Joe,
I contest your conjecture that the TAC program is a "clear no-win". All owners
of authentic Tigers benefit from the TAC program. Prospective owners of Tigers
can also benefit.
But, there is another perspective that I propose for your consideration. The
marque benefits from the TAC program. As owners of Tigers, we have at least two
roles: 1) temporary custodian of the Tiger(s) we own; and, 2) steward of the
marque. The TAC program is part of that stewardship.
Lastly, if you speak with Paul Reisentz or Tom Hall, either will explain to you
how inspectors and senior inspectors are trained and tested.
Steve Sorenson
Joe Hankins wrote:
> Hey Guys!
>
> I've been lurking for quite a while now, but I just can't keep quiet any
> longer! How about those guys who want to pursue the "to TAC or not to TAC"
> question and the morality of revealing that a car may not be traceable back
> to the "one true Tiger" do so somewhere else? This last missive about
> pondering the meaining of TAC 7 miles above the earth is more than my
> stomach can stand. Some people are taking themselves way to seriously here!
>
> I can tell you that, if I was pondering dropping serious money in order to
> get an honest-to-god Mark II Tiger, I wouldn't depend only on the word of a
> self-sanctioned committee who got together and said "We're the experts
> because we say we are experts and after all, we are the experts." I would
> be pretty confident that if they told me it was a fake, it would indeed be a
> fake. But that ain't near enough. Anybody who would drop 30 large on the
> strength of a TAC certification would be fair game for any serious con
> artist worth his salt! Having a car TAC's is a clear no-win proposition.
> You either find out that it definitely is a fake, or maybe it isn't. Such a
> deal!
>
> (And it's just a coincidence that my name is Joe!)
>
> Joe
|