ROUSH and Ford sued for making too many Blackjack Mustangs
Click to enlarge
ROUSH announced the Stage3 Blackjack Mustang back in 2006, and in 2007 said it would make 100 of them. New Yorker Drew Conner bought Blackjack number two, spending almost $59,000 for his slice of limited edition Mustang pie. Only the glossy black 'Stang wasn't so limited after all: according to a lawsuit Connor filed in New York, Ford and ROUSH made another 100 Blackjacks in 2008.
Both Ford and ROUSH are named in the suit, and Connor has been joined by "at least 100" other Blackjack buyers. The plaintiffs' complaint is, of course, that the Blackjack's "value from scarcity and as collectors' items were and are dramatically less than the buyers had been led to believe their value would be."
But to make everything all better, the plaintiffs are asking for class action status, a jury trial, and... ahem... more than $12 million. That sounds like a lot, but say there were just 100 plaintiffs, that would be $120,000 per person, and would get them their money back plus a 100-percent premium for being misled... which might sound more reasonable. Or not. For the moment, both Ford and ROUSH have no comment on the litigation. Thanks for the tip, iOrange!
UPDATE: One point of clarification that's been bothering us is why Ford has been included in this lawsuit. All it did was build the Mustangs then sold them to ROUSH, which developed, manufactured and distributed the run of limited-edition Blackjack Mustangs.
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 4)
BigMcLargeHuge 1:19PM (8/05/2008)
Well, he's right depending on the car.
There is only 1 classic breed of muscle car. No other muscle car will ever have the same value.
The reason they have value is that THOSE cars signified an era in car history. These don't.
These new Mustangs are just a retro-styled new car. They're not anything we haven't seen before. The only reason people want retro is because they remind them of the ACTUAL classics.
If you are thinking of investing in a future classic, it has to be something different, and it must signify an era in automotive history.
Corey W. 2:18PM (8/05/2008)
Just because a car is a special edition or limited run or even considered a classic doesn't mean you're going to get big bucks for it. There's a lot of different variables that are taking into account when a value is determined. But just looking at it from a purely financial investment, no it's not a good investment.
Gavin S. 5:41PM (8/05/2008)
Angelo, the point is that nobody knew which cars were going to increase in value. If you're so smart why don't you pick yourself a winner from this era and see what you get for it down the road?
fd 11:40AM (8/05/2008)
You may have forgotten to factor in the lawyers' fees.
I have seen it in a couple cases where lawyer's offices have millions of $ of expenses in class action lawsuits and the plaintiffs / affected customers / consumers receive a $5 - $25 off coupon if you still have a proof of purchase receipt from n years ago.
Reply
andybee 11:43AM (8/05/2008)
IIRC A number of people tried this in the UK with Renault, when there was a second edition of the Renault Clio Williams. Didn't get far.
But US law is often perceived as tougher
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 11:40AM (8/05/2008)
I'll be interested to see if this goes anywhere. This kind of thing is very common in the auto industry, especially if you include the almost alike cars they often make, like the Ferrari FXX, or the whatever Sang is currently being made of the Veyron.
I know this guy seems like a fool who deserves to lose his money, but the auto companies might want to treat the fools a little better lest they decide to waste their money on other things like diamond-studded iPhones.
Reply
mike 11:41AM (8/05/2008)
Thanks for the tip IOrange? I sent you guys this tip at 8:00 AM, I bet iOrange was still sleeping by then.
Reply
Allan 11:44AM (8/05/2008)
Considering the article was posted on Reuters around 7pm last night... I'm pretty sure this IOrange person could have easily beating your 8am time frame...
Ferg 11:43AM (8/05/2008)
I understand their reason and think it is a legitimate reason to get upset. If Ford said that there would only be 100 made, then there should have only been 100 made. Not as an investment, but for the unique aspect of there being only 100 of that particular variant. If the mustangs were sold on that perspective and that was stated to the customers, then they go out and make double what they say... then they have every right to be upset.
Reply
carsteve 12:26PM (8/05/2008)
Agreed. This action by the Roush owners has merit which cannot be denied.
Ford also did this for the GT500s. They gave some figure early on (forgot what it was), and they are going ahead and producing over that figure (with approximately 700 or so [number clarification?] 2009 GT500 models).
Chris 11:46AM (8/05/2008)
Why was BMW sued by American E28 M5 owners?
When BMW of North America first anounced the E28 M5 in late 1986, production was said to be limited to 500 cars. But by the time production ended in November 1987, however, almost triple that number had been produced. Thus, a class action lawsuit was filed against BMW by E28 M5 owners who claimed that the collector's value of their cars was diminished by the greater volume. The company settled the case by giving these owners a rebate on the purchase of a new BMW.
Reply
Dude 11:51AM (8/05/2008)
I'm sorry, but that car looks like a picture from a JC Whitney catalog.
Reply
BigMcLargeHuge 11:52AM (8/05/2008)
The new models they built were 2008s.
Its not the same year, therefore not the same car.
Ford should be able to resurrect the name 'Blackjack' for any new-build Mustang they choose, whether it be 2008 or 2018.
No car company should be sued for resurrecting a heritage for a second production run.
Judgement goes to the defense.
Reply
steve.ricken 1:45PM (8/05/2008)
Cars back then weren't as mass-produced as they are today. You'll have to crush a LOT more cars to get the same value in 40 years for a 2008 Roush Mustang
mkM3 12:06PM (8/05/2008)
Ford and Roush should now create a good 3000 more of these Blackjack Mustangs, just to spite these idiots.
I guess Ford needs to start including a clause "Actual production numbers may vary". People will sue for any reason they can.
Reply
BILL 11:58AM (8/05/2008)
I am going to be keeping a close eye on this one. Depending upon how it goes I may decide to sue Hot Wheels for making too many of every model car I have in my collection. When I found only 1 example on the shelf at Wal-Mart I thought that was all there was - until I went to another Wal-Mart.
Reply
Kimura 11:58AM (8/05/2008)
Let me know when there's a Mustang special edition that has an IRS. That's the one I want.
Reply
Jim Cip 2:24PM (8/08/2008)
Check out the 1999 to 2004 SVT Mustang Cobra's.
RG 12:00PM (8/05/2008)
I love how it said "at least 100."
Well, to me logic should dictate that the 2007 owners are suing because of the 2008s, so how on earth could it be "at least" 100 if they only made 100?
Are there some 2008 owners suing because Ford made more of the car they bought?
Reply
CARLOS 12:03PM (8/05/2008)
...IT DOESNT REALLY MATTER....FORD WILL BE OUT OF BUSINESS SOON AND THAT WILL CERTAINLY ADD TO THE VALUE OF YOUR RARE MUSTANG...
"TOYOTA RULES"
Reply