Harry P.

But that's not the point. It has nothing to do with comparing the price this car sold for to the prices of other cars, or how many other cars you could buy (or build) for less. The point is it's one of a kind. That's why the high price. It's extremely collectible. Of course you could build or buy other cars for a lot less, but that's irrelevant to this particular car. This particular car is bringing these kinds of prices because it is the only one in the world. And people with money are willing to pay, in exchange for owning a one-of-a-kind object. And I'm sure the buyer assumes the price will continue to rise and he can sell it for a profit any time he decides to do so. And there will always be another buyer who would love to own a one-of-a-kind car. Sure, anyone can build a one-of-a-kind car, but the value wouldn't be the same, because anybody can go build a one-of-a-kind car. But not anyone can build another one of this car, and Chrysler will never again manufacture another car exactly like this... this one is the only one there will ever be.

Well, he lost the lawsuit on "procedural" grounds, not on the merits of the case. In other words, on a legal technicality that the hotshot array of GM lawyers no doubt were able to come up with. I'm no lawyer, so I can't say he can try it again. I would assume so, but even if he could... he's just a "regular guy." I doubt he'd want to get involved at this point unless he was able to get his legal fees covered somehow.

Rick, nobody on this whole thread has said that only GM has recalls. All manufacturers have had recalls at one time or another, for problems of varying severity from trivial to major. We get it. But the sheer scope of the current GM mess is unprecedented. The total number of problems, the total number of separate recalls, the total number of cars recalled... no other manufacturer has had a fail on such an epic scale. And by this time, the real issue that Congress is investigating is not all the part and design failures and all the recalls. While obviously a huge story in itself, what Congress is trying to determine is how and why GM actively buried all of these problems for so many years. It's the actions of GM employees that are now being investigated more so than the actual recalls. All manufacturers have recalls. Not all manufacturers actively hide the problems from the public and continue on doing "business as usual." That is why GM is on the hotseat.

That's an admirable goal to shoot for...

The more I read about this mess, the more it stinks. It's appalling what went on at GM on a corporate-wide level. Incompetence, poor design, poor communication, poor decision making, poor management, and apparently an active attempt at "CYA." It's enough to make me think we would have been better off not bailing them out. I was never in favor of the bailout, not due to political beliefs but the idea that companies should succeed or fail in an open market capitalistic economy based on their own merits.

Here's a new twist to the whole sad story I hadn't heard before. From Bloomberg Business Week: It was close to 3 a.m. on June 6 when Courtland Kelley burst into his bedroom, startling his wife awake. General Motors, Kelley's employer for more than 30 years, had just released the results of an investigation into how a flawed ignition switch in the Chevrolet Cobalt could easily slip into the "off" position—cutting power, stalling the engine, and disabling airbags just when they're needed most. The part has been linked to at least 13 deaths and 54 crashes. GM Chief Executive Officer Mary Barra, summoned before Congress in April to answer for the crisis, repeatedly declined to answer lawmakers' questions before she had the company's inquest in hand. Now it was out, and Kelley had stayed up to read all 325 pages on a laptop on the back porch of his rural home about 90  miles northwest of Detroit. The "Valukas Report," named for former U.S. Attorney Anton Valukas, who assembled it at GM's request from interviews with 230 witnesses and 41 million documents, blamed a culture of complacency for the more than decade-long delay before the company recalled millions of faulty vehicles. It described employees passing the buck and committees falling back on the "GM nod"—when everyone in a meeting agrees that something should happen, and no one actually does it. On page 93, a GM safety inspector named Steven Oakley is quoted telling investigators that he was too afraid to insist on safety concerns with the Cobalt after seeing his predecessor "pushed out of the job for doing just that." Reading the passage, Kelley felt like he'd been punched in the gut. The predecessor Oakley was talking about was Kelley. Kelley had sued GM in 2003, alleging that the company had dragged its feet addressing dangers in its cars and trucks. Even though he lost, Kelley thought that by blowing the whistle he'd done the right thing, and paved the way for other GMers to speak up. Now he saw that he'd had the opposite impact: His loss, and the way his career had stalled afterward, taught others at the company to stay quiet. "He stood in the doorway of our bedroom with a stunned look on his face," Beth Kelley, his wife of 23 years, says. More on the story... Kelley had been the head of a nationwide GM inspection program and then the quality manager for the Cobalt’s predecessor, the Cavalier. He found flaws and reported them, over and over, and repeatedly found his colleagues’ and supervisors’ responses wanting. He thought they were more concerned with maintaining their bureaucracies and avoiding expensive recalls than with stopping the sale of dangerous cars. Eventually, Kelley threatened to take his concerns to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Frustrated with the limited scope of a recall of sport-utility vehicles in 2002, he sued GM under a Michigan whistle-blower law. GM denied wrongdoing, and the case was dismissed on procedural grounds. Kelley’s career went into hibernation; he was sent to work in another part of the company, and GM kept producing its cars. Selling for around $16,000, Cobalts were popular with teenagers. The first death linked to its switch came in July 2005, when a Maryland 16-year-old, Amber Marie Rose, crashed her red ’05 into a tree. The airbag did not deploy. Although reports streamed into GM about moving stalls and disabled airbags for years, the company waited until Feb. 13, 2014, to issue a recall.

Going by the box art illustration alone, it looks pretty much like the body is in more or less stock position on the hot rod version.

The only documented numbers-matching 4-speed convertible in existence. You can't get more "special" than that. It's like the Mona Lisa of the muscle car world... when there's only one, that one is going to bring some big bucks every time it changes hands.

I definitely could get on board with this if I were a bigshot at Ford. Maybe the only problem is that it's a bit too ambitious. I'd trim the number of models back, at least for the time being, and make the "new" Lincoln Division's debut a little "cleaner." Just my opinion, of course, but since Ford already offers a ton of "crossovers" and utes and pickups, in my theoretical world I'd keep Lincoln a luxury car only division and avoid product overlap with Ford. I'd definitely offer a Continental, A Mark, and maybe a Zephyr and/or Town Car. But nothing else, and definitely not a pickup in any form. "Lincoln" and "pickup" don't work... it's like offering a Buick pickup. I would absolutely give the new Lincolns their own distinctive styling, not just warmed-over or gussied-up Fords. I'd go so far as to make the styling so different and unique that some might see it as going too far... but if you saw a new Lincoln on the street, you'd know it was a Lincoln.

You have to remember that eBay is open to the public. And there is a wide range of intelligence among the public.

You have to wonder... would those iconic names help sales? Or hurt? I know what I think. Building brand recognition is a huge part of marketing. Really the whole point of marketing. I don't understand why the auto industry has largely abandoned the brand recognition they worked so hard to gain and started calling their cars "ABCs"...

Catchy name, but a real PITA.

The whole alphabet-soup style of "naming" cars comes from Europe, where a lot of car "names" are based on engine size. Fine for them... but we're not Europe, we're the US. Cars with actual "names" worked just fine in the past. And they would work now, but too many big brains in the American auto industry don't get it. Again... simply drop the alphabet soup, give the current Lincolns real names, and even if you do nothing else, sales numbers will rise.

I hate the "Air Team."

But what the heck is an "MKZ?" Sounds like an assault rifle. Give the car an actual name, for crying out loud. People respond viscerally to names, not letters.

If Ford did nothing else except begin badging and advertising the car as a "Continental," sales would pick up.

Styling doesn't increase cost (assuming it's feasible as far as manufacturing). Do your cost-cutting under the skin. Share platforms, share parts, share assembly lines. But for God's sake, put a distinctive skin on the thing! Lincolns of the '50s-'60s had some of the most distinctive, classy, and memorable styling of all time. They looked like Lincolns. When you saw one, you knew what you were looking at. Today, that distinctiveness has disappeared for the most part. Way too many generic designs that look 90-95% like the other guy's stuff. They already have stylists on the payroll. Let them do their thing!

So why did they go with a bland gussied-up Ford instead? I swear, give me 10 minutes with their muckety-mucks and I'd set them straight.

See my previous comment regarding styling that stands out from the crowd.

Maybe because it's not marketed correctly? Step one, stop calling it an "MKS" and call it a "Continental." Use the consumer brand recognition you have already worked to gain! The alphabet-soup names may work in Europe, but traditionally we've named our cars. A name can really stick in the consumer's mind, a jumble of letters not so much. Ask people who makes an "MKS" and who makes (made) a "Continental" and you'll see. "You have an MKS? Is that like a TG4? Or a ZYQ? Who makes that, anyhow?" What sticks in consumers' minds more? MKS or Continental? Impala... Firebird... Corvette... Charger...Torino...Electra... Thunderbird...Mustang....Challenger...Eldorado...Riviera. You get my point. Iconic American cars with iconic names, not some generic meaningless alphanumeric "name." I believe Ford needs to make more of an effort to differentiate the Lincoln brand. A "proper" model name would be a start.

I had no idea a kit of that car existed! Cool!

What Lincoln needs to do is drop the alphabet soup names. I know they're "trendy" and very "European," but heck, this is the good old US of A, fer pete's sake! Come out with a flagship car (maybe using the current Taurus platform to keep costs down, maybe go crazy and go all new). Give it unique, even striking styling that stands out from the crowd (like Lincolns used to do). Call it a "Continental," price it realistically, and sit back and count the money.

Joe... did you say it's the first time you drove your Jeep in a month? Why the long time?

Well, yeah... if you're going to be all "common-sensy" and succinct about it...

Of course not. Some prices rise faster than inflation, some prices (like electronics in general) are actually cheaper today than they were twenty years ago (adjusted for inflation). But the overall blanket statement that model kits don't cost any more today than they did back in the day (again, adjusted for inflation), and that the prices have merely kept up with inflation, isn't true. The prices have outpaced inflation by a good bit. If the price of a $2 kit from 1968 (pretty much the price for most domestic kits back then–I remember because my weekly allowance was $2!) had merely kept up with inflation, the average kit today would sell for $14, not $25-30 or more. Brett's statement that the price of kits has mirrored the inflation rate since the nineties may be true, but overall, prices outpaced inflation somewhere between 1968-today, otherwise, like I said, a kit today would sell for about 14 bucks.