691
General Discussion / Re: Vinyl or Not?
« on: February 20, 2007, 03:54:09 AM »
Here is my green L89 with a green vinyl top... 
News:
Welcome to the CRG Discussion Forum!
Classified ads are not allowed on the forum.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
692
General Discussion / Re: "Camaro" by Cyrkle
« on: February 19, 2007, 03:14:19 PM »
Wierd...I just sold that record on Ebay yesterday.... http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=016&sspagename=STRK%3AMESO%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260086074633&rd=1,1
693
General Discussion / Re: Recommendation for Radiator and Electric Fans for Big Block
« on: February 14, 2007, 02:52:02 PM »
The Lincoln Mark VIII fan is the best I have ever used. I have two in cars now. There are other sources for the fan but I found this one on Ebay and posted the link. They move about 4500 CFM. This fan with virtually any big block rtadiator and you should be fine.
694
General Discussion / Re: Recommendation for Radiator and Electric Fans for Big Block
« on: February 14, 2007, 02:48:41 PM »695
Originality / Re: camaro with a slide back sun roof
« on: February 11, 2007, 03:45:10 PM »
I used to own a 70 Z28 called the Hurst Sunshine special that had a slide backvinyl sunroof. It was done by Hurst for GM as a test to see if they wanted to produce it. I think later it was a option on Buicks ?
696
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 09, 2007, 07:08:35 AM »
Interesting blog from someone who is in the know.
About Me
Name: Rick Carey
Auctions Editor of Car Collector and Victory Lane magazines. Reporting on the collector car auction market since 1991. Editor of Car Collector's Online Market Journal www.ccomj.com. For more see www.rickcarey.com.
His blog this subject:
Friday, February 02, 2007
The Barrett-Jackson Rumor Mill, Again
It’s no wonder Craig Jackson sometimes acts paranoid. How many times does Barrett-Jackson have to deal with uninformed rumors?
We’re still putting down the “the Futurliner didn’t sell for $4 million” stories, a year after the $3,680,000 (that’s the $4 million hammer bid less the 8% seller’s commission) wire transfer landed in Montreal.
This week it was “did you hear about the class action against B-J? It’s all over the Internet.”
Well, no I hadn’t, so I went looking.
I found someone named Sam Barer’s posting on his blog. A wide-ranging rant, it started off by accusing B-J of fraud (“some hobbyists are claiming a worst [sic]: fraud”), which must have gotten Mr. Jackson’s attention. Then there it was, Barer says someone “has filed papers with the court” and “this is already being discussed as translating into class-action status.”
Sam claims to be “a collector car journalist” who has “been watching the Barrett-Jackson auction for years.”
From reading his rambling posting it didn’t even appear that he was at B-J, much less on the block where he might have become aware of what goes on there so to find out I called the phone number for his company’s “Business Office.”
I reached Sam at home.
Not only wasn’t Sam at Barrett-Jackson this year, he’s never been to Barrett-Jackson at all. He has been “watching the Barrett-Jackson auction” though. On SPEED Channel. He watched the whole thing, he said – except for the parts he missed. And he “knows people” who’ve bought and sold cars at Barrett-Jackson.
When pressed, Sam admitted that he didn’t know if a suit had been filed. He further allowed that the “class action” was complete conjecture.
This is pathetic. Barrett-Jackson (and Craig Jackson and even Keith Martin who came in for his share of Barer-bashing) has been taking flack from someone who hasn’t any firsthand knowledge of what went on at Barrett-Jackson in 2007 (or any other year). He’s just dishing out recirculated rumors, then piling surmise and conjecture on top of them.
Barrett-Jackson has now issued a statement dealing with Mr. Barer’s rumors and surmise. The statement is clear, concise and factual, unlike the rambling rant that prompted it.
In the case of the lawsuit/class action rumor, there is no “there” there.
Craig Jackson isn’t the one who is paranoid.
Rick Carey
February 2, 2007
Labels: barrett-jackson, collector car auction
posted by Rick Carey at 3:12 PM 0 comments
About Me
Name: Rick Carey
Auctions Editor of Car Collector and Victory Lane magazines. Reporting on the collector car auction market since 1991. Editor of Car Collector's Online Market Journal www.ccomj.com. For more see www.rickcarey.com.
His blog this subject:
Friday, February 02, 2007
The Barrett-Jackson Rumor Mill, Again
It’s no wonder Craig Jackson sometimes acts paranoid. How many times does Barrett-Jackson have to deal with uninformed rumors?
We’re still putting down the “the Futurliner didn’t sell for $4 million” stories, a year after the $3,680,000 (that’s the $4 million hammer bid less the 8% seller’s commission) wire transfer landed in Montreal.
This week it was “did you hear about the class action against B-J? It’s all over the Internet.”
Well, no I hadn’t, so I went looking.
I found someone named Sam Barer’s posting on his blog. A wide-ranging rant, it started off by accusing B-J of fraud (“some hobbyists are claiming a worst [sic]: fraud”), which must have gotten Mr. Jackson’s attention. Then there it was, Barer says someone “has filed papers with the court” and “this is already being discussed as translating into class-action status.”
Sam claims to be “a collector car journalist” who has “been watching the Barrett-Jackson auction for years.”
From reading his rambling posting it didn’t even appear that he was at B-J, much less on the block where he might have become aware of what goes on there so to find out I called the phone number for his company’s “Business Office.”
I reached Sam at home.
Not only wasn’t Sam at Barrett-Jackson this year, he’s never been to Barrett-Jackson at all. He has been “watching the Barrett-Jackson auction” though. On SPEED Channel. He watched the whole thing, he said – except for the parts he missed. And he “knows people” who’ve bought and sold cars at Barrett-Jackson.
When pressed, Sam admitted that he didn’t know if a suit had been filed. He further allowed that the “class action” was complete conjecture.
This is pathetic. Barrett-Jackson (and Craig Jackson and even Keith Martin who came in for his share of Barer-bashing) has been taking flack from someone who hasn’t any firsthand knowledge of what went on at Barrett-Jackson in 2007 (or any other year). He’s just dishing out recirculated rumors, then piling surmise and conjecture on top of them.
Barrett-Jackson has now issued a statement dealing with Mr. Barer’s rumors and surmise. The statement is clear, concise and factual, unlike the rambling rant that prompted it.
In the case of the lawsuit/class action rumor, there is no “there” there.
Craig Jackson isn’t the one who is paranoid.
Rick Carey
February 2, 2007
Labels: barrett-jackson, collector car auction
posted by Rick Carey at 3:12 PM 0 comments
697
General Discussion / Re: Cowl Tags from the B-J
« on: February 05, 2007, 05:29:36 AM »
Rear axle was not a restamp.. I don't remember if the trans was but the engine and rear were orig. Trans might have been orig. but I just don't remember.
698
General Discussion / Re: NEED INFO
« on: February 04, 2007, 03:46:09 PM »
I have never heard of it. I have been to Jay Lenos shop and didn't see it. Leno is not really into musclecars.
699
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 03, 2007, 10:14:36 PM »
I just found my copies of some of the paperwork on the blue JL8 Z. Orig.window sticker, Car shipper, purchase contract, Letter dated August 69 from Chevrolet offering to swap out the chambered exhaust for quieter exhaust, article in July 1972 Car Craft on the car pitting it against a Boss 302 and even talking about the 4 wheel disc brakes. Another article in Cars magazine where they add Blackjack headers, Lakewood traction bars, Mallory Super CD,Hays clutch. Options per the window sticker were ...fold down seat,console,spoilers, 410 posi, 4-wheel disc, M21 trans, Rosewood wheel, guages,am radio,Special front bumper,ducted hood,Z28, Black houndstooth deluxe interior.
I don't remember the build date on the car but as I recall it was built within a week of when Emanuel took delivery. Built in LA and sold new in LA. If I could afford it I would love to have that car back. In 72 it ran a 13.85@105. Great car. I think the guy is nuts if he sends it back.
I don't remember the build date on the car but as I recall it was built within a week of when Emanuel took delivery. Built in LA and sold new in LA. If I could afford it I would love to have that car back. In 72 it ran a 13.85@105. Great car. I think the guy is nuts if he sends it back.
700
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 03, 2007, 09:57:17 PM »
Out of 1200 cars there I'm guessing most had the descriptions embellished. We all have different opinions of what restored it, show quality paint etc. The misleading thing on this car would be dealer installed crossram. But they don't tell you what dealer or when. A dealer that had it a year ago would probably qualify.
701
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 03, 2007, 02:51:02 PM »
LOL...Not the best Z28 in the world but a great car with great history and paperwork. It was restored by a non Camaro guy that owned it for years so it had the usual resto errors. Why he would not want it is beyond me. I have seen Larry get carried away critiquing little things on cars and ignore the big picture. I hope that is not the case.
702
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 03, 2007, 12:23:03 AM »
Here is a Press Release from Barrett Jackson, outlining their position on this matter:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. – February 1, 2007
Earlier this week, officials at the Barrett-Jackson Auction Company were made aware of a “blog” making
false allegations regarding the Company’s business practices. While the author of the blog decided to
remove the posting after receiving a written statement from Barrett-Jackson, the original blog content has
been copied to numerous other Web sites and other locations on the Internet. The reply from Barrett-
Jackson has not been copied to these additional locations.
The statements published in the original posting, and repeated in numerous other forums since that time,
are untrue and are potentially harmful to Barrett-Jackson’s business interests. Barrett-Jackson issues the
following statement for the purposes of clarifying the situation and providing its position regarding the
accusations made against the Company.
•
There is no lawsuit against Barrett-Jackson alleging improper or unlawful auction practices.
•
Barrett-Jackson has historically offered a combination of reserve and no reserve vehicles across
the auction block. In a sale with a reserve, a vehicle is not sold if the reserve price is not met. In a
no reserve sale, every vehicle that crosses the block is sold to the highest bidder, regardless of the
amount of the last bid that is made before the fall of the auctioneer’s hammer. In a no reserve sale,
the owner of a car may not bid (by himself or through an agent) on his own car.
•
In recent years, Barrett-Jackson has run auctions that are completely no reserve. This is a
business decision made by Barrett-Jackson; there is no legal or other requirement that all vehicles
be sold at no reserve. In the future, Barrett-Jackson may opt to offer vehicles with a reserve.
•
Owner buy-backs and so-called “chandelier” or “shill” bidding are forbidden on all no reserve
vehicles sold at Barrett-Jackson. The practice is specifically prohibited in the consignment contract
signed by each seller.
•
Barrett-Jackson’s auction staff monitors all bid activity to the best of its ability while a vehicle is on
the block. If Barrett-Jackson sees that an owner (or someone known to be the owner’s agent) is
bidding on his own vehicle, the Company stops the bidding and reverts to the last bid.
•
With the size of Barrett-Jackson’s auction venue and the presence of thousands of registered
bidders, it is physically impossible to guarantee that no owner (or an unidentified owner’s agent)
attempts to bid on his own vehicle. For this reason, it is Barrett-Jackson’s policy to penalize any
owner who successfully bids on his own vehicle by charging that person both the seller’s
commission and the buyer’s premium on that vehicle. This penalty serves as a meaningful
deterrent for those who may otherwise choose to ignore the rules. Individuals who fail to abide by
auction regulations may also be barred from participating in future Barrett-Jackson events.
Page 2
•
Barrett-Jackson continually updates its practices and procedures to implement additional measures
to prohibit owner buy-backs and to prevent the practice of “chandelier” bidding in any no reserve
situation. These procedures include a continually evolving use of technology and visual aids to
assist the auction staff in identifying owners who may attempt to bid on their own vehicles.
•
State and federal auction laws provide that the auctioneer has discretion in calling the final bid and
declaring the goods sold with the fall of the hammer. There is no regulation governing the amount
of time a vehicle must remain on the auction block, nor does Barrett-Jackson’s consignment
contract guarantee the amount of time a vehicle will spend on the auction block.
•
Barrett-Jackson does not run its own cars through the auction and provide “shill bidders” to inflate
prices of vehicles.
•
Barrett-Jackson is diligent in its efforts to run a clean auction on every level. The Company has
been audited numerous times and has never been found to be in violation of any state or federal
auction regulation.
A live auction is a complex, challenging scenario with a limitless number of variables in any given situation.
There is no way to guarantee a flawless sale of every vehicle that will please every seller and every buyer.
No auction company can guarantee that every individual will be happy with every sale. Nevertheless,
Barrett-Jackson takes the interests of its customers—on both sides of the equation—very seriously and will
continue to do so as the Company works to refine and improve its policies and procedures today and into
the future.
In a related matter also mentioned on the recent Internet postings, there have been numerous rumors
circulating regarding Barrett-Jackson’s decision to revoke journalist Keith Martin’s media credentials during
the Barrett-Jackson 2007 Scottsdale auction. Barrett-Jackson responded directly to legitimate inquiries
about this situation and has identified the individual who overheard Mr. Martin’s comments in the Barrett-
Jackson media center (the circumstance which led to the decision to revoke his media credentials).
Statements indicating that the situation was fabricated, or that Barrett-Jackson has been unable to produce
any corroboration of the events, are untrue. This matter has already received more attention than it
warranted, and Barrett-Jackson has made the business decision to not engage in discussions that may
encourage further speculation.
About The Barrett-Jackson Auction Company
Established in 1971 and headquartered in Scottsdale, Ariz., Barrett-Jackson specializes in providing
products and services to classic and collector car owners, astute collectors and automotive enthusiasts
around the world. The company produces the “World’s Greatest Collector Car Events™” in Scottsdale and
Palm Beach, Fla. For more information, visit www.barrett-jackson.com or call (480) 421-6694.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. – February 1, 2007
Earlier this week, officials at the Barrett-Jackson Auction Company were made aware of a “blog” making
false allegations regarding the Company’s business practices. While the author of the blog decided to
remove the posting after receiving a written statement from Barrett-Jackson, the original blog content has
been copied to numerous other Web sites and other locations on the Internet. The reply from Barrett-
Jackson has not been copied to these additional locations.
The statements published in the original posting, and repeated in numerous other forums since that time,
are untrue and are potentially harmful to Barrett-Jackson’s business interests. Barrett-Jackson issues the
following statement for the purposes of clarifying the situation and providing its position regarding the
accusations made against the Company.
•
There is no lawsuit against Barrett-Jackson alleging improper or unlawful auction practices.
•
Barrett-Jackson has historically offered a combination of reserve and no reserve vehicles across
the auction block. In a sale with a reserve, a vehicle is not sold if the reserve price is not met. In a
no reserve sale, every vehicle that crosses the block is sold to the highest bidder, regardless of the
amount of the last bid that is made before the fall of the auctioneer’s hammer. In a no reserve sale,
the owner of a car may not bid (by himself or through an agent) on his own car.
•
In recent years, Barrett-Jackson has run auctions that are completely no reserve. This is a
business decision made by Barrett-Jackson; there is no legal or other requirement that all vehicles
be sold at no reserve. In the future, Barrett-Jackson may opt to offer vehicles with a reserve.
•
Owner buy-backs and so-called “chandelier” or “shill” bidding are forbidden on all no reserve
vehicles sold at Barrett-Jackson. The practice is specifically prohibited in the consignment contract
signed by each seller.
•
Barrett-Jackson’s auction staff monitors all bid activity to the best of its ability while a vehicle is on
the block. If Barrett-Jackson sees that an owner (or someone known to be the owner’s agent) is
bidding on his own vehicle, the Company stops the bidding and reverts to the last bid.
•
With the size of Barrett-Jackson’s auction venue and the presence of thousands of registered
bidders, it is physically impossible to guarantee that no owner (or an unidentified owner’s agent)
attempts to bid on his own vehicle. For this reason, it is Barrett-Jackson’s policy to penalize any
owner who successfully bids on his own vehicle by charging that person both the seller’s
commission and the buyer’s premium on that vehicle. This penalty serves as a meaningful
deterrent for those who may otherwise choose to ignore the rules. Individuals who fail to abide by
auction regulations may also be barred from participating in future Barrett-Jackson events.
Page 2
•
Barrett-Jackson continually updates its practices and procedures to implement additional measures
to prohibit owner buy-backs and to prevent the practice of “chandelier” bidding in any no reserve
situation. These procedures include a continually evolving use of technology and visual aids to
assist the auction staff in identifying owners who may attempt to bid on their own vehicles.
•
State and federal auction laws provide that the auctioneer has discretion in calling the final bid and
declaring the goods sold with the fall of the hammer. There is no regulation governing the amount
of time a vehicle must remain on the auction block, nor does Barrett-Jackson’s consignment
contract guarantee the amount of time a vehicle will spend on the auction block.
•
Barrett-Jackson does not run its own cars through the auction and provide “shill bidders” to inflate
prices of vehicles.
•
Barrett-Jackson is diligent in its efforts to run a clean auction on every level. The Company has
been audited numerous times and has never been found to be in violation of any state or federal
auction regulation.
A live auction is a complex, challenging scenario with a limitless number of variables in any given situation.
There is no way to guarantee a flawless sale of every vehicle that will please every seller and every buyer.
No auction company can guarantee that every individual will be happy with every sale. Nevertheless,
Barrett-Jackson takes the interests of its customers—on both sides of the equation—very seriously and will
continue to do so as the Company works to refine and improve its policies and procedures today and into
the future.
In a related matter also mentioned on the recent Internet postings, there have been numerous rumors
circulating regarding Barrett-Jackson’s decision to revoke journalist Keith Martin’s media credentials during
the Barrett-Jackson 2007 Scottsdale auction. Barrett-Jackson responded directly to legitimate inquiries
about this situation and has identified the individual who overheard Mr. Martin’s comments in the Barrett-
Jackson media center (the circumstance which led to the decision to revoke his media credentials).
Statements indicating that the situation was fabricated, or that Barrett-Jackson has been unable to produce
any corroboration of the events, are untrue. This matter has already received more attention than it
warranted, and Barrett-Jackson has made the business decision to not engage in discussions that may
encourage further speculation.
About The Barrett-Jackson Auction Company
Established in 1971 and headquartered in Scottsdale, Ariz., Barrett-Jackson specializes in providing
products and services to classic and collector car owners, astute collectors and automotive enthusiasts
around the world. The company produces the “World’s Greatest Collector Car Events™” in Scottsdale and
Palm Beach, Fla. For more information, visit www.barrett-jackson.com or call (480) 421-6694.
703
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 02, 2007, 03:36:15 PM »
You guys are assuming that because the pic in the above post is at Barrett-Jackson that the writer meant his bidder agreement allowing the auction house to bid for the seller was at Barrett-Jackson also. He never said it was. I might still have my bidder agreement here. I will look for it later today. Or maybe someone else has one.
704
General Discussion / Re: 1967 Camaro LA VIN number 16 Body #1
« on: February 02, 2007, 01:50:08 AM »
I saw the car also. As I recall it was a LA car but had a restamped engine and they put a N on the engine vin stamping as if it was a Norwood car. I think it also had the traditional "Caution fan" sticker for that perfect restoration.
705
General Discussion / Re: Barrett-Jackson lawsuit
« on: February 01, 2007, 11:43:33 PM »
Finally chiming in. The blue JL8 Z28 was very real with very real paperwork. I owned it a few years ago. It was bought new by Dave Emmanuel the automotive writer. He even used it in a couple magazine articles in the 70's. It had the orig window sticker and other paperwork. I think the block wasdecked but it was the orig block and I confirmed the car with Emmanuel.This same car sold at RM in Monterey last year and both times the auction card said it had paperwork but I never saw any of it on display. It was on the cover of Sports Car Market Magazine last month but that also was not mentioned on the Barrett-Jackson auction card. I passed by it at Monterey and didn't realize it was my old car. Someone since me has added the crossram.
As for Barrett-Jackson not being the venue to sell survivor cars, in addition to the Z28 last year there was the L78 convert the year before. Or the killer 12K mile 68 L78 Camaro the year before that. Each time those cars brought record type money.
As for the article written by the 4 wheel drift guy I have posted on other forums that I put his article on the same level as a grocery store check out line mag like National Inquirer etc. I consider most of what he said as crap.
As for Barrett-Jackson not being the venue to sell survivor cars, in addition to the Z28 last year there was the L78 convert the year before. Or the killer 12K mile 68 L78 Camaro the year before that. Each time those cars brought record type money.
As for the article written by the 4 wheel drift guy I have posted on other forums that I put his article on the same level as a grocery store check out line mag like National Inquirer etc. I consider most of what he said as crap.