Man, some guys just never have enough money. Pretty sad days in America when you will sue your own fan club which has helped keep your legend going strong.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...1064/1530/FREE

 

This has been discussed at length and this is a typical one sided article. There are 2 sides to every story and I can promise you that Kopec and Eber are no angels....but they use articles like this to play victim.

There is a legitimate gripe from Shelby here. Another factoid left out is that SAAC apparently hasn't even paid for many years now... the $1 (yes ONE dollar) per year that CS generously gave them as a licensing fee.

 

Shelby has stated a lot of claims regarding mismanagement at the SAAC and failure to comply with contractual agreements. The SAAC operators deny any of that. This is why we have courts.

In the end, it's Shelby's name, and I tend to side with him that he should excercise control regarding how it is used.

 

I was PO'd after reading that article, too. But after reading Shelby's rebuttal, and doing further research, I have to take Shelby's side on this one. But as Torch said, it's for the court system to decide now.

 

You are being nice here, WAY nice...

 

Yeah, this is totally one sided story.

 

Both sides will get their chance if this actually goes to a trial. You should also know that SAAC filed a lawsuit against Shelby in Massachusetts the day before (and despite their press release gloating how they "beat him to the punch," seem to love playing up that they are the victims here).

We will see . . . morally right or wrong, for SAAC to pretend a written contract never existed, then to say it existed, but that they were "tricked" into signing it, doesn't make them any more credible than they make Shelby out to be. By the way, those aren't unsubstantiated rumors, those came right from SAAC letters and legal paperwork.

Mike

 

Shelby claims the club has made a lot of money but "never counted me in on anything," according to a Dec. 3, 2007, report in Automotive News.

Perhaps SAAC did not directly wet Shelby's beak although the continuous promoting and support of his cars without any cost to Shelby might not be viewed as worthless given the fact SAAC did not give up on his products as Shelby did and kept the enthusiasm going and eventually maintaing demand.

Perhaps SAAC should take a page out of Robert Lane's book and agree to all of Shelby's terms and demands in exchange for a couple of interviews.

Sounds like a good deal to me!

 

Hate to say it, but it happened to the Cobra Kit Car makers. He sued them for building a Cobra Kit Car, and using the word Cobra. I guess he has the word Cobra trademarked.

 

I thought Ford had Cobra trademarked. There's a ton of things in the FRPP catalog that either have Cobra or a snake badge on them.

 

Yes, I know....WAY too nice!!!

 

Cobra is not owned my Shelby if I understand correctly. I think Ford does own the Cobra name, which is why the Shelby Series 1 was not a 'Cobra.' I also think the whole kit car thing was to make sure there was a difference between them and real Cobras... no AC there as the car's name was just Cobra. Ford then bought the rights to the name I believe and has had it ever since, thus they can use the snake badge and name.

 

After production stopped of the "1970" Shelbys, Carroll Shelby sold the rights to the Cobra name to Ford for $1.00. He then changed his mind and wanted the name back. Ford would not budge and that is why they were on the outs for a long time. I believe they came to some agreement but I'm not sure exactly what it was. I believe it is correct that Ford still has it because it's true that you don't see it on SGTs or SGTHs anywhere.

 

They do.

 

I have said it once, and I'll say it again. Carroll Shelby is a businessman, no different than Bill Gates or Donald Trump. Business, and the object of business, making money, is a harsh, harsh business. I give Shelby a LOT of credit for starting several charities, as well as helping children south of the border in the '60s when it wasn't "in vogue" to do any sort of charity work. God bless him for keeping his integrity intact with his work for charity.
-Jim

 

In case you missed it: "All the proceeds from the (GT500KR at the Barrett-Jackson auction) sale went to the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation..." not to the Carroll Shelby Children's Foundation which had been the recipient of Ford donated cars sold at the auction. That enthusiastic announcement came from a Ford rep during the introduction of the GT500KR.

Shelby and his dream team lawyers best not brag too much of his charity work and hope for a judge who is not informed on the percentage of the collected donations which have actually been distributed to charity.

 

Shelby stated in one of his rebuttals that the goal of his foundation initially is to raise money and build up a "war chest" if you will. And that is true with most any foundation. The goal of a foundation is to amass enough money so that the foundation can be self-perpetuating, and use further donations and interest gained from the endowment to distribute to charity. The endowment is left intact to continue to fund the foundation.

 

That's commendable. Being able to build a "war chest" and accumulating dividends while his business was in debt for millions of dollars and expenses stacking up is an amazing feat which can only be accomplished by those exceptionally skilled in economics.

I would not mind having his accountants doing my tax returns.

 

Let me know how it works out. I might join you

 

I am on the case. If I succeed I'll share the info...for a reasonable tax deductible donation.