Sorry but I could sit all day and enter votes to bias the results. Nothing against the site, but even those that require cookies can be bypassed.

If a chip is repaired it should be noted that it is restored.

I don't want to get into the whole debate and the side issues, but do offer a simple solution that should make almost everyone happy.

David, when you repair/restore a chip, one of the conditions is that you will be marking it with your "W" stamp or something physically, not easily removable, that stays as part of the chip, denoting it was restored/repaired.

The debate has gone back and forth on marking and David has said his customers don't want them marked. Which means the people asking for the work to be done are just as responsible as the person doing the restoration. (look up the word accomplice)

Dave, demand as part of yours terms for "restoration" that an identifying mark MUST be placed on the chip.

Otherwise the minute a chip walks out of your shop, the owner is tempted to commit fraud and make false claims about the chip or the condition.

Chip repair and restoration can be a valuable service and from what I've seen here David does some amazing work. But if that work is taken and used to defraud collectors, it isn't art or restoration anymore, it's forgery.

-=-=-

The argument about restoring a car is a good example. Someone doesn't fix things and replace parts with remanufacturered replics and then claim the car is "original".

If a chip has a hole in it and the hole is filled, for example, it should be perminantly marked as restored.

Please people, in all of this, don't forget, it's the customers who are paying to have this work done. Why aren't they insisting on marked restorations? Who is buying the chips from these dealers?

Would you consider that if DW stopped fixing chips and makng his altered brass cores, that there aren't ten others who could do the same thing? Or maybe there already are others doing the same alterations. How about that?