Shelby and SAAC at Odds

"The Caine Mutiny" ....and it was "the shhtrawberries..."

Great movie.

 

It seems obvious that this whole effort is to get control of The Registry. What are the chances SAAC looses the data to CS in court?

 

If it makes it that far (CS seems not to have a lot of courtroom victories) the data was voluntarily submitted or collected for the registry, SAAC, and the membership. I suppose Shelby could get the info collected in his warehouse attic if he has a reciept or signed inventory list of what was loaned/given to SAAC.
My concern is that CS is wanting non-enthusiast to control his legacy. I'm thinking 5-10 years from now Team Shelby will be history (seems to be the life span of most CS ventures) and SAAC or USAAC (Unauthorized Shelby American Automobile Club) is still around in some form.
Just wish the hardheads on both sides would meet today and work out whats best for the current and future owners and enthusiast of Shelby's Marque.

 

USAAC has a nice ring to it.

 

This is a small extract from the 1997 Shelby Registry that Carroll Shelby forwarded: I'd be pretty upset if after all this time someone tryed to take away what this amazing Club has put togeather.

" One of the reasons these cars are so exceptional is because of what they accomplished. Everyone who worked for Shelby American had a hand in that. But once we CLOSED the company's doors, we stepped out of the picture. If it wasn't for a small handful of owners and enthusiasts who dedicated themselves to these cars, the Cobras and Shelby Mustangs would be just so many old, used cars today. That dedication is illustrated by this registry. When we were building the cars, our goal was to get them out the door and into the hands of dealers and owners. We never paid much attention to how many were four speeds and how many were automatics, or how many were painted red, or to any of the small details that todays owners find so interesting.
The Shelby American Automobile Clubs Exceptional dedication is responsible for keeping the bloodline of these cars from being diluted by fakes and look-alikes. That translates into the continuing high level of interest in them as well as their high values. The publication of a book like thisassures Cobras and Shelby Mustangs their rightful place in automotive history. An incredible amount of work has gone into gathering the information contained in this book, sorting though it, organizing it and then turning it into printed page. It is turly a labor of love for everyone who was involved. I know what thats all about, because the cobra was a labor of love for me.
signed Carrol Shelby"

 

Wow, an impressive post XL428. And I mean that in a very sincere and heart felt way for all concerned.

 

This shows Mr. Shelby sees value in The Registry.

He wants to take a SAAC engine and put it under the hood of Team Shelby. He's good at engine swaps..

 

If all the SAAC members bought a copy of the registry, that'd be about $1M; if half refuse the registry? ...a half-million ...not bad income for folks who are supposedly so worried about Shelby allegedly wanting to carry out his evil plot to bilk the members if he owned the SAAC registry. Could some major bilking be already underway ...and not by Shelby?

What do you all think the SAAC registry actually costs to print (the real numbers)? Whose pockets do those profits go into? <lol> There are other questions I wonder about that I just won't post here because it wouldn't be appropriate on a public forum.

I wonder what SAAC's financial statements actually look like. I suspect Shelby does too. You know, the ones SAAC hasn't povided to Shelby though mandated in the contract they signed ...the very same contract that gave SAAC license to Shelby TM-assets ...and for the exorbitant price of $1/year <lol>. And SAAC apparently had dificulty honoring that too! You'd have to be blind, imo, to not see how SAAC has profited off of Shelby's back over the years. If you want to see sharks circling a potential kill, go and view those videos that were posted earlier. Sharks are very carefull and patient predators, you know <lol>

Now you take a quote from Shelby out of context -- clearly what would be considered a "celebrity endorsement" in the truest sense of the words -- and want to use it to show how SAAC made him what he is? Get a grip! What court in the US would let you use that quote against the same person who was endorsing you in a business relationship and trying to help you succeed as a club ...you know what a club is ...those not-for-profit public-benefit organizations that typically bind enthusiasts of all kinds.

You guys think judges are stupid? Could that quote be from an era when Shelby was naively unaware of how SAAC leadership would financially profit or was financially profiting from their relationship with him ...when he thought the club was solely run by devoted volunteers trying to benefit his enthusiast base/following and therefore was willing to give a sweetheart licensing deal with minimal compliance stipulations? You know, a quid pro quo or sorts. I think those are interesting and valid questions to contemplate, don't you? I think a court would think so too, don't you? Who would they find are the financial beneficiaries of the club activities besides the members (which is mandated under the law)? Shelby, who was +/-$10M in the red before the Ford bluebird? I doubt it. Who's left? Bingo!

So did Shelby know how lucrative the club became? How could he without the contract-stipulated annual financial statements? What a bunch of stand-up guys!

Does anyone else think these are interesting questions?

 

No.

 

The "hardheads" you speak of are doing battle right now. It has everything to do with money... and very very little to do with "Marque"... If there was no money to be made here all the parties would still be pals.
jimbo

 

SAAC is all about the marque, always has been. Considering the time consuming process of acquiring and keeping the records accurate for so many years, is it not justified that they should receive some compensation? What is a fair amount and why do YOU care? The laborer is worthy of his hire. SAAC should be allowed to keep that which they have created. Shelby did not do the work, as he acknowledges.

The above Shelby quote from the registry is not out of context, it is accurate and as applicable today as it was then. Some say the cars would be worth as much today with or without SAAC. As Shelby notes, that is NOT the case, and I agree. Without the registry there would be a number of 'fakes', 'air cars' and 'fraud cars' that would certainly dilute the current values. This would make it most frustrating to confirm an original cars identity. Some cars would have simply been lost due to inability to confirm their identity.

But it's clear that some can only see this through 'legal eyes' and dismiss the larger ethical questions as irrelevant.

 

I agree that Shelby's comments can be placed in the proper context and there isn't much ambiguity in his stated appreciation for SAAC (at least at the time). Obviously things change, but he did say it.

On the other hand, someone about fifteen pages ago posted one of Kopec's or Pardee's statements, possibly from the same Registry, in which he also stated his appreciation for Shelby's help and admitted that Shelby generously LOANED him all sorts of documents used to create the Registery, documents that would go back to Shelby whenever he asked. That seems to be opposite to what SAAC is now saying ("oh no, he GAVE us those documents and he can't or shouldn't have them back").

Why not use the same set of ethics and scrutinize both sides?

Mike

 

Mike...there is so much disinformation flying about....iit's hard to keep the full story straight.

Rick Kopec responded in early December with regard to CS's referenced allegation about the 'attic' paperwork.

The essence:

 

+1 Maybe that's "why now" and why Shelby is 'through with them.'

---

I think it's easy to confuse the members benefitting from all the good work that SAAC has done (validation, clone-screeing, registry, etc) in return for their annual membership dues, with a personal Shelby benefit. The club is not a benefit to Mr. Shelby personally, imo (except to the extent he's wanting to screen one of his own cars <lol>) and his rockstar status is orthogonal to who runs the club, whether the present cast or other club members with a new team. What matters is that the work continues in some competant fashion. I just don't see how whose receiving compensation at SAAC for what was a work of love are now somehow the only ones who can perform that task satisfactorily.

Nevertheless, in return for a dedicated club taking good care of the enthusiasts and fans of his products, he clearly offered, and both parties executed, a sweetheart licensing agreement/contract ...one that either party can terminate if they become displeased at any time. Maybe the club officials were only looking at the benefit of the agreement legitimizing their activities, but there were also obligations/responsibilities ...simple as they were to comply with. Why did that not happen at some point? Did it truly happen at any point?

Possibly the club officials should have terminated that agreement themselves when the joy of doing what they did was no longer adequate compensation for their efforts. Possibly Shelby should have terminated it at the first hint of non-compliance. Maybe he sensed a growing arrogance, difficulty relating, ulterior motives or who knows what (surely not I) before deciding he was 'through with them' (if that's the quote). Maybe that's "why now?" It's kinda like a long relationship ...very hard to come to grips with terminating it at the first whif of perfume because it just doesn't necessarily mean there's been any wrongdoing.

That's now history, it would seem, along with Mr. Shelby's prior interest in a business realtionship with the SAAC management team. That's is his perogative though.

Maybe Shelby forms a new team. Maybe SAAC continues unendorsed under a new name and without using any Shelby names/marks in their business ventures. Maybe they all kiss an make up (not holding my breath on that one).

On one level I wish this problem would just go away. On another level I want to see justice served for ignoring the contract, but in a way that does not negatively affect the membership. I think there are solutions for that and I hope that's what we'll ultimately see. Just my .02 (...again <lol>).

Dan

 

So, does that mean all such materials have been returned to Shelby?

What about the merchandise allegedly created with no license during the periods of contract non-compliance? Has that been shipped off to Shelby?

I didn't think so.

---

Btw, I really chuckled at the part about the single bare light bulb <lol> ...it was a very visual description ...I could almost 'smell' the dust in the attic ...very articulate description and an enjoyable read.

 

No (I guess)...he said he didn't want it back. (Maybe...dunno for sure) <lol>

No, the contract is still in effect, isn't it? There is no period of non-compliance.

Next?

 

I didn't want to get things sidetracked with my example re: the "attic paperwork," I just used that as an example of people's changing perspectives and memories when in different situations. Maybe CS said he didn't need the papers returned, then or ever, only two people probably know. Brass on the Titanic, as they say. I think CS's own press release clearly explains his feelings on the whole issue - no need for us to sit here and parse his statements.

Sorry - I'm sympathetic to SAAC, but also cognizant of the application of the law and the value of a contract between two businessmen (I am a lawyer in the non-internet world).

Mike

 

What will be or has been returned is not that easy to ascertain. It will take some time to sort out the details of who owns what, how they got it and who gets to keep it. You would think from Shelbys (and supporters) perspective he is entitled to everything. Not so fast! It remains to be determined who gets what. And who gets what is just as important to me from a legal as well as an honorable standpoint. No foul on SAAC's part working under the assumption the 'stuff' was not required to be returned, now that it IS 'required' (if indeed that is true), give them time to figure it out.

 

Dan,

This one line shows your complete bias to this whole affair. Say anything else you like, but as a casual observer who has not been around Shelby or SAAC for very long, your lack of faith on the part of SAAC is disturbing to say the least.


As for court, the only ones to win in a court battle are the lawyers, and to be quite frank with you, they are the only ones who seem to want to push both sides into court.

Again I'll ask, why is it you as a non Shelby owner seems to be so adamantly against SAAC. From reading your other posts (all of them), it's clear you have not done your homework on the issue, or on the members who are responding to you. For if you had, you would not have made quite a few of the statements you have to date.

Yours In Fords (do a web search),

Bill S.
Proud Multiple (past, present, future) Shelby owner and SAAC member.

 

Sorry, Mike...I "underquoted" the clip.

Nevertheless, the "attic" paperwork, as written up by SAAC, was no doubt helpful as historical glue, filling in blanks in original logistics.... invoices from Ford, AC, etc. However that is just one element of the historical library. A trailer full of paperwork from Ford, headed for the dumpster, also helped weave the historical fabric.

I don't think giving the whole dumpster-load of stuff back is an issue...or a big thing... since it is but a small part of the Registry of data collected over 30-odd years.