Disclaimer: The following is just my two cents on the subject, if you like it, great, if you don't, sorry, but this is a public "DISCUSSION" forum and you post here, of your own free will, we did not force you to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by STLUCIE
The car is CSX3145. My questions aren't really specific to this car or the loss of use matter, I just want to know, in general, are raced Cobras the only ones of historical significance and whether 289s are more desirable than 427s (because they were raced vs. 427s which were not?) Thank you, Bill.
|
The problem with CSX3145 is that it was never "professionally raced", so there is no vintage records of logbooks for the car from any racing organizations. As such, then yes, whatever racing the car may have done, is inconsequential to the value of the car. Historical documents, from racing organizations may negate my statement, but once again, without them, it's just folk lore for the car and it's previous ownership chain. In other words, value is set at time of ownership being changed. In the 70's, the value was very little, but a value just the same was set between a seller, and a buyer. As time goes by, this same time related value, between buyer and seller, is once again set. Nothing more, nothing less.
Now, my thoughts on the issues at hand (remembering, only the lawyers, and folks like yourself, will be paid, no matter how the courts find at the end of the suit) in regards to the legal wrangling currently going on, and yes, I know you did not ask, but I'm putting it out there just the same:
As far as ownership history goes, the "swap" as noted in the history is the deciding factor, what was swapped for, at that time, a non operable vehicle that was not worth what it is today? Was it an equitable swap "at that time". Did Dennis not bother to title it in his name because it was just a project car at that time? There are many here who have done the same, which muddies the waters even further. Yet, if the title to the car, was signed by Dennis's brother, who was then swapping the car to Dennis for whatever the other side of the equation was, then Dennis's brother holds no rights to the car, whether it was retitled or not. So, when Dennis sold the car in 1989, the sales was between Dennis and the other party, with his brother being owned nothing else, as he had already received his compensation in the earlier transaction.
Bill S.