How do you handle the questions?

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by Paul F

Look at it? We need you to help us write it at the conference. The document will be nothing like the SAAC registry. It will not be a catalog. It is a guide to the non-60's Cobra owner as to how to respond to 'the question'. This threads' original intent was to discuss how to answer the question. Many owners have a lot angst about how to deal with the question. You clearly have a lot to contribute for those that own continuation Cobras.



Too much legal mumbo jumbo. I have no idea what you are trying to say. All I know is the judges said Shelby Cobras built after the 60's are kit cars. No, I can't present it as you well know the website that had the judgement or whatever you lawyers call it, took it down. But you probably have a copy of it and I know you are not willing to share it. You've said so in the past.

As to your first paragraph, Gee whiz, I'm flattered! Why didn't you just say so.. Gald to help where can. As to the "angst" many owners have that don't own real Cobras (original series or continuation series) my official recommendation is that in response to "the question" regardless of whether it's phrased "is it a kit", "is it real" or "is it a replica" the simple response is "it's a pretend Cobra" or "it's a tribute Cobra". Either will work.

As to continuation series owners, they don't need any help since they have no angst in dealing with "the question". At least I don't. The answer for us is rather simple..."Its a continuation series Shelby Cobra". Without fail people are in awe of the Shelby and ask about the car. Unfortunately the interest generated, the photos, videos etc usually cause delays in my excursions. In fact, just happened again today at DMV. The minute they learn it's a Shelby...sheesh.

Fortunately for you with your LA Exotics they don't generate such interest or awe causing such inconvenience. It can be such a pain

As to the second paragraph, you mean you cite a court opinion as establishing or finding a particular fact but now you admit ignorance in understanding it as "mumbo jumbo"? You know it is always better when you don't know or don't understand to keep quiet then to open your mouth and confirm your ignorance. Looks like not only do you have to be schooled on the issue which is the subject of this thread but on the legal "mumbo jumbo" you cited too. I'll just let you figure it out for yourself.

Oh, almost forgot...where did I say I had a copy of the opinion? I actually don't have any of the opinions although I read them and know what the issues were and the holding on the issues. I would have thought that for someone citing the names of the Circuit judges themselves you had copy of the opinion in your back pocket.