Re: [DML] Re:1982 DMC is concours?

[Marc A Levy <malevy@xxxx>]

James Espey wrote:
<SNIP>
> Actually, the bulk of disagreement lies because people do not
> understand the definition of "concours". Rather than repeat myself,
> see my posting here:
> 
> http://www.egroups.com/message/dmcnews/10997

I just re-read this message, and do not see a definition of "Concours", but I do
see you talk about your experience with Corvette shows. I hardly think that
because that is the way Covette shows are run that it need to be the way
DeLorean shows are run. Mike made a good point earlier in this thread that a
Porche concours expects that the owner has made improvements on the car, and
that a perfectly original car would not be a winning car... So who is correct?

I do agree that most "concours" shows are run in a similar way, but that does
not make it right... Especially in the case of the DeLorean.

<SNIP>
> >Of course, if the concourse judging was not set up this way, there
> >would be less
> >of these "correct", but unsafe and unreliable parts sold.
> 
> I'm not sure where you're going with this, but I *know* that the bulk
> of Ducellier alternators we sell are to people who would prefer to
> save money over buying a Motorola, not because they're concours
> people. I don't think we've EVER sold an original clutch line to
> anyone, and there are no "new" overflow bottles in existence.
> 

I think it is clear, that there is a obvious business motivation to design the
judging as it currently stands. I hope you and Stephen dont take this as a
personal attack, I just thought it was obvious to everyone. From a business
stand point, it is a good idea. You seem to agree with this in your reference
to the post above (http://www.egroups.com/message/dmcnews/10997) where you
write:

> Because people will spend literally hundreds of thousands of 
> dollars preparing their cars for Bloomington, the greatest of all 
> Corvette shows. 

I do not find fault with this, I was just stating what I thought was obvious. 
That is there is a business motivation (as small as it may be, based on your
comment above) behind the design of the judging.

> 
> Always in search of a good debate,
> 

I am glad you see it that way... After I wrote that last message I was worried
that it may be considered a flame, but it was not intended to be.