Richburg wrote:
It is not a "high horse" that I am sitting. It is my TR.
I will rate you last message "R" for "Rat's Ass"
I am humbilly ??? impressed by your many (or lack there of) brains.
Should I schedule you for surgery.
I don't care how denigrate you and your friends feel. When you show
respect, you get it in return. Stop being an "Rat's Ass and put your
"knowledgeable" into constructive comments about the subject matter.
To get back to the question.
Are you interested, just shopping, asking for more.
Greetings
len drake wrote:
>
> Hey doc - I think the point I tried to make to you somehow flew on
> by. Hostile you are. As someone earlier pointed out, you may have
> mega bucks, must have a few brains too, but how did you pass grade
> eight English? The point that you missed was that nobody on this
> list gives a rat's ass how many dollars you make and when you have
> to denigrate someone by letting them know that you make more than
> he does, it doesn't help prove anything. I've got a couple of nice
> cars too, but it doesn't make me any better, more knowledgeable,
> or more credible. Take two humbility pills with water and get off
> your high horse carefully.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Len Drake
>
> >Richburg wrote:
> >
> >Maybe you should communicate to you friends the need to have respect for
> >someone who has posted some information. It works both ways. If there
> >is something to say. Try communicating in a more constructive way.
> >then maybe the members of the list will get non-hostile responses.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Craig
> >len drake wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey Doc - lighten up. I don't think it's necessary for us to get
> >> into a mud slinging thread about how much money people on the list
> >> make. This list caters to all of us, whether it's a rusted out
> >> TR7 or the finest Triumph that money can buy, or restore.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Len Drake
> >> Kelowna, B.C.
> >>
> >> >Dr. Richburg wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Hello Chris,
> >> >
> >> >It must be in the coffee. What type is that, maybe I'll talk my
> >> >patients into some.
> >> >
> >> >You appear to not know much about what you drive. There is nothing
> >> >"lame" about my 65 TR4. There is probably $18,000 worth of work in this
> >> >car. More money then you probably made last year. If you are really a
> >> >Triumph lover, your response would be on the car, not the marketing of
> >> >it. I guess you are in the news business instead of the "Triumph Car
> >> >Driving Business" and it would be more interesting to report on the
> >> >marketing of a rare classic car vs. the car itself.
> >> >
> >> >You know, there's a big difference in cars produced on Dec. 31 and Jan.
> >> >2. That difference is 1964 vs. 1965. In 1965 only 250 were made, 3
> >> >left in England, there remainder were exported to other countries. This
> >> >fact is an added value to collectors of fine automobiles like my 65 TR4.
> >> >Remember, this is not the theoretical world of education, but rather the
> >> >business world of reality.
> >> >
> >> >For your information, the commission number is CT40287. If you are
> >> >interested, come over and inspect the car and maybe we could talk about
> >> >what's in the news.
> >> >
> >> >Craig Richburg
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Chris Lillja wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Dr. Richburg --
> >> >>
> >> >> The point is -- that lame attempts to "market" what is probably a
> >> >> perfectly nice TR4, to people who love Triumphs anyway -- make it
> >> >> look suspect in the eyes of the very people who might buy it.
> >> >>
> >> >> So my history book sez the final TR4 was built on Jan 6, 1965 and
> >> >> had the commission number CT40304. With 250 made in calender year
> >> >> 1965, that would make the first "1965" TR4 CT40054. Yes -- they
> >> >> should be in sequence and there are no gaps reported in this
> >> >> period...
> >> >>
> >> >> Now the question at hand is does the commission number of this
> >> >> car fall in this sequence CT40054 - CT40304? If not it is merely a
> >> >> 1964 (or earlier) that wasn't bought and titled until 1965.
> >> >>
> >> >> So what's that Comm. # doc?
> >> >>
> >> >> It's pretty academic considering there should be no difference
> >> >> between a car produced on Dec. 31 (say CT40053) and Jan. 2....
> >> >>
> >> >> "Still ride in triumph over all mischance..." - Shakespeare
> >> >>
> >> >> Chris Lillja
> >> >> TR4A
> >> >> Norton Commando
> >> >> Spit MKIV
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
|