rumor control--has SAAC lost its use of Shelby name?

[G.R.]

As someone mentioned earlier we here are not privy to "all" the behind the scenes issues. So all we can do is speculate and espouse our biased or unbiased opinions.

Personally I could care less one way or the other. I've owned two hot rods that just happen to have a Cobra body rather than a a '32 Ford. I admire Shelby and the racing championships won as a team. The body style of a Cobra is one of the sexiest automotive bodies every built(if one equates it in that light). Probably one of the reasons people of all ages admire it. And when you add a high performance V-8 it is just that more exciting.
Most of us here do not own or have ever owned an "original" for the most part we own replicas thus we as the saying goes "have no horse in this race" and should not presume to judge either of the parties. MHO

This is a damned hobby---enjoy it! and be thankful you can afford to own one....or just continue as always arguing "Real or Replica", "True to the original or an abomination" "Shelby bash or boost"....or don't, makes no difference to me. I just think it is funny that the same posters say the same thing year in year out.

[Dan Stryffeler]

Being an outsider (like 99.9% of the rest of us here) I don't have a clue what was written into the licensing agreement with SAAC.

What typically happens to licensed goods (clothing, toys, etc.) when the contract expires? Anyone out there been in this type of agreement?

If I lent some corporate records to someone to facilitate research, I would think that there would be a clause in there giving me some rights to the results of that research (at least as to publishing if not ownership of the results), and certainly the right to collect the original documents back. Anyone?

I would also guess that regardless of how the agreement was written, it will probably come down to how much either party wants to spend in legal costs to defend their position (their interpretation of the contract). SAAC seems to have fired the next round by asking for donations to their legal fund...

- Dan

[Nedsel]

Dan, if I gave you a chassis blueprint, and you built a car using it, would I have the right to ask you for the car after it was finished?

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by Nedsel

Dan, if I gave you a chassis blueprint, and you built a car using it, would I have the right to ask you for the car after it was finished?

Ned, Those Shelby lawyers may be watching and looking for any little scrap of text to help them. It may be both brave and foolish for you to post on this topic.

It does seem interesting that the Shelby lawyers needed to quote the SAAC registry as to Rick returning materials. If I were reading between the lines, I might guess that there was no written agreement between Shelby and SAAC on those materials. Otherwise, don't you think the lawyers would have quoted some exact paragraphs out of a contract? But they did not. They quoted the SAAC registry.

[Trevor Legate]

A perfectly valid point Nedsel.

Like everyone here on this webbysite, (other than Nedly) I have no insider knowledge re the issue under discussion. I guess that if the gentleman in question wants his stuff returned, then so be it. However, it was point 4 in the dreadful 'Cummings' letter that opens a whole other can of worms. And I know what my repsonse would be to such a demand.....

As a piece of PR work, this is down there with the worst of them.

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by Trevor Legate

A perfectly valid point Nedsel.

Like everyone here on this webbysite, (other than Nedly) I have no insider knowledge re the issue under discussion. I guess that if the gentleman in question wants his stuff returned, then so be it. However, it was point 4 in the dreadful 'Cummings' letter that opens a whole other can of worms. And I know what my repsonse would be to such a demand.....

As a piece of PR work, this is down there with the worst of them.

Trevor,

Somehow I doubt you needed a license from Shelby to publish your fine books. Perhaps you just needed a disclaimer of trademarks in your books.

If so maybe SAAC just needs to add a trademark disclaimer in small print on all of their tshirts, posters, magazines, snakebites, etc.

[Excaliber]

John M., I personally have been troubled over various issues with Shelby for a long time, and my history of posts here will generally show support. But there comes a time when I just can't do it anymore, for me, this is that time.

You don't have to have a horse in the race or be a member of a baseball team to see something is wrong, and take a stand. It just took me longer than some, and there is no joy in it, no bashing, just a personal reality check.

[John McMahon]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

John M., I personally have been troubled over various issues with Shelby for a long time, and my history of posts here will generally show support. But there comes a time when I just can't do it anymore, for me, this is that time.

You don't have to have a horse in the race or be a member of a baseball team to see something is wrong, and take a stand. It just took me longer than some, and there is no joy in it, no bashing, just a personal reality check.

How true...sad, but true.

Who will ultimately lose in the end? The enthusiasts.

[Don]

From Yahoo Finance, note the mention of a Licensing update, anyone attending ?

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Carroll Shelby International, Inc., (Pink Sheets:CSBI - News) announced today that its Annual Shareholder Meeting will be held on Thursday, December 20, 2007, at 11:00 AM local time at the Shelby Automobiles Inc., facility in Las Vegas, Nevada. Shareholders will have an opportunity to vote on the election of the Board of Directors for the coming year.

Upon completion of the formal portion of the meeting, John Luft, will present company updates on Carroll Shelby International and Carroll Shelby Licensing. Amy Boylan, President Shelby Automobiles Inc., will provide updated information on Shelby Automobiles.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/071121/20071121005644.html?.v=1

The Public Relations firm retained by Caroll Shelby Licensing, maybe there is one, but could not find any press release on the topic

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/03/prweb513490.htm

An unknown , all the sections in the Licensing Agreement and what the parties agreed or did not agree to.

[Excaliber]

Greed comes in many forms, it's not always about money. Shelby seems to have an insatiable need to control everything and everyone, no matter what the cost. My experience has been that the 'body' follows the 'head'. IF there is corruption within the ranks, (perhaps a bad example, I'm not saying there is), it often flows from the top down.

I don't know the details of 'getting your brand name' back. I just don't like the methodology chosen to do it, sue 'em, sue 'em all, SOP with Shelby. Is it not enough to withdraw their license, but then to rub their nose in it too? Cold, very cold...

[ZOERA-SC7XX]

After reading the letter from M. Neil Cummings, I don't see any basis for his demanding records after 1996, much less any product previously licensed by Colonel Selby. These lawyers will demand anything unless/until they are taken to task. I have less respect for Selby than I had yesterday, and will not help finance this 'Raid' on SAAC with my 50 bucks.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

While I don't have a dog in this fight (don't own an original Cobra nor an original Shelby Mustang, but have a nice 66 GT-350 CLONE), I would trust SAAC about 1000 times more with the VIN #s of said cars than any Shelby run company.....JMHO...........

I am also of the opinion that the work that SAAC has done for the last 32 years has very much to do with today's value of original Cobras and Shelby Mustangs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While I don't always agree with the way SAAC is run and has done things, I think they have kept the faith and the helped make the cars what they are today.......

BTW:I am starting a "small" collection for round trip air-fare to the Vegas facility for the shareholders meeting, as I'm a shareholder....

I have a lot of things I'd like to say at the meeting, doubt they would give me the time of day thought...........

Guess I shoulda been a lawyer, looks like Shelby's companies are keeping some lawyers in tall cotton........wish they would spend that money on building cars and not lawsuits, maybe my stock would be worth more than the 26 cents a share it closed at today....

David

[pipehunter]

I think it is interesting that so many posts offer legal conclusions based on little more than the Nov 14 in terms of documentation. Second, that said, the reference in that letter to two sentences in the Registry to buttress the demands in the letter is certainly curious. Third, I find the SAAC letter and particularly the Burke quote to be amateurish, but then again, I had the same reaction to the Nov. 14 letter. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds and I cannot wait to see the agreement between Shelby and SAAC.

Finally, Amy B I respect your willingness to step up and field the questions. On the other hand, in light of the letter of Nov. 14, I certainly question your first comment (Nov.1, I believe) in this thread which reads, in pertinent part:

"The SAAC team will still continue with what they do, we hhave not renewed the shelby License, but I am sure they will continue with the registry. We at Shelby will also keep the registry for all new cars and old, if the owners of cobra and vintage mustang want to join.

I did not ask for there info back or any of their stuff. We have always maintained that we would keep the new cars we build and ford builds, SAAC does not have the GT_H or the shelby GT info, that has always been ours, as with all cars going forward."

[Paul F]

It hardly seems like greed or money is the issue here.

5000 members x $40 = $200,000. That pays a few salaries, an office, and not much else.

2500 attendees to SAAC @$30. Let's assume 2day average = $150,000, most of which likely went to expenses.

Nobobdy's going to get rich on that.

[amy B]

Originally Posted by pipehunter

I think it is interesting that so many posts offer legal conclusions based on little more than the Nov 14 in terms of documentation. Second, that said, the reference in that letter to two sentences in the Registry to buttress the demands in the letter is certainly curious. Third, I find the SAAC letter and particularly the Burke quote to be amateurish, but then again, I had the same reaction to the Nov. 14 letter. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds and I cannot wait to see the agreement between Shelby and SAAC.

Finally, Amy B I respect your willingness to step up and field the questions. On the other hand, in light of the letter of Nov. 14, I certainly question your first comment (Nov.1, I believe) in this thread which reads, in pertinent part:

"The SAAC team will still continue with what they do, we hhave not renewed the shelby License, but I am sure they will continue with the registry. We at Shelby will also keep the registry for all new cars and old, if the owners of cobra and vintage mustang want to join.

I did not ask for there info back or any of their stuff. We have always maintained that we would keep the new cars we build and ford builds, SAAC does not have the GT_H or the shelby GT info, that has always been ours, as with all cars going forward."

Pipe, my comment was to the original post. I personally never asked for anything back, all I knew was that the license was not renewed. Bob said "I" asked, and it wasn't me. I am SAI, CSL cancelled the the license on Carroll's say. As I said I was always starting the new club and registry, the saac registrar are a great group, they will continue the work as they did before the license, I am sure.

Amy

[TerrysSPF]

Originally Posted by amy B

the saac registrar are a great group, they will continue the work as they did before the license, I am sure.

Amy

Amy, I don't see how they can possibly continue to work "as they did before". If they thought they could, I don't know if they would have taken on the Kirkham cars.
And why make them give up all materials (like t-shirts, posters, etc.) that were printed prior to the end of this year? Let them sell the stuff, for cryin' out loud............unless Shelby wants to purchase it from them.
-That's cold.

[pipehunter]

Originally Posted by amy B

Pipe, my comment was to the original post. I personally never asked for anything back, all I knew was that the license was not renewed. Bob said "I" asked, and it wasn't me. I am SAI, CSL cancelled the the license on Carroll's say. As I said I was always starting the new club and registry, the saac registrar are a great group, they will continue the work as they did before the license, I am sure.

Amy

I gotta tell ya Amy, that you refer to a nuance that many of us would miss, particularly this early in the process, and particularly when this nuance was not expressed by the President of SAI, a sister company to and licensee itself from CSL. Indeed, wouldn't the new club operate pursuant to a license from CSL? I understand how appropriate it is to commence ops on Mr. Shelby's birthday, but I also note this date is just after the expiration date of SAAC's license, at least as presented in the Nov. 14 letter.

Even though I am a SAAC member, I have no dog in this fight either. At the same time, however, I certainly want to see the continuation of celebration of these vehicles, and the maintenance of the value of the marque. I can certainly understand that SAI wants the same thing, but (a) clearly there is some profit motivation (profit not necessarily equaling greed), and (b) the jury is of course out on whether SAI can continue the good deeds (as opposed to missteps) of SAAC.

For folks like me, you have an opportunity to win us over. Fairness and candor will mean a lot.

[TerrysSPF]

Originally Posted by pipehunter

Finally, Amy B I respect your willingness to step up and field the questions. On the other hand, in light of the letter of Nov. 14, I certainly question your first comment (Nov.1, I believe) in this thread which reads, in pertinent part:

"The SAAC team will still continue with what they do, we have not renewed the shelby License, but I am sure they will continue with the registry. We at Shelby will also keep the registry for all new cars and old, if the owners of cobra and vintage mustang want to join.

I did not ask for there info back or any of their stuff. We have always maintained that we would keep the new cars we build and ford builds, SAAC does not have the GT_H or the shelby GT info, that has always been ours, as with all cars going forward."

Yep.........something smells a little fishy here. Either Amy is out of the loop, or she misled people here.

I don't think Team Shelby gives a rats rearend what happens to SAAC. Pity, since they helped keep the Shelby name alive and was a valuble asset to people looking to purchase original cars. Nothing like biting off the hand that feeds you, but it seems Shelby has made a profession out of doing just that.

I'm still not clear on the Jan 1996 date. Is Shelby asking for ALL documentation collected by SAAC from that date on - even concerning older vehicles (built pre 96) and information collected concerning original cars? -Or do they just want info collected on "newer" vehicles built from 1996 on?
No matter WHICH scenerio is correct, I don't understand why you would want to seperate this information in two parts, between two different books, and between two different companies.

Yep, sorry Amy, but it sounds like another typical Shelby lawsuit. -Bitterness & Greed.
IMO, Team Shelby doesn't give a rats ass about us replica owners, or even owners of the 'ol POS built in the 60's at this point. He (and you) are banking on the "new Shelby's" becoming popular and hoping enough of the "new" car owners join the club to make it profitable. -Heck, pretty soon Ford will be offering a new Team Shelby membership with every Mustang purchase.

-How sad (again) that it comes to this.

[dblbarrel]

As a lowly replica owner I dont have a dog in this fight.
Not a SAAC member, just love Cobras, and respect Mr Shelby.
But I fail to see how SAAC's licensing agreement does any thing to impact
or hurt Shelby's revenue.
Bad blood will do no one any good in this.

[pipehunter]

Another item is interesting as well. There was mention in one of the posts of Planet Cobra and a Mr. Stephen Becker of Atlanta, GA opening a Shelby dealership. Is that the same Mr. Becker mentioned on the NorCal SAAC website in a post allegedly attributed to Carroll Shelby? Am I wrong, or do I remember seeing this in the SAAC newsletter? Here is the quote from the Norcal SAAC website:

"Effective immediately I, Carroll Shelby, am no longer associated or involved, in business matters or any other activities, with Mr Steven G. Becker, LLC, self-described "Deal Maker" from Suwanee, GA. Further, I retract my letter of introduction dated August 1,1999 which he publishes on his website.

Signed, Carroll Shelby
October 10, 2001"


Amy, can you respond? Many thanks.