13
« on: October 30, 2008, 10:58:57 PM »
From TC...just thought it was appropiate here as well...
I don't think it is all about money to some......The practices of "yesterday" are now today's news...except in this case it looks like this was "today's practice.." Unless "you" modify your thought process instead of in front of the curve you end up behind it..I would suspect that is the case here..IMO JM probably needs to change his process or again IMO stop it altogether if certain practices can't be deduced..
Another case in point...'69 Yenko last three of VIN 272, Daytona Yellow..(don't worry..I discussed this back in 2003 on Yenko.net....caught flak back then..as saying "rebody" was like calling the Pope a name..lol) was a local race car, a known Yenko, a car I used to ride in and cruise Broad Street here in Richmond in, was actually used as Don Yenko probably envisioned.. got abused, cut up, and then in the late 90's.."restored"...all before the 'net and the sharing of info we have today..Unfortunatly in 2003 the then owner didn't know the previous history of his car...I'm sure it was a surprise to find out his "restored" car used to be a 9 sec bracket car which set low et at the 1995 Richmond Super Chevy Show..1 real Yenko VIN, 1 uncut firewall with original tags in place, a bunch of parts from God only knows how many cars..and viola....1 factory original, restored Yenko...a real car with real history...just not a lot of "real" parts save an unpierced cowl with original tag, the VIN tag, and a metal dash
Another example..the items we use as documentation..look at POP's..Who here is going to say a POP bought through Hemmings in 1992 (made on the same GM machines, with the same GM tape, using the same warranty book and metal card as the factopry did) isn't the real deal?? How many POP's which were used over the last 7 years (when the market was hot) to validate a car were actually made in the '80's/'90's??? I'd bet more than a few...especially on Camaros...Is JM responsible for deciding if the ink is '69 or '89 vintage??
There are countless cars which fall into this type of catagory...That is why doing your research is vital today...Unfortunatly because GM didn't envision these cars would be collectible and we are enthusiast have..we have to use ALL of the resources available to us to determine originality...Jerry's report or one like it, is just 1 piece of the equation...and a piece which is open to interpetation as it doesn't address ALL of the potential pitfalls (ie: Is this body shell the same one this VIN left the plant with...was this POP made in 1969 or 1989 and its' just aged?) That is why when paying for a collectible you need to look beyond what is being presented..do some legwork, invest your time and not only your money..
I would susggest the easiest way going forward if someone wants to guarantee their money with these cars...and to not end up in this type of situation...is just evaluate what it would take to build the car...what the parts and labor are worth and pay that...This is what other collectors in other hobbies have to do...It might not be the answer people want to hear..but IMO it is the only answer at this junction..
The sad truth is there isn't any 100% foolproof way to know what you THINK you have is what you TRULY have...unless you bought it new...
__________________
Show Posts