. That, to me, is altered. In the case of the Plank, it literally looks bleach white!! I mean, plain old water won't do that. I think when people bring cleaning cards with water into the issue of cleaning cards with chemicals, it distracts from the topic at hand, which is using chemicals to clean cards. It is almost putting the two on a level playing field, when it is not. Many of these cards have been exposed naturally to moisture over the century, rain, damp basements, etc. so comparing a card exposed to water (in my opinion) isn't the same discussion. I think it's another topic that deserves it's own thread. That Plank is whiter than any T206 I have, and may be the whitest T206 I have ever seen. It looks unnatural. How a grader didn't notice THAT is beyond me. A 100+ year old card being bleach white. Sincerely, Clayton |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Hey Clayton,
You bring up valid points for sure and in the plank's case, you are definitely right, but how about other cards that don't get affected visually by chemicals? I know you are passionate about this subject, but let's say there is no proof of long term effects for using chemicals and all it does is clean the card...what then? The plank was obviously abused by someone that didn't know what they were doing, but I'm sure there are other examples that do not affect the visual appeal. Moderation is key to a lot of things in life, right? So what is there in these "chemicals" that makes cleaning them so wrong? I guess what I'm looking for is the list of contents/ingredients so we know what is right and wrong to use. Can we get a list or do we just go generic and say all chemicals? IMO this subject needs to dig a lot deeper if we are going to assume the generic route. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
T206's Graded low-mid 219/520 T201's SGC/PSA 2-5 50/50 T202's SGC/PSA 2-5 10/132 1938 Goudey Graded VG range 37/48 |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Sincerely, Clayton |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So, for me, I am left with having to assume any and all chemicals-and when I think of that, I'd prefer these cards to not be treated with ANY chemicals-detectable in the short term or not. Sincerely, Clayton |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Poll--- Do you smell your cards? | dog*dirt | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 56 | 03-17-2014 08:39 AM |
T206 F/S - New Cards added, those sold removed | Edwolf1963 | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 4 | 05-02-2011 09:02 PM |
buying buying buying regionals test issues and oddball | sflayank | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 08-17-2010 05:17 PM |
POLL: Buying/Selling/Trading | Archive | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 28 | 01-25-2008 06:00 PM |
cards removed from scrapbook | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 07-01-2006 02:49 PM |