Dealer installed/applied nameplates. Points off or ignore?

[Restorer32]

Apologies if I sound belligerent and argumentative. I just want an AACA award to continue to mean something. For better or worse, in this day of E-Bay, an AACA award is looked upon, and promoted, as a "Certificate of Authenticity". You and I know that it isn't the case but to the average buyer new to the hobby it is. His first exposure to AACA may be when he buys a vehicle sporting an AACA Senior badge.

[Steve Moskowitz]

Per Mr. McCraw: There is NO deduction for a dealer emblem on a car unless it has defects in some way.

[Restorer32]

That's good enough for me.

[Steve Moskowitz]

I am still trying to make sure I get the right advice on the cad issue but I am not aware that it is impossible to get the correct cad. As long as it is available then the correct finish should be applied...at least that is what common sense tells me.

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Steve Moskowitz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Per Mr. McCraw: There is NO deduction for a dealer emblem on a car unless it has defects in some way. </div></div>

Thank you Steve for getting an answer for all of us here.

Now we just need to get the word out to all the other judges. Maybe a blurb in the Judge's Newsletter the next time it comes out.

[Restorer32]

Yellow cad and silver cad (both actually zinc these days) is readily available. I have even begun to see repro Model A parts in yellow cad. SaW A '36 Packard at a show a while back with a beautifully restored carb, done in yellow cad. Stood out like a sore thumb!

[Hulon C McCraw]

In response to all the comments made over the dealer installed logo I offer the following:

Page 18, 4. BADGE DISPLAY a. Badges and license plate frames with club names other than AACA will NOT be subject to a deduction for authenticity, if they are appropriate to the vehicle and displayed in good taste. They will be judged for condition.

Hulon C McCraw

VP Class Judging

[Restorer32]

Page 18, 4, c. "Non-authentic license plate frames and advertising badges are not acceptable, regardless of the number or manner in which they are displayed". If a dealer logo is not an advertising badge then what is it? It is certainly not a "badge or license plate frame with club name". I interpret this rule as having been written specifically to penalize license plate frames and logos advertising dealerships. Where would this rule apply otherwise?

[Steve Braverman]

I know of a 1929 La Salle with a small brass plate (business card size) attached to the rear apron with the dealer's name on it. It was interesting to me because it was a Cadillac dealer that was local to where I grew up, and is no longer in existence.

The car was restored, but the owner left the plate. I think it was historically interesting, and should have remained on the car. I have never seen another dealer plate like it.

[Restorer32]

If we accept dealer logos without penalty then should we not likewise accept license plate frames advertising dealerships?

[novaman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I interpret this rule as having been written specifically to penalize license plate frames and logos advertising dealerships. Where would this rule apply otherwise? </div></div>

Like on my Chevy II before I had it HPOF. It had a U.S. Coast Guard Aux. License plate frame and a plate that said "MY TOY".

[Terry Bond]

Rule sounds pretty clear on license plate frames. The advertising badges referred to are the ones advertising gas, oil, repeal prohibition, vote for someone, etc. that attach to the bumper or license plate.

Terry

[Restorer32]

I think you are assuming something that may or may not be the case.The manual certainly doesn't make that distinction. A dealer installed logo is advertising no matter how you parse it. What about frames advertising a dealer? What if it was installed by a used car dealer? What if a dealer installed his logo on the bumper rather than the trunk lid? The rule needs clarification. Obviously there is much confusion in this area.

[Guest Albert]

How about Henney and Yanko, are they a deduction too?

[Stan Kulikowski]

I have the advertising frame on my 73 LTD that was on the car since the day it was delivered to my grandfather. The frame is in excellent condition and to my knowledge I have never received a deduction for the frame.

[Shop Rat]

Here is the e-mail that I recieved from Hulon McCraw regarding this issue. I had e-mailed him because of his reference in his post to club badges other than AACA badges, not dealership nameplates/logos.

Hey Susan:

Glad you emailed me direct on this matter and you are correct I don't visit the forum very often.

I am aware the dealership logo placed on the rear of the vehicle is what's in question. NO POINT DEDUCTION.

Thanks for your support of our judging system, AACA and the hobby we love.

Thanks,

Hulon C. McCraw

Per his previous post there would be no more than a one point deduction for less than perfect condition. It stands to reason that if the dealship put a license plate frame on the car when they sold it that would be the same as a nameplate/logo. (We have told the dealship where we buy cars/trucks that we don't want the frame. They finally put it in the records because every time it went in the shop for anything they put a new frame on it.)

[Restorer32]

So you are saying that we DO NOT DEDUCT for dealer license plate frames? If so, then would you please explain the rule in the manual that states "Non-authentic license plate frames and advertising badges are not acceptable, regardless of number and manner in which they are displayed".

[MCHinson]

The explanation is the following quote from Steve Moskowitz posted on page one of this discussion...

"Rick and his team are working on a major edit of the manual for next year. However, the "same state as when the dealer received the vehicle from the factory" is probably an antiquated statement that is ambiguous at best (my opinion). If that were taken at face value, having been a dealer for many years, cars would be dirty, have paper in them, mats and keys in the trunk, antenna not installed, etc. A little if not a lot of common sense needs to be used here and is used most of the time."

[Guest windjamer]

32, let me try. I have a brass lic. plate frame w/an american flag and a eagle. Its ovious this is not fac. or new car dealer installed.This is a deduction. a new chevy blazer I bought from Botnic Chev.was delivered to me w/ a lic. plate frame that had there name on it. This would not be a deduction. It comes down to a little common sence. If in doubt ask,the owner may have a window sticker or sales slip w/ the dealers name on it or outher documentation. A frame w/ wight watchers or save the whale is not auth.

[Restorer32]

So the rule will be rewritten to say "Non-authentic license plate frames other than dealer (new or used car) advertising frames are not acceptable"? I will abide by the ruling of course but as a judge it seems too broad to enforce equitably. Most other exceptions to the rules such as electric starters or electric fuel pumps have been allowed in the interest of safety or driveability. I fail to see how allowing yet another non-factory accessory furthers the mission of AACA. How is a dealer plate frame any different from one of hundreds of other dealer installed but not factory authorized add-ons for which we do deduct points?

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Restorer32</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So you are saying that we DO NOT DEDUCT for dealer license plate frames?</div></div>

No, it is not me saying it. It is our Vice-President of Class Judging Hulon McCraw.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If so, then would you please explain the rule in the manual that states "Non-authentic license plate frames and advertising badges are not acceptable, regardless of number and manner in which they are displayed".</div></div>

I can't explain other than if the nameplate/logos/license plate frames are being looked at as factory authorized since new cars are only sold through authorized dealers and most of the items have the brand (Dodge, Chevrolet, etc) "symbol" on the items. To me, and I am stressing here that it is only my opinion, that makes them different than if a dealer goes out and puts aftermarket tint on windows, Vent-Shades over windows, etc.

Certainly an item placed there by a second-hand car dealer that does not sell that brand as a new vehicle should be removed as non-authentic.

[Guest windjamer]

After all this I guess the best thing to do is wate for the new judges manual. I was only a sgt. , but I was called to hq. for officers call once. The col. was explaning a procedure for the next day and a young Lt. kept interuping with but sir, the book says,after the 3ed time I heard damit lt. the book is a guide only a guide.Nuff said.

[Restorer32]

The book may be only a guide but you try telling that to a car owner who has lost an award by one point to another car where a judge has used his "discretion" to overlook an item specifically forbidden by the "guide book". I think that, above all, exhibitors want and expect a level playing field. Hopefully the new "Guide Book" will eliminate any confusion. I guess an owner will need to document that his car was sold new by the dealership advertised on the logo or license frame. Could be tough to do in many instances.

[Restorer32]

I gusee the judge was using his discretion when he deducted for your ignition wires, huh?

[Guest windjamer]

32 you are 100% right on both counts we do need to all be on the same page and NO ONE will yell any louder than I if I think I have been SCREWED. In fact I tryed to call Hulan the day I rec. my judging sheet,but he wasnt home Must have heard me clear down in Tenn. But believe me the subject is NOT dead. Soner or later I will meet the team capt. and express my displeasure. I still say see what the new book says and go from there. Till then lets agree to disagree and shake hands. Dick

[Guest windjamer]

Hey Reb. Its all your fault, and folks have the nerve to call me a adjatator. ?????

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: windjamer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey Reb. Its all your fault, and folks have the nerve to call me a adjatator. ????? </div></div>

wj, I'm not ajatatin', honest.

I really am trying to get us all on the same page with this for the future. It has no bearing on any car we plan to show. I want it to be fair and even for all.

[Restorer32]

That is my goal as well. It's the old slippery slope thing. Today dealer logos, tomorrow radial tires, the day after that small block Chebbies. I'm sure we can come up with a justification for each. Is that what the club really wants for the future?

[DaveBerg]

I am entering this discussion very late and have not read all of the posts yet. Unless rules have been changed that I am not aware of, the way we handled nameplates, license plate frames, etc that did not come from or authorized by the factory was this:

If it was an AACA item or item from another Automobile Club we would not take a deduction unless the item was in a condition that would warrant a deduction. Keep in mind that was for condition without concern for the items origin. If it were an item that was not AACA or that of another Car Club, ie Joe Smith Chevrolet, or Jim's Fine Used Cars or United Bingo Club etc we would take a deduction not to exceed two points.

Now this is the way I was taught at the judging schools of the 80's and this is what I taught in the judging schools of the 90's. If this rule has been changed I simply missed that event and apologize. I do not ever recall the rule being changed though. So as far as I know it is as I have outlined above.

[Shop Rat]

Wellllll, sounds like we need a melding of the minds to come up with a rule for 2008 and the future. Hulon has indicated don't except for condition at most one point. You say do but not more than two points.

As I stated before this has no impact on what we plan to show. So I have no vested interest in the outcome. I just want it to be clear to one and all from now on what the rule will be.

Thanks Dave.

[ex98thdrill]

Dave, this isn't a shot on you or anyone else, but a valid argument that I could see on this issue would be the window sticker.

A window sticker is a factory document, and on most window stickers, it states the name of the dealer that the vehicle is delivered to. I will never argue the point that the dealer's name was never on the vehicle when it left the factory, but on the same token neither were the hubcaps. If we were to properly judge the cars in accordance to the way that they were delivered to the dealership from the factory (as the AACA rulebook states), there would be no dealer names, the hubcaps would be off, and in many cases, there would be a protective coating on the seats.

In either case, all but one vehicle that I've ever owned, I took the dealer names off of the vehicle and threw them away as soon as I got it home, so this will never apply to me.

If the vehicle owner has the window sticker and the dealer's name and serial serial number match the sticker, I would look at it in the same manner as I would the hubcaps so long as they are authentic and in good condition. Of course the argument over the 'Yenko' cars is a very valid point as well.

I had never given this issue much thought until this original thread had started, but my father's best friend has a 1962 Chevy Impala SS with 40,000 miles on it, and a 1977 Chevy Monte Carlo with 18,000 miles on it. He bought both vehicles new, they both have the dealer's tag on them, and he still has the original window sticker on both cars. For his vehicle to be judged and to lose points for the original dealer tags would be a moral crime. Personally (just my thoughts only), the issue should be looked at in the same manner as the hubcaps.

[DaveBerg]

Thanks for your thoughts. It is not my intent to join in the debate of the issue and I am not taking either side as to whether or not taking a deduction is the proper thing to do. I am merely stating the rule as it was taught to me in the AACA judging schools and the way I taught it in the judging schools I conducted during my years in judges training. It will be for you the judges and members to decide whether or not you like the rule or whether or not you want to see it changed.

As for the window sticker, I always assumed those did come from the factory so I guess a comparison in that respect would not work. As for the hubcaps, they may not have been on the car when it left the factory but they were authorized by the factory with part numbers and as such would qualify as factory authorized parts which of course we accept.

[Restorer32]

Thanks Dave. I knew I hadn't dreamed up the rule I have have been following for years. It is interesting, and disturbing, that many judges have apparently not been following your teachings.

[Guest windjamer]

Susan Im sure you know Im just busting on you. Actualy Im a little jelious I couldnt start a thread that would generate as much thought and contrversy as this. I bet we all learn more from discussion than any book.

[ex98thdrill]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for the hubcaps, they may not have been on the car when it left the factory but they were authorized by the factory with part numbers and as such would qualify as factory authorized parts which of course we accept</div></div>You're right Dave, from that aspect I had never given that portion of the discussion any thought.

In either case with us not keeping the dealership name on the our daily driver's, I don't have any intentions on doing it with our point judged cars either.

I do find the old style dealer names on the cars as adding character for the vehicle so long as they're authentic. In the case of the Rochester area Judge's Ford was in business for years, and I wouldn't have an issue with seeing Judge's on a Ford built during the era that Judge's Ford was in business. Seeing "Joe's Used Cars" wouldn't cut it with me. Even if the owner had factory dealer literature with the Dealer's name on it, I wouldn't want to totally dismiss it either. In my case I've always been a chassis judge, so I've never been in that position, so it isn't a case where someone got away or didn't get away with anything pertaining to this issue.

In either case, I can see both sides of the coin, and I'm sure that the executive committee will come out with a good resolution to solve this in the best interest of everyone.

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: windjamer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Susan Im sure you know Im just busting on you.</div></div>

Yep, I sure do. Just remember about paybacks.

Actualy Im a little jelious I couldnt start a thread that would generate as much thought and contrversy as this. I bet we all learn more from discussion than any book. </div></div>

Thought is good.

Discussion is good.

Controversy is not good.

Resolving an issue and getting a ruling....priceless.