Kirkham in Shelby Registry

[JWheaton]

Originally Posted by Power Surge

So is New Britain like a Continuation England? Maybe ERAs have more validity to originals than new CSXs do!

....I knew someone would start putting it all together.

Thanks Sal.

[REAL 1]

Mr. Kopec's informal response sets forth a legitmate reason to include Kirkhams in the registry regardless of the fact they are not considered by SAAC as genuine Cobras. They could lend themselves to being sold as originals by the unscrupulous. There are other reasons however, that I think justify their inclusion that I set forth in my original posts on this thread.

To illustrate I would simply point out that not only are Kirkhams included in the registry there will be the inclusion of Brock coupes, Lone Star and the new Ford GT. I don't think there is anyway they could be mistaken for an original. Therefore there are other reasons for including these cars. Some I can understand others I have no clue. Therefore as I said there may be multiple reasons for including any one type of car.

Xl8or: I don't know what you don't get or understand. It has nothing to do with ego or saying mine is better or getting my panties in a wad as many try to twist what I say. All I do is point to SAAC's official statement on their web page and what they accept the Continuatoin Cobra as. There may be multiple reasons for including various cars in the registry including preventing fraud later down the line especially with cars that are exact to spec but not original. I have no issue with trying to insure that there is no fraud and maintaining the purity of the originals. Thats a legitmate reason to include Kirkhams or any car that is exactly as original....i.e... to keep track of cars to prevent fraud. It also keeps someone from passing off a Kirkham as a Continuatoin Series.

[cobred]

This thread is getting a little played out. I just dont see how putting the Kirkhams into a Shelby registry is going to prevent future fraud. If someone is going to fake a Kirkham into a CSX the vin. would have to be changed, so because the car is in the book that will prevent it? (I dont think so Tim). I may be wrong but I think the registry is something that should be reserved for Shelbys only, past, present and future.

[JBo]

Here we go again:
Shelby threatens to end licensing deal with performance car maker

Kathy Jackson
Automotive News
October 5, 2007 - 5:17 pm ET



LOS ANGELES -- Unique Performance Inc. will lose its license from Carroll Shelby Licensing Inc. to produce high-performance cars if Unique does not satisfy customer complaints.

Shelby Licensing says Unique has a backlog of 50 to 60 vehicles.

Since 2002, Unique, headquartered near Dallas, has partnered with former race car driver Carroll Shelby to refurbish and re-engineer vintage Shelby Mustangs of the 1960s. The cars include the GT500E Eleanor and the GT350SR, which sell from about $100,000 to more than $200,000.

But in a letter to Unique CEO Douglas Hasty, Shelby Licensing threatens to end the license agreement. Shelby Licensing says Unique has failed to deliver vehicles and return deposits totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Hasty declined to comment.

Customers have filed lawsuits against Unique. For instance, in a Sept. 4 lawsuit filed in federal court in Texas, Robert Garner contends he signed an agreement with Unique in May 2005 for the purchase of a $189,000 GT500E Super Snake with a deposit of $94,500. In May 2006, he made another deposit of $47,250.

To date, Garner has no car and says Unique has refused to return his deposits.

Another federal suit, filed Sept. 18 in Texas by Alan Cummins, alleges that he bought a defective Super Snake in August 2004 from Unique for $188,300 and that Unique has neither repaired the vehicle nor returned the plaintiff's money.

Cummins' lawsuit says it may add Carroll Shelby as a defendant because Shelby endorses the vehicles made by Unique.

In a press release, Shelby Licensing President John Luft said: "Carroll Shelby Licensing has had no choice but to give Unique notice that its license agreements with Shelby are subject to termination. We, as the licensor, must carry the burden of protecting the good will associated with the Shelby brand."

Besides the Shelby vehicles, Unique also manufactures vehicles designed by car customizer Chip Foose -- including a 1969 Chevrolet Camaro, 1970 Dodge Challenger and the Foose Stallion, based on the current Mustang.

[clayfoushee]

I am somehow comforted that all is "right" (translation: "perversely bizarre") with the "Cobra" world after a quick scan through this.

As someone who would never buy "the next" registry, even after "pigs fly," it doesn't matter to me if it doesn't come out until 2025, which is looking more likely.

[Supersnakes]

Parties District Court Judge Type of Lawsuit Cause of Action
June 7, 2006
Carroll Shelby Licensing Inc v. Lubinsky CA Central Other Contract

December 21, 2005
Carroll Shelby Licensing Inc et al v. Jon A Wilhelm CA Central King Trademark

May 4, 2005
Carroll Hall Shelby v. Stephen Gerard Becker et al CA Central Pregerson Trademark

October 25, 2004
Denice Shakarian Halicki v. Carroll Shelby International Inc et al CA Central Otero Copyrights

[Jamo]

Finally, some good came from this thread...an "old friend" came back just in time to allow some unfinished business.

Only suspended...for two years.

[Mark IV]

Originally Posted by JBo

Shelby Licensing says Unique has a backlog of 50 to 60 vehicles.


But in a letter to Unique CEO Douglas Hasty, Shelby Licensing threatens to end the license agreement. Shelby Licensing says Unique has failed to deliver vehicles and return deposits totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Hasty declined to comment.

Customers have filed lawsuits against Unique. For instance, in a Sept. 4 lawsuit filed in federal court in Texas, Robert Garner contends he signed an agreement with Unique in May 2005 for the purchase of a $189,000 GT500E Super Snake with a deposit of $94,500. In May 2006, he made another deposit of $47,250.

To date, Garner has no car and says Unique has refused to return his deposits.

Another federal suit, filed Sept. 18 in Texas by Alan Cummins, alleges that he bought a defective Super Snake in August 2004 from Unique for $188,300 and that Unique has neither repaired the vehicle nor returned the plaintiff's money.

Cummins' lawsuit says it may add Carroll Shelby as a defendant because Shelby endorses the vehicles made by Unique.

In a press release, Shelby Licensing President John Luft said: "Carroll Shelby Licensing has had no choice but to give Unique notice that its license agreements with Shelby are subject to termination. We, as the licensor, must carry the burden of protecting the good will associated with the Shelby brand."

So based upon these allegations, Shelby Licensing must file suit against itself for failure to produce, deliver and return deposits on Series 1 cars and CSX "replica" (sorry, Evan) Cobras!

Not to beat a dead horse as Amy has done more to clean house and improve the customer service end of the Shelby empire than anyone in the last twenty years, and God bless her for telling the Emperor he has no clothes!

People, it's supposed to be a hobby! Relax your baloon knots!

And Robert Garner, call me...I have some crap to sell you for WAY too much money! Geez, where do they they find these fish?

[REAL 1]

MarkIV: Uh, Shelby Licensing isn't filing suit against itself. That is an inaccurate statement. They are withdrawing their licensing to a dealer that is not delivering.

As to the "replica" comment, that must have made you feel better. Had to get that in eh? Ouch! For your refresher please refer to www.SAAC.com In fact in reviewing what SAAC says it appears that the MarkIV is not even considered a genuine Cobra (replica or otherwise) Oops. Sorry MarkIV.

[cobred]

I think MarkIV is saying Shelby should sue themselves because of the backlog of CSX4000 Cobras.

[csx700?]

SAI
thier one to throw stones as far as delivering both in a timely manner and a quality product !? i'm not defending unique here in any way but both of these companies seem to have the same business ethics ? wait, sorry no ethics.............that's better !

* sorry this thread seems to have gone off in a different direction *

[lineslinger]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

It has nothing to do with ego or saying mine is better or getting my panties in a wad as many try to twist what I say.

Yeah, no ego interjections from you Evan, everyone realizes the important thing is to twist your words, must be tough out there in the realm of right all by yourself.
You never get your panties in a wad, I always seek out your posts when seeking logic and accountability.
Interesting how reactions and observations on commentary by others is flawed until we get clued in by the REAL ?.
Same old BS from you pal, different day.

[Jamo]

...anyway, thread's has petered out, so let's let it drop outta sight.