DMC @ NY international auto show

[DMC3165]

I saw on Facebook today that DMC will be at the NY int auto show with the DMC-EV starting this weekend. Anyone know if they'll have their own setup, not just paired up with other EV's? Or if they'll be showcasing other products? Thinking about going next Monday. I was going to skip it this year due to my work schedule but i think I'll check it out now. Anyone else have any info on this? I checked the auto show website but couldn't find any info about DMC.

[DMC3165]

found one pic but no other mention (bottom of page):

http://www.autoshowny.com/sights/photos/

[DMCCA Cameron]

We will have our own booth with the Ev and a Stock car.

[stevedmc]

We will have our own booth with the Ev and a Stock car.

Hey man. Welcome to the forum.

[DMC3165]

Awesome thanks Cameron, looking forward to seeing you guys there. Will try to get there on Monday.

[tjd]

We will have our own booth with the Ev and a Stock car.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1981-Grey-5-speed-3-Time-Concours-Winner-All-Original-/110850477074?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item19cf340c12

Since according to the auction description this is most likely the stock DeLorean you speak of that is being planned to be displayed alongside your companies prototype Electric Conversion I sincerely hope that you (DMCH) don't plan on misrepresenting this original Concours car as a representative of your companies "New-Build" cars. Because from the pics in the auction the representation of this fine example of an original DeLorean your New-Builds in comparison (if the one that I was able to view and inspect in the DMCMW showroom last year on two different occasions that had only 500 miles on it since it's Build as completed by your company was a fair representation of the over all quality of your companies Builds) fall short of the over all fit and finish and overall build quality of this pristine Concours winning original car.

Disclaimer* My opinion of the Concours car is based on the auction photos only, but is backed up by awards given. But to be fair my original car with 38,000 miles on it has better fit & finish then the "New-Build" that was in the showroom as did many of the other privately owned original DeLoreans that were on hand at DMCMW on those two occasions. Also to be fair to DMCH I don't know and can't say that the one "New-Build" DeLorean I was able to view and inspect was representative in fit & finish with all of DMCH's Build cars.

[DMCCA Cameron]

I will be at show starting on monday. Look forward to seeing you.

[Totally 80s]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1981-Grey-5-speed-3-Time-Concours-Winner-All-Original-/110850477074?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item19cf340c12

Since according to the auction description this is most likely the stock DeLorean you speak of that is being planned to be displayed alongside your companies prototype Electric Conversion I sincerely hope that you (DMCH) don't plan on misrepresenting this original Concours car as a representative of your companies "New-Build" cars. Because from the pics in the auction the representation of this fine example of an original DeLorean your New-Builds in comparison (if the one that I was able to view and inspect in the DMCMW showroom last year on two different occasions that had only 500 miles on it since it's Build as completed by your company was a fair representation of the over all quality of your companies Builds) fall short of the over all fit and finish and overall build quality of this pristine Concours winning original car.

Disclaimer* My opinion of the Concours car is based on the auction photos only, but is backed up by awards given. But to be fair my original car with 38,000 miles on it has better fit & finish then the "New-Build" that was in the showroom as did many of the other privately owned original DeLoreans that were on hand at DMCMW on those two occasions. Also to be fair to DMCH I don't know and can't say that the one "New-Build" DeLorean I was able to view and inspect was representative in fit & finish with all of DMCH's Build cars.


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/140/872/charles%20Bennett%20haters%20gonna%20hate.jpg

[tjd]

^ I'd rather be called or labeled a hater or a whiner then be an ass kisser like so many are in this hobby when it come to what they will say as it relates to DMCH, at least with what they will say publicly anyway.

That's the most you'll get out of me unless you have something intelligent to add.

My real question is why is DMC at an International Auto Show that is made up of mostly New Car Manufacturers in the first place? Unless it is another effort to deceive the public about these cars and their company (much like their adopted company name). DeLorean Motor Company Texas is a DeLorean Parts Vendor, Restorer, and Service Provider. I do not see what business they have setting up booth in such a setting, unless it's another one of their publicity stunts designed to mislead the press and general public about the nature of their company and some of their products specifically the "New-Build" and the "EV".

So far the EV has not been accurately described by any of the media pieces run on TV or in print that Stephen Wynne has taken part in, instead of a made to order Electric Conversion of a previously existing DeLorean originally built by DMC ltd which it is, it is described as a prototype of a newly to be produced 2013 Electric DeLorean built by DMC Texas in a partnership with Epic EV which it simply is not.

[stevedmc]

^ I'd rather be called or labeled a hater or a whiner then be an ass kisser like so many are in this hobby when it come to what they will say as it relates to DMCH, at least with what they will say publicly anyway.

My car will never be sent to DMCH for repair, so I've pretty much got the freedom to say whatever I want in public. It just sucks that James takes everyting as a personal attack and won't even be my friend on FaceBook.

You would be suprised what people are willing to say about DMCH privately.

[Jonathan]

Just my 2 cents here, but of all the times I've been to the Auto Show in Toronto, there are always tons of vendors, booths, and displays for many things other than brand new cars. Last one I was at had a big display on Shelby Cobras and the year before that was old Corvettes. Not to mention the booths selling shamois, toy cars, or classic car insurance. It's not like you're going to see a booth set up selling kitchen appliances. If DMCH doesn't promote at the Auto Show, what else are they going to do? Put a display in at the Boat Show??

[pezzonovante88]

Just my 2 cents here, but of all the times I've been to the Auto Show in Toronto, there are always tons of vendors, booths, and displays for many things other than brand new cars. Last one I was at had a big display on Shelby Cobras and the year before that was old Corvettes. Not to mention the booths selling shamois, toy cars, or classic car insurance. It's not like you're going to see a booth set up selling kitchen appliances. If DMCH doesn't promote at the Auto Show, what else are they going to do? Put a display in at the Boat Show??

Agreed. Its all part of the show. New car manufacturers are the main attraction, but there are so many other cool(er) things to see at a major auto show, like vintage Lamborghinis and Shelbys, and in this case DeLoreans!

[tjd]

I also will not take my car to Houston for any reason, but that is due to geography for the most part, If I lived closer I'd still have reservations about leaving my car there out of site though due to James Espey's behavior that he has demonstrated toward me.

My beef is not with them personally (regardless of what James thinks), I think the company is on the wrong track and being guided by someone that is less then honest when it comes to describing the shops restoration and modification business as it pertains to the cars that they restore, refurbish, re manufacture, and or modify. They have somehow gotten this arrogance and they seem to actually believe the sign out front now, that they are "DeLorean Motor Company". In reality they are just a Vendor, (not a car manufacturer) just like their own satellites and their independant competition Grady, Bengston, Hervey etc, the only difference being they bought the parts inventory from Kapac. I do give them credit where credit is due, they seem to reproduce more NLA DeLorean parts then most of the other vendors, but some like the Binnacle it is inexcusable that it has taken nearly eight years to develop it after 1st announced back in 2004 if it is to be believed these will actually be sold at DCS this year.

Due to their parts monopoly DMCH takes their customer base for granted, blatantly misleads the general public and the media about the nature of it's company and it's main product it peddles to them, and wonders why those of us that have the courage to speak about this publicly would dare do so, well I'm tired of being pissed on by them and told it's raining, and I'm tired of them trying to take credit for building the type of car I occasionally drive when they haven't and never will.

Fortunately for DMCH they have plenty of people that buy this car because of their fandom of Back To The Future, and I contend DMC Texas can claim anything it wants with customers like these because as long as they (DMCH) don't take the car out of Back To The Future then they can say anything they want about the damn thing and these people could care less. These people adore the publicity stunts because it keeps the car in the press. Unfortunately there are fewer and fewer owners that own their car because of what it was and it's true history, and out of them few have the courage to speak up publicly for the fear of Stephen taking up the business practices of his former DeLorean One partner Old Eddie Bernstein and start blacklisting the nay sayers. I'm afraid that's where were heading folks, and it's a damn shame. It's a shame that the general dishonesty of their PR is even remotely tolerated by it's customer base. But to you DMCH cheerleaders what's that say about you?

[tjd]

Originally Posted by Jonathan View Post
Just my 2 cents here, but of all the times I've been to the Auto Show in Toronto, there are always tons of vendors, booths, and displays for many things other than brand new cars. Last one I was at had a big display on Shelby Cobras and the year before that was old Corvettes. Not to mention the booths selling shamois, toy cars, or classic car insurance. It's not like you're going to see a booth set up selling kitchen appliances. If DMCH doesn't promote at the Auto Show, what else are they going to do? Put a display in at the Boat Show??


Agreed. Its all part of the show. New car manufacturers are the main attraction, but there are so many other cool(er) things to see at a major auto show, like vintage Lamborghinis and Shelbys, and in this case DeLoreans!

I don't know what it's like in other citys, in Detroit at the North American Auto Show it is strictly new car manufacturers. We have Autorama for older cars and vendors. But this is Detroit.


If DMCH doesn't promote at the Auto Show, what else are they going to do? Put a display in at the Boat Show??

The entire DeLorean business as a whole is a niche business, why are they at a auto show promoting anyway? Who doesn't know what a DeLorean is? and for those interested in owning a DeLorean either original or restored by DMCH or another vendor or privately for that matter why would these people need a show like this to become aware of the DeLorean or of DMC Texas for that matter?

This is just another publicity stunt to mislead the general public into believing that they are DeLorean Motor Company (new car manufacturer) and that they build new DeLoreans in Texas. None of this is true, and all the publicity stunt does is cheapen our cars automotive legacy by muddying it's true history all in the name of ill gotten publicity for DMCH and for 99% of the people reached by said publicity stunts to just annoy DeLorean owners who'd rather have nothing to do with DMCH's publicity regurgitating this misinformation at the gas pumps or at the car shows (which the later I will for the most part not be attending this year as a direct result of DMCH's misleading publicity stunts surrounding the EV).

Rant over: to answer your question, if DMC were to display in my area the appropriate venue would be Autorama were all the other like builders or old car parts or service providers do like Shelby or anyone else. The Auto Show in my area at least is limited to New Car Manufacturers.

[DMC3165]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. For me personally I have dealt with Rob Grady for the better part of 15 years as well as the current DMCH for parts over the last 3.

Despite personal experiences I've had with both overall they have been mainly positive most of the time. Maybe its a personality trait of mine but I'm not a journalist or anything so who the hell is really going to care what my personal thoughts are. Aside from that its all just rhetoric. I do not feel in anyway publicly bashing a vendor will help me in anyway shape or form.

[Jonathan]

Just a couple quick comments as I won't try to understand or explain why you have such a beef with DMCH.

1) If there are so many things about the way DMCH is operating their business, what is your proposed alternative? Would we rather see the parts inventory back in storage containers, owned by a bank, and inaccessible by the car owners? Well, of course not. But what then? Don't forget that your interest in the game is $20-30k and theirs is in the millions. They have to make decisions to enable a company to survive, and sometimes all the little people might not like it.

2) Just on the thought of promoting and niche markets. You know what came to mind that was a niche market once upon a time until the marketing and business leaders took off shooting for the sky? Apple. So I look at this with optimism. Who knows, maybe so many people in the world go so ape shit over wanting a DeLorean that they build a whole plant to make new ones. Sound silly? Sure. But I know Steve Jobs would have supported this kind of idea years ago.

[stevedmc]

Who knows, maybe so many people in the world go so ape shit over wanting a DeLorean that they build a whole plant to make new ones.

Maybe. But where on earth are they going to get binnacles for these new cars?

[Jonathan]

Maybe. But where on earth are they going to get binnacles for these new cars?

Haha, sweet. Nice one Steve! Funniest thing I've heard all day :)

[tjd]

Don't forget that your interest in the game is $20-30k and theirs is in the millions.

Actually not Stephen Wynne acquired the complete NOS parts inventory held by KAPAC for less then $1 Million.


Just a couple quick comments as I won't try to understand or explain why you have such a beef with DMCH.

Jonathan I was around when Stephen was in bed with Ed Bernstein as his business partner in DeLorean One. I have not and will never forget that Stephen continued to do business as Ed's partner as Ed went nuts on the phone and started taking Vins and blacklisting people. While many celebrate that Stephen ended the partnership eventually, I will not forget that he was complacent with Ed and continued to be his partner while this kind of stuff was going on.

As far as the DeLorean One issue goes and Stephen's past business associations and dealings I would not consider DeLorean Motor Company Texas as the go to vendor for me until Stephen Wynne retires from the business and the DeLorean One legacy then finally dies with that act.

A lot of what is going on with the misleading PR is exactly what Ed would do to attract his beloved elitist business. DeLorean car for 100K, Open Houses for $150+, New luggage that costs god knows what. (What I was thinking when I saw the new luggage is Where are the Golf Clubs?) These guys aren't exactly in touch with the typical DeLorean owner and I suspect they never will be.


Would we rather see the parts inventory back in storage containers, owned by a bank, and inaccessible by the car owners?

The parts have not been bank owned and unavailable since at least 1988, they were probably available earlier (1988 is my earlieset Kapac solicitation in my DeLorean Automobilia collection). The same NOS DeLorean parts were sold by the DeLorean Parts Depot operated by Kapac that DMCH now owns that inventory and warehouses. The existance of The DeLorean Parts Depot was kept on the down low by DeLorean One (Stephen Wynnes company) so they (DeLorean One) could sell the same parts for a higher mark up. The difficulty in finding parts back in the late 80's and early 90's was just as much due to Stephen Wynne as it was Ed Bernstein.


Just on the thought of promoting and niche markets. You know what came to mind that was a niche market once upon a time until the marketing and business leaders took off shooting for the sky? Apple. So I look at this with optimism. Who knows, maybe so many people in the world go so ape shit over wanting a DeLorean that they build a whole plant to make new ones. Sound silly? Sure. But I know Steve Jobs would have supported this kind of idea years ago.

No matter how much misleading and misrepresenting of DeLorean Motor Company Texas and it's products to the general public is done by Stephen Wynne and James Espey it will never really bring the car back. The car is outdated as far as safety guidlines by the DOT. What flew in 1981 would never fly today. DMCH will also never have the capital to develop a different car from the ground up. Face it Stephen Wynne is not John DeLorean. All their PR is doing is muddying and cheapening the cars and the real DeLorean Motor Companies true history, and the DeLoreans place in it.

The PR that DMCH is engaging is completely selfish and $$$$ driven, this is a way to line Stephen's pockets before he retires and he is willing to destroy this cars history and heritage in order to do it, the "New-Build" was already a failure which cost them little to nothing to promote, when he fails with the EV will he leave us paying 400% more for NOS parts to pay for his greed? I could see that happening, well for as long as DMCH lasts before bankruptcy anyway.

So in actuality Jonathan depending on how much capital is invested in prototyping the EV and deals made with Epic EV Stephen Wynne's ambitions could very likely lead us to another period of our parts inventory being back in storage containers, owned by a bank, and inaccessible to the car owners, and like the other dark period for DeLorean owners we'll again have Stephen Wynne and his greed and ambition to partially thank for it. I hope not but I believe it is a far more likely outcome of the EV fiasco and DMCH's overall mismanagement then your rosey Steve Jobs Apple comparison.

[tyb323]

TJD, there are these magic pills called Zanax, I think you need a few.

Regardless of what your opinion/crusade is against DMCH, I still respect them as a vendor and I'm not going to ding them for trying to have a successful business. I support entirely what they are doing with this electric thing and every interview I have seen with SW and conversation I've had with James has called this the 2013 EV, because that's what it is. It uses modern technology in the powerplant and will be branded as a 2013 kit car if I have my facts right. I've never once seen SW on tv saying that they are building new cars from scratch, although that is what the NEWS REPORTERS say because tbh, they don't really give a damn what the specific facts are. Hell, one of the media outlets started floating the number that there were to be 200,000 DMCEVs built, you think DMCH would come out and say that?

Look it's clear here that your issue is with DeLorean One and it's clear you don't want to give DMCH you business because of some 20 year old grudge, but could you just stop coming on this forum with the sole purpose to ding them? I honestly haven't seen you post one positive remark about anything and come to think of it, I haven't seen you post anything but anti DMCH stuff. I mean hell, this thread is 85% your negative crap. Just chill out and let it go. I'm fairly certain some of us would find whatever your career is to be just as "evil" as you make DMCH out to be.


Now I'm bracing myself for over analysis, being called a fanboy, and bascially enduring the coming shitstorm from you while the majority of the community reads your response and shakes their heads.

[DMCMW Dave]

Road and Track:

http://blog.roadandtrack.com/delorean-electric-prototype-%E2%80%93-2012-new-york-auto-show/

Oh - and note who the author is. . . . .

[Totally 80s]

Who gives a shit that DMCH is showing a Delorean at an auto show?

To me it sounds like there must be a lot of sexual tension between you and somebody at DMCH.

[nofear365]

"The PR that DMCH is engaging is completely selfish and $$$$ driven, this is a way to line Stephen's pockets before he retires"

That's why it's called business. That's the name of the game my friend. Take a breath and let it go. Life is too short.

[dmc6960]

I still believe they listen where it counts and when its not in a pure argumentative tone.

I wanted a UV/IR new windshield.
DMC (James) said new windshields UV only.
I said I wanted a UV/IR new windshield.
Other people said they wanted a UV/IR new windshield.
DMC made 10 UV/IR windshields for double the price.
I now have a UV/IR windshield.

It is free enterprise that allows them to do all the extra stuff they do. I see nothing wrong with it. Especially if it maintains general interest in the DeLorean, which keeps their business sufficient enough to justify the FURTHER investment in all the new parts we get. Could the binnacles been handled at little differently? Yea, probably. But as a result of them we're probably not going to see previews of many new parts until they are ready to be sold.

[tjd]

Regardless of what your opinion/crusade is against DMCH, I still respect them as a vendor and I'm not going to ding them for trying to have a successful business.

That's easy to do when you keep your head stuck in the sand like so many in your generation do. Who cares about ethics or honesty or how you treat customers lets just make some $$$$$$, who cares who or in this case what you have to destroy in order to do it.


Look it's clear here that your issue is with DeLorean One and it's clear you don't want to give DMCH you business because of some 20 year old grudge, but could you just stop coming on this forum with the sole purpose to ding them?

I haven't forgotten Stephen's role in DeLorean One if that's what your asking, nor have have I forgotten Stephen's role in more recent history as he has been complacent while James Espey publicly attacks customers who question DMCH's less then honest controversial depiction of itself over and over again to the media as to the nature of it's business and it's products and it's publicity stunts to further prop up phoney-baloney product terms like "New-Builds" and now "New" EV's.


every interview I have seen with SW and conversation I've had with James has called this the 2013 EV, because that's what it is. It uses modern technology in the powerplant and will be branded as a 2013 kit car if I have my facts right.

Where have you seen it called a Kit Car? As far as calling it a 2013 DeLorean EV as a component car, I still take issue with that. It is still using a large amount of 30 year old off the shelf parts as well as parts needed from a donor car. If it still has even one part off a donor on it it is a damn lie to call it a new anything, even calling it or implying to be a "New" Kit would be a lie. The EV is a restoration and conversion of an existing DeLorean if it needs parts from donors. The "prototype" EV is just that, a restoration and conversion of an already existing car.

To sell these cars as a Kit or Component Car is just a dirty snaky way to go even farther with their lies to get away from describing the cars with accepted market terms of Re-Manufacture or Restoration.

Even more reason to not support this unethical company/vendor.

[DeloreanJoshQ]

I saw on Facebook today that DMC will be at the NY int auto show with the DMC-EV starting this weekend. Anyone know if they'll have their own setup, not just paired up with other EV's? Or if they'll be showcasing other products? Thinking about going next Monday. I was going to skip it this year due to my work schedule but i think I'll check it out now. Anyone else have any info on this? I checked the auto show website but couldn't find any info about DMC.

Here is some more info that you requested:

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/04/05/delorean-electric-surprises-in-new-york-will-cost-95-000-in-20/?icid=maing-grid10%7Clegacy%7Cdl20%7Csec3_lnk2&pLid=149576

[Totally 80s]

That's easy to do when you keep your head stuck in the sand like so many in your generation do. Who cares about ethics or honesty or how you treat customers lets just make some $$$$$$, who cares who or in this case what you have to destroy in order to do it.

You should show them whats up and start your own Delorean parts business. Even better, a "not for profit" parts business. That would show us whippersnappers how things are done in your generation.

[stevedmc]

You should show them whats up and start your own Delorean parts business. Even better, a "not for profit" parts business. That would show us whippersnappers how things are done in your generation.

Have you seen my cross reference parts list?

[Jonathan]

9578

Like Kermit the Frog says, "Maybe if you were nicer to people you would have more friends."

[tyb323]

That's easy to do when you keep your head stuck in the sand like so many in your generation do. Who cares about ethics or honesty or how you treat customers lets just make some $$$$$$, who cares who or in this case what you have to destroy in order to do it.



I haven't forgotten Stephen's role in DeLorean One if that's what your asking, nor have have I forgotten Stephen's role in more recent history as he has been complacent while James Espey publicly attacks customers who question DMCH's less then honest controversial depiction of itself over and over again to the media as to the nature of it's business and it's products and it's publicity stunts to further prop up phoney-baloney product terms like "New-Builds" and now "New" EV's.



Where have you seen it called a Kit Car? As far as calling it a 2013 DeLorean EV as a component car, I still take issue with that. It is still using a large amount of 30 year old off the shelf parts as well as parts needed from a donor car. If it still has even one part off a donor on it it is a damn lie to call it a new anything, even calling it or implying to be a "New" Kit would be a lie. The EV is a restoration and conversion of an existing DeLorean if it needs parts from donors. The "prototype" EV is just that, a restoration and conversion of an already existing car.

To sell these cars as a Kit or Component Car is just a dirty snaky way to go even farther with their lies to get away from describing the cars with accepted market terms of Re-Manufacture or Restoration.

Even more reason to not support this unethical company/vendor.

1. So you have a problem with my generation knowing how to run a business? Because your generation sure did a crackerjack job of running our country into the ground with your high "ethics".

2. Maybe if you didn't make personal attacks against James and Stephen on a regular basis they wouldn't have to defend themselves against your assaults. BTW, contrary to what you may believe, DMCH is not the third reich...

3. I asked James about how they were going to sell these cars, he told me personally they were going to label it a kit car. I still haven't seen you provide evidence showing that DMCH is saying they are building an all new from scratch electric car...

[Chris Burns]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F3bIUgODY0

[DMC3165]

I like the idea of the EV car but I was surprised to see the unused bulkhead connectors still visible in the front passanger side of the engine bay. The brightly colored bulkhead connectors don't look out of place with all the brightly lit electronics. But apparently no longer serve any purpose.

[tjd]

1. So you have a problem with my generation knowing how to run a business? Because your generation sure did a crackerjack job of running our country into the ground with your high "ethics".

For your 1st point proclamation I am not going to lower myself and continue to respond to your baiting & flaming which all of your posts in this thread have been laced with, same goes for your most recent post Jonathan and you "Totally 80s". If you don't have anything of substance to add as it pertains to this discussion then...



2. Maybe if you didn't make personal attacks against James and Stephen on a regular basis they wouldn't have to defend themselves against your assaults. BTW, contrary to what you may believe, DMCH is not the third reich...

I don't have a problem with Stephen and James personally, and I have never attacked them personally. The same can not be said about Mr Espey as he has attacked me personally and publicly as he has others here and the only provocation is questioning anything to do with DMCH where he is uncomfortable providing an answer, whether it be about Binnacles that have been promised for years, or in my case questioning the misleading term "New-Build" as it is not used in the automotive industry outside of some new car manufacturers except in the case of DMCH.


Now that we have gotten that BS out of the way on to your question or point that has any substance as it pertains to the EV and it's appearence at the NY Auto Show.



3. I asked James about how they were going to sell these cars, he told me personally they were going to label it a kit car. I still haven't seen you provide evidence showing that DMCH is saying they are building an all new from scratch electric car...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZg3IT6rv0o&feature=share

Taking the car to an Auto Show with 95% new car manufacturers many of them launching new car models (that's why the press that DMCH covets is there for) and describing the car as a "prototype" of an Electric DeLorean that goes into production in the 1st quarter of 2013.

No where does James describe the car he is sitting in as a conversion and restoration of an already existing 1981-1983 DeLorean, nor does he describe the cars they will be offering to the public as made to order "Kit Cars". He is instead using (misleading for his product) industry terms that car companies regularly use to describe new cars.

The NY Auto Show is just another publicity stunt of many before it where this Texas Vendor is using and abusing it's misleading name and misleading product descriptions to extend it's ill-gotten 15 minutes of fame off the back and legacy of a 30 years defunct car company and car. History or ethics be damned.

[Jonathan]

Taking the car to an Auto Show with 95% new car manufacturers many of them launching new car models (that's why the press that DMCH covets is there for) and describing the car as a "prototype" of an Electric DeLorean that goes into production in the 1st quarter of 2013.

No where does James describe the car he is sitting in as a conversion and restoration of an already existing 1981-1983 DeLorean, nor does he describe the cars they will be offering to the public as made to order "Kit Cars". He is instead using (misleading for his product) industry terms that car companies regularly use to describe new cars.

The NY Auto Show is just another publicity stunt of many before it where this Texas Vendor is using and abusing it's misleading name and misleading product descriptions to extend it's ill-gotten 15 minutes of fame off the back and legacy of a 30 years defunct car company and car. History or ethics be damned.

I just saw a video no more than one or two days ago where the interviewer was going over the car, quoting stats, and one thing he said was that this particular car had 70,000 miles on it before it was converted. I just can't seem to find the link. It might have been someone on FB that posted it. EDIT: D'oh, nevermind, it's the one Chris posted at the top of this page :)

On the other hand, do you always believe everything you see and hear in the media or on the internet? James and Stephen can't control which of these interviews or videos get's the most publicity or how it gets edited to sound better for the readers. For all you know, they go over the donor car, 70,000 miles, conversion details at great length in every interview and the media outlet chooses to edit those parts out. Are you shadowing them all day checking up on them?

Personally I think you need to get over yourself and move on. No one on here wants your BS negativity to cloud the board anymore. That's generally why people have given up and left the forum in the past because of listening to this crap.

[Delorean Industries]

Is that the girl from the Delorean International calender shoot or am I tripping?

[kajcienski]

Just saw the DeLorean display - All the Houston guys are there and booth was very busy with the usual crowd chanting Flux Capacitors and 88mph. Nice guys (Steven especially) but Cameron tried to sell me the concorse D with 600 miles (I think he said around $70k) displayed next to the EV while his head was buried texting someone at the same time on his phone. Since I had a driver he said I needed another one to store. Huh...? (I didn't know how to respond) The EV was interesting.

[Kenny_Z]

Is that the girl from the Delorean International calender shoot or am I tripping?

I think you're right.

[Totally 80s]

For your 1st point proclamation I am not going to lower myself and continue to respond to your baiting & flaming which all of your posts in this thread have been laced with, same goes for your most recent post Jonathan and you "Totally 80s". If you don't have anything of substance to add as it pertains to this discussion then...

I love this guy. He states his extreme negative opinion, we respond with our contrary opinion and we are "baiting and flaming"? If we don't agree with you were trolls apparently.

Tjd, to sum it up there is nothing that we say that is going to change your mind. That is why I first put up the "Haters gonna hate" photo. "Haters gonna hate" means that this person will always find something negative to say and will never have any words of motivation or upliftment for you. We tell you our side and you dismiss it.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7182/7049866887_cb0e796a59_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/53939212@N00/7049866887/) hatersfinal (http://www.flickr.com/photos/53939212@N00/7049866887/) by mauibarber (http://www.flickr.com/people/53939212@N00/), on Flickr

[tjd]

I love this guy. He states his extreme negative opinion, we respond with our contrary opinion and we are "baiting and flaming"? If we don't agree with you were trolls apparently.

Absolutely not, I have discussed what is going on with the false misconceptions as it has to do with DMCH and some of it's products and that is relevant because they are doing it yet again at the NY Auto Show. You and couple other people come on here and attack me because "I'm so negative" because I dare question and or criticize DMCH, but you (and a couple others) have offered very little to nothing (You Alex) other then personal attacks on me as it pertains to this thread.

In fact all of your posts Alex (Totally80's) have been bait & flame in this thread, starting with your 1st post with the wise ass Haters Gonna Hate jpg, + all 4 of your follow up posts have been full of nothing but personal attacks against me (someone you don't know). You haven't offered anything as it pertains to the subject of the thread. But I'm the troll because I'm sick of being sick and tired of the misleading DMCH propaganda that another piece seems to appear almost weekly with their newest publicity stunt the EV. Alex you have contributed nothing as it pertains to any real discussion that is on topic in this thread.


You should show them whats up and start your own Delorean parts business. Even better, a "not for profit" parts business. That would show us whippersnappers how things are done in your generation.

I have no problem with them making an honest profit. I have problems with the dishonest way Stephen has positioned his company starting out with DeLorean One, to the misleading PR for the "New-Build" to today with the publicity stunts & misleading marketing of the EV.

I also think it is hilarious that you and Tyler (atleast he'll talk about what's going on with the EV between his baiting and flames) think that the majority of everyone else is staying silent and shaking their heads at me? Dream on fanboys, I am not the only DeLorean owner/enthusiast that is sick and tired of the propaganda and misleading bull that is spread about these cars by DMCH. That goes for you too Quelhorst! Two of you I know are Backies and you not giving a rats ass about the car being misrepresented is anticipated. Like I said as long as they don't take the car out of Back To The Future...


Personally I think you need to get over yourself and move on. No one on here wants your BS negativity to cloud the board anymore. That's generally why people have given up and left the forum in the past because of listening to this crap.

I think DMCH needs to get over themselves and stop whoring a car they did not create to the media and everyone else by falsely implying to people that have no clue about these cars that new DeLoreans are still being built (See the last paragraph for the video proof from the horses mouth), they should instead get on to what their customer base (DeLorean Owners) wants and get on to getting the Binnacles done (you've been promising for 8 years), and how about the center counsel armrest that you also promised back in 2004? As for you Jonathan it is the typical extreme left wing thinking these days that if someone is voicing an opinion that they do not personally agree with that they should be attacked (most often personally) and silenced, and the Leftists are supposed to be all about the ideology of tolerance. Get over yourself Jonathan. Were both living in free countries (at least the last time I checked), and I'll voice my opinion even if it varies from yours. If you want a controlled forum where nothing is allowed to be said that go to DMCH owned and operated DMCHelp

Bottom line I'm not wasting anymore of my time with your guys flame wars. Jonathan if you do not like what I have to say click my profile and click on Ignore User. Do not dictate to me what I can discuss in an on topic discussion. It's not like I'm jumping all over the forum and bashing DMCH in repair Q&A threads. Bottom line too bad if I don't like DMCH and the way they choose to publicize their business and products. Though most will not voice it publicly because of the parts monopoly (parts that every owner here will need at times) and the fear of retribution by DMCH not everyone here is a fan of DMCH for many reasons including the BS publicity and misleading product descriptions that are at the center of my frustration with them.

My final word on this, The DMCH cheerleaders that like to defend them for the misconceptions about the DeLorean that are out there and blame the media for misrepresenting the cars as new, here in this video from 1:34 to 1:39 the interviewer point blank asks Stephen Wynne "Not only can you repair old ones but you can build new ones?" Stephen Wynnes answer "Yes, Yes!"

Just watch the video from 1:34 to 1:39, there it is from the horses mouth.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hy-Xh08nPo

There you have it Stephen Wynne on the record claiming to the media that yes he has the capacity to build "New" DeLoreans. This as any DeLorean owner is aware is an outright lie. Even if they can snake around the safety requirements that the DeLorean could never pass for current safety standards by calling it a Kit Car, there are many NLA available parts (Left Front Fender as one big one) that are not available anymore. Yes the media is easily impressed by the large warehouse full of NOS parts, but us as owners are too aware that this part stockpile does not make up 100% of the parts needed to build a new car from scratch off the shelf. Stephen Wynne is absolutely guilty of misrepresenting to the media his companies logistic inventory and legal capacity to build a new DeLorean DMC-12.

I'm sure those of you on the Kool-Aid will still come up with an excuse and try to exonerate DMCH and blame the media, I'll be waiting.


*For the other stuff can you if you have the capacity to act like (even on the internet) a decent human being and act like an adult and keep either your commands and bait & flames behind the Iron Curtain or on the Playground where it belongs.

[stevedmc]

Did Steve Wynne say there is a 2012 model? I really would like to see the title for that.

[DMC3165]

My $.02,

TJD makes some valid points. Although his points seem to be very angrily directed at Stephen, he is obviously very well versed in his DeLorean history and knows what he's talking about.

I'm not one for public bashing of anyone I prefer to make up my own mind through personal experiences. As for DMCH I have been dissatisfied with some of their parts at times. But aside from that how they represent themselves to the media and the public in general really makes no difference to me.

If they can some how keep the word DeLorean in the publics mind I really feel it will help keep values up. Hopefully.

[DMCVegas]

I don't have a problem with Stephen and James personally, and I have never attacked them personally.

I'm gonna call total bullshit on that. How in the hell could you possibly say all these things that they're both dishonestly running a business, and yet not call that a personal attack?

Now then...

http://sportsnickel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/DevilsAdvocate_fs.jpg

DMCH is NOT the first company to perform "factory" restorations or rebuilds. Nissan did it some years ago with their Datsun Z cars, and even BMW has done it as a demonstration of factory available parts. Yet I don't hear any outcry over what they've done, now do we? Did they word things differently? I dunno. If anyone can produce the factory literature we can certainly find out. Speaking of which...

As for DMCH's labeling of these other cars as "New Builds", just to play another round of Devil's Advocate here, perhaps that is due to the legal aspect of it. One thing to make absolutely clear is that these vehicles are not brand-new, nor is DMCH advertising them that way. They do in fact call them "new build" cars. So let's consider something here. DMCH is NOT De Lorean Motor Company of the past. We know this, we can agree upon it. If they were however to describe one of their newer cars as simply "New" cars, that could possibly get them into a whole heap of trouble. That certainly insinuates that the cars are absolutely brand-new, AND/OR were manufactured by DMCL in Northern Ireland. That could easily get them landed in court. However these are "New Build" cars. And what exactly does that mean?

LOTS of manufacturers describe old and recycled cars as "new". Every time Lexus debuts an "All New" car no one ever bitches about how it's just a warmed over Toyota, so who honestly gives a shit about DMCH calling a car a "New Build". But I digress. DMCH can't call any of their DMC-12s "new" for the aforementioned legal reasons. But just like Lexus/Acura/Infinity/Plymouth/Cadilliac/Buick/Mazda/Kia/etc., it is simply a badge-engineered vehicle. The Dunmurry-Spec DMC-12 is no longer available as a new car. That was a vehicle built by De Lorean Motor Cars Limited in Northern Ireland. The cars that we see now use the same DMC-12 platform, but are built by DeLorean Motor Company of Houston, Texas. As such they are built with totally different specifications in mind. From the Improved parts (Transmission Governors, Headlight Switches) to the NOW available options (sat-nav radios, two-tone interiors, hybrid drivetrains), this is a TOTALLY different build of the DMC-12. In fact it is a "New Build".

And that is exactly how I perceive these new cars: as "New Builds" meaning new specifications of the same platform. I have no vested interest in defending DMCH, but I am absolutely tired of self-righteous assholes taking low-blows at them constantly as a pathetic way to impose some false sense of importance on the DeLorean community about themselves.

Do I have anything to risk by pissing off or appeasing vendors? Nope. I'm still the same asshole that I ever was to them and everyone else. Did DMCH do what could be considered some "shady" things in the past? I'd say so. Has DMCH ever done me wrong personally? In the sense that I've had a couple of hiccups with two orders over the years, maybe you could say that. But they were quick to correct things and apologized. Compared to my dealings with other vendors though they still seem to be the ones who have their shit together the most...but hey, mistakes get made, and guess what?

http://www.ipgbook.com/filebin/images/book_image/large/9781849531320.jpg

Life as a whole is far too short to keep fueling these constant blood-feuds. Besides that, some shit should absolute be cleared up about Wynn/DMCH versus Bernstein/D-1. D-1 apparently didn't break from Wynn, it was the other way around. Past articles will easily show that. As for the details though, that's up to Wynn to come forward. But still, what in the hell does any of this matter? What, the "principal" of the thing? Ok, but still, how does that impact anyone? If we go simply for the principal of the matter, then I'll just keep going after people myself then for that same reason.

[stevedmc]

I'm gonna call total bullshit on that. How in the hell could you possibly say all these things that they're both dishonestly running a business, and yet not call that a personal attack?

Now then...

http://sportsnickel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/DevilsAdvocate_fs.jpg

DMCH is NOT the first company to perform "factory" restorations or rebuilds. Nissan did it some years ago with their Datsun Z cars, and even BMW has done it as a demonstration of factory available parts. Yet I don't hear any outcry over what they've done, now do we? Did they word things differently? I dunno. If anyone can produce the factory literature we can certainly find out. Speaking of which...

As for DMCH's labeling of these other cars as "New Builds", just to play another round of Devil's Advocate here, perhaps that is due to the legal aspect of it. One thing to make absolutely clear is that these vehicles are not brand-new, nor is DMCH advertising them that way. They do in fact call them "new build" cars. So let's consider something here. DMCH is NOT De Lorean Motor Company of the past. We know this, we can agree upon it. If they were however to describe one of their newer cars as simply "New" cars, that could possibly get them into a whole heap of trouble. That certainly insinuates that the cars are absolutely brand-new, AND/OR were manufactured by DMCL in Northern Ireland. That could easily get them landed in court. However these are "New Build" cars. And what exactly does that mean?

LOTS of manufacturers describe old and recycled cars as "new". Every time Lexus debuts an "All New" car no one ever bitches about how it's just a warmed over Toyota, so who honestly gives a shit about DMCH calling a car a "New Build". But I digress. DMCH can't call any of their DMC-12s "new" for the aforementioned legal reasons. But just like Lexus/Acura/Infinity/Plymouth/Cadilliac/Buick/Mazda/Kia/etc., it is simply a badge-engineered vehicle. The Dunmurry-Spec DMC-12 is no longer available as a new car. That was a vehicle built by De Lorean Motor Cars Limited in Northern Ireland. The cars that we see now use the same DMC-12 platform, but are built by DeLorean Motor Company of Houston, Texas. As such they are built with totally different specifications in mind. From the Improved parts (Transmission Governors, Headlight Switches) to the NOW available options (sat-nav radios, two-tone interiors, hybrid drivetrains), this is a TOTALLY different build of the DMC-12. In fact it is a "New Build".

And that is exactly how I perceive these new cars: as "New Builds" meaning new specifications of the same platform. I have no vested interest in defending DMCH, but I am absolutely tired of self-righteous assholes taking low-blows at them constantly as a pathetic way to impose some false sense of importance on the DeLorean community about themselves.

Do I have anything to risk by pissing off or appeasing vendors? Nope. I'm still the same asshole that I ever was to them and everyone else. Did DMCH do what could be considered some "shady" things in the past? I'd say so. Has DMCH ever done me wrong personally? In the sense that I've had a couple of hiccups with two orders over the years, maybe you could say that. But they were quick to correct things and apologized. Compared to my dealings with other vendors though they still seem to be the ones who have their shit together the most...but hey, mistakes get made, and guess what?

http://www.ipgbook.com/filebin/images/book_image/large/9781849531320.jpg

Life as a whole is far too short to keep fueling these constant blood-feuds. Besides that, some shit should absolute be cleared up about Wynn/DMCH versus Bernstein/D-1. D-1 apparently didn't break from Wynn, it was the other way around. Past articles will easily show that. As for the details though, that's up to Wynn to come forward. But still, what in the hell does any of this matter? What, the "principal" of the thing? Ok, but still, how does that impact anyone? If we go simply for the principal of the matter, then I'll just keep going after people myself then for that same reason.

Thats a lot of words. I started to get a headache after a few sentences and quit reading. The difference between Nissan and DMCH is Nissan is Nissan and DMCH is just a Delorean vendor who happens to have more NOS parts than anyone else.

[Totally 80s]

Absolutely not, I have discussed what is going on with the false misconceptions as it has to do with DMCH and some of it's products and that is relevant because they are doing it yet again at the NY Auto Show. You and couple other people come on here and attack me because "I'm so negative" because I dare question and or criticize DMCH, but you (and a couple others) have offered very little to nothing (You Alex) other then personal attacks on me as it pertains to this thread.

When did "Haters gonna hate" become a personal attack? I thought it summed up my feelings on it pretty well.

My overall point is most people don't care that they are putting a Delorean in an auto-show. I don't think its mine or anybody's business what they do. If you don't like them the simplest thing to do is stop buying anything from them ever or go start your own Delorean business. Either of those things would certainly accomplish more than yelling in a forum for Delorean geeks.

There are people being slaughtered in Africa and your jumping up and down talking about what Stephen did or did not say about cars he owns. :rollin: I think its silly. (please don't take that last sentence as a personal attack). I ain't mad atcha. No hard feelings I hope.

[DMCVegas]

Thats a lot of words. I started to get a headache after a few sentences and quit reading. The difference between Nissan and DMCH is Nissan is Nissan and DMCH is just a Delorean vendor who happens to have more NOS parts than anyone else.

We're not discussing the differences in the companies themselves. We're discussing the recycling of existing vehicles into "new" ones. If you decline to read words let alone understand them and then wish to ignorantly challenge them, that's your problem.

[Totally 80s]

We're not discussing the differences in the companies themselves. We're discussing the recycling of existing vehicles into "new" ones. If you decline to read words let alone understand them and then wish to ignorantly challenge them, that's your problem.

So I'm a little confused, because the government doesn't recognize them as "new" then they are not? Or is it because they have a used fender on them that they are not new?

I could personally care less if the government says its new or not. Maybe its just semantics?

[Dracula]

I've remained quiet in this thread, until now, due to the fact that my opinion of DMCH as media-whores is well known. However, there are a few things I do wish to say.

First off, let me preface it by stating that I'm with TJD in opinion on many regards.

That said, him and I have some overlapping and divergent opinions and neither of us are afraid to speak our minds.

My primary concern is and always will be the use of my DeLorean. It's undeniable that DMCH holds a monopoly on parts. They've also done a great job of setting up a regional parts/service center network. That's a commendable effort and a prudent business decision. That said, I was disgusted with the "New Build" concept. It's not the term that I get hung up on, but the way they market the cars. If you do a Google search, you get dozens of pages where they claim to be building new cars.

This EV crap is a worse extension of the same mis-marketing that has become a prevalent trend from DMCH.

Don't believe me? Check out this page on DMCH's site:

http://delorean.com/2011/10/electric-delorean/

Here's a direct quote from their site:


"This sucker's Electrical??"

Yes! You're looking at the brand-new, all-electric DeLorean which debuted at the DMC Texas - Open House Event Oct.14th, 2011.


That car is NOT what they claim it to be. It is, in fact, a converted DeLorean made into an electric car; something that had been done multiple times before DMCH jumped on the publicity bandwagon.

The ABC News piece that they feature also treats the car as a joke and a series of bad punchline gags; hardly a good choice to represent the car, but that's more my opinion than fact.

What is a fact is that DMCH can be found and quoted, in numerous interviews going back several years, as saying that they're building new DeLoreans. A reputation based on lies will ultimately hurt the product; notwithstanding my personal opinion of the numerous DMCH "new builds" that I've seen that are of inferior quality to the factory DeLoreans or ones restored by private owners.

Now, my concern and outcries come from two main areas:

1. I like the history of the DeLorean. I may be 23, but I loved the car when I saw one in a museum when I was around 4 or 5 years old. From there, I researched the car and decided to own one. This is atypical for most DeLorean owners my age. Most people know of the car as the BTTF time machine; though, that's debatably fading away. Regardless of that, it's overshadowed the car itself and its famed as a movie prop and a pop-culture pun. DMCH's EV crap throws more mud into already murky water by playing off of the car as a movie prop and takes credit for work that they never did to build the DeLorean. They act like it's a completely re-engineered car that they spent years designing. In reality, it's an annoying flash-in-the-pan attempt to capitalize on the fad of electric cars. I've had to deal with more BS in the last few years due to DMCH and their marketing campaigns than I care to from a public that now knows less than they did before. The media will soon get bored with DMCH's one-trick donkey show and leave owners with another annoying series of jokes and misinformation. Sadly, this is already happening.

2. I want to be able to continue driving my DeLorean and, in order to do so, I'm going to have to replace the parts that will, inevitably, fail. There are many that, short of finding an eBay replacement or similar used part, I'll have to get from DMCH. So, their business practices directly affect me and EVERY SINGLE DELOREAN OWNER until there's 100% parts availability from outside suppliers. They will make up whatever money they lose from this EV and "new build" crap by increasing the prices on parts and labor. That, bottom line, will be felt by everyone who wants to drive their car or restore one. If that alone isn't enough of a reason to be concerned, I don't know what is.

There have been numerous references to the capitalist system; the thing about that is that the ability to criticize and speak out about a product or a company is the foundation of capitalism and the free market. I've already been perusing the cross-over parts list and when the day comes when more and more people are running DeLoreans with deviations from stock due to parts costs, if I haven't sold mine from annoyance at BTTF and the Houston debacle, I'll be doing whatever it takes to keep my cars on the road.

[Jonathan]

I could personally care less if the government says its new or not...

Clearly we need to lighten this thread up a notch. So let's see if we can take it off on another hellish tangent...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw

Agreed Alex, no hard feelings to anyone. Everyone gets to have an opinion, that's what makes life great :)

[stevedmc]

We're not discussing the differences in the companies themselves. We're discussing the recycling of existing vehicles into "new" ones. If you decline to read words let alone understand them and then wish to ignorantly challenge them, that's your problem.

Well part of my issue is that DMCH is pretending to be Delorean Motor Company. Nissan isn't pretending to be anything they are not.


They act like it's a completely re-engineered car that they spent years designing.

You've got to give them some credit. They did recover the damaged 30 year old binnacle.

[thirdmanj]

I enjoy your editorials DMCVegas. Do you write professionally?

This is a very old debate, on par with the carburetor thing I think. I really can see both sides, they both make good points.

The car will ALWAYS be an icon, and that will ALWAYS be capitalized upon and referenced in whatever publicity it receives. My only advice would be to not take it personally. Taking offense to misinformation only demonstrates an inability to control your own feelings. If one can't handle it, get rid of the car. But it won't change anything. You'll still have your knowledge and opinions, and when the DeLorean or "Time Machine" comes up in conversation (which is bound to happen) you'll still feel obligated to correct others when they get something wrong.

There we go. But that's what's so cool about this forum. On top of all the technical advice and support with our cars, we can meet up here and share are opinions and bitch about things. No one else cares, except those who use this space and bother to comment. Meh, whatev. I for one am glad to have this forum, the vendor network, and my stainless steal piece of history.

Thanks again!

-James

[Dracula]

To add another level of stupidity to this; DMCH is now "Authorizing" people to build a DeLorean BICYCLE!

http://deloreanbicycle.com/

http://urbanvelo.org/delorean-bicycles/

What's next? Does the DMC magnet that I have on my stainless refrigerator make it an "Official DeLorean Refrigerator" now, or do I need to buy a hood emblem and slap that on, too?

[thirdmanj]

To add another level of stupidity to this; DMCH is now "Authorizing" people to build a DeLorean BICYCLE!

http://deloreanbicycle.com/

http://urbanvelo.org/delorean-bicycles/

What's next? Does the DMC magnet that I have on my stainless refrigerator make it an "Official DeLorean Refrigerator" now, or do I need to buy a hood emblem and slap that on, too?

Heh heh. Yeah I admit, I LoLd a bit.

[Dracula]

I posted this here because this was "unveiled" at the auto show. It's a f***ing bicycle with "DeLorean" written on it! The fact that Houston was displaying this product at their booth and that they're marketing it as an "Authorized" bicycle has two issues for me.

First, who the hell does DMCH think they are to have the say to "Authorize" a DeLorean bicycle?

Second, how does this help spread good press for the DeLorean name? Is the plan just to slap the "DeLorean" logo on everything that they can? If I put a hood emblem that says "DeLorean" on my toilet, it's as much an "authorized DeLorean product" as that bicycle.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go use "The Authorized Limited-Edition New Build DeLorean Toilet*"

*may be composed of mostly waste parts. Limited-edition in regards to the number that people are stupid enough to buy are all that will be made.

[stevedmc]

Where on earth did this fact come from?

"Not so interesting factoid: You might think the car would be displayed with the doors “up” for dramatic effect, but the Delorean’s door raising mechanism isn’t strong enough to hold them up for eight hours at a time."
http://urbanvelo.org/delorean-bicycles/

I've left my car doors open all day at car shows with zero problems.

[thirdmanj]

Where on earth did this fact come from?

"Not so interesting factoid: You might think the car would be displayed with the doors “up” for dramatic effect, but the Delorean’s door raising mechanism isn’t strong enough to hold them up for eight hours at a time."
http://urbanvelo.org/delorean-bicycles/

I've left my car doors open all day at car shows with zero problems.

Yeah right? I just posted a reply that the "factoid" is bogus. It's "awaiting moderation". Bill would be proud ;)

[DMCMW Dave]

Where on earth did this fact come from?
"Not so interesting factoid: You might think the car would be displayed with the doors “up” for dramatic effect, but the Delorean’s door raising mechanism isn’t strong enough to hold them up for eight hours at a time."


They kept them closed to keep obnoxious kids from crawling through the cars all day.

I just love it when news (using the term loosely) people just Make Stuff Up.

[stevedmc]

They kept them closed to keep obnoxious kids from crawling through the cars all day.

I just love it when news (using the term loosely) people just Make Stuff Up.

Can't say I don't blame them. We have been pretty lucky at car shows in the south though. Usually one owner stays behind when the doors are up and the rest of us go check out the nice cars.

[tjd]

For the record I don't have a problem with DMCH restoring, re-manufacturing and or converting DeLoreans. I have a problem with the outright lies spread by Stephen and probably James (Stephen is now on the record) claiming that these above mentioned products are actually new cars.

Me I'm a big fan of the DeLorean car ever since I 1st laid eyes on one in the summer of 82 and since then I've become a two time owner.

My problem with DMCH (and it's not personal with James & Stephen, One I've never met and the other I hardly know, I'm just very opinionated about how they market their business in a deliberately misleading way with their name and more importantly the car) is 90% the misleading marketing and their whoring of the brand. If they where honest about the descriptions of their products the media wouldn't give them the time of day (who cares if they restore & modify cars?), and that is how it really should be, hence why they actively misrepresent and outright lie to get the media attention they desire so much. The other 10% of my distaste is how they show no appreciation for the customers they have, the customers that made them and keep food on their table (the current DeLorean owner). How much of their time and effort has been devoted toward attracting an elitist crowd with the "New-Builds" and now the EV? While products that have been promised for years to their core audience is put off and put off. They take you for granted and brush you aside to devote resources to instead attract an imaginary elitist big ticket customer that is going to fork over 95K for an electric DeLorean. From my understanding the "New-Builds" never met sales expectation but this electric conversion that costs significantly more somehow will?

and like Chad points out we as owners take all the risk for this venture (due to the NOS parts Houston holds that we all need stuff from at times) while Stephen basks in the spotlight yet again. They may sell a few EV's I have no doubt (To make back what they have invested in this stunt I seriously doubt), but the legacy of all the publicity stunts will be a more muddied history of this car and the original company and pro-longing of the BTTF association ("Where were going we don't need gas") and a new generation of misinformation and jokes. Not to mention even higher parts prices for us the DeLorean owner. Thanks a lot Houston!

and yeah Chad the "DeLorean" bicycle is an absolute joke and yet another example of how out of touch Stephen and James are with the typical DeLorean owner, and how they are turning the "brand" into a joke. I do think some here might buy a bag of James feces though if DeLorean was embossed on the contents ;P

Those that don't see a problem in all this, well I'm sorry for you (not me). If you despite all of this still choose to do business with them directly and make them your vendor of choice, that's up to you. I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm not going to lie either I buy from them direct when I don't have an indirect alternative for whatever product I'm buying.


Another opinion of mine that seems to go against the grain of DMCH's apparent opinion of themselves, and some your personal opinions that I've read here too is this:

I don't think it is because of DMC Houston or anything extraordinary that they have done that we are able to own and enjoy are cars today, it's because of us the DeLorean Owner that Stephen Wynne operates an apparently successful business, and James Espey has a job, same goes to the other vendors though I think they all mostly realize this. We the individual owners keep the DeLorean Dream alive. Not that little vendor in Texas that seeks out the medias attention so much.

[Dracula]

Well said! The basis of the free-market economy is that the consumer holds the cards. DMCH is not a free-market enterprise. They rely on our dependence upon them for parts and, as a result, have a fairly solid customer base that they can use to cover their foolish endeavors with no harm to them. It's the same as a communist government. One ruling class controls the means of production or, in this case, one shop owns all the remaining original DeLorean parts.

I get riled up every time I see DMCH taking advantage of their customer base with these stupid projects. Binnacles MAY be done by DCS; despite the promise of their completion 8 years ago, but they can develop a new lighter underbody for the car that suits their EV needs. They say that Epic EV contributed to it, but just how much do you think they would kick in towards a replacement underbody for the DeLorean with next to no other practical application? I guarantee you that it wasn't a 50-50 split.

That's, perhaps, one of the best examples of them putting their projects ahead of their customers; the same thing that doomed the REAL DeLorean Motor Company.

Another issue is that when their parts are sub-standard, they don't apologize or say that there will be any further development on the part despite numerous complaints. The example of this is the replacement dashes. The quality on those; to put it bluntly, sucks. They warp, are poorly colored, rattle, and are prone to having the studs break. Had I known this BEFORE I bought one, I'd have kept my recovered dash in the car.

I get that a growing number of the DeLorean owners; more prevalent online, are fans of BTTF, but they should give it a rest with the advertisement based off of those movies. Despite what the BTTF fanboys say about it being a classic and more influential to DeLorean ownership and a perpetual draw to the cars, interest in it IS fading. Kids today don't care about a movie made in the 1980s and set in the '50s/'80s. There aren't nearly enough Nazi zombies or topless motorcycling scenes in it. It doesn't matter how good a film is or how classic it is, it still fades. How about such films like Casablanca, Gone with the Wind, The Maltese Falcon, Frankenstein, Dracula, or The Phantom of the Opera? These are all classics, but most youths won't watch them because they're too old, or in black-and-white, or too boring, etc. When you BTTF-ers get to the point where you have to explain your gags and props more frequently, you'll see what I've been saying for years.

What's the legacy of the DeLorean going to be in 30 years time? Do you think that BTTF will still be talked and joked about 55 years later after all the "It's 2015; where are our flying cars and hoverboards that we were promised?" jokes are expended? I don't want the legacy of the DeLorean to be a failed sports car, movie prop, and media whore to be what becomes of what was started as a new and unique idea.

[Totally 80s]

Ferrari has been doing this kind of branding for years. Have you ever been into a Ferrari Store? Golf clubs, lamps, towels, and even SURFBOARDS. All officially branded Ferrari. What does Ferrari have to do with Surfing? At least the Bike is stainless steel.

I don't think this merchandising has hurt Ferrari one bit, why should it hurt Delorean? If it keeps DMCH and the rest the venders in business I am OK with it.

Chad's point about who has the right to license these things however is an interesting one. That's above my pay grade. If I was to guess it would be whoever owns the copyright to the stylized name/font.

[tjd]

That's, perhaps, one of the best examples of them putting their projects ahead of their customers; the same thing that doomed the REAL DeLorean Motor Company.

History often repeats itself, and I can see the parallels between DMCH and DMC ltd. As far as their biggest asset the NOS parts they have already raised the price of many parts significantly since they acquired them from Kapac. Where is the tipping point?

DMCH has taken ownership of the electric "prototype" not Epic EV. I think that clearly shows who has more skin in in this game. I don't think Mr Wynne or Mr Espey would risk their skins to bring an electric conversion to market if it was not for (us) their captive customer base they keep with the NOS parts. We take the initial (and long term) risk of failure, they reap the rewards of any success, it is sickening.

[Totally 80s]

What are you talking about? Delorean went out of business because it started a car company in the middle of a recession, the car was way overpriced, underpowered and had bad P.R. Also, the cocaine thing. :8ball:

It had nothing to do with DMC starting new projects. THE CARS WERE NOT SELLING.

[Dracula]

Ferrari has been doing this kind of branding for years. Have you ever been into a Ferrari Store? Golf clubs, lamps, towels, and even SURFBOARDS. All officially branded Ferrari. What does Ferrari have to do with Surfing? At least the Bike is stainless steel.

I don't think this merchandising has hurt Ferrari one bit, why should it hurt Delorean? If it keeps DMCH and the rest the venders in business I am OK with it.

Chad's point about who has the right to license these things however is an interesting one. That's above my pay grade. If I was to guess it would be whoever owns the copyright to the stylized name/font.

The merchandising hurts the DeLorean when it causes an increase in the cost of parts to the average owner due to a poor ROI on the various avenues they undertake. To stay in business, more money has to come in than goes out. If these publicity stunts generate too little, something has to be done to restore their income. The result is the captive audience suffers parts hikes and increased labor rates to offset every stupid failure they undertake.

DMCH has trademarked what they call a "Stylized Logo" despite the fact that it's a logo created by DMC back in the 1970s and was merely never trademarked. Here's a shot of it from the opening of the dealer prospectus film:

9636

Otherwise, it's been well-documented that they DO NOT OWN THE RIGHTS TO THE DELOREAN CAR, NAME, OR FACTORY LOGO. However, their separate page on licensing from the main site implies otherwise.

http://delorean.com/contact/licensing/

I also find it funny that their "About Us" page contains a verbatim quote from Wikipedia that I edited myself:


The current DeLorean Motor Company located near Houston is not, and has never been, associated with the original company but supports owners of DeLorean cars.

http://delorean.com/about/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeLorean_Motor_Company

The particular usage of commas is indicative of my writings style and, therefore, I should receive some form of compensation


What are you talking about? Delorean went out of business because it started a car company in the middle of a recession, the car was way overpriced, underpowered and had bad P.R. Also, the cocaine thing. :8ball:

It had nothing to do with DMC starting new projects. THE CARS WERE NOT SELLING.

You mean there's no parallel to the "new builds" that aren't selling or the unsold EVs that Houston is creating and the cars that DeLorean built and couldn't sell? What about such funds-drainers as the DMC-24 bus, the Logan Manufacturing Company, DMC airport tug, Thinkol, etc. that John Z. DeLorean wasted company money with?

[tyb323]

To clarify here, the bike was an independent project by a delorean enthusiast. He went to dmch for the name, they said yes (please no debates on if they have the right to do that or not...). That's the extent of the involvement, dmch did not set out to make a delorean bike, it was given to them. Tim, on another note, I'm offended that you accuse me of baiting and flaming when you yourself demeaned me for my age and then proceeded later to post an essay that insulted everyone who opposes you.

Look I don't give a damn if you don't like dmch, and I respect your opinion, really I do. But being militant about it and basically telling people who disagree that they are idiots is downright insulting and "baiting and flaming". I have no issue with your opinion aside from it potentially damaging the business that dmch and its vendors rely off of, so please do us all a favor and take it back a notch. That's what I mean when I say take a xanax. You're being completely unreasonable...

[Dracula]

To clarify here, the bike was an independent project by a delorean enthusiast. He went to dmch for the name, they said yes (please no debates on if they have the right to do that or not...). That's the extent of the involvement, dmch did not set out to make a delorean bike, it was given to them.

However, the $64,000.00 question; for those of us that get the reference, is: Did he have to PAY them anything for it? If he DID, then there's potential for a lawsuit; as there is with anyone who falls for Houston's mis-marketing of the DeLorean name and logo.

So, who wants to buy an authorized, limited-edition DeLorean toilet?*

9637

*no guarantee provided that it won't be full of sh*t.

[Totally 80s]

You mean there's no parallel to the "new builds" that aren't selling or the unsold EVs that Houston is creating and the cars that DeLorean built and couldn't sell? What about such funds-drainers as the DMC-24 bus, the Logan Manufacturing Company, DMC airport tug, Thinkol, etc. that John Z. DeLorean wasted company money with?

The new builds payed for themselves with the publicity easy. You can't buy that kind of nationwide tv, radio, and print advertisement. So I'll call that a wash at worst.

It's way to soon to cast judgement on sold or unsold EVs

The DMC-24 bus sold so I am not sure how much money was "lost" nor does anyone know exactly how much was spent by DMC. While in hindsight these may have been money losers for DMC you are not gonna sit there and tell me that is the reason they went out of business. All business make decisions that sound good initially but then cost them money. DMC went out of business because people didn't buy the cars. Not because of some investment in tug boats or licensed sunglasses.

[Dracula]

The new builds payed for themselves with the publicity easy. You can't buy that kind of nationwide tv, radio, and print advertisement. So I'll call that a wash at worst.

It's way to soon to cast judgement on sold or unsold EVs

The DMC-24 bus sold so I am not sure how much money was "lost" nor does anyone know exactly how much was spent by DMC. While in hindsight these may have been money losers for DMC you are not gonna sit there and tell me that is the reason they went out of business. All business make decisions that sound good initially but then cost them money. DMC went out of business because people didn't buy the cars. Not because of some investment in tug boats or licensed sunglasses.

There's no way to measure the revenue gained by DMCH since they started that campaign without looking at their books, which I'm sure they wouldn't let me do. Though, I'm sure it doesn't even compare to their parts and labor sales. From what I remember, they didn't even manage to sell 3 "new builds" a year despite all their hoopla and the duress its caused the DeLorean community.

It's not too soon to judge the EVs. All that's required is the knowledge of the production cost of the car they have and the cost of parts for it then balance it against the number of paid sales that they have for the cars. Until that number swings in favor of their sales of EVs, then it's a loss on their books that they have to make up for in their quarterly reports.

I couldn't find any documentation of the DMC bus ever being BUILT and all information I found about it said that the project never got off the ground, so I'd love to know how you claim it sold. (I mistakenly called it the 24 instead of 80; sorry for any confusion there.) As a result, all the R & D that went into the project was nothing but a tally in the negative column of the DMC financial ledger. Projects like the sunglasses, tugs; whatever never went past the point of pet-project and, without being commercially available, drained company funds and contributed to the downfall of DMC. It wasn't the only problem, but it was still one of the ones that led to their bankruptcy.

[stevedmc]

To clarify here, the bike was an independent project by a delorean enthusiast. He went to dmch for the name, they said yes (please no debates on if they have the right to do that or not...).

I wonder if they would give their blessing on a fuel system project.

[Totally 80s]

There's no way to measure the revenue gained by DMCH since they started that campaign without looking at their books, which I'm sure they wouldn't let me do. Though, I'm sure it doesn't even compare to their parts and labor sales. From what I remember, they didn't even manage to sell 3 "new builds" a year despite all their hoopla and the duress its caused the DeLorean community.

It's not too soon to judge the EVs. All that's required is the knowledge of the production cost of the car they have and the cost of parts for it then balance it against the number of paid sales that they have for the cars. Until that number swings in favor of their sales of EVs, then it's a loss on their books that they have to make up for in their quarterly reports.

I couldn't find any documentation of the DMC bus ever being BUILT and all information I found about it said that the project never got off the ground, so I'd love to know how you claim it sold. (I mistakenly called it the 24 instead of 80; sorry for any confusion there.) As a result, all the R & D that went into the project was nothing but a tally in the negative column of the DMC financial ledger. Projects like the sunglasses, tugs; whatever never went past the point of pet-project and, without being commercially available, drained company funds and contributed to the downfall of DMC. It wasn't the only problem, but it was still one of the ones that led to their bankruptcy.

Got the bus confused with that snowmobile/tractor thing. I have seen a few of them on ebay every once in a while. Looks like for the Bus they were basically just slapping their name on the side so I can't imagine a whole lot of money went into that venture.

[Dracula]

Got the bus confused with that snowmobile/tractor thing. I have seen a few of them on ebay every once in a while. Looks like for the Bus they were basically just slapping their name on the side so I can't imagine a whole lot of money went into that venture.

The snowmobile/tractor was built by the Logan Manufacturing Company, which; while, they didn't lose money building them DMC lost money by acquiring LMC.

The bus still lost money in regards to the prospectus, research, time, advertising, research and more. It adds up fast.

[tjd]

DMC went out of business because people didn't buy the cars. Not because of some investment in tug boats or licensed sunglasses.

John DeLorean was accused of diverting funds from DMC ltd to fund Logan Manufacturing Company among other pet projects. This did not help DMC ltd stay afloat. There where other mitigating factors to why the cars weren't selling (outside influences) so don't blame the car entirely. The cars did actually sell quite well to those that had access to the $$$$ to buy one. If you dig into individual car histories you will find that most where purchase by cash while DMC ltd was still in business producing cars. That's a pretty unusual method of buying a new car don't you think? Many interested people were turned away at the dealerships who could not obtain credit to buy a DMC-12.



The DMC-24 bus sold so I am not sure how much money was "lost"

The DMC bus was scraped before any where produced.

History lesson now aside.


The new builds payed for themselves with the publicity easy. You can't buy that kind of nationwide tv, radio, and print advertisement.

Publicity that DMCH does not deserve as it was as a result of a proven lie made by DMCH that it has the legal and logistic ability to produce new DeLoreans which it simply does not. If DMCH described it's products in an honest way they would have referred to them as restorations, re-manufactures, or in the EV's case a component car or kit car and or conversion. None of these terms are news worthy so DMCH created deliberately misleading terms to go along with their misleading name and then took the additional step to lie to the media in order to get attention for it's company and it's products.

The question I ask is why does a parts/service/restoration provider for a car that went out of production 30 years ago that has a built in customer base based on it's unique market position (it's NOS parts asset) numbering in the thousands need media exposure for anyway?

Is it that Stephen and James lifestyles exceed what an honest service/parts/restoration business can support? I say too bad to that, if you want to have the $$$$ to support the lifestyle of the CEO of a car manufacturer then they should have done something different with their lives. There is no reason for the misrepresentations and lies spread by them as it has to do with the defunct DeLorean car.

[Totally 80s]

Whether Logan manufacturing existed or not would not change DMC going out of business.

People paid cash for the cars because only rich people could afford them. It's like $90,000 adjusted for inflation today. I know three people who have brand new Ferrari's and two of them paid cash.

[Michael]

The DMCH bitch sessions pop up here every other month, and the same things get said, then they go away for a bit until the next gripe comes along. My question to you who have an ax to grind with DMC is "Whadda gonna do about it tough guy?"


They have a monopoly on Delorean Well boo hoo! Sell your Delorean and buy another car, they don't have a monopoly on cars


They are misleading the public! So what? Even if they are, that goes on in business every single day, and anyone who has the attention span long enough to read past a headline or a youtube clip will know exactly what a "New Build" is. And if they can't figure that out then it's not DMC's job to cater their advertising practices to the smallest common denominator.


I'm tired of waiting for a binnicle, they should make them before other projects You are welcome to have one custom made at your expense. You are also welcome to sign your life away and buy your own defunct car companies' cache of parts for a cool million and make a go of it...and when you do you may run it as you please and let the free market decide your fate.


I don't like it when people tell me about new Deloreans, it upsets me and it's DMCH's fault Well cry me a river, the dude with the dream car has to live through Hell putting up with that kind of stuff.

[tjd]

The DMCH bitch sessions pop up here every other month, and the same things get said, then they go away for a bit until the next gripe comes along. My question to you who have an ax to grind with DMC is "Whadda gonna do about it tough guy?"

Well boo hoo! Sell your Delorean and buy another car, they don't have a monopoly on cars

So what? Even if they are, that goes on in business every single day, and anyone who has the attention span long enough to read past a headline or a youtube clip will know exactly what a "New Build" is. And if they can't figure that out then it's not DMC's job to cater their advertising practices to the smallest common denominator.

You are welcome to have one custom made at your expense. You are also welcome to sign your life away and buy your own defunct car companies' cache of parts for a cool million and make a go of it...and when you do you may run it as you please and let the free market decide your fate.

Well cry me a river, the dude with the dream car has to live through Hell putting up with that kind of stuff.

Touche Michael

You could have actually cut and pasted real quotes though, instead of putting your own approximations of what was said in a quotation box. ;)

Very true every time Stephen or James goes out and whores a car brand that isn't theirs to whore in the 1st place and tries to redefine a classic that was definitively defined more then 30 years ago I'll probably pop back up and bitch about it. But what came 1st the chicken or the egg?

[Dracula]

Touche Michael

You could have actually cut and pasted real quotes though, instead of putting your own approximations of what was said in a quotation box. ;)

Very true every time Stephen or James goes out and whores a car brand that isn't theirs to whore in the 1st place and tries to redefine a classic that was definitively defined more then 30 years ago I'll probably pop back up and bitch about it. But what came 1st the chicken or the egg?

This is hardly a "chicken or egg" case, as there was a DeLorean before DMCH and there will be one after them, too. It's a chapter in the history of the car and one that I don't like the way its being written.

[tjd]

Well boo hoo! Sell your Delorean and buy another car, they don't have a monopoly on cars

This I take exception with. Why should I sell my DeLorean because of them? I didn't buy it either time because of Stephen Wynne. Stephen has no right to try to redefine a product that went out of production for good 30 years ago. Why can't he tell the damn truth about what it is he is selling without someone having to read the fine print? if and when that is ever provided. Why would he tell his customers the truth when he blatantly lies to the press? I wouldn't be surprised that an EV customer would find out only when they see the title that what they are buying is not a DeLorean at all and instead a component car that only resembles a DeLorean, I bet they still don't find out that it also has used parts on it.

[thirdmanj]

The DMCH bitch sessions pop up here every other month...

Yeah, but this old dog of a conversation is allowed. Any other old-ass-boring debate would've been stifled by admin daaays ago. Just sayin.

Not to mention its Waaaaaaaay the fuck off topic.

[dmc6960]

This is very relevent...


First announced last October, the reborn, all-electric Delorean has made a surprise appearance at the New York Auto Show this year. It's a surprise because not even Delorean Motor Company president Stephen Wynne knew he was going to be here until a few weeks ago, when show organizers called with an invite.

First paragraph....
http://green.autoblog.com/2012/04/05/delorean-electric-surprises-in-new-york-will-cost-95-000-in-20/

[Dracula]

This is very relevent...



First paragraph....
http://green.autoblog.com/2012/04/05/delorean-electric-surprises-in-new-york-will-cost-95-000-in-20/

So the New York auto show just contacted DMCH out of the blue? There are many companies that are chomping at the bit to get their cars featured, but they turned them down and contacted someone who hadn't applied?

I'm going to call BS on that. I'm sure they applied and sent in all the necessary paperwork and didn't hear back about it until a few weeks before the show.

[tyb323]

New York auto show is extremely well organized, they wouldn't let someone know just weeks before the show that they were in unless they absolutely had no other choice. Dmc isn't listed as a standard carmaker, they are listed as a special exhibit. One of the exhibits they had backd out and they called dmc due to all the buzz of the ev.

[Dracula]

New York auto show is extremely well organized, they wouldn't let someone know just weeks before the show that they were in unless they absolutely had no other choice. Dmc isn't listed as a standard carmaker, they are listed as a special exhibit. One of the exhibits they had backd out and they called dmc due to all the buzz of the ev.

Until I hear from someone who worked at the auto show, I'm not going to believe this. There are many other, better, choices for the show than DMCH and their electric conversion; like someone that actually builds a new car.

[DeloreanJoshQ]

Until I hear from someone who worked at the auto show, I'm not going to believe this. There are many other, better, choices for the show than DMCH and their electric conversion; like someone that actually builds a new car.

Chad,

Would you say that you are well-educated and experienced in product development, business management, marketing, media relations, customer service, inventory control, business finance, and with a proven and successful business track record?

Would you please share with the rest of us a list of simple one-sentence rules that DMCH should follow to be a successful business? Rules that you would follow if you were president of DMCH? This would help me understand your business model better.

example: -DMCH shall not advertise any of their products or cars in public/media.

I'm all ears....

[Dracula]

Chad,

Would you say that you are well-educated and experienced in product development, business management, marketing, media relations, customer service, inventory control, business finance, and with a proven and successful business track record?

Would you please share with the rest of us a list of simple one-sentence rules that DMCH should follow to be a successful business? Rules that you would follow if you were president of DMCH? This would help me understand your business model better.

example: -DMCH shall not advertise any of their products or cars in public/media.

I'm all ears....

I would say that I'm experienced in business management, marketing, customer service, inventory control, business finance, and have a successful track record due to the fact that my used car sales keeps a roof over my head and food on the table.

I use a very simple approach: I tell people exactly what they're buying from me and what they can expect out of their purchase.

When I sell a used car, the first thing I do is state that I'm selling a used car.

DMCH does everything that they can to do the exact opposite.

The reason I'm calling BS on the Auto Show contacting them is because, from a business/convention/show standpoint, you keep a list of short-notice people on hand in the event of a cancellation that you can call and offer a spot to. You don't cold-call someone and ask them if they want to participate in an event several thousand miles away at that short of notice because of the logistics and difficulty that any organization would have in getting ready in that short of a time frame. DMCH had to have applied to be in the show; maybe Stephen only found out about it with two weeks to get ready, but I'd bet money that there wasn't someone at the New York Auto Show thinking, "Gee, someone just cancelled on us. Maybe I should call up those people with the electric DeLorean and see if they want to be included."

[tyb323]

"Gee, someone just cancelled on us. Maybe I should call up those people with the electric DeLorean and see if they want to be included."

That's pretty much word for word what I was personally told at the auto show booth when I was there on Saturday.

[Dracula]

That's pretty much word for word what I was personally told at the auto show booth when I was there on Saturday.

By who? DMCH? If they said it, then it's about as true as anything else they were peddling.

[tyb323]

Ok chad...

[theMonch]

It is utterly amazing how many threads in this forum go off topic so quickly and become some fruitless online battle.

[Michael]

It is utterly amazing how many threads in this forum go off topic so quickly and become some fruitless online battle.

Really? Is this your first time on the internets?

[sean]

It is utterly amazing how many threads in this forum go off topic so quickly and become some fruitless online battle.

it might be even more amazing that the theMonch has been so quiet all this time since his own gem of a thread to return with this quip.

[stevedmc]

It is utterly amazing how many threads in this forum go off topic so quickly and become some fruitless online battle.

:TrainWreck:

[dvonk]

:TrainWreck:

:hihi2:

[thirdmanj]

^^ :popcorn::hysterical: ^^ ...all this shit.

[Dracula]

Laugh now, but as parts costs rise to offset the losses from these foolish endeavors, you won't be able to say you weren't warned.

[Michael]

Laugh now, but as parts costs rise to offset the losses from these foolish endeavors, you won't be able to say you weren't warned.

:rolleyes1: I guess it's to fund DMCH's new headquarters:
https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQsqY4k5sq5IUftbobBsMy_jlIk9a9GB PxLe8dtfOHZFbQgZB1qvQ

[theMonch]

Really? Is this your first time on the internets?

Trust me, I know that there are real gems in forums. I am active in a good dozen of them. But this one is by far the worst when it comes to bickering. And it would be fine if the bickering were to have it's own threads. That way we could just ignore the children and find the info we were looking for.

Don't get me wrong love the forum and community, but there definetly are some improvements that could be made to the moderation. IMHO


it might be even more amazing that the theMonch has been so quiet all this time since his own gem of a thread to return with this quip.

I've been around. And my "controversial" thread back on the .com site was that way because of some of the same people that ruined this one as well.

[Dracula]

I've been around. And my "controversial" thread back on the .com site was that way because of some of the same people that ruined this one as well.

It wasn't ruined. You were stating that you wanted to get more than your money's worth from a car as a buyer. It happens every so often, but it's rare and not the norm; nor something that tends to turn out well in the world of classic cars.

[stevedmc]

It wasn't ruined. You were stating that you wanted to get more than your money's worth from a car as a buyer. It happens every so often, but it's rare and not the norm; nor something that tends to turn out well in the world of classic cars.

If memory serves me correctly, he didn't get his perfect car for $15k either.

[Dracula]

If memory serves me correctly, he didn't get his perfect car for $15k either.

A valid point, too. I don't know the exact price, but I do believe you were right.

[stevedmc]

A valid point, too. I don't know the exact price, but I do believe you were right.

I'm always right. I was also one of the people who ruined Monchy's "controversial" thread.

[thirdmanj]

Alright I'm gonna bitch about the bitchers since we're sooooo off the fuckin' topic.

Dudes, if this "bickering" bothers you do much, don't read the thread and don't get involved. If you're here for a little entertainment then so be it, read and enjoy, like I do. Sometimes you can even jump in if you have a point or if you just want to add fuel. But no ones forcing you to click on the thread dude.

You guys act like its a crowded room full of aruguments and ass holes. This THREAD maybe, but it's also in "Open Discussion" for a reason. When this begins to happen or heads it this direction on the tech threads and such, the mods are really good at splitting it or deleting the offensive post. So relax! Don't go out of your way to be pissed off and offended, and then post about it. Then you become part of the very thing your bitching about.

[thirdmanj]

I'm always right. I was also one of the people who ruined Monchy's "controversial" thread.

I wanna see I wanna see! Lemme SEE!!

[dmc6960]

I wanna see I wanna see! Lemme SEE!!

Sorry man, that thread was back on dmctalk.com.

[stevedmc]

I'm always right. I was also one of the people who ruined Monchy's "controversial" thread.


I wanna see I wanna see! Lemme SEE!!


Sorry man, that thread was back on dmctalk.com.

Some of Monchy's battle can be seen here:

http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?121-Average-Real-World-Pricing-2010

[Dracula]

Interestingly, price was never stated for what he paid for the car, though, I'm sure it's over $15,000.00 due to the lack of bragging.

[Michael]

Trust me, I know that there are real gems in forums. I am active in a good dozen of them. But this one is by far the worst when it comes to bickering. And it would be fine if the bickering were to have it's own threads. That way we could just ignore the children and find the info we were looking for.

And just what important info were you looking for here on page 9 of this thread? I think you just wanted to look like the voice of condescending reason and replied to this thread just to announce that you were above replying to this thread.


I've been around. And my "controversial" thread back on the .com site was that way because of some of the same people that ruined this one as well.
Gotta love those people that worry about the internet threads that were abused and ruined....like they were some sad eyed puppies that just needed help. Help the Monch save the internet threads!
http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj91/marssz85/save-the-internet.jpg

[theMonch]

And just what important info were you looking for here on page 9 of this thread? I think you just wanted to look like the voice of condescending reason and replied to this thread just to announce that you were above replying to this thread.


Not bickering or crying, just stating a point. I wanted to learn about the DMC booth at the NYC auto show like the thread title suggests. Instead I was mis-lead down the road of sad pathetic cry-baby Delorean owners. Oh and I never made it down to page 9, that's just where it puts new posts silly.

[Dracula]

Not bickering or crying, just stating a point. I wanted to learn about the DMC booth at the NYC auto show like the thread title suggests. Instead I was mis-lead down the road of sad pathetic cry-baby Delorean owners. Oh and I never made it down to page 9, that's just where it puts new posts silly.

Says the delusional owner. This thread is only on page 3.

[theMonch]

Interestingly, price was never stated for what he paid for the car, though, I'm sure it's over $15,000.00 due to the lack of bragging.

Wrong. Under 10k - and thats a perfectly running driving "daily driver quality" delorean.

[Dracula]

Wrong. Under 10k - and thats a perfectly running driving "daily driver quality" delorean.

Yeah, and I have a bill of sale for a car that SAID $5.00... It sounds like you may have made an unrelated contribution to the previous owner's retirement fund out of sheer coincidence...

[dmc6960]

Says the delusional owner. This thread is only on page 3.

Page 11 with the default posts per page set at 10.

Edit: With this post being #110 of the thread, the next one will be Page 12.

[Dracula]

Page 11 with the default posts per page set at 10.

People still use that?

[Michael]

Not bickering or crying, just stating a point. I wanted to learn about the DMC booth at the NYC auto show like the thread title suggests. Instead I was mis-lead down the road of sad pathetic cry-baby Delorean owners. Oh and I never made it down to page 9, that's just where it puts new posts silly.

And here you still are :rolleyes1:

[DMC3165]

Not that it matters but at first I just wanted some Ingo about the DMC booth at the auto show. I had no idea the discussion that followed would happen. But its been a real interesting read!

[Dracula]

Not that it matters but at first I just wanted some Ingo about the DMC booth at the auto show. I had no idea the discussion that followed would happen. But its been a real interesting read!

That's not too bad, considering we're on a forum for a 30-year-old car discussing faults that, typically, either led to storage or are a result of the car being removed from storage. It's good that we have posts about other things, too, otherwise it'd be a series of threads about people buying the car, congratulations being given, followed by advice called 'use the search button,' or someone talking about something BTTF-related that they have.

[nofear365]

Just going to add my 2 cents about my experience at the car show...

I spotted James Espey immediately and introduced myself. VERY nice man. After 5 or 6 minutes of discussion about the DMC EV and my own Delorean James allowed me to go past the velvet rope and let me get a closer look at the EV car itself. Overall I was really impressed with the interior and the overall fit and finish of everything within the car itself.

Past the redundant and completely annoying BTTF / Flux Capacitor jokes (people actually think they are the first to come up with that - STILL!) there was an very positive impression of the car and the company itself by the guests at the show.

[tyb323]

For the record of people thinking this is all out battle and we all hate each other, I would be more than happy to sit down and have a drink with Chad and Tim. We have our differences, but at least imo I'm not going to be slipping arsenic into their drinks. So I'm not sure this conversation is "ripping the community apart". It's all in good fun. At least Chad doesn't go after my mom like "Opethmike" does on the facebook...

[opethmike]

For the record of people thinking this is all out battle and we all hate each other, I would be more than happy to sit down and have a drink with Chad and Tim. We have our differences, but at least imo I'm not going to be slipping arsenic into their drinks. So I'm not sure this conversation is "ripping the community apart". It's all in good fun. At least Chad doesn't go after my mom like "Opethmike" does on the facebook...

Hey, when your mom heard I thought she was hot, she said I have a good taste in women. So there. And, she is, by the way, super-hot.

[Dracula]

For the record of people thinking this is all out battle and we all hate each other, I would be more than happy to sit down and have a drink with Chad and Tim. We have our differences, but at least imo I'm not going to be slipping arsenic into their drinks. So I'm not sure this conversation is "ripping the community apart". It's all in good fun. At least Chad doesn't go after my mom like "Opethmike" does on the facebook...

Thanks. It's hard to tell from posts, but my paranoia over-emphasizes parts of my nature. I fear being at the mercy of a monopoly and I also know that I am with DMCH. Couple that with a survivalist instinct to be self-reliant and question everything around you and you see a bit of where I come from. I'm not saying my points are any less valid; only that I completely understand how people disagree with me and that I respect their opinion.

There's only one person in the DeLorean community that I would not associate with to the point where I wouldn't be able to share a drink and keep a civil conversation; and for good reason, I might add.

That, however, is an entirely different point and something I won't elaborate publicly for the sake of civility.

[DMCVegas]

Site is finally back up, and I FINALLY have some free time to reply back!


This EV crap is a worse extension of the same mis-marketing that has become a prevalent trend from DMCH.

Don't believe me? Check out this page on DMCH's site:

http://delorean.com/2011/10/electric-delorean/

Here's a direct quote from their site:



That car is NOT what they claim it to be. It is, in fact, a converted DeLorean made into an electric car; something that had been done multiple times before DMCH jumped on the publicity bandwagon.

In total agreement with you on that. If it's simply a converted car that was constructed with a VIN issued by DMCL back in the 80's, absolutely it is NOT a "brand-new" car. That I would certainly agree with you on as being false advertising. If it they were to advertise it as a test mule of some sort, or experimental prototype, then I wouldn't see any harm. But in this case, yes, I'd absolutely agree with you that this is misleading.




Well part of my issue is that DMCH is pretending to be Delorean Motor Company. Nissan isn't pretending to be anything they are not.

Whose really to say? Nissan changed names when DATSUN wasn't considered to be as marketable of a name. Now with French Renault owning such a large stake in the company, and Carlos Gohsen as CEO, a non-Japanese leader on top of all this, how can you even say that Nissan/Datsun are the same company since then? Truth is they're not. Hell, Lotus isn't even the same company it was since Chapman died (or at least alegidly as some conspiracy theorists claim, but that's a whole other topic) as it's been owned by all sorts of other foreign companies over the years. Even Avanti gets rebooted every once in a while, yet no one complains about them *pretending* to be the same company... So really, it's a moot point.




To add another level of stupidity to this; DMCH is now "Authorizing" people to build a DeLorean BICYCLE!

http://deloreanbicycle.com/

http://urbanvelo.org/delorean-bicycles/

What's next? Does the DMC magnet that I have on my stainless refrigerator make it an "Official DeLorean Refrigerator" now, or do I need to buy a hood emblem and slap that on, too?

Hell, even JZD himself was in the middle of licensing swag while DMC was in business. I know there was a colgone in the works, and back in the late 1990's a jacket and some prototype sunglasses went up for auction (pink framed aviators with "DE LOREAN" printed in the upper left corner of the right lens) that proved this. And lets also not forget about the "De Lorean Time" watches that JZD was also taking orders for when he was trying to raise interest for another car project. It's hard to criticize DMCH for doing things that even JZD was doing, but give a pass to him simply because he wasn't involved with the newer projects.

Besides, I own my car because I like it. It's a personal thing, owning my particular car, because it's all that matters to me when it comes to all things DeLorean. Maybe it's because after 12 years of ownership, I'm tired. I've had my share of flamewars and in-person arguments with anonymous strangers. I feel I've done my part to promote and defend the marque time and time again. Though all through this aside from demonstraiting economic ownership costs, I've never tried to "justify" my ownership to others. I don't need permission to own my car, let alone the approval of my peers. "Dilution of the brand" doesn't concern me in the least. I'm not a hipster who liked DeLoreans before they were cool or mainstream and wanted to be different. I bought my car for me, and to hell with the rest of the world. DMCH wants to license out products, it's fine with me because it ultimately doesn't concern me. If I gave a shit what other people thought about my car, I'd be driving a beige econobox trying to blend in as much as possible.

Now then, let's talk about the building new cars aspect.


2. I want to be able to continue driving my DeLorean and, in order to do so, I'm going to have to replace the parts that will, inevitably, fail. There are many that, short of finding an eBay replacement or similar used part, I'll have to get from DMCH. So, their business practices directly affect me and EVERY SINGLE DELOREAN OWNER until there's 100% parts availability from outside suppliers. They will make up whatever money they lose from this EV and "new build" crap by increasing the prices on parts and labor. That, bottom line, will be felt by everyone who wants to drive their car or restore one. If that alone isn't enough of a reason to be concerned, I don't know what is.

Using this sort of logic, we should consider shutting down DMCTalk itself so that NO ONE is able to restore their existing DMC-12s so that we can ensure a parts supply for ourselves. If people don't know how to restore their cars, they won't buy parts, demand drops, supply levels are maintained, and prices may possibly stabilize if not drop. It's an extremely ridiculous idea, but is an alternate solution to your concern.

Coming back into reality though, allow me to ask another question:
WHAT IN THE HELL IS DMCH SUPPOSED TO DO WITH ALL OF THESE UNUSED PARTS COLLECTING DUST?!?

KAPAC obviously didn't have a use for them. DMCH is a business and should be allowed to make a profit, but seriously, what are they supposed to do with all of these parts that are just sitting around? What's so wrong with a PR stunt such as an EV vehicle or other products that generate brand recognition? Compared to print advertisement it's a whole lot more economical and effective. People hear DeLorean, interest gets generated, new owners come into the community and buy parts to rebuild their cars. It's a helluva lot better than a classified ad buried in Hemmings somewhere that most people don't read. It's advertising. Still though there are parts to move. If building new cars gives them a way to sell these parts and generate profits that can continue to fuel the business, then why not? Who really cares? Will prices actually go up as a result? Who knows? Will it stop me from enjoying my car? Nope. Also, since my car has been in long-term storage, I've been out of the game for a while on parts buying. But what I do know for sure is that when I last saw, DMCH was still far cheaper than AutoZone or NAPA.

Still though there is that question: What are they supposed to do with all of these parts that aren't being used? And just what is so wrong about finding a way to use them?

Honestly not trying to flame anyone, just find this debate fascinating.

[DMCVegas]

Separate reply since this is a separate subject (thread split?).



You mean there's no parallel to the "new builds" that aren't selling or the unsold EVs that Houston is creating and the cars that DeLorean built and couldn't sell? What about such funds-drainers as the DMC-24 bus, the Logan Manufacturing Company, DMC airport tug, Thinkol, etc. that John Z. DeLorean wasted company money with?


John DeLorean was accused of diverting funds from DMC ltd to fund Logan Manufacturing Company among other pet projects. This did not help DMC ltd stay afloat. There where other mitigating factors to why the cars weren't selling (outside influences) so don't blame the car entirely. The cars did actually sell quite well to those that had access to the $$$$ to buy one. If you dig into individual car histories you will find that most where purchase by cash while DMC ltd was still in business producing cars. That's a pretty unusual method of buying a new car don't you think? Many interested people were turned away at the dealerships who could not obtain credit to buy a DMC-12.



The DMC bus was scraped before any where produced.

History lesson now aside.



You're both actually right, but for different aspects.

John De Lorean had a vision for DMC to become a global conglomerate. Certainly there is the aspect of a lofty goal for perhaps ego, but more importantly De Lorean *knew* that the DMC couldn't survive on the DMC-12 alone. Perhaps he learned lessons from Preston Tucker and Henry Kaiser, but De Lorean did always say that a sports car was the best way to enter into the market. And he was right. For a niche vehicle, people are far more willing to take a risk on it versus a family sedan. Kaiser himself saw this as Kaiser Motors go down while the Jeep brand of niche vehicles flourished and still exist to this day. So JZD decided to proceed with a Sports Car to break into the automotive market by going after those niche buyers. He knew it would be a halo car.

Now on to the side projects. There was first of course the DMC-80. A bus. Honestly this was a VERY smart move. You have to understand that in reality there are 3 types of buses that are built:

School Bus.
Motor Coach (Charters i.e. Greyhound, and RVs).
Public Transportation.


School buses at the time were primarily from Crown and Bluebird, as well as International. A very competitive business there. Next up are your Motor Coaches, and MCI had a pretty good lock-down on those. Which left public transportation buses. And at the time the only real supplier was General Motors. And they damn-near had a monopoly on municipal buses since the 1940's when they started helping phase-out trolley cars. In any case it was another niche area to sell an automotive product. It was a damn-smart move. It is unfortunate that the British Government either being short-sighted, worried, or having a conflict of interest (Dennis Thatcher being a major shareholder of GM Stock) demanded that DMC abandon the project. As such it was sold off. Don't know for how much, but I think it's pretty safe to assume that they did receive some sort of compensation for it.

And then there is the DMC-44. In case no one has ever seen it, here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtYgS2_S88Y

So now what does that look like?
http://www.atvstyle.com/images/rhino-660-atv.jpg

Once again JZD was far ahead of himself. It was another niche that had great potential for sales and could have really helped build the company up. But it wasn't pursued. It's really too damn bad. Lots of people over the years have accused JZD of being uninterested with the DMC-12 project and wanting to move on before it was complete and that his not seeing it through to the end is what doomed it. Most likely that wasn't the case at all. He was probably tied up with trying to expand the company in order to help stabilize finances and cash flows.

Note: Logan Manufacturing was NOT apart of DMC. That was a separate company that JZD had owned privately, and from which the profits fueled his personal income for the years after DMC's collapse. Aside from a brief change of ownership during his divorce, it was always his.

I've always said that the lack of proper financing was the biggest reason that the DMC-12 didn't sell. I can second that according to most owners I've talked to over the years, almost all original owners paid cash for their cars. If they financed, it almost ALWAYS went through credit unions. Consumer Auto Financing was the one aspect of the car business that DeLorean knew almost nothing about. I would absolutely contend this, because had he have known, JZD would have created a Financial division under the corporate umbrella to move DMC-12s. Yes thanks to the currency exchange rate the DMC-12 shot up to an MSRP of over $25K, but that wouldn't have been the worst thing to overcome to convince buyers to buy DeLoreans. Take a look at this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCiKwY3_Yss

11.9%!!!! And that's if you had good credit! If you walked in to buy a new car today with good credit and the best they could do was 11.9%, you'd laugh in their face! And that's the point here. Comparatively, the MSRP on an 1981 Corvette was $16,258.00 (http://www.corvettelink.com/corvette_years.asp?Year=1981). And that's just the base price which still didn't include as many features as a DMC-12. You figure a 60 month loan @ 11.9%, and you'd have a payment at about $360.83 a month for 5 years. By comparison if DMC had have done their own in-house financing and offered 0% rates like most car makers do, the monthly payment for the same loan would be $416.67. A difference of about $50 a month, assuming you didn't get any extras with the Corvette. Most likely you would, so the car payments would be similar. Still though $50 a month more to get a gullwinged exotic with disc brakes, cassette player, and a plush interior is a helluva deal. Once the Legend Industries turbo engine came out you could tack about another $100 or so onto the note, and you would have then had a super car that couldn't even compare to the Corvette and would have given more expensive Italian exotics a serious run for their money. Never mind that the QACs would have closed on time as the build quality would have increased as intended, and the extra cash would have ensured payments for dealer warranty work would have continued. And remember, we're assuming that DMC is matching the same qualifications as GMAC (who later stopped financing for DMC-12s). If DMC Financial was born and could have offered more competitive financing rates to people to actually leverage interest rates to make DMC-12 automobiles more affordable, they would have moved more cars simply because a DeLorean may have been all that anyone could get financed for.

Hyundai and other foreign car makers are perfect examples of this. When I was growing up, Hyundai was considered to be a car you bought when you couldn't get financed for anything else. It may have been a joke at the time, but it helped them sell cars and made them into the company they are today. Had DMC had done the same thing and have financed cars for people that couldn't get as good a rate with GMAC, Ford Motor Credit, or anywhere else, they very well could have upset the market beyond belief with the increased sales.

[Dracula]

Hell, even JZD himself was in the middle of licensing swag while DMC was in business. I know there was a colgone in the works, and back in the late 1990's a jacket and some prototype sunglasses went up for auction (pink framed aviators with "DE LOREAN" printed in the upper left corner of the right lens) that proved this. And lets also not forget about the "De Lorean Time" watches that JZD was also taking orders for when he was trying to raise interest for another car project. It's hard to criticize DMCH for doing things that even JZD was doing, but give a pass to him simply because he wasn't involved with the newer projects.

I've never denied that JZD did this and just because JZD did it, it doesn't mean it wasn't foolish then, too. The "DeLorean Time" project is irrelevant, since that has no connection with DMCL or DMCH and the funds involved for that were DeLoreans to do as he wished with.


Now then, let's talk about the building new cars aspect.

Using this sort of logic, we should consider shutting down DMCTalk itself so that NO ONE is able to restore their existing DMC-12s so that we can ensure a parts supply for ourselves. If people don't know how to restore their cars, they won't buy parts, demand drops, supply levels are maintained, and prices may possibly stabilize if not drop. It's an extremely ridiculous idea, but is an alternate solution to your concern.

Coming back into reality though, allow me to ask another question:
WHAT IN THE HELL IS DMCH SUPPOSED TO DO WITH ALL OF THESE UNUSED PARTS COLLECTING DUST?!?

KAPAC obviously didn't have a use for them. DMCH is a business and should be allowed to make a profit, but seriously, what are they supposed to do with all of these parts that are just sitting around? What's so wrong with a PR stunt such as an EV vehicle or other products that generate brand recognition? Compared to print advertisement it's a whole lot more economical and effective. People hear DeLorean, interest gets generated, new owners come into the community and buy parts to rebuild their cars. It's a helluva lot better than a classified ad buried in Hemmings somewhere that most people don't read. It's advertising. Still though there are parts to move. If building new cars gives them a way to sell these parts and generate profits that can continue to fuel the business, then why not? Who really cares? Will prices actually go up as a result? Who knows? Will it stop me from enjoying my car? Nope. Also, since my car has been in long-term storage, I've been out of the game for a while on parts buying. But what I do know for sure is that when I last saw, DMCH was still far cheaper than AutoZone or NAPA.

Still though there is that question: What are they supposed to do with all of these parts that aren't being used? And just what is so wrong about finding a way to use them?

Honestly not trying to flame anyone, just find this debate fascinating.

And how many "fraudulently-new-builds" have they sold now? How many parts will these EV sales use? If they sell 5 of them, a best-case estimate, then that hardly makes a dent in the parts inventory; especially if they have to deal with things like used underbodies lying around. I get the idea of using up parts, however, the EV sales are so miniscule that they won't use up any significant amounts.


Separate reply since this is a separate subject (thread split?).







You're both actually right, but for different aspects.

John De Lorean had a vision for DMC to become a global conglomerate. Certainly there is the aspect of a lofty goal for perhaps ego, but more importantly De Lorean *knew* that the DMC couldn't survive on the DMC-12 alone. Perhaps he learned lessons from Preston Tucker and Henry Kaiser, but De Lorean did always say that a sports car was the best way to enter into the market. And he was right. For a niche vehicle, people are far more willing to take a risk on it versus a family sedan. Kaiser himself saw this as Kaiser Motors go down while the Jeep brand of niche vehicles flourished and still exist to this day. So JZD decided to proceed with a Sports Car to break into the automotive market by going after those niche buyers. He knew it would be a halo car.

Now on to the side projects. There was first of course the DMC-80. A bus. Honestly this was a VERY smart move. You have to understand that in reality there are 3 types of buses that are built:

School Bus.
Motor Coach (Charters i.e. Greyhound, and RVs).
Public Transportation.


School buses at the time were primarily from Crown and Bluebird, as well as International. A very competitive business there. Next up are your Motor Coaches, and MCI had a pretty good lock-down on those. Which left public transportation buses. And at the time the only real supplier was General Motors. And they damn-near had a monopoly on municipal buses since the 1940's when they started helping phase-out trolley cars. In any case it was another niche area to sell an automotive product. It was a damn-smart move. It is unfortunate that the British Government either being short-sighted, worried, or having a conflict of interest (Dennis Thatcher being a major shareholder of GM Stock) demanded that DMC abandon the project. As such it was sold off. Don't know for how much, but I think it's pretty safe to assume that they did receive some sort of compensation for it.

And then there is the DMC-44. In case no one has ever seen it, here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtYgS2_S88Y

So now what does that look like?
http://www.atvstyle.com/images/rhino-660-atv.jpg

Once again JZD was far ahead of himself. It was another niche that had great potential for sales and could have really helped build the company up. But it wasn't pursued. It's really too damn bad. Lots of people over the years have accused JZD of being uninterested with the DMC-12 project and wanting to move on before it was complete and that his not seeing it through to the end is what doomed it. Most likely that wasn't the case at all. He was probably tied up with trying to expand the company in order to help stabilize finances and cash flows.

Note: Logan Manufacturing was NOT apart of DMC. That was a separate company that JZD had owned privately, and from which the profits fueled his personal income for the years after DMC's collapse. Aside from a brief change of ownership during his divorce, it was always his.

I've always said that the lack of proper financing was the biggest reason that the DMC-12 didn't sell. I can second that according to most owners I've talked to over the years, almost all original owners paid cash for their cars. If they financed, it almost ALWAYS went through credit unions. Consumer Auto Financing was the one aspect of the car business that DeLorean knew almost nothing about. I would absolutely contend this, because had he have known, JZD would have created a Financial division under the corporate umbrella to move DMC-12s. Yes thanks to the currency exchange rate the DMC-12 shot up to an MSRP of over $25K, but that wouldn't have been the worst thing to overcome to convince buyers to buy DeLoreans. Take a look at this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCiKwY3_Yss

11.9%!!!! And that's if you had good credit! If you walked in to buy a new car today with good credit and the best they could do was 11.9%, you'd laugh in their face! And that's the point here. Comparatively, the MSRP on an 1981 Corvette was $16,258.00 (http://www.corvettelink.com/corvette_years.asp?Year=1981). And that's just the base price which still didn't include as many features as a DMC-12. You figure a 60 month loan @ 11.9%, and you'd have a payment at about $360.83 a month for 5 years. By comparison if DMC had have done their own in-house financing and offered 0% rates like most car makers do, the monthly payment for the same loan would be $416.67. A difference of about $50 a month, assuming you didn't get any extras with the Corvette. Most likely you would, so the car payments would be similar. Still though $50 a month more to get a gullwinged exotic with disc brakes, cassette player, and a plush interior is a helluva deal. Once the Legend Industries turbo engine came out you could tack about another $100 or so onto the note, and you would have then had a super car that couldn't even compare to the Corvette and would have given more expensive Italian exotics a serious run for their money. Never mind that the QACs would have closed on time as the build quality would have increased as intended, and the extra cash would have ensured payments for dealer warranty work would have continued. And remember, we're assuming that DMC is matching the same qualifications as GMAC (who later stopped financing for DMC-12s). If DMC Financial was born and could have offered more competitive financing rates to people to actually leverage interest rates to make DMC-12 automobiles more affordable, they would have moved more cars simply because a DeLorean may have been all that anyone could get financed for.

Hyundai and other foreign car makers are perfect examples of this. When I was growing up, Hyundai was considered to be a car you bought when you couldn't get financed for anything else. It may have been a joke at the time, but it helped them sell cars and made them into the company they are today. Had DMC had done the same thing and have financed cars for people that couldn't get as good a rate with GMAC, Ford Motor Credit, or anywhere else, they very well could have upset the market beyond belief with the increased sales.

I wasn't arguing how a second product wasn't a viable business idea for DMCL or that it didn't make sense; for a new car company, it was a great thought-process and a means of diversifying their offerings. DMCH, however, is a one-trick pony that's trying to disguise that fact. They sell used DeLoreans and parts. Is the EV different? No. Is a "fraudulently-new-build" different? No. They sell the same product in all cases. Some just appeal to a smaller portion of the already limited target consumer base. If they wanted to appeal to their target consumers, they'd have had binnacles years ago and would offer an exchange program for those of us who bought their horrible dashes.

[DMCVegas]

I've never denied that JZD did this and just because JZD did it, it doesn't mean it wasn't foolish then, too. The "DeLorean Time" project is irrelevant, since that has no connection with DMCL or DMCH and the funds involved for that were DeLoreans to do as he wished with.

I would disagree that marketing is a foolish idea. It holds double benefits in the forms of product recognition, as well as profitability. Now granted I do think that two important keys to marketing are both a solid connection to the brand and other products, as well as a high quality of the product itself. Glasses and clothing for example for a car are great. The private label wines that DMCH was marketing a while back on the other hand was not (I was a very outspoken critic at the time of the wine). The whole drinking and driving aspect aside, wine has no connection to the car, and with such a product it's far too subject to individual tastes. As such it poses a great risk for the brand. To paraphrase Espy, it was also an experiment as to what types of products people might also consider buying. When people identify with a product, they love to show that pride as well as prove their loyalty through voluntary branding, and marketing fills that need. But like I say, a product needs to be relevant to the brand. A Car Care kit with private labeled cleaning products marketed to people? Great. Shirts, hats, fine. A bicycle? That's fine too, except how in the hell am I supposed to strap it to my DeLorean to get it anywhere where I'd want to do pleasure biking? Once again that tie-in to the brand is very key. That's honestly the only thing that turns me off about the bike. It does of course appear to be crafted very well using quality parts. That's good because quality is important. Older TJ Jeeps and farther back models for example would be marketed with some decent enough products back in the day as either dealer accessories or authorized licensed products. Jeep now licenses cheap quality luggage that falls apart at Wal Mart, and offers up tons of other nonsensical items with the brand. That to me damages the brand because if they can't be bothered to check the quality of licensed products, how can they ensure the same quality for their vehicles? Thus far DMCH doesn't seem to have fallen into that trap, and what they have licensed has been with quite reputable partners from what I've seen. I do believe in such cases that does indeed help the brand. And if they make money off of these items, all the better. And I'll probably buy a few too.





And how many "fraudulently-new-builds" have they sold now? How many parts will these EV sales use? If they sell 5 of them, a best-case estimate, then that hardly makes a dent in the parts inventory; especially if they have to deal with things like used underbodies lying around. I get the idea of using up parts, however, the EV sales are so miniscule that they won't use up any significant amounts.

I wasn't arguing how a second product wasn't a viable business idea for DMCL or that it didn't make sense; for a new car company, it was a great thought-process and a means of diversifying their offerings. DMCH, however, is a one-trick pony that's trying to disguise that fact. They sell used DeLoreans and parts. Is the EV different? No. Is a "fraudulently-new-build" different? No. They sell the same product in all cases. Some just appeal to a smaller portion of the already limited target consumer base. If they wanted to appeal to their target consumers, they'd have had binnacles years ago and would offer an exchange program for those of us who bought their horrible dashes.

I agree that the EV car if it is an existing DMC-12 that was simply converted over is in fact misrepresented as a "new" vehicle. But I do disagree that it's construction is a bad idea. It does of course bring recognition to the product. Will they sell any? Who knows. Since Tesla's little controversy has started up and people are becoming more aware of LiIon batteries easy ability to become permanently damaged because of total discharge, I don't think that they will move a whole lot of these EVs. However aside from brand recognition, let's also take a step back here and look at the EV in a different light.

People are always worried about parts availability, especially those who are outside of the DeLorean community. Yeah the DMCEV is a converted electric car that does successfully run, but really it's not about functionality. It reminds me of those old Chrysler turbine cars and the futuristic cars of the past. In other words it's simply a concept. And why do manufacturers build concepts? To not only gauge public reactions to styling, but to also demonstrate what they're capable of. And what DMCH has demonstrated with the DMCEV here is that even if they run out of PRV engines, or interior parts, or underbodies, or almost whatever else you can think of, that they can either replenish supplies, supersede those parts with better ones, or they can evolve the car entirely from drivetrains to custom interiors. They've proven here that they're resourceful to suit current or future owner needs. And maybe it's not just for the DMC-12 either. I remember the whole thing about DMCH buying the Kappa platform from GM. Now the plant where the car was made was turned over to someone else for some other EV project. But no mention was ever made as to what specifically happened to that car. Maybe the DMCEV is DMCH peacocking for the sake of showing off. Maybe it's to prove viability for future investment opportunities? Who knows? But it is a thought.

As far as DMCH being a "one trick pony", I'd say that for the most part that is a rather fair assessment. You have a company that stumbles onto a massive cache of parts for a niche, yet beloved automobile and is able to acquire them for a pittance. From there they start up a new business selling these parts either directly to other service centers or their own garage for the repair and restoration of said vehicles. And even to quote Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2005/0919/090.html)DMCH 6 years ago, when they did an article on DMCH; "...every sale of parts is virtually found money." That absolutely isn't ever going to happen again, and that truly is the limit of the business model at this point. Now having said that, I also cannot fault them for trying to diversify their business. I believe that it is a beneficial to the incomes of DMCH's owners and employees as it is to the DeLorean community as a whole. If they diversify they can help float the business as well as bring others in on it. By comparison with the Bricklin SV-1, it's parts are pretty much in control of Terry Tanner. He's got one other guy in the shop, sure. But when they're gone who exactly is supposed to keep that business going in order to serve that community?

As for the dashboards and binnacles, it is a damn shame how the whole situation has been handled, that's for sure. And I would agree there too that in order to move forward, those items need to first be resolved. Who knows why communication there has broken down. But I can see your concerns and absolutely believe them to also be quite valid. Lots of time and effort goes into these other projects, and yet the others are dead in the water with no updates. That can easily lead to a worry about abandonment and concerns that while DeLoreans may have gotten DMCH's business where it is today, what could become of it tomorrow? More specifically what could become of the responsibility to the community as a whole? It is a valid concern, sure. But I'm not worried. I don't think that it'll come down to that. Not now with other investors in the form of Service Centers who require that parts availability for their businesses. I think it's work out as a nice system of checks and balances. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll wager I'm not on this one.

[DMCVegas]

I enjoy your editorials DMCVegas. Do you write professionally?

No, I do not. I'd love to of course (and probably missed the opprotunity on the old .com site), but I always wind up disagreeing with everyone no matter what I say... :biggrin: So I don't quite know how well I'd come across to people.




The car will ALWAYS be an icon, and that will ALWAYS be capitalized upon and referenced in whatever publicity it receives. My only advice would be to not take it personally. Taking offense to misinformation only demonstrates an inability to control your own feelings. If one can't handle it, get rid of the car. But it won't change anything. You'll still have your knowledge and opinions, and when the DeLorean or "Time Machine" comes up in conversation (which is bound to happen) you'll still feel obligated to correct others when they get something wrong.

If you don't mind me asking, could you clarify that statement a little bit? I'm not trying to start an argument there or anything, but if it is meant to be interpreted how I think you mean for it to be, I believe that I might just be able to shed a bit of light on that subject. At least from my own POV.

[Dracula]

I would disagree that marketing is a foolish idea. It holds double benefits in the forms of product recognition, as well as profitability. Now granted I do think that two important keys to marketing are both a solid connection to the brand and other products, as well as a high quality of the product itself. Glasses and clothing for example for a car are great. The private label wines that DMCH was marketing a while back on the other hand was not (I was a very outspoken critic at the time of the wine). The whole drinking and driving aspect aside, wine has no connection to the car, and with such a product it's far too subject to individual tastes. As such it poses a great risk for the brand. To paraphrase Espy, it was also an experiment as to what types of products people might also consider buying. When people identify with a product, they love to show that pride as well as prove their loyalty through voluntary branding, and marketing fills that need. But like I say, a product needs to be relevant to the brand. A Car Care kit with private labeled cleaning products marketed to people? Great. Shirts, hats, fine. A bicycle? That's fine too, except how in the hell am I supposed to strap it to my DeLorean to get it anywhere where I'd want to do pleasure biking? Once again that tie-in to the brand is very key. That's honestly the only thing that turns me off about the bike. It does of course appear to be crafted very well using quality parts. That's good because quality is important. Older TJ Jeeps and farther back models for example would be marketed with some decent enough products back in the day as either dealer accessories or authorized licensed products. Jeep now licenses cheap quality luggage that falls apart at Wal Mart, and offers up tons of other nonsensical items with the brand. That to me damages the brand because if they can't be bothered to check the quality of licensed products, how can they ensure the same quality for their vehicles? Thus far DMCH doesn't seem to have fallen into that trap, and what they have licensed has been with quite reputable partners from what I've seen. I do believe in such cases that does indeed help the brand. And if they make money off of these items, all the better. And I'll probably buy a few too.

I get the point of marketing, however, it's not as though DMCH is trying to promote a new product. They're re-selling a 30-year-old car. The only thing that these new products add to the picture is a little more public awareness about DeLoreans, however, that works both ways. Their associations haven't always been positive; like that crap with "the hundreds" where it tied the car into a group of punkish kids and general hooligans. It also didn't help that they made overpriced clothing that was hideous. I'll interject a slice of personal opinion and say that the type of venture that DMCH should use to promote the cars are tours and cross-country drives. The DeLorean suffers from a reputation of being unreliable; what better way to offset this than driving one on a cross-country tour? Many of the public misconceptions are based on a lack of facts, so it would help the DeLorean brand and its longevity if they were to work on things like a challenge to save the worst DeLorean they can find or to show the speed and handling of a Stage II car.

Currently, DMCH is doing exactly what you described with the Jeep products; a series of unrelated tie-ins that don't build brand quality.


I agree that the EV car if it is an existing DMC-12 that was simply converted over is in fact misrepresented as a "new" vehicle. But I do disagree that it's construction is a bad idea. It does of course bring recognition to the product. Will they sell any? Who knows. Since Tesla's little controversy has started up and people are becoming more aware of LiIon batteries easy ability to become permanently damaged because of total discharge, I don't think that they will move a whole lot of these EVs. However aside from brand recognition, let's also take a step back here and look at the EV in a different light.

People are always worried about parts availability, especially those who are outside of the DeLorean community. Yeah the DMCEV is a converted electric car that does successfully run, but really it's not about functionality. It reminds me of those old Chrysler turbine cars and the futuristic cars of the past. In other words it's simply a concept. And why do manufacturers build concepts? To not only gauge public reactions to styling, but to also demonstrate what they're capable of. And what DMCH has demonstrated with the DMCEV here is that even if they run out of PRV engines, or interior parts, or underbodies, or almost whatever else you can think of, that they can either replenish supplies, supersede those parts with better ones, or they can evolve the car entirely from drivetrains to custom interiors. They've proven here that they're resourceful to suit current or future owner needs. And maybe it's not just for the DMC-12 either. I remember the whole thing about DMCH buying the Kappa platform from GM. Now the plant where the car was made was turned over to someone else for some other EV project. But no mention was ever made as to what specifically happened to that car. Maybe the DMCEV is DMCH peacocking for the sake of showing off. Maybe it's to prove viability for future investment opportunities? Who knows? But it is a thought.

As far as DMCH being a "one trick pony", I'd say that for the most part that is a rather fair assessment. You have a company that stumbles onto a massive cache of parts for a niche, yet beloved automobile and is able to acquire them for a pittance. From there they start up a new business selling these parts either directly to other service centers or their own garage for the repair and restoration of said vehicles. And even to quote Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2005/0919/090.html)DMCH 6 years ago, when they did an article on DMCH; "...every sale of parts is virtually found money." That absolutely isn't ever going to happen again, and that truly is the limit of the business model at this point. Now having said that, I also cannot fault them for trying to diversify their business. I believe that it is a beneficial to the incomes of DMCH's owners and employees as it is to the DeLorean community as a whole. If they diversify they can help float the business as well as bring others in on it. By comparison with the Bricklin SV-1, it's parts are pretty much in control of Terry Tanner. He's got one other guy in the shop, sure. But when they're gone who exactly is supposed to keep that business going in order to serve that community?

Currently, the EV is a modified DeLorean retaining an original title. As such, it's not a new vehicle or a "prototype" as they claim, it's a modified DeLorean following FOUR earlier attempts at this. The only difference is that DMCH calls it a "new car" to get media attention.

I can see your point, too, about showing an availibility of parts and that the cars can be continued to be used, but why not offer something like a natural gas conversion to the public, instead, as that can still retain the original PRV platform and is a more logical step in maintaining classic cars on the road.

I get the point of diversification; I really do, but the problem is that if their diversification calls for the destruction of other DeLoreans and doesn't produce any significant new demand for their parts, then it becomes a failed endeavor that has to be made up for somehow and that somehow will be at an increase to the DeLorean owner who never went along with all the hoopla. For that matter, if I were DMCH, I would be looking at buying up the Bricklin parts supply as a means of diversifying their business and the fact that there are many people with overlapping interest in the DeLorean and the Bricklin. For that matter, expanding their services into another limited-production vehicle would be a boon to their public appeal. Perhaps they could also start refurbishing Renault Alpine GTs? Those are both just off-the-cuff ideas, but they would be far more stable than the EV nonsense.


As for the dashboards and binnacles, it is a damn shame how the whole situation has been handled, that's for sure. And I would agree there too that in order to move forward, those items need to first be resolved. Who knows why communication there has broken down. But I can see your concerns and absolutely believe them to also be quite valid. Lots of time and effort goes into these other projects, and yet the others are dead in the water with no updates. That can easily lead to a worry about abandonment and concerns that while DeLoreans may have gotten DMCH's business where it is today, what could become of it tomorrow? More specifically what could become of the responsibility to the community as a whole? It is a valid concern, sure. But I'm not worried. I don't think that it'll come down to that. Not now with other investors in the form of Service Centers who require that parts availability for their businesses. I think it's work out as a nice system of checks and balances. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll wager I'm not on this one.

The part of it that concerns me is that it shows that DMCH will release a crap product for a high price and ignore the complaints about them to work on their side nonsense. If that's all they offer and you have the choice of the terrible new dashboard or a badly-damaged original, it works to DMCH's favor that most will choose the substandard replacement. I see that as a trend to offer inferior products to the consumer group and price them for a notable mark-up that nets them a good profit and makes it prohibitive to sourcing your own. The fact that they can sell us crap and then ignore our complaints about the product is what worries me. After the dash issues I have, I will NEVER buy a DMCH "improved" part without first examining it and finding someone who can attest to the quality of the product so that I don't get taken advantage of again.

[Stainless]

Came across this article this morning:
http://www.examiner.com/article/a-brief-chat-with-delorean-motor-company-vp-jim-espy-re-their-new-electric-car

The most interesting part of the article:
"DMC is currently undergoing certification processes from the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) and National Highway Traffic Safety Authority (NHTSA) to sell DeLorean EVs as new cars, with new model-year designations and vehicle identification numbers. Espey says DMC hopes to bring these new EVs to market sometime in 2013."

This was news to me. I didn't think that they had unused parts for everything in order to sell new cars. I thought they were all going to be conversions. Interesting...

[Dracula]

I can't see the cost of this being worth the potential sales of under 20 EVs that they've predicted.

[Stainless]

Since this now appears to be the official "Electric DeLorean" discussion thread, I came across the first article of someone bashing the idea. All the other articles that I have read are positive.

Here's for an interesting article written by someone that has an obvious dislike of the car:
http://www.wheels.ca/article/806862

[dmc6960]

Here's for an interesting article written by someone that has an obvious dislike of the car:
http://www.wheels.ca/article/806862

Ugh that was difficult to read. I decided to read a few other articles by this author. Nearly every one was like that.

[Dracula]

Since this now appears to be the official "Electric DeLorean" discussion thread, I came across the first article of someone bashing the idea. All the other articles that I have read are positive.

Here's for an interesting article written by someone that has an obvious dislike of the car:
http://www.wheels.ca/article/806862

That was senseless hatred with no basis whatsoever and the only valid point was that the recharge time is lengthy on standard AC current.

A terrible piece and I already hated their modified car.

[nofear365]

Another article written by someone that most likely never drove one, let alone sat in one.

[Cory W]

Ah, yes, Jim Kenzie. He's Canada's self-proclaimed answer to Jeremy Clarkson. Except he's not funny. Or objective. Some say, he's not even a very good driver.

He's also a self-absorbed asshole.

Story:
Last year, he came to my town for the same show, guns a blazing, with a Maserati coupe "to add some style to this little show". Never mind the hot rods and customs that came from hours away on their own dime, or the Ferrari 458 that was actually driven over from Ottawa. (about 4 hours away, on a 2-lane highway) Hell, even the all-original, unrestored, original-owner 1962 Corvette a family friend owns is worth more attention in my humble opinion.

He spent most of his time trying to sell his calendar ("I'll sign it for twenty bucks more!"), or walking the rows of cars while offering pithy little quotes about every single vehicle. Except mine. "Not worth my time", he said. This from a man who proudly owns an AMC Hornet and complains that it doesn't get any love from the showgoing populace. (Pot, meet kettle) Then he took our (failed former provincial politician) mayor for a drive to the fanciest restaurant in town where the taxpayers paid for his meal. Bunch of giggling sycophants.

The show is on May 12 this year. He's supposed to be back, and bringing "something even more spectacular" for us little peons to swoon over. I'd prefer he no-shows.

[dmcjohn]

Ah, yes, Jim Kenzie. He's Canada's self-proclaimed answer to Jeremy Clarkson. Except he's not funny. Or objective. Some say, he's not even a very good driver.

He's also a self-absorbed asshole.



That description sums up Jeremy Clarkson perfectly!

[ccurzio]

That description sums up Jeremy Clarkson perfectly!

Except that Clarkson is funny and a good driver.

[20098]

There is a write up in the current issue of Business Week on the DMC EV. Some of the information isn't correct, but it was nice to see something current about our cars.

I'll try to scan a copy and post it later on today...

[20098]

Scan from the magazine, pages 85, 86 and 87...

992099219922

[DMCVegas]

Finally have time to finish my response, as well as had to have help in retrieving the drafted post.


I get the point of marketing, however, it's not as though DMCH is trying to promote a new product. They're re-selling a 30-year-old car. The only thing that these new products add to the picture is a little more public awareness about DeLoreans, however, that works both ways. Their associations haven't always been positive; like that crap with "the hundreds" where it tied the car into a group of punkish kids and general hooligans. It also didn't help that they made overpriced clothing that was hideous. I'll interject a slice of personal opinion and say that the type of venture that DMCH should use to promote the cars are tours and cross-country drives. The DeLorean suffers from a reputation of being unreliable; what better way to offset this than driving one on a cross-country tour? Many of the public misconceptions are based on a lack of facts, so it would help the DeLorean brand and its longevity if they were to work on things like a challenge to save the worst DeLorean they can find or to show the speed and handling of a Stage II car.

Currently, DMCH is doing exactly what you described with the Jeep products; a series of unrelated tie-ins that don't build brand quality.

Totally understood. I for one was against the wine thing because I thought that it harkened back to the stodgy and elitist DOA culture that really suffocated the DeLorean marque for so long. Granted mass communications such as the one we're using right now have been a game changer to exchange ideas, but it also allowed control of the community to be put back into the hands of owners and not just a handful of angry old men and women in Los Angeles. I also get it when it comes to associations with certain types of people. I have a passion for the DeLorean as one of my core cars, but I enjoy almost all cars and would consider almost all for ownership with two exceptions: 1. If it doesn't interest me, I won't own it. and 2. If it's a Corvette I detest it and would rather strip it for parts and scrap the rest.

Why do I dislike Corvettes? Simple: I cannot stand typical Corvette owners because they're douchebags. I grew up around them, and to this day still run into these types. I always felt that this video was a perfect representation of the Typical Corvette owner:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM3So0U1BMQ

Certainly not all Corvette owners are like this, and I've had quite a few of the good ones in regular conversations with me agree that there is a problem with the perception of owners because of people like this. With these men whom I've talked to, they've all recommended the Corvette highly to me as a fun project car with lots of options for performance as well as customization for reasonable prices. And on paper they're absolutely right. But I just don't want to be associated with those loud and obnoxious losers. One bad apple spoils the bunch I know, and the other advice given to me is that if I can drive a DeLorean and not care about what people think, I should do the same with a Corvette. But it's not the same at all because then I'd be fighting everyone. With the DeLorean I have the comfort of the community here as a whole, because I do believe that I am one of the two types of stereotypical DeLorean owners: Either elitist and pretends that the car is something it's not, or the second type that I identify with: Eccentric with extremely eclectic tastes.

So yeah, I can totally see why The Hundreds campaign irritated you and others. Having said that though, I doubt we'll ever see much of these guys or others actually own DeLoreans. Social acceptance is key to those types of people though, and a DeLorean is a quicker ticket to ostracization than acceptance for those types since it is an obscure car. So that's why I've never worried about the association with The Hundreds. It's not a car for everyone, but the ones who will become owners will separate themselves from such groups to become one of us.




Currently, the EV is a modified DeLorean retaining an original title. As such, it's not a new vehicle or a "prototype" as they claim, it's a modified DeLorean following FOUR earlier attempts at this. The only difference is that DMCH calls it a "new car" to get media attention.

Again, totally agreed that calling it a "new car" is wrong and very misleading. I do however think that beyond DMCH's economical interests there is quite a motivation for lots of people, including most owners to back the idea and term of "new car" for the public to see. For media outlets it's to help sell a story. For those hard-core owners it's a big "fuck you!" of sorts to everyone who had a hand in DMC's downfall in '82. It shows that despite the British Government's plans to stop DMC's rebirth by throwing the stamping dies into the ocean, and any conspiracy theories (real, perceived, or otherwise) that people have about Detroit helping destroy DeLorean, that even if DMCH only ever cranks out a single DMC-12, those efforts to destroy production of these cars were ultimately a failure.




I can see your point, too, about showing an availibility of parts and that the cars can be continued to be used, but why not offer something like a natural gas conversion to the public, instead, as that can still retain the original PRV platform and is a more logical step in maintaining classic cars on the road.

I get the point of diversification; I really do, but the problem is that if their diversification calls for the destruction of other DeLoreans and doesn't produce any significant new demand for their parts, then it becomes a failed endeavor that has to be made up for somehow and that somehow will be at an increase to the DeLorean owner who never went along with all the hoopla. For that matter, if I were DMCH, I would be looking at buying up the Bricklin parts supply as a means of diversifying their business and the fact that there are many people with overlapping interest in the DeLorean and the Bricklin. For that matter, expanding their services into another limited-production vehicle would be a boon to their public appeal. Perhaps they could also start refurbishing Renault Alpine GTs? Those are both just off-the-cuff ideas, but they would be far more stable than the EV nonsense.

I don't know if we can easily call a drivetrain conversion the "destruction" of an automobile. A BTTF conversion, sure. And the reason being is that no one is going to use a BTTF car as a daily driver. Doesn't matter if it's polished every day in a hermeticly sealed room, or left to rot in a field: If it's not being used, it's abandoned. As for if they do indeed build new cars from scratch, I don't think that destroys anything, including the marque. Does a V6 in a truck make it any less of a truck? The other side of that is while the initial prototype was a refurbished and/or converted car, these should be new vehicles that are being made. They can weld up new chassis and fabricate underbodies. The question is of course in regards to the VIN numbers. DMCH is a manufacturer, so why aren't they using new VIN numbers? Even if they did buy up parts cars that were beyond repair (i.e. fire damage), then applying the VIN to a new build could be the birth of a new vehicle. Might also be illegal depending, but if they're a manufacturer they shouldn't even have to do this.

As for Bricklin parts and natural gas conversions, I don't see those as viable options. Bricklins are obscure cars with not a lot of demand. I'm sure that the only reason Terry Tanner has a queue of cars to refurbish is because he and his assistant work at their leisure on the vehicles. That and he's the only, or perhaps only one of two places that perform that service (at least from what I've seen). I also think that more people have forgotten about BTTF than anyone who ever really was aware of the SV-1, but I digress there... Even so, getting into the Bricklin business still offers nothing for the DeLorean side of things either. Though what would it matter if DMCH cranks out refurbished SV-1's or DMC-12s? They'd still be criticized the same.

I don't think natural gas conversions are very viable for any car myself. Not that they don't work or aren't feasible, but because they're too complicated for your average person. Years ago I was talking with this guy who was (or at least he claimed to be) and ex-engineer for General Motors. We got to talking about things including DeLoreans and the automotive business in Detroit, and he said something to me that I'll never forget. He asked me if I knew real story behind the electric starter. I said sure, Cadillac's son died from an infection after cranking a car on a cold winter morning when the crank froze to the crankshaft and hit him. His father was distraught and wanted an electric starter to keep people safe. The guy said that wasn't entirely true. An electric starter had already been in the works, as had a simplification process for starting and running vehicles. In truth the electric starter was simply built to make vehicles more marketable. It took intelligence (something lacking among people then just as today) to know how to crank-start, let alone start a vehicle at all. And there were/are more dumb people willing to part with disposable income than there were/are smart people willing to buy things. Thus the simplicity of push buttons, counterweight-controlled spark advance, and all-inclusive keys were introduced to make cars more salable to the dumb. A trend we of course see with convenience groups still. This also applies to refueling. Remove cap, insert nozzle and pull trigger until it stops. Then remove nozzle, replace cap, and you're done. And for lots of people, that is a severe enough chore. Refueling with pressurized fuels (H, LP, LPN, or Natural Gas) is too much to handle for most people. That's why you not only don't see it proliferating gas stations, but why when it comes to propane for BBQs, most places just exchange cylinders. Plus I just don't think there are enough people who are willing to buy such a kit for their cars.




The part of it that concerns me is that it shows that DMCH will release a crap product for a high price and ignore the complaints about them to work on their side nonsense. If that's all they offer and you have the choice of the terrible new dashboard or a badly-damaged original, it works to DMCH's favor that most will choose the substandard replacement. I see that as a trend to offer inferior products to the consumer group and price them for a notable mark-up that nets them a good profit and makes it prohibitive to sourcing your own. The fact that they can sell us crap and then ignore our complaints about the product is what worries me. After the dash issues I have, I will NEVER buy a DMCH "improved" part without first examining it and finding someone who can attest to the quality of the product so that I don't get taken advantage of again.

I can absolutely see that, and even agree with you. After this came up on the old .COM forum, it was either you or someone else who had posted pics of the dashboard and the ribs underneath were quite visible from the top. Which admittedly convinced me to see an upholstery shop to have my entire dash recovered rather than buy one. As for why DMCH seems to be focusing so much attention on these other projects rather than seeing the remaining ones through, I don't know. I have a strong feeling of history repeating itself though and these are the same motions that the original DMC went through. First off are the mistakes that C.K. "Chuck" Bennington made with ignoring the media and keeping everything about the factory and vehicle development so under wraps. It made the media upset so they ran stories about suspicion that the company was never able to shake even to this day. History is regrettably repeating itself there. I also think that DMCH is trying to diversify their business as well, but not just with the sale of this EV. Now I have a Far-fectched idea, I know, but hear me out...

GM sold the Wilmington, Delaware assembly plant to Fisker to build EV cars. This was the plant where DMCH was trying to bid on the plant to get both the plant and the tooling for the Kappa platform. For those that don't remember, have a look.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/we-hear/delorean-solstice-company-dreaming-about-a-kappa-revival-tour/25403432%20w527%20st0/new-delorean-kappa-solstice.jpg

Now we heard that the plans for DMCH did not go through because GM sold the plant to Fisker. But what I'm curious about is what happened to the Kappa platform and the tooling? Fisker was certainly going to retool, but made no mention about where the tooling is going, and GM never said what exactly became of the Kappa platform. What if, and believe me this is just an idea, what if DMCH's plans for the EV are not so much to market a new car, but to show their engineering ability (or ability to at least competently farm-out the work) and their manufacturing capability in order to attract both investors and government loans and grants? Fisker has been plagued with delays to the point where the fed has suspended their loans which has forced layoffs and suspended development of some models. And now we find out that the DoE has hired a restructuring adviser to oversee the company's finances. (http://www.businessinsider.com/doe-hires-restructuring-advisor-to-monitor-fisker-funding-report-2012-4) That company is in deep trouble. But here is DMCH which already has 1 platform which unlike it's debut now has 30+ years of engineering development behind it, and could use the Kappa with has 6 behind it. Plus uses parts from GM suppliers. Maybe the DMCEV is there to not only demonstrate these capabilities but also to disassociate the public's perception of JZD and cocaine as a way to make the project even more attractive to investors but political allies. Far-out idea I know, but just maybe...

[Dracula]

I cannot stand typical Corvette owners because they're douchebags. I grew up around them, and to this day still run into these types.

I completely agree. I was driving a 1994 ZR-1 for a VERY BRIEF time. I loved everything about that car, but I will not deal with its owner group. When you criticize someone for a non-factory battery, you need a life.


Again, totally agreed that calling it a "new car" is wrong and very misleading. I do however think that beyond DMCH's economical interests there is quite a motivation for lots of people, including most owners to back the idea and term of "new car" for the public to see. For media outlets it's to help sell a story. For those hard-core owners it's a big "fuck you!" of sorts to everyone who had a hand in DMC's downfall in '82. It shows that despite the British Government's plans to stop DMC's rebirth by throwing the stamping dies into the ocean, and any conspiracy theories (real, perceived, or otherwise) that people have about Detroit helping destroy DeLorean, that even if DMCH only ever cranks out a single DMC-12, those efforts to destroy production of these cars were ultimately a failure.

I'd have absolutely no problem with them calling it a "new" car if it actually were. If they come out with a car that has a new VIN and a build year of 20XX, then I'd applaud. Until then, regardless of what they call it, it's still false advertising and has created a new, unnecessary annoyance for the average owner to have to deal with. I would love to be able to respond to the question of, "Did you hear that they're building those cars again in Texas?" with, "Yes, I did." Until that is actually the case, I can't condone a misleading marketing program that would get other businesses in trouble for false advertising.


I don't know if we can easily call a drivetrain conversion the "destruction" of an automobile. A BTTF conversion, sure. And the reason being is that no one is going to use a BTTF car as a daily driver. Doesn't matter if it's polished every day in a hermeticly sealed room, or left to rot in a field: If it's not being used, it's abandoned.

Typically, I wouldn't call it that. Though, when you cut up the underbody and frame to make a car that has the potential to be used for a commuter car if you live within bicycle distance, then it's as good as destroyed. What are any of the electric DeLoreans used for as-is, other than displays to the fact that they're electric-powered or trailered (by a gasoline vehicle) to the occasional electric-car event?


As for if they do indeed build new cars from scratch, I don't think that destroys anything, including the marque. Does a V6 in a truck make it any less of a truck? The other side of that is while the initial prototype was a refurbished and/or converted car, these should be new vehicles that are being made. They can weld up new chassis and fabricate underbodies. The question is of course in regards to the VIN numbers. DMCH is a manufacturer, so why aren't they using new VIN numbers? Even if they did buy up parts cars that were beyond repair (i.e. fire damage), then applying the VIN to a new build could be the birth of a new vehicle. Might also be illegal depending, but if they're a manufacturer they shouldn't even have to do this.

If they do build new cars, I see that as a positive. It always makes the originals more valuable. When it's buying up a parts car, though, and re-using the VIN, then it's not original and merely working around the legalities of titling and registering a car. It's not new because it doesn't add another VIN to the world; only an asterisk to a DeLorean that already existed.


As for Bricklin parts and natural gas conversions, I don't see those as viable options. Bricklins are obscure cars with not a lot of demand. I'm sure that the only reason Terry Tanner has a queue of cars to refurbish is because he and his assistant work at their leisure on the vehicles. That and he's the only, or perhaps only one of two places that perform that service (at least from what I've seen). I also think that more people have forgotten about BTTF than anyone who ever really was aware of the SV-1, but I digress there... Even so, getting into the Bricklin business still offers nothing for the DeLorean side of things either. Though what would it matter if DMCH cranks out refurbished SV-1's or DMC-12s? They'd still be criticized the same.

I was using that as an idea of another direction that DMCH could go instead of their current re-packaging of the DeLorean.


I don't think natural gas conversions are very viable for any car myself. Not that they don't work or aren't feasible, but because they're too complicated for your average person. Years ago I was talking with this guy who was (or at least he claimed to be) and ex-engineer for General Motors. We got to talking about things including DeLoreans and the automotive business in Detroit, and he said something to me that I'll never forget. He asked me if I knew real story behind the electric starter. I said sure, Cadillac's son died from an infection after cranking a car on a cold winter morning when the crank froze to the crankshaft and hit him. His father was distraught and wanted an electric starter to keep people safe. The guy said that wasn't entirely true. An electric starter had already been in the works, as had a simplification process for starting and running vehicles. In truth the electric starter was simply built to make vehicles more marketable. It took intelligence (something lacking among people then just as today) to know how to crank-start, let alone start a vehicle at all. And there were/are more dumb people willing to part with disposable income than there were/are smart people willing to buy things. Thus the simplicity of push buttons, counterweight-controlled spark advance, and all-inclusive keys were introduced to make cars more salable to the dumb. A trend we of course see with convenience groups still. This also applies to refueling. Remove cap, insert nozzle and pull trigger until it stops. Then remove nozzle, replace cap, and you're done. And for lots of people, that is a severe enough chore. Refueling with pressurized fuels (H, LP, LPN, or Natural Gas) is too much to handle for most people. That's why you not only don't see it proliferating gas stations, but why when it comes to propane for BBQs, most places just exchange cylinders. Plus I just don't think there are enough people who are willing to buy such a kit for their cars.

It's not a practical solution for everyone, but it is a solution that leaves the original car mostly intact and one that I would perform in a world without gasoline. It's another form of alternative energy and I suggested it to show that there are other eco-friendly routes that could be pursued. I agree with your point about the stupidity of human beings, as a whole, and how laziness is always a factor, though I counter with the point that if there were a significant profit to be made with it, they'd develop a system that could be operated by the dumbest dredges of society.




I can absolutely see that, and even agree with you. After this came up on the old .COM forum, it was either you or someone else who had posted pics of the dashboard and the ribs underneath were quite visible from the top. Which admittedly convinced me to see an upholstery shop to have my entire dash recovered rather than buy one. As for why DMCH seems to be focusing so much attention on these other projects rather than seeing the remaining ones through, I don't know. I have a strong feeling of history repeating itself though and these are the same motions that the original DMC went through. First off are the mistakes that C.K. "Chuck" Bennington made with ignoring the media and keeping everything about the factory and vehicle development so under wraps. It made the media upset so they ran stories about suspicion that the company was never able to shake even to this day. History is regrettably repeating itself there. I also think that DMCH is trying to diversify their business as well, but not just with the sale of this EV.

This is my biggest point. It's undeniable that their core consumer base is DeLorean owners who are restoring or having a car restored. As a result, I am bothered by the lack of a reply to their products that were inferior; dashes-no word on those from DMCH, ball joints-safety issues prompted a fix/discussion, headlight switches-see ball joints. The binnacle project shows just how they can't keep to a timeline for one product. There is no reason that they should have had replacement underbodies available before them.


Now I have a Far-fectched idea, I know, but hear me out...

GM sold the Wilmington, Delaware assembly plant to Fisker to build EV cars. This was the plant where DMCH was trying to bid on the plant to get both the plant and the tooling for the Kappa platform. For those that don't remember, have a look.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/we-hear/delorean-solstice-company-dreaming-about-a-kappa-revival-tour/25403432%20w527%20st0/new-delorean-kappa-solstice.jpg

Now we heard that the plans for DMCH did not go through because GM sold the plant to Fisker. But what I'm curious about is what happened to the Kappa platform and the tooling? Fisker was certainly going to retool, but made no mention about where the tooling is going, and GM never said what exactly became of the Kappa platform. What if, and believe me this is just an idea, what if DMCH's plans for the EV are not so much to market a new car, but to show their engineering ability (or ability to at least competently farm-out the work) and their manufacturing capability in order to attract both investors and government loans and grants? Fisker has been plagued with delays to the point where the fed has suspended their loans which has forced layoffs and suspended development of some models. And now we find out that the DoE has hired a restructuring adviser to oversee the company's finances. (http://www.businessinsider.com/doe-hires-restructuring-advisor-to-monitor-fisker-funding-report-2012-4) That company is in deep trouble. But here is DMCH which already has 1 platform which unlike it's debut now has 30+ years of engineering development behind it, and could use the Kappa with has 6 behind it. Plus uses parts from GM suppliers. Maybe the DMCEV is there to not only demonstrate these capabilities but also to disassociate the public's perception of JZD and cocaine as a way to make the project even more attractive to investors but political allies. Far-out idea I know, but just maybe...

That's an interesting theory. I'd also like it to be valid, however, if my fear of a DMCH blunder affecting customers is laughable to this community, that idea... Well, since it supports DMCH, it might actually get approval and cheers. In any case, I may be singing the same tune as I always have, but I will continue to do so until there's a DeLorean on the road with a title that states its build as in the 21st century that isn't due to a DMV oversight.

[pezzonovante88]

Ah, yes, Jim Kenzie. He's Canada's self-proclaimed answer to Jeremy Clarkson. Except he's not funny. Or objective. Some say, he's not even a very good driver.

He's also a self-absorbed asshole.

Story:
Last year, he came to my town for the same show, guns a blazing, with a Maserati coupe "to add some style to this little show". Never mind the hot rods and customs that came from hours away on their own dime, or the Ferrari 458 that was actually driven over from Ottawa. (about 4 hours away, on a 2-lane highway) Hell, even the all-original, unrestored, original-owner 1962 Corvette a family friend owns is worth more attention in my humble opinion.

He spent most of his time trying to sell his calendar ("I'll sign it for twenty bucks more!"), or walking the rows of cars while offering pithy little quotes about every single vehicle. Except mine. "Not worth my time", he said. This from a man who proudly owns an AMC Hornet and complains that it doesn't get any love from the showgoing populace. (Pot, meet kettle) Then he took our (failed former provincial politician) mayor for a drive to the fanciest restaurant in town where the taxpayers paid for his meal. Bunch of giggling sycophants.

The show is on May 12 this year. He's supposed to be back, and bringing "something even more spectacular" for us little peons to swoon over. I'd prefer he no-shows.

Yuck. I've not experienced Kenzie in person, but I've heard from a number of people that he can be a real tool. I get the vibe that he thinks he's a big hot-shot celebrity-like Clarkson- and that his word is God's. "Not worth [his] time". What kind of a car journalist says that about one of the biggest crowd- drawers and most controversial cars in existence? What an asshole. And you're right, who cares about a modern Maserati? Those cars are EVERYWHERE.

[Stainless]

Here's a thread from the admin of a turbo diesel forum that slams the electric DeLorean:
http://www.myturbodiesel.com/forum/f8/electric-delorean-car-should-have-stayed-1985-a-15126/

Of course it contains incorrect information that DMCH is building new cars from scratch. He appears to have a lot of disdain for cars that aren't full of computers and DeLoreans in general: "The presenter was well informed about the car and the electric DeLorean had some nice specs: 0-60 in about 5 seconds, about 100 mile range, and 125 mph top speed. Unfortunately, one major problem is that…it’s a Delorean."

[DMCVegas]

Here's a thread from the admin of a turbo diesel forum that slams the electric DeLorean:
http://www.myturbodiesel.com/forum/f8/electric-delorean-car-should-have-stayed-1985-a-15126/

Of course it contains incorrect information that DMCH is building new cars from scratch. He appears to have a lot of disdain for cars that aren't full of computers and DeLoreans in general: "The presenter was well informed about the car and the electric DeLorean had some nice specs: 0-60 in about 5 seconds, about 100 mile range, and 125 mph top speed. Unfortunately, one major problem is that…it’s a Delorean."

As for this guy's opinion:

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001344095/Motivator20_20No20One20Cares_answer_3_xlarge.jpeg

Not because he's slamming a DeLorean, but because he's some random looser on the internet who is more concerned with hearing his own voice rather than writing any sort of thing with actual substance or intelligence. And I say this will full confidence because not only did he post this to his lonely blog that no one reads, but had to abuse his position as an Admin of some random message board to whore said board out as a place to plaster his pathetically amateur writing he's so desperately trying to get noticed for.

If his dumbass actually bothered, he'd know that computer models actually were used in the design of the DMC-12. Models that had shown the substructures were unsafe in collisions were used and were the deciding factor in abandoning the Bill Collins' design that we know as Proto-1. And then of course there were the measurements that Lotus did in calculating the shrinkage of the underbody for curing purposes, computer-aided drafting of the car itself (photographs of which are actually available in Stainless Steel Illusion), and of course the computer controlled factory that did everything from move Tellus Carriers around the floor to monitor buying trends from Dealer Floor Planning in order to compute build trends for the construction of new cars to ordering parts inventory to replenish consumed components on the factory floor. But he wouldn't know anything about that now would he? And why should he? I'm sure whenever someone threatens him he just whips out his trusty ban-hammer.

[opethmike]

As for this guy's opinion:
he's some random looser on the internet

loser*

Internet*

[Stainless]

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w57/jlattin21/someone-on-the-internet-is-wrong2.jpg

[DMCVegas]

I see where you're going with this. Allow me to clarify. I'm here on a message board. As said board states the advice any one can find here is just that: advice. I don't, and never have claimed to be any kind of an authority on anything. We have discussions, I participate. I especially don't cross-post my words onto numerous boards, let alone have any sort of blog or other crap trying to desperately get people to pay attention to me. I'm not that important, and I'm willing to bet that everyone on here would agree. By contrast this guy did the exact opposite trying get attention for himself at every turn by posting his words everywhere, and that just makes him look like so very, very sad.

[Stainless]

I see where you're going with this. Allow me to clarify. I'm here on a message board. As said board states the advice any one can find here is just that: advice. I don't, and never have claimed to be any kind of an authority on anything. We have discussions, I participate. I especially don't cross-post my words onto numerous boards, let alone have any sort of blog or other crap trying to desperately get people to pay attention to me. I'm not that important, and I'm willing to bet that everyone on here would agree. By contrast this guy did the exact opposite trying get attention for himself at every turn by posting his words everywhere, and that just makes him look like so very, very sad.

I won't speak for everyone, but I very much appreciate the advice that you offer and how you are willing to express your point of view. I was very tempted to post something on that guy's forum to call him out on his post, but then again, that would be giving him the attention that he seems to be seeking.

[Ryan]

DMCVegas,

IMHO, I think the only downside to your posts is that they are too long. I'm not saying this to be a jerk, I'm honestly offering constructive criticism so that your posts have a better chance of being read, and they should be read because you do offer good points of view. Some conciseness could go along way. Take what you will from my pointer. I certainly don't offer much to the discussions here, nor are my posts perfect.

[mattyparas]

eh it seems to me we should be greatful to DMCH - id perfer dealing with a company than 100s of individual sellers on ebay.

As far as these side projects and licensing their brand to other companies its no concern of mine or anyone elses. DMCH is a private company, they have no shareholders to answer to.

[thirdmanj]

eh it seems to me we should be greatful to DMCH - id perfer dealing with a company than 100s of individual sellers on ebay.

As far as these side projects and licensing their brand to other companies its no concern of mine or anyone elses. DMCH is a private company, they have no shareholders to answer to.

oooooh shit, now we're gonna be on the "grateful to DMCH" discussion again.

"Because you're new here, I'm gonna cut you a break, today. Now why don't you make like a tree, and get outta here."


That last part was just for laughs :lol: , I'm assuming by your post count that you haven't had the joy of reading the countless threads that have gone on by way of your observation. Let's just say there is some dispute about that particular view point. I'm sure some motivated forum member could dig up some and link you to it.

Welcome btw.

[stevedmc]

People wouldn't be using this thread to vent if a certain thread was still open and a certain person were still here.

[sean]

People wouldn't be using this thread to vent if a certain thread was still open and a certain person were still here.
And yet we we still get by as if a certain person never existed, win.

[stevedmc]

And yet we we still get by as if a certain person never existed, win.

Thats why this forum is just so awesome. It doesn't need Bill to have drama. :)

[sean]

Thats why this forum is just so awesome. It doesn't need Bill to have drama. :)

If you consider this thread "drama" them I'm cool with all this drama going on :D

[mattyparas]

oooooh shit, now we're gonna be on the "grateful to DMCH" discussion again.

"Because you're new here, I'm gonna cut you a break, today. Now why don't you make like a tree, and get outta here."


That last part was just for laughs :lol: , I'm assuming by your post count that you haven't had the joy of reading the countless threads that have gone on by way of your observation. Let's just say there is some dispute about that particular view point. I'm sure some motivated forum member could dig up some and link you to it.

Welcome btw.

I usually sit and read rather than reply thats why my post count is low. And despite everything I read I still think that having a few centralized sources for parts is good for Delorean owners. Edit: Maybe grateful is the wrong word. I wouldn't go thanking them for what they have done, I just think overall its more convenient.

I understand that many people feel a connection to the brand/car and hate to see it whored on shoes, bikes, watches etc. but really their opinion while it can be considered by the DMCH owners ultimately doesn't matter. DMCH can do whatever they want with whatever licensing rights they purchased as well as with the parts they purchased. This isn't a social issue where there is a moral issue of consequence, I tend to think people take it too personally.

[stevedmc]

If you consider this thread "drama" them I'm cool with all this drama going on :D

As long as its off topic then i'm happy.


DMCH can do whatever they want with whatever licensing rights they purchased as well as with the parts they purchased.

When did they purchase licensing rights to the "Delorean" brand?

[sean]

As long as its off topic then i'm happy.

Everyone knows that.

[mattyparas]

As long as its off topic then i'm happy.

When did they purchase licensing rights to the "Delorean" brand?


I assumed they owned it -they don't ? If its not DMCH they who owns the rights to license to slap "Delorean" on products ? Not doubting you, just asking a question. Someone must, I would imagine that if I came out with a Delorean product SOMEONE would be able to sue me for it - I assumed it was DMCH.

[stevedmc]

I assumed they owned it -they don't ? If its not DMCH they who owns the rights to license to slap "Delorean" on products ? Not doubting you, just asking a question. Someone must, I would imagine that if I came out with a Delorean product SOMEONE would be able to sue me for it - I assumed it was DMCH.

I never said they didn't own the rights. I said they never purchased it. They took something that wasn't theirs and registered it as if it were their own. The Delorean trademark was public domain until the late 90s if I remember correctly.

[mattyparas]

I never said they didn't own the rights. I said they never purchased it. They took something that wasn't there and registered it as if it were their own. The Delorean trademark was public domain until the late 90s if I remember correctly.

Aha that makes sense. I just looked it up at the UPTO and was going to post.

Surprising though they don't seem to own the "Delorean" word mark - http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4002:g6u523.2.1; but only the DMC logo.

[sztybel]

Way way back in this thread somebody mentioned a DeLorean bicycle. If that's not the most retarded idea I've seen so far, I'm not sure what is.

[Dangermouse]

Delorean Wine?

[sztybel]

I feel like the wine at least gave the impression of a high class brand. The bike just seems cheesy. But then maybe it would go great with wine. WACCA WACCA!

[mattyparas]

I feel like the wine at least gave the impression of a high class brand. The bike just seems cheesy. But then maybe it would go great with wine. WACCA WACCA!

I think Delorean whiskey is something we can all agree on :)

[Cory W]

DeLorean car, DeLorean bike...there's a transportation correlation there at least. Licensing the likeness and information for videogames is a fun way to reach an enthusiastic audience too.

Automotive branded Wine? I can think of an issue or two there.

IMO, If it makes sense to the marque (and there's room to debate where the marque truly stands, now and then), is low risk financially, and may bring some exposure, cool. Look at the Ferrari boutique at many Ferrari dealerships worldwide. Thery have all sorts of crazy stuff, but it's red and has a prancing horse in a yellow rectangle, so people will buy it.

You will hear differently from me if we ever hear about DeLorean brand edible underwear, or a Sybian available in grade 304 grained Stainless. :shock:

[dvonk]

...or a Sybian available in grade 304 grained Stainless.

:lol:


hm... :evilgrin:

[sztybel]

I love my DeLorean, but comparing it in any way, shape, or form to a Ferrari is just plain silly. :driving1:

[Dracula]

I assumed they owned it -they don't ? If its not DMCH they who owns the rights to license to slap "Delorean" on products ? Not doubting you, just asking a question. Someone must, I would imagine that if I came out with a Delorean product SOMEONE would be able to sue me for it - I assumed it was DMCH.

There is NOTHING that DMCH can do to legally stop anyone from using the DMC logo or the DeLorean name on whatever they want. They own the firhts to the "stylized" logo, which is really just a logo used by DMC in the '80s that was never trademarked.


I love my DeLorean, but comparing it in any way, shape, or form to a Ferrari is just plain silly. :driving1:

Maintenance and upkeep costs.

[opethmike]

Maintenance and upkeep costs.

How so? Even the 3x8 cars require much more maintenance, more difficult maintenance, and costlier parts.

[nofear365]

Maintenance and upkeep costs.

Sorry, but that's absurd! I work with quite a few guys that own Ferraris. Do you have any clue what some of the 6k and 12k mile maintenance costs are? More than ive put into my car throughout my entire 7 years of ownership.

[Cory W]

I honestly expected more reaction to my finishing statement than the Ferrari boutique thing in my last post. Nowhere was I comparing Ferrari vehicles to the one and only DeLorean car. It was about the various product tie ins Ferrari has and their distribution channel, and where DMC could go with it.

Course, if you're going to derail a thread why not do it with some style?