Shelby and SAAC at Odds

Or so (he can do NO wrong) pro Shelby?

Dan, I'm not just defending SAAC, I'm defending my love for the cars, history, and believe it or not, Shelby's Legacy. I don't mind Shelby giving SAAC a kick in the buttocks, but seems to me he wants to bury SAAC.

RussT

 

No period of non-compliance? Are you saying the terms of the license-agreement were honored each year since it was signed? I don't think so.

 

I'm not pro Shelby per se. I'm anti not honoring your obligations.

Dunno, maybe he does want to bury them. All he's actually done, I believe, is terminate the llicense agreement and apply for a wordmark of "SAAC." I suspect the modern-Shelby vehicle registry would be done by Team Shelby anyway. I thought I read that SAAC was not interested in a registry for the new cars, but I could be wrong.

I wish I did own a vintage Shelby Cobra. As a young teen they were the most desireable car of all to me. I remember Baldwin/Motion's two cars they campaigned on LI... a 289 and 427 -- awesome!!

 

Uh-oh....common ground.

You remember Joel Rosen?

 

Ha!

I was there too..
Those were the days
I mostly remember them kicking ass..
jimbo

 

It has been a while since I have posted here........... I just want to correct some of you who keep saying that CS terminated or pulled the contract from SAAC............ there is a BIG differance between Termenated/pulled and just deciding not the "Renew it". The contract ends, I believe, in February, and it will not be renewed.
On a different note......... just incase SAAC looses and does have to give back all the Paper Work....... have they started Copping them yet?
I am rooting for the Two making up and working things out to best fit everyone.
David.

 

Not to re-hash a sore subject, but numerous posts have been made that CS 'owns' certain trademarks. It is very true that filings have been made to trademark certain names (GT350, GT500, SAAC, Snakebite, etc...) but
none of those have been held to judicial review. Trademarks have been overturned in courts when a lack of representation has been made (not using or protecting the mark lets it fall into public domain). So before anyone assumes that such a claim exists, remember that it will be tested in the inevitable court battle between CS and SAAC, and that it may have far reaching consequences for both SAAC, CSL, SA's and CS. If you recall, he also applied for a 'tradedress' on the shape of the 427, but was rebuffed.

 

Yeah... wasn't he 'the man' at Motion Performance back then. I believe he worked on my '68.5 SBF302 Intermecchanica Italia and chassis and engine on my '74 2.8 V6 Capri (quick and great-handling 'stealth' ride for what it was). Blew off a lot SB Chevelles with both those cars and the Capri was faster around the cones than the Italia which was too twitchy near the limit with its unforgiving panhard ...Joel Rosen, I'm pretty certain that was him -- that brain cell is barely lighting up <lol>

When the Motion Cobras would show up at NY National, the SB and BB 'vettes would look for places to hide. I don't think I ever saw them lose a round (tho they must have occasionally).

I grew up in Astoria, Queens -- used to catch a ride in the early '60s with my older brother and his freinds to see the Cobras ...before there was a L.I.Expy ...good memories.

Common ground... yeah! ...imagine that ;-)

 

Sure were! Those Cobras had an amazing launch. The 289 was as quick as the 427 for the first 60' or so. Both were blue (??), if I recall ...great memories. S-U-N-D-A-Y! What a dinky place by today's standards. When I got a little older I had a '59 352BBF 4-door with stage-coach doors (a former livery car) that I souped-up a bit (heads/cam) with a 3-spd that always jammed. Drove home in reverse on more than one date!!

Later bought a new '68 S-code 390/325 -- stealth ...ordered a base mustang and then optioned it up becuse I didn't want the 'steal-me' C-stripe of the GT. Put a whole Shelby rear-end on it from a wrecked Shelby. That was as close to owning a Shelby as I ever got <sigh> but what I always wanted was a 427 Cobra

 

As I understand a 'non profit' it must do something like hold classes or offer training of some kind, at least that seems to be the case with SAAC. Due to this complexity it was decided to just file as a 'for profit' corp.

Even as a non profit I remain VERY skeptical of where the money goes/went. The rules concerning non profits (charities, etc.) are so freakin' lax it's just another way to rob contributors and stuff your pockets. MANY charities give out less than 5% of the take in. While the CEO's and various 'family members' reap huge income. Recent examples include a couple of charities directed by/for Veterans and the disgusting results of what was taken in vs what was given out.

I'd rather deal with a for profit group in that regard. The tax filings/requirements would be more likely to keep the money clear. With a profit group we often hear about the 'gross income' numbers but rarely see the 'expenses' numbers. I know in MY business looking at the 'gross' numbers you would think I'm doing fine, the actual take home is, well, pretty gross in terms of real dollars after expense!

In that regard I think Shelby Heart Fund is often misconstrued. That charity reports recent HUGE numbers in assets with little corresponding outflow. As I understand it the assets, which drive up the big number of dollars, are not all that liquid. If the value is based on say a 'car' and the car is just sitting there the group has to maintain it, insure it, care for it all of which COSTS money. Until and unless the car is sold you would have to conclude it's more of a liability than an asset.

Likewise BIG numbers are reported as income for SAAC, but we have no clear picture of expenses. It will be interesting to see how that works out. Maybe those SAAC guys ARE making more than 37 cents an hour, it might be 42 cents!

 

Yeah, it might be $.10/hr or $100K/year... can't tell ...that's likely why the licensing agreement clearly stipulated annual financial statements had to be provided by SAAC to Shelby Licensing. Maybe they felt that if some were to substantially profit at SAAC, then the $1/year license fee might no longer be an appropriate amount.

Also, don't confust a non-profit club with a not-for-profit 501c(3) corporation. As I understand it club rules are far easier to cope with and many states control them differently (in some states a club cannot hold more that 5% of it's annual dues across a fiscal filing boundary. I'm aware of at least one auto club in NYS that that the attorney general ordered to divest assets back to the members in cash or mutual benefit within 90 days (they opted for a huge party) to get the nums in line iwth the 5%.

I suspect the Shelby Childrens Fund is underpinned by a 501C(3) [dunno] has been in its asset building phase for along time. With the recent influx in donations probably largely due to Shelby's association with Ford and all the public attention that has garnered, they are likely now much closer to their sustainable philanthropic goals, so outflows should be increased in the near future (just my guess, but that cycle is typical from what I've read).

I think a Club is a different animal than a philanthropic not-for-profit 501c(3) Corp. Corporation tho both exist to benefit a particular audience. Possibly there are also differences state-to-state since 501C(3) is a federal classification and club rules are often determined at a state level, I believe.

Yeah, if you own your own business and calculate net income/hr worked, it's a whole lot less than it can look like in the financial statements, but wages/salaries are still line-items in any corporate financial statements I've seen.

 

All,

I think I've been messing up in the way I've put quotes from other members into my posts. I believe the point I'm trying to make is clear, but I don't think the person I'm quoting and responding to is being identified properly. Please forgive me. I'll try to learn and do better.

Steve​

 

Steve....

Just go to the post you want to quote and reply to...

And look for the "Quote" button in the lower right...



That will initiate a new post...with the prior post set up to show as a quote.

Start your reply below the area that is enclosed in the QUOTE tags.

 

Like this....