Speciality auto sport

Agreed this is a unique one time issue, this surely is a difficult decision for Theron to put up this survey and I'll thank him in advance for same.

I have no skin in this SAS game, but so far I'm the only yes vote on the survey and figured I should explain why.

 

I voted yes not so much because I think we should take SAS' money.

 

I voted yes because I think it should be Theron's decision (even though he was gracious enough to put it up for a vote). Theron is managing the business of the SOC site. He should be able to make the decisions a he sees fit.

 

That said, I also believe the disclaimers should be more explicit, perhaps displayed in the banner of the site; and make it clear ads are paid for, and the appearance of anyone's ad is not an endorsement by the SOC or by the owners of the site.

 

Anyway, just my two cents.

What is 'Right' and what is 'Law' are two absolutely separate universes!

 

Ask me how I know...or anyone else who owns/owned a business involved in any sort of litigation.

 

Refusing to accept 'Advertisement' fees from one vendor while accepting fees from other vendors who provide similar 'product/service' may be construed as obstructing the refused vendor's ability to do business. A very possible legal liability. Who would be on the hook? Certainly not members who voted for or against acceptance, but the site 'Administrator'.

 

I would suggest placing a banner on advertisements stating that Advertisement space on SOC is not an endorsement of that product, and also include a link to on-line reviews of the respective vendor on that banner (as well as on the 'Makers' tab to keep things fair).

 

The onus of due diligence should be on the (prospective) buyer!

 

I'm just saying...

 

 

 

 

As one of the few non-supporting members that voted "no" I felt as a bit of a hypocrite. I have since renewed my membership to help support the site.

Several changes in the last few days that I feel are beneficial to the site also prompted my renewal. Hopefully we can concentrate on the positive in the future.

Jim and Jim ,

MUSB: any lawyer can make any case about any thing whatever. It is what they do. Would someone do so in this instance. As you have suggested? I think not. Would SAS take initiative to do so? Seems unlikely SL would be engaging lawyers to focus attention on what he is doing.

Jim Dunn;  ataboy!! This is what we need.

As much as I think that banning a company's advertising (in this instance) is the right thing to do (and that's how I voted), I also agree with Jim that this opens a whole 'nother can of worms, and may not be the best aproach. All it takes is a letter and Theron is paying to defend himself and the site in court. As well as BIG DISCLAIMERS  (maybe in red?) at the top of every page, maybe an added paragraph mentioning the need for "due diligence" before spending one's hard earned cash with links to this and other threads in the "Ready For A Speedster Replica" thread? We could get our point across this way and avoid the troubles the other route may create. As for people spending their money and being taken, we can only do so much...Al

 

PS- Jim Dunn- welcome to the fold!

 

Hmmm- Maybe a 1st draft this afternoon...

We do not endorse or recommend any particular Advertising Company herein 

Please Google any Advertiser........Caveat Emptor

Ads are now marked with

*~*~*  Paid Advertisement *~*~*

Why's that, John?  YOU, and Nolan, too, for that matter, managed to both buy absolutely superior cars (for really good delivered prices) which you both should be proud of.  Hell, you've even gotten niggling things fixed by SAS when you needed them for pretty good customer service in my book.  I certainly would love to have a finished SAS/SAW car.  Remember, I was the guy who wrote a very positive review of his shop and finished product back in the early 2000's after visiting the place with you.  You can find it on here in the archives - I can no longer find it on his (many) sites.  It appeared on his web site for years.  I would still do so for his past finished products, but not for his shop or the way he conducts business.  None of that in any way reflects on you or Nolan, as you both had positive experiences with him.  What DOES reflect on you both is your continued support for your friend in spite of overwhelming evidence that he is screwing customers left and right.  Kurt Scott warned about Steve Lawing back in the 1990's - looks like Kurt continues to be right. 

 

Gordon, I did find your review on the SAS website today;  It's still there.  Please remember I do not support the business model that Steve has in place, nor do I understand why he has gotten himself into the pickle he is currently in.  He has told me in the past with all of the outsourcing he is doing that the shop has become an assembly point, more or less.  

 

I do not support or approve of what seems to be happening now, please believe me.  I do have a great car and so does Nolan.  We are the lucky ones and I don't know what will happen to those currently in the queue.  There were several cars in various stages of assembly the last time I visited in the Spring so I am hopeful we will see some finished editions coming along.  The last one completed was a Speedster and it was headed for Dubai.  

 

I will be eternally grateful to Steve for the car he built me and how he helped me with the inevitable sorting process that followed after delivery.  It was, after all, the first edition sold to a customer.  It took six months to build which seemed like an eternity at the time and many trips back to get everything squared away.  I think it is a jewel and will not look forward to the day when I will be looking for a new home for it.  

 

Please know that I am not and have never been a shill for SAS but have been an enthusiastic owner of a car that many on this site have ridden in or driven.  Any comments I make in the future will be about my car only.  Period.  

 

Despite assurances that this is a one-time 'democratic process' it establishes (like it or not) a PRECEDENT to justify future demands for interventions of a similar nature.

 

It's indeed a slippery slope that's taken conclusive control out of Theron's hands.

 

I also believe that an up or down Yes/No vote should either have been anonymous, or, if not a secret ballot, to have provided for 'justification comment'

 

Musbjim's cautionary comment that being "Right" and being "Legal" are two different animals is right on...and Blanchette's supporting observation that a simple 'retaliatory' letter of legal mumbo-jumbo from a lawyer representing S.L. can open an expensive can of worms for Theron.

 

If it's not too late I vote NO with all of this post as my "justification comment" along with instituting a caveat proviso, in big red letters, that none of the SOC advertising represents endorsement. 

Please know that I am not and have never been a shill for SAS but have been an enthusiastic owner of a car that many on this site have ridden in or driven.  Any comments I make in the future will be about my car only. Period.  

 

 

Your car is great, and you've had wonderful trips in it, etc.  Perhaps the fact that you were the first customer, and were able to visit frequently and see what was going on with your car had an effect on its production and completion.

 

Whatever, you have every reason to feel good about how you were treated by SAS.

 

I took the survey but there was no place for comments.  Had I been able to post a comment it would be something like this;  "Notice - Advertisments on this site must not be construed as an endorsement of any product or advertiser. There are ample posts on this site that are there to assist you with doing your own due diligence!

 

Too bad there was no room for comments.

John, I appreciate your candor.  You're a stand-up guy....ANYONE who meets you will quickly come to know that, and I certainly have.  

 

I am pleased that you and Nolan and others who have received their cars from SAS have true gems that should be admired by others - I have never been the one to say that he builds inferior product - in fact, I have always said how good they are, both on workmanship and the driving experience - they are terrific cars (and I guess I still say that on his website!)

 

And it is not the fault of his customers that he has chosen to conduct himself and his business in the manner that he has.  If he needs to gather up-front capital for each build, well...That's what small business banks are for, not funding his production budget with deposit money.

 

Lots of people, including you, have tried, in vain, to get Lawing to change his ways.  Lord knows, you've tried, but your help fell on deaf ears so what more could you do?  I can't think of anything - you've done your best, and so did Charles Gardner.  

 

All we can continue to do on here is to warn those that find this site of the perils of dealing with SAS and a few others - in fact, all of the suppliers to this hobby, large and small.  Some are great to work with, others are terrible and we should highlight both the good and the bad.  Sometimes, people actually listen to us.  Fortunately, some of the worse builders are slowly fading from the scene so maybe, just maybe we're being a little effective - Who knows?

 

Anyway, it's pretty clear that this horse has been beaten to death and we should all move on.  I hope to see you at another gathering and will be the first to buy you a beer and chat.  I'm sorry if you've taken heat from, or offense from, my comments.  Having been burnt by CMC and a few others producing parts and going through recovery of money spent, I'm getting tired of dealing with bad suppliers.  

 

I hope you understand the position of those trying to recover or collect from these guys.  It ain't fun.

 

 

This messy, somewhat argumentative process we are going through is the positive critter called democracy.  However, we need to remember that the process is ongoing only because Theron invited it.  We don't own the site, any more than a reader of a newspaper owns the paper.  No matter what the poll results are, Theron decides what happens, both with the current issue and any future issues. As supporters of the site, we are not without influence, but company policy is dictated by the owner.

 

Our caveats concerning precedent are irrelevant, since the members have no power to dictate policy.  From my perspective, that's how it should be.

 

Of course, we're a bunch of car guys, who can't agree on what day it is.  FYI, your Wednesday is my Thursday.  Honest!

The way I see it, it's still Theron's decision. He's just making a more informed one by soliciting member feedback.

> On Oct 6, 2015, at 1:01 PM, SpeedsterOwners.com <alerts@hoop.la> wrote:
>

"We don't own the site, any more than a reader of a newspaper owns the paper"

 

Jim:  Unlike a newspaper, Theron would not have a site without the contributions of the 'readers'.

 

And as far as we 'readers' go, we are certainly a mixed bag.  Yes, it is and will be Theron's decision as to what advertisers he accepts; we can only post caveats based on events that have happened.

 

Cheers.

 

PS Do you really live in Fiji?

 

 

LOL, U GUYS ACT LIKE THIS SITE IS A DEMOCRACY. IT IS NOT. ITS THERONS AND HE CAN CHOSE TO DO WHAT HE LIKES INCLUDING BUMPING VINCE OFF. HELL I WOULD HAVE BUMPED VINCE OFF YEARS AGO.

THERON CAN U PLEASE REINSTATE VINCE SO HE STOPS CALLING ME.

does being a paid member give you any rights?  I know it isn't property of anyone here but if you pay to use the site, shouldn't you get a say about content?  Just curious.

We are having our say. Theron will decide based on his judgement -- it his decision to make, and he will make it. His decision will be well informed, to wit: all of the above.

Theron needs us as much as we need him.

Without him....no site.

Without us......no site.

Finally, a thread that I wasn't somehow responsible for starting!

Troy, this thread was started in reverse :~)

Jim;

 

"FYI, your Wednesday is my Thursday.  Honest!"

 

Can you please do something about my hangover?

 

Art

 

Bump,

 

So, WTF has happened?  It would appear to be: nothing.

 

The survey shows an overwhelming percentage of negatives to the SAS ad question, although the total number of respondents might be thought of as low.

 

The ads are still shown on the site.

 

I'm still not happy with that . . .

 

I vote for the reinstatement of Vince - a site icon he is.

 

I think, if I'm not mistaken, that happens a lot. But really, when you think about it clearly, what really is WTF and did it really happen? I'm not so sure now. I think what is really needed here is a precise definition of WTF so that all of us may understand without question, and, ponder if indeed it has happened.

Or, from the "Firesign Theater" one-and-only album;  

 

"How can you be in two places at once, when you're not anywhere at all?"

 

 

Didn't I hear all of these same arguments on the other side of the record?