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

[daltondavid]

Originally Posted by 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.

No she really cannot comment on that one....First off she was at Hot Wheels then. secondly as it is now, Stephen is Beneath her. But if Stephen ever gets hs way, that situation will change....Watch out for the Red Devil Amy, he's got his eye on you....

[pipehunter]

Originally Posted by RedCSX1

Again, Amy was not involved since she did not work for Shelby during that period. However my advise to Amy is to keep a watchful eye out at all times. I know people who have been burned in the past.

Thanks. I am now twice aware that Amy was not involved as she did not work for Shelby at that time. But that does not mean that she has not been advised that this is one and the same gentleman. Is it so, Amy?

[Power Surge]

One thing I've noticed since getting back into Cobras a few years back and dealing with Shelby, is mass disorganization. I do realize that Amy came into the middle of the Shelby mess, and she had done a supurb job thus far dragging SAI out of a really big hole (and not just financially). But even to this day, things just don't ever seem to add up. Shelby is still full of double standards and always seems to be stepping on it's own feet.

Reading the Team Shelby article in the new magazine, Carroll says some interesting things. He says he wants a club for Shelby owners to be able to join together, communicate, and have fun at national events. He wants a club that embraces and caters to Shelby cars and their owners. Well, there already IS a club that does this, and has been working hard at it for 30 years. It's called SAAC. Then the article goes on to say that Shelby wanted to partner with an existing club to get this going. Did they go with SAAC? No. They went with the S197 Mustang club.

So here's what I see, looking at this from the outside...

Shelby slapped SAAC in the face, but saying he wanted a club of his own that does what SAAC already does.

Shelby slapped SAAC in the face AGAIN, by saying they wanted to partner with an existing club to get this off the ground, and passing SAAC up.

Shelby continues to show mass disorganization by saying they want forums for members to communicate, when they already have the Shelby Owners Forum, AND the Shelby Forums, which is run by Carrolls grandson (or grand nephew, I forget exactly).

Basically, to the public eye, Shelby is turning his back on the clubs that have supported him, the people who've supported him, his own existing entities and even his own family in order to have "his own" club.

Politics and business aside, the morality revolving around this whole mess speaks way more volumes than any legal papers or business decisions.

I wish I could support Team Shelby, but it's a tough choice to make given the facts thus far.

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by TerrysSPF

...

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.

...

Since January 1996 is mentioned multiple times, perhaps that was the start of a new licensing contract between Shelby and SAAC. And that is the contract that has been in place since that time. The 1996 time frame probably coincides with SAI starting to build cars again, which could have been a major change for both SAAC and SAI in terms of their relationship. I'm pretty sure at some point in the distant past SAAC was Shelby licensing. Perhaps 1996 was the point where licensing shifted from SAAC to Shelby Licensing as SAI started up the business in Vegas.

My interpretation of the registry information was that they want all information collected since 1996, not on cars built since that date.

I'm not sure what the point of asking for financial records since 1996 is. If as Amy says, Shelby just wants to move on, why would they care about the financial records? The only thing that might make sense is if SAAC was to pay a percentage of something as part of their license. But if that was the case, you would think SAAC had to pay that on a regular basis, not in a lump sum after more than a decade.

To me, it just seems like the Shelby lawyers are out to do as much damage as they can.

[TerrysSPF]

Originally Posted by 1ntCobra

My interpretation of the registry information was that they want all information collected since 1996, not on cars built since that date.
To me, it just seems like the Shelby lawyers are out to do as much damage as they can.

-That's how I interpreted it as well. But if that's the case, then there will be a lot of instances where information was collected on the same car, both PRIOR to 1996, and POST 1996, where people will have to go to TWO different sources to retrieve all the details. -What a nightmare.

-The damage being done is to the enthusiast.

[CHANMADD]

Was this perhaps not started on what could now be construed as a naive belief that the owners of these fabulous cars would actually like to have a closer relationship with the innovator of this crazy ownership pride,and not as a malicious slap that it has been construed as?
Would....could.. it not be possible for the two entities to exist and benefit the members of both in a positive way,... in the future?

Is this peaceful co-existance such a difficult thing to envisage?

I think that we are forgetting after all that without the person who had the vision and guts to take these cars to the glory that they achieved,none of us would be here.

The achievements of these cars would have ensured their place in the halls of fame regardless of whether or not any history had been kept or not.

This is also not taking anything away from all the hard work that has been put into the record keeping of these cars.

Now, I don't own an original car and I have been a member of SAAC and intend to continue to do so and I will join Team Shelby as well !!
Why not!!!

[pipehunter]

Now I get it. A family squabble. From the links shown on the shelbyautos.com website:


The Shelby Family

Shelby Children's Foundation CSCF.org
- Get Carroll's Autograph CSCF.org
Win Carroll Shelby's GT500 WinAShelby.org
Carroll Shelby's Website CarrollShelby.com
Shelby Performance Parts and Accessories ShelbyPerformanceParts.com
Shelby Licensing ShelbyLicensing.com
Carroll Shelby Enterprises CarrollShelbyEnt.com
Shelby Collectibles ShelbyCollectibles.com
Shelby American Automobile Club SAAC.com
Shelby Dodge Automobile Club SDAC.org

[1ntCobra]

Amy,

I was reading your magazine. I think I only saw one mention of the Series One cars so far. The Dodge cars were certainly mentioned for a few paragraphs in one of the articles. Did you just run out of room to cover the Oldsmobiles? I would have thought they would have gotten more coverage than the Dodges as they were the only Shelby cars built from a clean sheet of paper and had supposedly had supercar performance.

[csx700?]

SAAC is much like the "kit car" industry that shelby wants to run out of town. It wasn't shelby that kept the interest in these cars going, it was the enthusiasts & clubs. Thank you Carroll for being partially responsible for the cobra being produced but you left it for dead long ago..........others saw to it that it continued to live on. Look at it like a parent that put it's child up for adoption..........it's gone to a good home where it is being well taken care of!

[Excaliber]

Just recieved notice I was high bidder on the new magazine from Shelby, cost me $31 with shipping.

...excuse me now, I gotta go shower, feel all dirty somehow...

[What'saCobra?]

Nedley
If i gave you the blueprints to the car for your use, i would certainly expect my blueprints back, unless i specifically said at the time you could keep them. But, nothing prevents you from making quality copies for your own use as the information is now public and that publication was accepted by CS et al. To further the objectives of open source availability of data to aid in preventing deceptions, you might separately publish those docs.

IMHO, you are the only person who has taken that Cobra raw material and created an important product and service with the use of same. Your work and imagination were important and the critical value-added to not only create both the product and service, but particularly to "police" the various frauds that continue to be foisted on a moderately unsophisticated public. SAAC certainly retains ownership of the publishing of that data, IMO; but that might be contended. My only point was that contention is more likely when one picks a public fight and uses charged language gratuitously.

i realize that others have managed other car histories in the Registry.

Turk
You may certainly criticize my lack of insider knowledge. Or anything else you wish. But, at some point this story will get a reality check and we shall see what we shall see. i see the lawyer's letter as only an initial attempt at getting what Shel' thinks is his own property back. Is there a previously initial letter and are you privy to it?

If it is true that SAAC have not even responded to two letters, have purposely avoided publishing a more conciliatory initial lawyer's letter and have firstly responded with this amateurish press release, SAAC isn't the good guy and won't be found such by most folks. Seeking defense funds from the public and not making all those communications available might be quite a further error of judgement.

It is often quite inconvenient to have to hold elections, just to prove the poll results. Legal cases are frequently similar, right up to the day of court.

Perhaps i haven't learned much about this issue yet compared to the more cognizant and inside informed amongst us. You seem certain, so i accept that at the moment, as a given. Hopefully you will keep us all up to speed with your insider knowledge, to keep us from going too far astray. Your forecast of the outcome of this contest will be read with interest by this plebeian.
--------------------

Just because FORD and Shelby have current "issues" doesn't mean FORD will let their one-man PR personality be "screwed-over", even by himself. Too much future at stake.

i watched the British side of the Angliss/Shelby affair from close near-daily proximity in Weybridge, as a valued frequent customer and friend and knew Shel' was blowing smoke from his asymptote. And so it came to pass. i similarly watched the Angliss/FORD argument and knew sufficient Brit law to be confident that Angliss would prevail in the UK. And so it came to pass.
i also forecasted that the British public and automotive trade-press would not support FORD's attack on Angliss. And so it came to pass. FORD came away looking very bad and they deserved it.

i caution SAAC again to get better PR advice on this (not me, i am biased both ways) and act with wisdom, sans smart-assymetry. The public will not smile on anyone that sullies their heros for no good reason.

For example, observe Hollywood's current attempt to denigrate our troops (and thereby the President) with the soldier's rape of a 14 year-old Iraqi girl using mega-star power and cubic money. Quite differently than Henry Nostrilitis Waxman's salivating spittle-mouth, the public are staying away from Hollywood's anti-war BullPuckey in droves. People do not want to see truly ugly, insulting and unfair behavior as cover for political lies and political purposes.

Raising the argument to stratospheric and public heights is not an effective opening strategy or gambit with a genuine hot-head. He will see your bid and raise it just for the excitement. Remember, he is a race winner that bet his life on the outcome of those races, with no quarter given or opportunity missed. Even his lawyers likely do not understand who they have as a client.

It will be interesting, to be sure, but i wouldn't take on anyone that can publish their point of view by the 55-gallon barrels of ink and megawatts of TV interviews, without serious supporting contractual & legal documentation, which has been at least unrevealed to date.

It is less likely to re-establish the status quo ante bellum if the antagonist is convinced we are grossly unfair or/and congenital liars-by-omission, not worth re-establishment.

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by What'saCobra?

Nedley
If i gave you the blueprints to the car for your use, i would certainly expect my blueprints back, unless i specifically said at the time you could keep them. But, nothing prevents you from making quality copies for your own use as the information is now public and that publication was accepted by CS et al. To further the objectives of open source availability of data to aid in preventing deceptions, you might separately publish those docs.
...

Keeping some of that data secret has been part of SAAC's strategy to prevent fraud. For example, SAAC does not publish the Ford serial numbers that correspond to the Shelby serial numbers for GT350s and GT500s. They will only verify whether or not a given pair matches when asked. Thus someone creating an air car for an owner unknown Shelby serial number in the registry, will not know what ford number to use on their fake.

As a side note on open source, as a software developer, some day I really need to figure out the economics of open source software. Then maybe I can convince Doctors, Lawyers, Police Officers, etc. to just do their jobs for the greater good for free. It should help eliminate health care costs, taxes and let the people collect on lawsuits without lawyers taking a cut.

[Excaliber]

Pssstt, Whatsa, I think your referring to JAMO, haven't seen Turk around these parts for awhile...

[fsstnotch]

Ex, did you seriously pat $31 for that mag?! I could have had my wife send you a copy for about $9 maybe? I live in a small town! They still had maybe 4 or 5 copies when I picked mine up last week and they weren't going anywhere!

[What'saCobra?]

Serious apologies to Mr. Turk. And i suppose also to Mr. Jamo, somehow, for my attribution error. i need more rest. G'night EX.

Say, what are REAL's opinions about this new wrinkle? If the Registry is no longer published by SAAC (which i hope does not come to pass), will the "new" one be "REAL"?

[Bill Kesner]

Blah....blah....blah.....

There are always (2) sides to every story for some reason or another. If everyone was a little more open minded to both sides between SAAC and Shelby, this thread would not be filled with one sided opinions.

Let the two parties work this out themselves. This is just a hobby for many of us, It is not our life. Businesses change and move on. Surely there are more important issues going on around us than this.

- Bill -

[RodKnock]

I haven't looked at the number of shares outstanding or the type of shares available to the public, but maybe SAAC can find some venture capital around the country and buy SAI and its subsidiaries at that paltry $0.26 per share and install their own board of directors and stop the lawsuit. Unfortunately, I don't see much upside for anyone out there.

Is it time for a reverse split? Sheesh, the lawsuit could bankrupt SAI.

[427sharpe]

Well, well, well. If it hasn't hit the fan quite yet, the poop is certainly in the air. I have a stake in this argument (albeit a small one) in that I am an original owner. I cannot begin to think what will happen if CS takes over the registry of the cars he abandoned when the cash spigot shut off. I am sure he would sell as many copies of the 60's registry as possible, but he would not suffer the pains to research, update and correct those future editions. And what of CS's lack of moral compass in the cars themselves? Remember all of those 'lost' frames?!?!? If CS controls the registry, will he find 'lost' GT500s? KR's? Cobras again? And when CS' interest wanes yet again, what then? Who will be there to guard the breed? What damage will be done to the original owners by CS? He doesn't give a rats patoot about us anymore UNTIL we mean some cash flow. I have had enough of the man, and wholeheartedly endorse SAAC in this contest. Sorry, Amy. I think you are an honorable person, but I cannot join CS 'Team'.
The $50 is better sent to SAAC's LDF. Perhaps it has come time for the little guys to enter the fray....maybe a class action lawsuit by original owners who may be damaged by the loss of SAAC.

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

I haven't looked at the number of shares outstanding or the type of shares available to the public, but maybe SAAC can find some venture capital around the country and buy SAI and its subsidiaries at that paltry $0.26 per share and install their own board of directors and stop the lawsuit. Unfortunately, I don't see much upside for anyone out there.

Is it time for a reverse split? Sheesh, the lawsuit could bankrupt SAI.

I highly doubt that the number of publicly traded shares is a large enough percentage of the total shares to gain any sort of controlling interest or have any impact on the voting at the shareholder meeting. The publicly traded shares are probably not even the same classification as the shares held by Shelby and other major shareholders.

[Jamo]

Whatsa...if you fail to distinguish between Turks and Armenians, you do need some rest.

I'm experienced enough not to opine as to what might occur at so early a stage and without knowing all that should be known. That is for uninformed talking heads, or tapping fingers, as it were. I'm also experienced enough to know that folks commenting on what tactics should be used by looking only at what is known, generally fail to tactically consider what might not be known...rather embarrassing at a negotiation table or before the bar at a later stage.

You can type for eternity as to why you think you know something because you saw a circle from a "near-daily proximity"...it's really not being a part of the circle, is it. And now Hollywood and international politics somehow affect the very essence of our appreciation of these little bastardized cars. You've really run out of tantilizing tidbits for pleading with folks to pay attention to your oft-repeated ramblings...and then, at long last, you finally suggest that you might be lacking a few watts to see what the dark hides.

When one realizes their zipper is down, it is best to proceed carefully so as not to catch oneself on the way up.