Re: [DMCForum] Re: DMCH in latest issue of Forbes...

[DMCVIN6683 <dmcvin6683@xxxxxxxxx>]

You guys dont understand Marc. Some people only want to see positive 
things in life and others point out negative things. Marc seems to read 
between the lines of the positive and negative things and come up with 
his own opinion and lets us know what he thinks. Sometimes i also think 
like Marc but i do not choose to post because of the backlash of the 
forum sometimes.

They are his opinions and we should respect his opinions.

If we were all the same life would suck.

Mark V




On Sep 11, 2005, at 10:23 AM, therealdmcvegas wrote:

> Ok, so let's put this all into a nutshell here, Marc. You're saying
> that DMCH is doing something unscurpulous by creating the Milineum
> contest? In order to potentially sell stacks of parts sitting around,
> they have decided to create a competition which encourages people to
> buy parts from them, in order to compete. Is this all?
>
> Certainly I agree that concours competitions are a double-edged
> sword. The idea is to have a vehicle which represents what the
> factory intended to produce at the time of competing vehicles exact
> production/completion date. However, not even the manufacturers
> always adhere to their own standards when it comes to production line
> practices. So the debate rages on of what a car should have been,
> versus what was actually physicly produced. Hence the fight between
> whose better: Someone who rebuilt a car to exact specification, or
> someone who owns a non-conforming factory vehicle, but is a true
> survivor?
>
> But that's not what you're really arguing here.
>
> You make it sound (and this is important Marc, because you prefer to
> insinuate something, rather to make a written commitment, as some
> sort of loophole to weasle your way out of things) as though DMCH has
> stated that in order to compete in their competetion, you MUST buy
> parts from them. And that forcing people to buy parts from them is
> the true meaning of the competetion. Which is WRONG on ALL counts!
>
> Before this, there was NO conforming competetion. There was only the
> DOA, and what they *interpreted* to be original. And if I'm wrong
> here, please point it out where, but the DMCH Councours event is
> based upon factory documentation that specifies what changes occured
> to vehicles, and at what time. That is what concours is about. Now,
> if someone has a surviving car that conforms, then they just simply
> dust it off, and enter it in to compete. Which is something that has
> happened before.
>
> But in all of this, were are the ill intentions behind DMCH's purpose
> for this contest? I doubt that Steven Wynn is toasting his huge
> profit off that $15 entry fee. And while the manual does layout the
> rules for cars and owners abide by, no where does it say that
> ANYTHING has to be purchased by DMCH, or even any of the sponsoring
> vendors. Sure if you need to purchase conforming parts, they are
> readily available from DMCH. But purchasing them FROM DMCH is not
> required.
>
> Yes DMCH has a shitload of parts that they need to sell off. The
> motivation of anyone who owns a business is of course profit. DMCH is
> no different. Yes, everyone is in agreement that DMCH has a goal of
> selling more parts to people, and does so via various means of
> encouragement. Could be a parts kit or package. Could be a
> competetive activity for people to participate in. It could even be
> lower prices than their competetion. But these are incentives to
> encourage people to buy from them. NOT to *FORCE* them, as you keep
> insinuating. And that is what I, and other are arguing with you.
>
> Now you say that perhaps my interpretation of your words is wrong.
> Which is quite possible, since you keep refusing to say anything
> direct. However, I just can't believe that. Not because of pride, but
> rather the fact that lots of other random people who read your same
> words, are taking away the same message that I am. You have a beef
> with DMCH. Sure, there certainly seems to have been a problem with
> the door struts. Something that did need to be brought out into the
> open, and discussed. However, it's hard to take ANYTHING you say at
> face value when you keep crying wolf all the time, and consistantly
> lay blame on everyone else for *misinterpreting* your words, as a way
> to weasle out of having to take responsability for what you said.
>
> Marc, because all of your comments about DMCH are consistantly in a
> negative tone, it appears as though you don't like DMCH. What your
> reasoning is, I don't know. But it appears to everyone else that you
> don't like them. And when you repeatedly post these negative comments
> over and over again, it also appears that you may in fact have an
> agenda of crusading against them. Of course you won't commit to
> actually saying any of this...
>
> -Robert
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

---

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

•  Visit your group "DMCForum" on the web.
   
•  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
•  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---