MPI Paint Decision Tree

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Edward R Heinen CSI CDT CCS LEED-AP Senior Member Username: edwardheinen Post Number: 22 Registered: 04-2022 Posted on Thursday, October 31, 2024 - 03:04 pm:    I used to use the online MPI Paint Decision Tree routinely to gain insights into substrates, surface-prep, and products as I'm specifying; especially for less common conditions. Now MPI is charging subscriptions at $375 per year for each tree (architectural, restoration). So I guess I won't be using that again, unless I can gain access as a professional specifier. Seems like I ought to have that privilege. Anyone else agree? MPI are not paint manufacturer reps, and I sense there is ongoing debate among manufacturers as to the value of their participation in MPI. Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 166 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Thursday, October 31, 2024 - 04:44 pm:    I met with a representative of MPI during the networking sessions at the CSI conference and I really complained about the costs. He said that he had been hearing it a LOT during the conference and he would bring that back to MPIs, (now owned by the Association for Materials Protection and Performance.) I told him I would frequently use the free access via the WBDG pretty much for the same reasons as you. But now that it costs a fortune, I cannot justify the costs to my employer, and will bid them adieu. Unless the do something about it. Not sure if that will make a difference. Ronald J. Ray, RA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: rjray Post Number: 230 Registered: 04-2004 Posted on Thursday, October 31, 2024 - 05:07 pm:    Of little value: MPI started out as a Canadian non-profit origination, which eventually evolved into a for-profit company. About 6 years ago, NACE purchased MPI, I believe from the founder of MPI. When NACE and SSPC merged, MPI fell under the new company AMPP, which Loretta mentioned. I became somewhat involved with NACE/MPI soon after NACE acquired MPI. NACE shared with me their ideas on how to reduce the cost of testing and listing for manufacturers, as well as how to improve architect’s access to the MPI listings and manuals, and ways to simply the listing themselves. I never really used the MPI system, so I do not know if NACE ever accomplished their goals for MPI. I was not aware that AMPP charged architects for access to the MPI “tools.” I can certainly understand anyone’s reluctance to pay for something that use to be free. That seems to be a trend, even in so-called non-profit organizations like CSI, for example. Ronald L. Geren, FCSI Distinguished Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1644 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Thursday, October 31, 2024 - 05:48 pm:    Ray: What did CSI offer that was free but now you have to pay for it? Ron Geren, FCSI Distinguished Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP