eBay Finds of the Day: Scary movie cars
With Halloween just around the corner, wouldn't you love showing up at this year's parties in a car or van from one of Hollywood's creepy classics? Something like a Rob Zombie Cadillac Eldorado convertible that was shot up in the climactic scene of the Devil's Rejects, maybe? So what if it was later refurbished and driven by Billy Bob Thornton in the Bad New Bears? Maybe the Dodge van so prominently featured in the 2003 remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre would be more your style? Complete with a chainsaw rip in the roof! How about the ultimate scary car in cinema history? Christine, her bad self. The car that nothing or nobody could destroy. Makes a Hummer look like an eggshell by comparison. Might even reduce your insurance rates with the high indestructibility quotient.The Volo Auto Museum and auction house has scared up these three gory vehicles and placed them on eBay with a closing bid date that should assure you get them before Halloween. Bidding is open now for items 170033211331 (Christine), 170033214132 (Chainsaw Massacre van), and 170033221014 (Zombie Eldorado), and closes October 11. Current bids are $25,258.58 for the 1958 Fury that was one of at least 14 Christines used in the movie. The Chainsaw Massacre Dodge is at a more palatable $2,026.00. The Eldorado is the bargain of the bunch with a current high bid of just $515.00, even though it includes an ashtray full of Billy Bob's cigar butts! Go figure.
[Source: The Auto Channel]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Greg 9:23PM (10/02/2006)
Something tells me that this car has unknown strings..
Does the owner get to use the Movie Poster 'Christine' for licensing, marketing, and appearances?
There is this something called 'Copyright' out there, and it tells me that current seller using the Christine Poster to sell this car is in infringement.
The seller has a 'Buy it Now' price at $175,000.
If the car does come with rights where it can be used with 'Christine', the movie posters, etc... then this car is a steal at 175k.
But if this car doesn't come with the marketing rights using the movie (which I highly doubht it does considering the display it has in its current museum) then I would say $175k is a stretch.
What do you guys think?
Reply
Greg 9:25PM (10/02/2006)
Regarding my first post on this thread..
I am embarrassed at those typo's... sorry!
Reply
frank4cars 12:20AM (10/03/2006)
The links explain the licensing for the Christine name.
Reply
logan 10:53PM (10/02/2006)
I think you're an idiot. It's a car for sale. Give up your attempted intellectualism (discussion of potential copyright concerns inherent in said-car purchase).
Reply
Greg 12:25AM (10/03/2006)
Hey Logan,
What's up with your attitude?
The seller is selling this car stating that there are no contract limits... and using what appears to be a DVD cover packaging from the Movie as a selling tool for the auction.
Now, if you did buy this car with the illusion that you could use seens or promo material of the movie to market the car.. like in DIE CAST retail items, hobby kit's, or even posters... then a price of $175k is a steal.
Example: There are about 3100 Wal-Mart Stores nation wide.
Say you buy this car with marketing rights to use the movie 'Christine'.
Then, with those rights, you do a deal with Johnny Lightning to make a Christine Car, and the royalty you make on the deal is say, 50 cents a car, with a retail price of $3.25.
Ok, now you get a case of 24 Johnny Lightning 'Christine' cars on the shelves of every Walmart.. giving you a total of 74,400 'Christine Johnny Lightning' cars in distribution.
74,400 unit's at 50 cents each per royaly = $37,200 for the deal.
Johnny Lightning is happy because an item like this will blow off the shelves.
Walmart is happy because they know it will fly off the shelves.
The owner of the car is happy because he still has the car, and just got back about 20% of his investment and still has the car for other ventures... like hobby kits, etc.
But... if he doesn't have the rights... then he can't do anything like is described above. Again, the seller is using material from the movie to sell the car, and is claiming ....
Excerpt from the Ebay Auction: '''While lots of cars are used in movies, this car was the movie! The main character with the movie being named after her. Also unlike many high profile movie cars, this one does not carry any contract limiting its commercial use.''''
Now, having some experience with auctions, (for I administrated federal auctions back in the 1980's) I can tell you this, once you bought it, you bought it, and when a seller is making claims like this but for some reason is not using the selling material he is using in the actual display of the vehicle, questions like the ones I raised do qualify as legitimate inqueries.
Which goes right back to the point of my original post.
Now if you are still reading this and are not suffering from A.D.D., you now might be able to see why I posted this to begin with.
Reply
MosquitoControl 3:14PM (10/03/2006)
Trying to read those all-caps descriptions made me dizzy...
Reply