I’m selling a BGS 10 Charizard that was NOT cleaned with Windex for $100,000.00.
You’re selling a BGS 10 Charizard that WAS cleaned with Windex for $100,000.00.
Can anybody here say it didn’t matter and they’d just as well take the Windex one? If not, then it does matter. Hence, it deserves a different designation.
To be fair, I had to compare it to flattening a card with a curve but decided it was different because nothing material was being added, or removed from the card. With cleaning restoration, something is being both added to and removed from the card.
Interesting, and important, discussion started here by the Op.
I’m happy OP got to clean his card, but would strongly advise against using chemicals.
Windex and acetone share some key components, namely isopropyl alcohol and ethylene glycol, both of which are solvents.
The very definition of “solvent” is a substance that can dissolve other substances.
Acetone is commonly used in nail polish removers, and is also used by custom card makers to erase the art on foil cards so they can use the blank foil as a template.
Maybe there isn’t any visible damage today, but that’s really just putting unnecessary risk on such a highly sought-after card.
Water is a chemical my dudes. I find it funny when people say “chemical” like it is such a scary word. Water is the “universal solvent” and can do a lot of damage to a lot of different substances.
That said I wouldn’t and have never used windex myself. Usually they are ammonia based I think, but I’d imagine OP used a very barely moistened cloth which should be no issue. 99.9999999% would be wiped away and the rest would vaporize off. I’ve historically used a good puff of hot air (that I usually have in excess). I then wipe away whatever the issue is with my shirt or a q tip or micro fiber cloth whatever is handy. Given how well my own water vapor has always worked I would have no reason to not suggest everyone just use that. I’ve also always handled my cards bare handed and I’ve used the edge of my fingernail to scratch stuff off on occasion too.
I wouldn’t personally value a windexed card any less than an exactly similar condition water vapor cleaned card. I also wouldn’t value a PSA 10 that was regraded from a PSA 9 any less than I would value a first graded PSA 10. But hey I buy cards and not labels so that is just me and I clearly don’t match opinions with many commenting before me here.
I find it funny how the general market seems to fear wiping a fingerprint off with a tiny bit of windex but then falls over themselves to pay a premium for inked cards.
The coins that get “cleaned” designations very much look different from non cleaned coins. Not a good analogy at all really. Cleaning a coin is generally a process that takes off some of the surface oxidation and luster chemically through dissolution or mechanically through buffing. Very much different than using the chemical water or the chemical windex on a card, leaving the card intact, and simply remove a post production oily fingerprint which PSA occasionally put on themselves.
PCGS (same owner as PSA) actually offers a cleaning service where they crack graded coins, clean them, then return them to the cases. www.pcgs.com/restoration Not sure exactly what goes on here.
It was strategically included in my post. I knew it would likely be taken as ridiculous by some people. I take fearing a chemical windex then touting chemical water is pretty ridiculous. I take calling a card that had a fingerprint wiped off it damaged is a bit ridiculous.
Signed cards are literally adding ink to obscure a bit of a beautiful work of art that lives below. Many people pay a premium for that. A professional company actually still grades those cards in 9/10 and 10/10 condition. I find that all ridiculous. They actually further go as far as even assigning a grade to the quality of the signature. Lol. They occasionally decline to authenticate valid signatures and also occasionally certify autopenned or forged signatures as authentic. All a bit ridiculous IMO.
@gottaketchumall, I get you don’t like signed cards, but that isn’t a reason to re-define terms and ignore the inherent differences.
The general perspective of a signed piece is the inherent historical value. Whether or not that is appreciated by all is a separate point. Condition is not relevant to a signed piece. “Inked” refers to people attempting to hide damage with ink. That isn’t occurring with signed cards.
Hold on, hold on, hold on. Water is an organic compound made up of organic chemical elements hydrogen and oxygen. They combine to form an ORGANIC natural chemical bond. Windex is composed primarily of synthetic chemicals. The issue is not that water is a naturally occurring chemical compound, the problem is windex is a SYNTHETIC chemical compound. Hence why water is technically ok but windex or other synthetic chemicals are not…
That above ^^^ for 1. Plus there are all kinds of chemicals that are naturally occurring you wouldn’t want on your card. There are many acids and bases occurring in nature that would destroy cards.
Let the man clean his card if he wants, geez. If he hadn’t mentioned this, and the card looks great, then none of you would be any the wiser or be complaining. Better not wash any car you’re about to sell either
Rumour has it, this card was stamped by the greasy fingers of Arita, maybe I should have sent it in to PSA for a fingerprint authentication. It might have only got the 9 fingerprint auto tho and not the 10…
We should not stretch the meaning of the word “chemical” outside of the context in which it was used for this particular scenario.
If people still want to use substances that could potentially cause long term damage on their cards despite the pros and cons discussed on this thread, then that’s on them.
Edit:
Im curious to know if you’ve tried just simply wiping it with a dry piece of cloth, since that usually does the trick. Unless its a really greasy mcdonalds fingerprint?
