Your photo clearly shows a stain on what you claim is an ivory joint. Ivory is a porous natural material and a stain would be absorbed into the material. The ivory would need to be sanded down to where the absorption ends - no telling how deep . Then you would need to polish the ivory and re match the shafts . Most cue makers would just say to replace the joint as a chemical wash most probably cannot remove an ivory absorbed stain and sanding and polishing could be a waste of time.
If that’s not a stain on your joint in the photo then why is it there and what is it?
Mike reading clearly is paramount.
Your confusing what i stated in my first post.
Let me help you.
MY POST
"And yes the stain on the shaft was intentional and the cue shafts have never been used or chalked"
Where in that statement does it talk about the joint material whatsoever or even ivory for that matter.
Further more with regard to the joint maybe you missed the part where I say I tested it with a hot needle.
To ensure I am believed what do I need to do post a video showing me do it?
Now on to talk about the actual statement your making about the Ivory joint I am "Claiming" nice choice of words by the way.
In no world does it change the structural integrity of the joint. If your not clear on this Google is a great place to start.
And clearly not to you but discoloration does also not mean it needs replaced from an aesthetic purpose. I love grain in ivory and the differences in color that ivory is known for.
So now you know 2 things hopefully if you were able to "read" this carefully this time.
First I never mentioned "intentional stained ivory" hopefully that's beyond clear now.
And second your opinion which once again we all know about opinions because everyone has one but a fair amout of the time are not fact.
In no way shape or form does this "ivory" joint (and yes Mike if you really need the video of me testing it i will post one) need replaced due to color discoloration.
And to everyone who had to read this sorry but the whole i know everything but didn't even read correctly what I am arguing and oh yeah I am not even accurate gets really old so I apologize to all of you.