Yes it's the SHAMPOO method...................there ain't NO encapsulation...............method.
On this part, you and I are more in agreement.
The definition that I started the thread with was how "The Shampoo Method" is defined.
My father shampooed carpet 50 years ago. This was his method:
1. Thorough vacuuming of the carpet. He used a pile lifter and a vacuum cleaner on many carpets, just the vacuum on others, depending on the type of carpet and soil load.
2. The shampoo contained a soil retardent, and he applied it through rotary scrubber, though he also used floor pads (not bonnets, but polishing pads) as well.
3. The carpet was then wet vacuumed (later he used a Chemstractor so that it could be wet vacuumed in one step). He noticed VERY little shampoo ever came up in the vacuum tank though.
4. He returned a couple of days later to remove blocks and tabs, and at that time vacuumed, or pile lifted and vacuumed the carpet. There was often more dry soil (and dry shampoo residue) in his vacuum bags than there was in the vacuum cleaner when he "pre-vacuumed".
What I described is nearly identical to how we today describe encapsulation. But the one SIGNIFICANT difference is how much cleaner we can get carpet because of how different the chemistry is from what was used 50 (or even 25) years ago. As I mentioned to Jimmy, more on that later.
But for now, let me ask this:
How many of you who are doing great work out there with "encapsulation cleaning" would be doing it if it had been sold to you (as a concept) as "shampoo cleaning"?
The fact is we are STILL fighting the battle of "steam" vs "shampoo" even though "shampooing" as it was once done is about as dead as wooly mammoths are today. But we are so averse to it we are like the hawthorn trees that grow around here and still have the long dagger like spikes they needed to protect them when mammoths roamed the earth, even though they are long gone...
But I digress.
We owe Rick Gelinas a debt of gratitude for coming to an understanding that unique chemistry changed the entire story of the shampoo method, and that in the renaming of it, we could once again embrace this very valid method, and in doing so, create a good and effective cleaning alternative for carpet maintenance.
I have some concerns about shortcuts I see cleaners taking with this method, and some things that are being said by cleaners and trainers on how it works, but the concept is valid:
My business today was built on cleaning carpet in the above fashion 50 years (and more) ago, and today its a far better method (if done properly) because of the advanced chemistry that wasn't available then.
