MMI Enterprises

Have delved pretty deep into the prospect of offering fence care and the balance between being able to make money at it while still satisfying the customers needs of ending up with a decent looking fence that is actually protected.. It is gonna be a tough sell is my feeling so far cause they want long term protection. If customers have a new fence and they are of the mind that it needs protection then the builder likely offers a seriously cheap rate to apply a clear water protection for pennies. If they are of the mind that they messed up last time in not protecting their old fence then they may be swayed towards a solid paint. That kinda puts us out don't it.... The cost of new fence install runs about $20 ln.ft. avg. out here which makes the fence something you would think customers would like to protect as an investment. Don't see a whole lot of it getting done though by 3rd party contractors. A neighbor down the street put in about 150' of tounge and groove redwood that surely ran them $28 ln. ft. and have not heard back about doing anything with it even though I priced them rediculously low at like $.20.. When I asked the fence install guys about it they said "It's redwood" as if it don't need protection so I know what info the HO is basing their decisions on. In a year or two it will look like the rest in the neighborhood well on its way to a delapidated grey fencedom. Omax 5yr waterbase looks decent but I didn't like working with water.... Penofin stinks and will only last a year or two in sun but it looks good in cedar color on redwood....WTW honey looks really good on my redwood test boards but have no idea how long it will last. It surely seems a logical choice on a fence restore. (splash and dash!)... RS blackened even though I am out west where it wasn't supposed to...haven't tried TWP or Bakers yet.. Here is what I have worked out for full on fence restore: 1 gal.= 33' of 6' fence= 198 sq. ft. 33' restore & stain= 1 hour 33'x$20 build=$660/5 (20% of replacement cost)= $132- 1gal.,etc. materials= somewheres around $90 an hr. with wtw and you get to do fence in one day.. $132/198sq.ft.= $.066 per. sq. ft. or $4 per ln.ft. When I tested the figures out on relatives and neighbors with replacement costs in mind it seems to work out. But as you can see it applies to full on restore with grey removal. Maybe I can get more..time will tell. On just waterproofing new fencing I think I can do $.335 with $27 product. That works out to $.20 labor for simply pumping it on with hand sprayer or sureflow. Will have to be a certain minimum though what with cleanup time involved. ..well that's what I got for today :)

My initial thoughts are that setup and prep requires a certain minimum of time and that you can not base your true production rate on this small an area. To do twice the size will not take you twice the time.. I call 33' 1 hour total cleaned and stained. It is 200 sq. ft.= 1 gal..... well approx anyways :)

If I not mistaken Deublin rotary unions are of the highest industrial quality flat out period...properly rated versions run up around $500 or more last I checked. I have their catalog if you need any info on the one you got..

Think Bix Bix Products Page might be the maker of Jasco paint removers.. JASCO® Paint Removers & Strippers but maybe not.(edit: apparently Homax is parent company of both).. The epoxy version is their strongest (methylene chloride) but is fairly expensive. Is not as expensive though as another similar product called Aircraft stripper...perhaps cheaper to sand whatever is on there. Pictures can be resized in most any image viewing program like Paint or MS Digital Imaging. Some times 800x600 will end up creating a small enough file size when saving..some times not..depends on camera formats or resize prog. I use MSDI, or Kodak Easy Share..

Reason I mention it perhaps being a poly as opposed to heavy coating of acrylic like mentioned in some other threads is cause I feel it much more likely that HO will grab the cheapest most readily available thing they see at the big box to acheive their wants in a beautiful permanent glossy coating. They know it is sure fire one coat and cheap.They know not what they do to themselves by going such route... Sounds like you'll be going the Bix Jasco method of removal. Please let us know how it works out..

Anybody got a clue as to what the active chemical in it might be..sounds like a rip off if it says it strips all. Personally if it didn't touch it the first try I would have saved my money. But hey tiger.. if the finish was more of a thick goop top coat that was cracking then it possably some HO attempt at poly urathaning..Please show a picture of it..

Just want to send out a thank you to Beth & Rod, Chris, and whoem ever else that ever dropped the "D" pump word in searchable threads here and there on TGS. If not for shared thought I would likely still feel somewhat unsatisfied in surflow height limitation hell or in contemplating this here xjet thread....THANX HEAPS!

I hate restriction dependency with a passion.. Another example is the restriction needed on the main water inlet just past the float tank on older machines to make old style vacuum switch work the burner..what a PITA...Yea you can play with the vac switch by stretching springs and filing parts of the contacts inside as I think John made me learn a few years back but is no comparison in reliability to the flow or pressure type switches. John make sure boss man keeps me a reed in stock for the flow switches.. :) But speaking of the cat unloaders.... do they all pretty much bypass some flow even when new?..when mine really started to go it bypassed maybe a third of my flow..

Jeff, This be one of the taboo products people love to hate. Think people base their whole business around the need to fix HO jobs done with Baer and CWF... supposedly it aint all that user friendly to remove neither which spurs on the metaphorical war :)

Like the site.. it is very cut to the chase and portfolio like. You won't mind if I simulate some of it right? :) One thing I noticed I'd like to ask about: "Water sealing coats the wood by filling the exposed cells with parifin wax to repell water." .. Since your using waterbase products that can somewhat form a film aren't you really using curing resins in an emulsion to acheive the water repelling? The RS folks make note in there FAQ how parafin wax found in other offerings evaporate away after first hot sunlit day (they are likely refering to oil products I would imagine). If what your using doesn't really use parafin then why not talk up the permanance of what you are using? The resin could be a synthetic urethane and I would not doubt that people will love the word if that the case.. :)

Oh shut the heck up!!..lol , I didn't know you work there..wouldn't even recognize you. I was just there last week to get a new little ball for my downstreamer and was chattin with boss man about this and that. My little five year old was running all around and think you interrupted for a second while heading out to do errand... :)

Holy freaken cow!.. it's the master Hotwaterwizzard himself gracing our friendly forum..Hi John!! Thought maybe you were out of the business or something since not seeing you online much... When John speaks I listen... ..yea all should also.. :lgbow:

Hey Chris, I guess we now have the answer on "how can this be good for business?" lol

Beth, thanx! that exactly the info I was after and it sounds satisfactory to me..:) Vlad, That DIY advice is typical and scary. One second they mention no damage and the next warn that the cleaned sections damage would be readily spotted as if yes indeed you should check just in case. It's like they don't know what they talking about or what could be commited to for advice. The part about brushing the roof is plain bad advice...no agitation should be used on a asphalt roof beyond low pressure water flow. Why risk protective particle loss I would ask the adviser. If I not mistaken some or most of the copper methods don't work satisfactory neither...Anyways, I guess we're all loose canon...

Scott you talkin about preaching to the choir for some time yet you just now realize some sections are open and some not? The funny thing about all the debate about diy is the amount of ownership some like to place on old/already existing ideas. This board is but a reflection of others that have had info shared for years and years already. The old delco board is an example. It is full of trades info...Besides that there surely are trade magazines, books, old timers, schools, people coming out of industry that constantly share and teach methods of completing tasks or what chemicals that could be used. There are also tv channels and websites based around diy. Honestly I am sure I'v forgotten more info flashed before my face by old timers or my own father (painter) then seen here. I am a bit disappointed in the talk of suppression and l liken it to repression. With that said I am also all for privacy found in the pm system, the member only sections, or the site supporter only sections. None of the three should be crawlable by the search engines or submitted to the index there of. To be clear I got no anomosity and never had misunderstanding of what would or could likely end up being searched out. BTW, The setting up of the websites indexing (a list of all pages used by the search engines) properly here on this forum has always been on my mind and tried to discuss it last year to not much fan fare. One error I see some site have is that of allowing people into a private thread by way of getting there from the search engines. When they are done viewing thread they then must become member to view any other threads.(not saying that is happening here). Whats worse though with internet searching is searching something out and getting a supposed valid link to only find you can't go there. (teasing). This example would be what we got here if our private pages are ever submitted to search engines......NOW with that said I ask Beth and Rod the question again...Are the member only or site supporter sections (private?) kept out of the search engine indexes??..just a thought I would like confirmed is all. :)

Don't beat yerself over it..such work with substrates in attempting rust fix or color changes is not work anyone can guarantee (sp?)lol) with any certainty of outcome...Guess it would depend on what you told them to begin with on whether you have justification of labeling yer own self as a deceiver.. :) The oxalic or what you did will not wear off..it is an actual change made to the surface..All you can do is wait for dirt, add color, or lighten the other areas to try and match.

Can we get more info on this or a piucture? I ask cause I wonder if the tint you describe is a colorant or if it is the all too common result of muriatic leaching of the crete minerals and glues. People can get used to the biege tint from the muriatic and but if you want it back your gonna play hell trying to reproduce it. My feeling is that if you have to make good on this then your gonna have to treat the whole area and work towards it all being lighter as it should be in the first place (that's if it not a stained or colored crete project).No way I would do such with checking if customer wants it lighter though..... The prevention of beige/yellowing/and or rusting from the hydrochloric is to use less strength to begin with and then neutralize after. The rust is from using unhibited muriatic most likely and the coloring is like a combination of minerals and glues being leached up...looks yuk to me personally..

Chris Chris Chris... thought you all about diy and spreadin the love sauce... Maybe you got a point..maybe Beth right about professionalism..maybe we just watch what we say of our woes and challenges or keep for member only sections and if not then keep it real as if costomers are interviewing us all the time. If I understand correctly some places like the clubhouse are member only. If it is true that thread titles from such areas or actual posts show up on the searches then maybe the indexing procedures and/or access rights of the web crawlers that are used to do it could be limited from getting in there. I see no reason why potential contractor members would be targeted based on communications snooped on in the member only sections. Beth, what you say about those showing up?..I don't know if they do or don't myself...If they do I think Appleman has a point.. :)

2000sq.ft.interior area=50x40 50+40+50+40=180Ln.ft. of wall x 11'height=1980 sq.ft. of wall Figuring 8' walls + 3' worth of eave and roof trim I say it pretty darn good way to do it John!! :)

ooooo. exciting!.. if there ever a project I would like to see the petrifying/densifying products used on this be it.. Cretowood from Sealer Store, Sealmax, etc..

Although I don't xjet I know that they are two different animals and that statement of one being more cost effective is way subjective. Every chore (concrete degreasing,concrete brightening, house washing, high house washing, roof washing, wood cleaning, wood stripping, wood brightening, etc.) demands differing chemical strengths and differing chemicals and differing flow or application rates to the point of there not being a universal parts material that can withstand the variety of abuse in corrosion. The general feeling though on downstreaming is that for the majority of tasks a mild enough dilution is to be used on task anyway hence the downstreamer, hose, wand, tips, swivels, connections, of the machine is not overly harmed. Depending on job size the chems are not in contact with the parts long enough but for to give it the needed cleaning they could likely use anyway. Surely part of the fear involved with increasing draw rates of downstream methods is that many people might end up corroding their parts faster then their warrantees or could hurt people or property with chemicals..(more liability) :) Some jobs demand strong ratio though so I am fan of straight chem applied by specialty type pumps where all the parts are taylored to the chems I am going to put through it. (house washing not such a job though) As to whether that article was against downstreaming and it for obvious reasons... I don't know as the main use of high house washing can be done just fine with downstreaming. The chem ratio in a on board mixing tank can be strong enough and most find they can still apply chems high through proper tip sizing. They are selling the xjet so that is part of obvious reasoning.. :)

Apple sauce is for roofs straight as mixed. Recipes are as such: 35 gallon formula: 10.5 gallons of 12% sodium hypochlorite 22.75 gallons of water 4 lbs. 6 oz. of TSP 4 lbs. 6 oz. of borax 5 gallon formula: 1.5 gallons of sodium hypochlorite (2 gal for heavy clean) 3.25 gallons of water 10 oz. of TSP (20oz. for heavy clean) 10 oz. of Borax (20oz.for heavy clean) Houses take from 1.5% to about 4% max bleach. Go here for xjet recipes and info on draw rates: House Washing Techniques and Formulas To figure things perfect for your needs or tank sizes use following formula: take c (desired tank percentage) x the flipped fraction t (desired tank volume) over b (starting bleach percentage) ? Formula being C x (t/b) ..as worked out here: http://www.thegrimescene.com/forums/residential-pressure-washing/10204-12-5-sh-quesiton.html :)

Stephen, The story goes that only the redwood out in the East shows issues and needs redwood only formula. They can't and don't even sell it to us out West. With that said, my new redwood test board has turned black on all the RS sections...more so on the rough side and but with Natural Cedar and light brown turning the least. Mighta coulda shoulda prepared the board chemically in some fashion or let it age but that just wouldn't fit into my business plan... Now for your redwood customer it perhaps different in that it older wood and doesn't have all the stuff leaching out. I would think ultamately it is more important that you get the customers take on what color tone they prefure and whether they want a finish/topped look to it... Personally I am not gonna push the RS light brown on redwood, I think it looks bad for showing redwood for being redwood....At this point I can't push any RS on any redwood. Cedar wood is another story and see it working out well on it. Cabot Aussie Timber Oil, Penofin, WTW working well on my redwood board. When considering which looks best on smooth side it is about a toss up. When considering which looks best on rough side I give it to Penofin(smells). When considering which is thought to last longest I got to go WTW. Omax or Cabot Spf not bad either if ya like that sorta thing...my two cents.

Oh ok I got ya and feel ya on the idea of weather taking it's toll through cycles of evaporation. If the evaporation was all even then it wouldn't matter so much. Wood can be wet as long as it is dispersed evenly or a certain vapor content is allowed to pass through. Do you have what amount that would be for wood?. Concrete is like 2% acceptable. But I don't have adog in the running here really and don't know what the RS people claim their product can or can't do. I thought they were all about getting some gray protecting pigment in the wood is all... Tanning oil for skin is like natural cocoa or olive oilsand may include some uv protection. Baby oil is mineral oil and considered a moisturizer that people joke about when someone uses it for protection like in the movies. The joke is that they end up looking like a lobster..lol We use a mineral oil and parafin based product called Alboline here at the house for makeup removal and other duties....good stuff :)

Ken, I would be interested to see more info on kerosene derived mineral oil based parafinnics drying out wood. Also interested about resins possably being in RS now?? And if you happen to have some info on linseed or tung oil swelling wood fibers while your at it I be interested in that too... (got to feed wood something, can't be all that bad can it?) Haha , the tanning oil statement is a bold one Ken.. I assume you mean to liken the RS product to not having any uv protection? Thought that is what the transoxide pigments are for.... Your really asking that RS crowd in here to whoop on you hu?..lmaof :)