Playfields - to seal or not to seal?

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Brad and Pam

unread,
Mar 11, 2005, 10:01:59 PM3/11/05
to
I haven't been in the hobby long but I keep reading and getting conflicting
advice about sealing playfields. Some say that sealing a playfield when its
just for personal home use is overkill as regular waxing will be enough.
To me it would seem better to seal older PFs to preserve them rather than
risk further damage due to their age.

Who's right and who's wrong??????


Dan Beck

unread,
Mar 11, 2005, 10:17:46 PM3/11/05
to

"Brad and Pam" <brada...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:42325b97$1...@duster.adelaide.on.net...

I think BECAUSE you see conflicting advice that should tell you the answer,
which is there is NO correct answer. It truly is a matter of opinion, and a
lot has been spoken about the topic--probably too much, in fact. I could
bore you all day with my playfield preservation philosophies; that and $2
will buy you an overpriced coffee at Starbucks...

You have to do what YOU think is correct, in terms of what your feelings are
about originality, durability, playability, resale value, and other issues I
have not named.


Respectfully submitted,
Dan


elvis

unread,
Mar 11, 2005, 11:26:52 PM3/11/05
to
my opinion is this!! if you play a game sparingly ...and enjoy
"regular" maintentance as part of the fun of it (which i do)....than i
say just wax the playfield once in a while...it is something that you
dont have a desire to do....and are not afraid too seal a playfield
forever.....than seal it...BUT REMEMBER..once sealed ..you cant improve
things...or clean things better...or whatever~~~~ so ..make sure you
are happy..

i personnaly enjoy WAXING A NICE OLD PLAYFIELD...KIND OF LIKE TAKING A
SUNDAY DRIVE AFTER WASHING YOUR CAR....YA KNOW!! THE JOY IS IN THE
WASH!!! THE DRIVE IS A BONUS!!!!!!!

derek

Barry - NY (Backglass@gmail.com)

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 9:02:15 AM3/12/05
to
Good question! Others you should ask...

1 - What wax is best to use?
2 - Are Mirror Balls better?
3 - What do you think of BBB?
4 - Whats your opinion on this Gary fellow...
5 - Should I MOD my TZ?

<insert evil laugh here>

Barry - NY

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 12:11:59 PM3/12/05
to
I would stick with your first view. The jury is still
out on the second, and there is no turning back
if the game is damaged by the process or effects
of adding additional clearcoating to a playfield.

Reserve the additional clear for protecting something
that's already damaged. A properly maintained game
in home use will suffer little or no more wear.

It's not really a "right or wrong" issue.

It is a "wait and see".....

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************

"Brad and Pam" <brada...@internode.on.net> wrote in message news:42325b97$1...@duster.adelaide.on.net...

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 1:37:09 PM3/12/05
to
Fred, I'm curious - just how long is "wait and see" in your book? There are a
number of cleared playfields that have been out there for getting on to eight
to ten years now; one guy recently mentioned that he's had one in use in a
commercial arcade environment for years and sees no issues.

I also disagree that a "properly maintained" game will suffer little or no
wear. Anyone who knows my collection knows my games are pristine and
well-maintained, but I still see evidence of wear around the edges of inserts
even on playfields that looked great when I first bought the game.

I think the jury has been out long enough, and the evidence is that a properly
done clearcoat job will NOT harm a playfield. I can certainly understand
personal opinions that clearing a playfield is a bad thing in terms of future
value, etc., but that's much different from the arguments surrounding the
longevity of the process or antecedent damage.

Joseph "Tony" Dziedzic

In article <d0v7t...@enews3.newsguy.com>, "Fred Kemper"

Ceegary

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 4:10:01 PM3/12/05
to
Fred thinks the jury is still out on whether the world is round.

GRY

"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:75udnTKOa75...@comcast.com...

Otto

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 4:29:08 PM3/12/05
to
For the 90's diamondplated stuff;


Seal it.

Otto

CARGPB11

My web page: http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-Ottoslanding


Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 5:04:28 PM3/12/05
to
You are welcomed, (and even encouraged), to
disagree by all means.

Judging from what I've seen in the value of
"other" collectables, this process doesn't
stand the test of time for them, so it is all
the more "likely" to affect pinball machines
in the same manner.

Again, the person(s) doing this to games or
perhaps owning them, will not be the ones
that will even see the consequences/benefits
of their actions. If in doubt, opt for the least
potential damaging action.

Could be a _very_ long time. Who knows?

As always, it's your game. Do what ever
you wish, but when you ask for opinions
here, you may get them. :)

Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************

"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:75udnTKOa75...@comcast.com...

Kyle Wren

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 5:35:55 PM3/12/05
to
In article <d0vp1...@enews2.newsguy.com>, Fred Kemper says...

Well stated Fred. I agree 100% with everything you said. I'll just add one
additional thing to consider which is not disputable by anyone. There are folks
that will be willing to buy a game that's been clearcoated, and those (like me)
that won't. If someone has to have a game with an additional layer of clearcoat,
they can always buy an unclearcoated game and have it done. You can't "un-do" a
clearcoat for a guy like me. So you have effectively reduced your overall market
by clearcoating.

Does that mean that you might be able to find a buyer that would still pay you
more later for the game because it's been clearcoated. Sure. But for me, I'd
rather not reduce my aftermarket audience. YMMV.


--
Kyle Wren
"Worst... Ball... EVER!!"

kirb

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 6:35:10 PM3/12/05
to
>I think BECAUSE you see conflicting advice that >should tell you the
answer,
>which is there is NO correct answer.

THANK YOU for the truth. It's all opinion and it's your game. Do the
research and do what you feel is right.

>that and $2 will buy you an overpriced coffee at >Starbucks...

You can still get a cup of coffee for $2?

Kirb

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 12, 2005, 6:42:47 PM3/12/05
to
Double-speak as usual, Fred. As I stated, you WILL see wear on insert edges
after time regardless of how well maintained the machine is.

The process *has* stood the test of time, and there have been ZERO
consequences for *properly applied* clearcoat after many, many years.

Personal preferences are fine; just don't mask your personal preferences in
mysterious "some day something bad MAY happen".

Tony

In article <d0vp1...@enews2.newsguy.com>, "Fred Kemper"

elvis

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 2:41:41 AM3/13/05
to
well.....i can spot a CLEAR COAT A MILE AWAY........and as a pristine
collector of vintage pinball....i run for the safety of my games...and
others who are not clear coated....

more power to ya..dont get me wrong..but ....i want too thank you for
encouraging clear coat..cause it makes all the vintaged "waxed games "
that much more valuable!!!


i do support sealing b glasses!!!! you bet...but clear coat in my
opinion is just not the way the games looked originally...and that "wet
look".....nope...looks phony to me!!!

i say wax!! and just keep up on things..and keep a fresh ball in
there...and you will be fine!!!

DEREK

elvis

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 2:49:08 AM3/13/05
to
good point...as a collector..i see less and less "good stuff'....and
the CLEAR COAT CROWD is just making things harder too find!!

nope...no clear coat........it looks fake to me!!!!!to shuiny..and too
"FAKE"...and not "RIGHT!!!!"

derek

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 3:46:10 AM3/13/05
to
???

Maybe you play your games above average? Nothing
will last forever, true. Certainly if 'edges' exist, there
can be some wear. There is a problem _already_.
I don't see this on any of my games, --- yet.

Anyway, it isn't really a "someday". Once the process
(extra clearcoat), has been done, It _is_damaged. We
still have little/no idea what damage is concealed, if the
person that did the work was competent, and if the materials
used were correctly applied. These are just a few issues.
You say "properly applied", but we really have no way of
confirming that either. The "damage" done by the installer,
much like those that swap NOS playfields, is yet another
cause for suspicion.

There ARE consequences. The game has lost value as
a collectable. Right now. Tomorrow. Forever.

These are NOT "my personal preferences".

*My* preference is the same as some others have said; I
wouldn't buy one as a collectable. I *may* buy a game to play, but
would pay less for it than an otherwise untouched, worn original.
*I* will apply additional clear if the playfield is damaged severely
enough. I would NOT expect that game to be worth more as a
collectable than an untouched original, though.


--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************


"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:D_CdnWIS057...@comcast.com...

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 7:36:14 AM3/13/05
to
Quite simply, you continue to persist to state your opinion as fact; that is
what I disagree with.

The game has lost value IN YOUR OPINION. The playfield is damaged IN YOUR
OPINION. In other folks' opinion they've simply added an additional layer of
a material that was present to begin with (I'm referring to WPC games here),
and the value has been enhanced.

Those are reasonable statements to make when you present them as your opinion,
and I certainly see both sides of the issue. I wouldn't clear (for example) a
woodrail game because MY OPINION is that clear is inappropriate for that
particular game (or era). But if someone else wants to, that's fine; it's
their game, and my opinion is simply that, and I would phrase any comments in
that context.

But let's be realistic and take the work of the handful of folks who have been
applying clear for a number of years. If there was a significant risk of
"mechanical" failure such as delamination, fogging, bubbling, etc., resulting
from the work of these individuals we'd have heard about it from now.

Clear will "damage" the value as a collectible? Again, opinion, and there are
both sides of the coin. I'd agree with you on the woodrail era game front,
but would disagree on the WPC games. But that's just my opinion, and to
phrase it in terms of fact is unrealistic.

Tony

In article <d10ul...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Fred Kemper"

cody chunn

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 9:56:30 AM3/13/05
to
Not Original = Diminished Collectable Value. This applies to ALL
collectables that I am aware of. Extra clearcoat is not original and does,
in fact, diminish collectable value.


"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:07udnVi6dKc...@comcast.com...

Barry - NY (Backglass@gmail.com)

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 10:57:13 AM3/13/05
to
>>Extra clearcoat is not original and does, in fact, diminish
collectable value. <<

In fact? Put two identical NOS Eight Ball Deluxe playfields on eBay.
One Clear Coated, and one not and see which demands the higher bids.
Like it or not, I would bet you it's the CC playfield.

In my opinion "Collectable Value" is what the market will pay. In the
above scenario, CC actually enhances the value.

Barry - NY

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 2:25:42 PM3/13/05
to
Okay, in my "opinion", _it_is_a_fact_, the game
is irreversibly damaged as a collectable! Watch
some of the shows that deal in collectables. See
what this stuff brings at auctions and shows that
feature collectables.

And you are quite welcome to disagree with
that as I stated previously.

It seems the original poster *asked* for opinions,
and that's exactly what they are getting!

Reality is folks will do whatever to their games,
and others will pay whatever for them, no matter
the condition. Again, the final surviveability is
yet to be seen as well as value.

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************

"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:07udnVi6dKc...@comcast.com...

cody chunn

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 3:45:08 PM3/13/05
to
That may be true today (seems people aren't so bright anymore). But these
two hypothetical 20-year-old playfields...what if one, when they were bought
20 years ago, was clearcoated by the hobbyist who bought them, one was not.
Now, today you put them on ebay. Which one will get the highest bid? The one
clearcoated by a hobbyist 20 years ago or the *unrestored* original in the
same condition? It will ALWAYS be unrestored original. Furthermore, often
unrestored originals with minimal damage sell higher than restored *mint*
pieces. So while there are plenty of people willing to pay exorbitant prices
for clearcoated playfields or services now, as far as the *collectability*
in the future, it's shot.

Clearcoating a playfield is definitely warranted if you are operating games,
no question. It will preserve your investment and keep the game's artwork
from being destroyed so it will remain appealing for pay-for-play.

Clearcoating as also a viable option to protect repairs. So is mylar. In
either case, the high-end collectablity is already shot by the wear, so it
doesn't matter.

<Back...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110729433.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 4:01:36 PM3/13/05
to
Tell you what, Fred. Next time someone asks for an opinion of whether or not
clearcoating is a good idea, tell them you don't believe it is because it may
damage the value as a collectible. Don't try to weight your opinion by
continually throwing up the "some day something bad MAY happen" smokescreen.
You don't know that, and that's just conjecture to support your argument.

Tony

In article <d1244...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Fred Kemper"

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 4:22:26 PM3/13/05
to
Nah, I'll continue to post my opinion the best I
can, and allow the reader to draw any conclusion
that the wish from it. When folks ask for opinions,
they are as valuable as what they paid for them....

Something "bad" indeed has _already_happened
if that was their first choice.

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************


"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:Baadnb_xWNm...@comcast.com...

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 6:49:08 PM3/13/05
to
Gotcha. Thanks for admitting all you want to do is convince people of your
opinion and NOT just provide information for them to make a decision. If you
wanted to let folks draw conclusions you'd leave out the emotional baggage.

Tony

In article <d12av...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Fred Kemper"

lens...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 7:41:42 PM3/13/05
to
I have a few 80's SS classics as I am sure some of you know. I thought
of touch ups and cc of the pfs but since they are all in above average
shape, I'm not going to do it. Now I have a couple of used pfs for ebd
and fp that I was thinking of restoring and in that case I would do a
cc over the extensive touchups. I think it's pretty much like antique
furniture. If the original finish is not there and/or it's been
refinished the value is greatly decreased. Now if it's been resored
from a real bad state and is now better after the work then that is a
different story and the value has increased but it will be much less
then the original condition every time. IMO anyway.
~eric

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 7:49:28 PM3/13/05
to
Gotcha what?
No, that information is not entirely in!

Re-read the thread.

Games with additional clear coating are less
valuable as a collectable than one that isn't.

The game is no longer original.

Baggage, whatever!

Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************

"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:ZqmdnYYr5vj...@comcast.com...

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 10:10:40 PM3/13/05
to
Nope, Fred, you're not offering information to allow people to draw reasonable
conclusions - you're leading them. Period.

Tony

In article <d12n3...@enews3.newsguy.com>, "Fred Kemper"

Ceegary

unread,
Mar 13, 2005, 10:40:04 PM3/13/05
to
Anyone who thinks the market pays less for non re-cleared 90s games simply
doesn't know the high-end market, refuses to accept fact or is a liar
through obtuseness. That's the beauty of a market, it doesn't revolve around
the strong opinions of two or three people, it's dictated by what price
certain pins in certain condition fetch. That's why it doesn't matter that
some people post how MM is not worth the money because the market says it
is. Doesn't matter that some people don't like IJ, it holds a fairly high
price. While I've heard of very nice games failing to meet their price
because they *weren't* cleared, I've never heard of one falling short
because it was properly cleared. I usually don't personally buy NOS pfs but
I know some who have sold games with even NOS pfs that have been cleared,
they got top dollar for them.

Older games may be a different story, there haven't been many examples of
nicely restored with auto-clear but that is starting to change. Right now
the average EM collector prefers a game as close to original as possible but
I can see a time when a fairly nice EM will not fetch the price a beautiful
restored one will. I believe Bill Davis showed some he's done though I
didn't get to see them, I'm sure they looked purty. However that is a
seperate issue because the games didn't originally have auto-clear. 90s
games did, adding clear is not altering the components, it's refurbishing
and the market likes that.

GRY

"Fred Kemper" <pbga...@davlin.net> wrote in message
news:d12n3...@enews3.newsguy.com...

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 12:31:33 AM3/14/05
to
That's pretty much what I've been trying
to say all along. :)

If you are trying to retain value as a collectable,
then that's certainly the way to go in my book.

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************


<lens...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1110760902....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 12:30:51 AM3/14/05
to
Well, you are not going to make me or
anyone else change what my comments
are to suit you or your wished as well.
Period.

Don't agree with them, don't read them.

Really simple, dude.

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************

"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:HfmdnVhXKtc...@comcast.com...

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 12:36:03 AM3/14/05
to
Okay, I guess I'm a liar.

(I guess I need a hammer.....)

sheesh.

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************


"Ceegary" <cee...@cox.net> wrote in message news:pI7Zd.21697$KK5.17430@fed1read03...

Fred Kemper

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 12:56:10 AM3/14/05
to
Hmm. I've just given this some more thought.

I'll just tell them to ask you.

Period!

--
Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
******************


"Joseph A. "Tony" Dziedzic" <ton...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:HfmdnVhXKtc...@comcast.com...

Ceegary

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 2:04:36 AM3/14/05
to
No Fred, YOU are the hammer. Everybody on RGP gets it; you don't like clear
unless a pf is trashed, we've read it umpteen times. The point that I'm
making, that seems to sail over your head, it doesn't really matter what you
and a few others think. You state it as though it's the market but it's not.
The market determines the desirebility and pricing by ponying up the bucks,
so it's your opinion only. Money talks and BS walks. Kind of reminds me of
the mother at the cadet parade; "Oh look, my Johnny is the only one marching
in step".

GRY

"Fred Kemper" <pbga...@davlin.net> wrote in message

news:d137s...@enews1.newsguy.com...

Joseph A. Tony Dziedzic

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 7:27:35 AM3/14/05
to
Thanks; an excellent summation.

Tony

In article <9IaZd.22979$KK5.4338@fed1read03>, "Ceegary" <cee...@cox.net>
wrote:

pbga...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 8:48:02 AM3/14/05
to
No, I don't think some people "get it" at all. If
that were true, why are some so hellbent on "changing"
what I have to say? (Especially when they ask!)

As far as "market", that is in reference to 'future',
not the present. Folks will pay whatever they think
they can afford on just about anything these days.
I still maintain that _collectability_value_ will be
less on damaged/painted/stickered ,what have you pins
in the future.

Shall we go through it again? <Bang!>

Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
=============================

pbga...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 8:54:00 AM3/14/05
to
Not really.

If it "Doesn't matter", why again is it so important
that we see things your way as well???

They are _all_ still opinions at this point.

(They are just not all the same...)

Fred
TX
CARGPB#8
========================================

Randy P.

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 11:26:59 AM3/14/05
to
<pbga...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110808082.1...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> As far as "market", that is in reference to 'future',
> not the present. Folks will pay whatever they think
> they can afford on just about anything these days.
> I still maintain that _collectability_value_ will be
> less on damaged/painted/stickered ,what have you pins
> in the future.

On this point I agree that the jury is still out. I want my EM pins to be
as original as possible, even if that includes some initials carved into the
cabinet. I won't buy an EM that's been restored. I've seen it with
collectible cars as well -- unrestored originals are more desirable to many
collectors than restored examples, although that is not necessarily
reflected in the price (ironically). In the future (or maybe it's already
happened as I've been out of the car hobby for a few years) I suspect some
unrestored cars will command higher prices than beautifully restored
examples.

It's possible that we may see something similar in the future with DMD pins,
and to a certain extent it's already true -- a pristine original DMD pin is
worth more to many people (including myself) than one that's been
beautifully restored with a cleared playfield.

I decided *not* to buy one of Bill Davis's spectacularly restored EM's
precisely because it had been restored. However, his asking price was
(justifiably) higher than what anyone I know would probably pay for a
beautiful original example.

So I think there *is* reason to think twice about clearcoating a DMD-era
playfield, although it hasn't stopped me yet ;-) A more cautious approach
would be to install hole protectors, ramp protectors, and Mylar -- all
reversible protection.

Randy

Mike Schudel

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 11:48:31 AM3/14/05
to
> On this point I agree that the jury is still out. I want my EM pins to be
> as original as possible, even if that includes some initials carved into
> the cabinet. I won't buy an EM that's been restored. I've seen it with
> collectible cars as well -- unrestored originals are more desirable to
> many collectors than restored examples, although that is not necessarily
> reflected in the price (ironically). In the future (or maybe it's already
> happened as I've been out of the car hobby for a few years) I suspect some
> unrestored cars will command higher prices than beautifully restored
> examples.

Did you happen to watch the Barrett-Jackson auto auctions? They couldn't
give original unrestored cars away. It was the totally redone, reworked,
chromed, repainted, chopped, tricked out engines, etc that were pulling in
the bucks. Of course they were being bid on people looking for nice stuff
to add to their collection and drive, not restorers. Most of the bidders
didn't look like they could tell the difference between a crescent wrench
and a timing light. ;-)

> It's possible that we may see something similar in the future with DMD
> pins, and to a certain extent it's already true -- a pristine original DMD
> pin is worth more to many people (including myself) than one that's been
> beautifully restored with a cleared playfield.
>
> I decided *not* to buy one of Bill Davis's spectacularly restored EM's
> precisely because it had been restored. However, his asking price was
> (justifiably) higher than what anyone I know would probably pay for a
> beautiful original example.

I guess it depends if you plan on selling the pin later. Personally I would
probably not clear an EM, but if I decided I was not going to worry about
resale value and wanted a nice looking pin I probably would go that route.
There is always someone down the road that would buy a cleared EM game, but
then again there are many that wouldn't.

> So I think there *is* reason to think twice about clearcoating a DMD-era
> playfield, although it hasn't stopped me yet ;-) A more cautious approach
> would be to install hole protectors, ramp protectors, and Mylar -- all
> reversible protection.

The mylar may not be reversible. I've seen first hand what happens to 15
year old mylar removed from playfields and over inserts. A crapshoot at
best. ;-)

--
Mike S.
Kalamazoo, MI

Gameroom: http://tinyurl.com/4hfev
WCS Owner's List: http://tinyurl.com/39cjo
MB Scoop Repair: http://tinyurl.com/9lfu
--------------------------------------------


Ceegary

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 12:27:07 PM3/14/05
to
Very true Mike. Randy, the car analogy somewhat actually plays against your
arguement. It used to be that cars in original condition commanded more and
that may still be true of the extreme top end of that market but beautiful
restorations command the bucks because the majority of collectors just want
to buy beautiful without the pain of getting there.

Verdict is definitely out on the future market with EMs. If auto-clear
represents a future hazard say goodbye to the vast majority of pins made in
the 90s (ie: diamond plate).

I like to talk about the market etc but I basically do the pins for myself,
I love the restoration process and am at present saving an ugly El Dorado.
I'm not going to claim restoring it to it's former glory, just making it as
nice as I can for myself.

GRY

"Mike Schudel" <schu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110818913.e2b966ffbe6b2b85b0f6bc8bf5788a62@teranews...

seymour...@excite.com

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 12:47:16 PM3/14/05
to
or, if you do as I plan to, which is to not sell any of my games and
keep them, it doesn't matter WHAT you do to them. I lean more towards
the wax em and keep em, but for damaged playfields and to lock in
repairs, CC is fine. (Whether auto or lacquer depends on era). Also,
Tony I have noticed also that I am getting edge and insert wear on my
used only in the home machines (after years in arcades.... ie. insert
was fine when game brought into home, there is now insert wear, very
slight, but there)

Most people have no clue what they are buying but will say "oooh shiny,
I want that one!".

the simple answer is that we are all "correct", and I think Fred's
saying that the addtional clear will affect the collectible value (not
the monetary value) in terms of the "museum definition" which is that
unrestored is better, no clear, etc. (technically, no touchup either).
Think in terms of Antiques, that's Fred's point. The monetary value of
the game is something different, and what you decide to collect
determines if you like the recleared or the original. There will come
a time when one is more desireable than the other, and the prices will
swing the other way.

Ceegary

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 4:26:34 PM3/14/05
to
What museums? I mean really, how many pins are in museums, how many are
going to be in museums and how many collectors really care? Oh wait, there's
a knock on my door, must be a museum calling ;-)

GRY

<seymour...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1110822436.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Randy P.

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 4:35:07 PM3/14/05
to
"Ceegary" <cee...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:fknZd.12$ZE5.5@fed1read03...

> What museums? I mean really, how many pins are in museums, how many are
> going to be in museums and how many collectors really care? Oh wait,
> there's a knock on my door, must be a museum calling ;-)
>
> GRY

I like my EM pins the same way museums like them for the same reason --
there is a sense of history you can see, touch, hear, and smell from an old
machine that's been in an arcade and never restored. Haven't tried tasting
one yet, but it's only a matter of time ;-)

That's part of the charm of EM's for me. It doesn't really apply to DMDs as
far as I'm concerned, but probably just because they're not old enough yet
;-)

I can hear my kids trying to sell my TZ after I'm pushing up roses: "Geez,
what the heck was Dad thinking when he littered this antique with all this
CRAP?" ;-)

Randy "mmmmmm....tasty EM!" P.


Ceegary

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 5:47:11 PM3/14/05
to
More like "Dad was so old-fashioned; collecing pinballs! So how much do you
think we can sell them for?"

GRY

"Randy P." <pin...@DELETEthepecks.com> wrote in message
news:dMidneTdvr7...@giganews.com...

Manic

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 7:16:56 PM3/14/05
to

"Ceegary" <cee...@cox.net> wrote in message news:QvoZd.18$ZE5.3@fed1read03...


> More like "Dad was so old-fashioned; collecing pinballs! So how much do you
> think we can sell them for?"
>
> GRY

LOL - you got THAT right "I can peddle them to get a Playstation 7 !!"

seymour...@excite.com

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 7:31:28 PM3/14/05
to
-More like "Dad was so old-fashioned; collecing pinballs! So how much
do you
-think we can sell them for

And sadly, they will probably sell them all for $100 a piece. Kids
today.....

frenchy

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 8:08:11 PM3/14/05
to
>> Okay, in my "opinion", _it_is_a_fact_, the game
is irreversibly damaged as a collectable! Watch
some of the shows that deal in collectables. See
what this stuff brings at auctions and shows that
feature collectables. >>

That might apply to pinballs a looooong time from now when that sort of
originality change would be viewed as more significant. A 10 or 20
year old game, ehh, I just still see as a sometimes necessary, many
times unnecessary mod. While I prefer it not to be done on a nice game
that didn't strictly need it, it would not really affect my purchase to
buy it at a good price. I think the older the game, like some classic
from the 50's, then it's getting closer to the term 'damaged'
especially if otherwise the game had no real artwork wear. Maybe the
term 'adversely altered' fits better, damage makes you think of
something being destroyed, like the artwork was stripped off and then
rescreened or something like that. I will post back in here in 100
years and report if my prediction came true.....Frenchy

frenchy

unread,
Mar 14, 2005, 8:11:55 PM3/14/05
to
They don't HAVE to use that shiny of clearcoat. They could use a more
satin type of finish, or use a mixture of glossy and satin to give an
absolutely original look that would not catch your eye if you wern't
told. Do they sell additives that can be added to clearcoat to simply
'satinize' the finish to whatever degree you want? Just wish everybody
that coats would at least stick to using something that looks original
instead of the 'mirror' option just because it looks like that...Frenchy

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages