OK, I make get deleted, but I thought I would take a shot at a final say.
Thank you Dr. Mayf for letting me know the "WHY" of your position. I do not
know whom you have encounter about the lack of a TAC sticker on your car and
what they might have said. None of use like having our integrity questioned.
As I said earlier it would sadden me if unjust accusations have been brought
against you.
You are right, not TAC-ing your car does not make it any less of a
Tiger....... to you. To the skeptical general public, who, if they have any
interest in Tigers, and given the Tiger - Alger history, it does. I think
their skepticism is just on two points. First and foremost is at the point
of sale. Second is that this is a fraternity of Tiger owners. If there was
a fraud amongst us it effect the whole.
In a court of law you are allowed witnesses to verify where you were,
when you said you were there. It is an uncomfortable think to be accused of
something you are not. It is however, reassuring to be able to back yourself
with others who will stand behind you. TAC offers you that. Personally I
don't doubt that your car is a real Tiger, but neither am I qualified to say
it is even if I was now looking at it. Were a friend of mine looking to
purchase your car and ask me if it was real I would have to say "I don't
know." It is not my intent to question your integrity, but rather question
my lack of knowledge in the matter. TAC-ing your car meets the skeptic half
way and in the end verifies your integrity. In the end both parties, with a
degree of humbleness, can walk away satisfied. I too will end the matter
here. Regards, Tom Witt
----- Original Message -----
From: "DrMayf" <drmayf@teknett.com>
To: "Tom Witt" <wittsend@jps.net>; <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: TAC vs Commonsense
> Ok, one last post, then I hit the delete key on this subject (in fact
> already have hit it several times...) My objection to having my car Tac'd
is
> this. I have owned it for 30 something years (since Jan 1967). It was a
> Tiger when I bought it, it is a Tiger now. If the inspectors will take my
> word for it and issue me a sticker without inspection I will do it. But
you
> see, I have to prove to their satisfaction that it is a Tiger. My
integrity
> is suspect because I have to prove that the car is what I say it is. As to
> having a car verified at point of sale, that happens at just about every
> sale of anykind. Why must it be done up front? Heck, I really don't care
but
> it is interesting to see the reactions of all the people in the "club".
>
> ANyhoo, this has, actually, been fun.
>
> mayf
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Witt" <wittsend@jps.net>
> To: <tigers@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 2:47 PM
> Subject: TAC vs Commonsense
>
>
> > Mayf,
> > I asked this in the first post I sent this morning, but will ask it
> again.
> > What is your objection to having your car TAC-ed? What I am asking is if
> three
> > TAC inspectors were to show up to your door and I were to pay the ten
> dollar
> > fee would you turn them away?
> > What would be lost? It seems that you have everything to gain. Yes,
your
> > Tiger is a real Tiger, you know that. BUT, not everyone does. Not the
> casual
> > viewer on the street, not every Tiger enthusiast, not every potential
> buyer
> > (someday). Thus, the matter of authenticity is covered to ANY who may
> question
> > at any time with your TAC certificate. What is objectionable to that?
With
> the
> > potential for fraud by others is it not in the best interest of Tigers
> > everywhere to be counted as authenticated?
> > Just because the general public has taken to accepting the TAC-ed car
> as a
> > standard doesn't mean that TAC-ing is the villain. Really your complaint
> > should be with the public at large (which of course would include Tiger
> > owners) for electing to use the TAC standard. In life we all have to
give
> up
> > some freedoms for the general good. When comparing TAC to no standard
for
> > authenticating a Tiger TAC-ing seems like the far lesser evil.
> > In summary a group of ernst volunteers has set to prevent fraud (via
> TAC-ing)
> > of a significant collectible. The people at large (small a group as that
> my
> > be, but, in some way connected with the Sunbeam Tiger) have adopted the
> > standard of TAC. You dislike the adaptation of TAC by the people
> > because............ ?
> > Mayf I have appreciated the input you have given this list and me
> personally.
> > However, on this point I can not seem to see the cause of the position
you
> > have taken.
> >
> > Tom Witt
> > B9470101 (nearly TAC-ed, but the inspectors had a flight to catch)
|