I agree that the buyer should know the history and let the market establish the
price. The market recently established a benchmark (perhaps, I don't know for
sure) of 40K for an unrestored Mark II. A similar car restored from a rust
bucket would probably come in for less and a complete rebody, lower again.
The misreprentation is the ethical issue, but the sale of used cars and ethics
are two lines that traditionally have never intersected!
Melusky
>I don't believe that the issue is one of dissing Algers (at least speaking for
>myself) it is more of a matter of misrepresentation at time of sale. I can
>almost buy the idea of "rebuilding" being perfectly legal in the eyes of the
>law but I think it is the right of any buyer to know this before paying
>authentic, non-rebuilt, Tiger money for a car.
>
>Many out there might think it doesn't matter if the Alger is identical to an
>authentic Tiger but I'm willing to bet the vast majority of potential buyers
>will feel cheated, no matter how good the rebuild, if after paying Tiger
>market
>rate they find thier new pride and joy to have a questionable pedigree.
>
>Frank
>B9471116
>
>>
>> What is the real motivation behind all this dissing of Algers? Money,
>> snobbery, ???
>>
>>
>> Rob
>
__________________________________________________________________
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397
|