My conversation with the seller of the $5.5 Million Mustang! (LONG) - Vintage Mustang Forums
Vintage Mustang Forum
HomeForumGalleryClassifiedsAbout UsAdvertiseContact Us
» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
Go Back   Vintage Mustang Forums > General Discussion > Vintage Mustang Forum
Vintage-Mustang.com is the premier Ford Mustang Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-04-2008, 07:19 PM   #1 (permalink)
Supporting Member
Otis Campbell
 
zim64half's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: In line at Napa
Posts: 2,680
Default

Hello all.

Here is a running lst of the communication I have had with the guy selling the now infamous 5.5 million dollar Mustang!

-Zim

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[message sent by me thru seller's website morning of 1/2/2008]

Hello.

I was wondering about the Mustang you have for sale. I thought that the first Mustang was in the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn Michigan.

Thanks,

Jason Zimberoff

------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: musclecars53@comcast.net
To: zim@svs.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Requesting general information


Hi

I'm not sure if you didn't read our ad or you just aren't very well versed in Early Mustangs. Number one, in the Ford Museum, is one of the pre-production prototypes built. Approximately 185 of these were built prior to regular production. These cars were sent to racing teams such as Holman-Moody and Alan Mann Racing in England, used as crash test vehicles, etc. They were never offered for retail sale to the public.They were "test" vehicles. As a side note, we also have pre-production convertible #93, which is the lowest vinned pre production convertible in existence except for #1 in the Museum.

Our Mustang Convertible, vin # 212, is indeed the first Mustang convertible built for retail sale to the public and also the first Mustang of any style sold to the public. This is all verified with documentation.

If you have any confusion on this, call me.

Thanks

Randy


------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: zim@svs.com
To: musclecars53@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: About Mustang #212

Hello.

I simply meant to ask what you had there.

I apologize if the first short question I sent through your webpage made it seem that way, but I was not trying to be difficult, or being confused when I contacted you about the car. As someone who is interested in Mustang history, and someone who likes to document the differences between the early 64.5 cars and the later 65 cars, (and an owner of a generator-equipped #45434 myself) I think it would be fun to come and see it, and spread the word that it is in the Chicago area. I live in Batavia.

But let me try to explain where I am coming from, if you want to see how well versed I actually am in early Mustangs... I am only trying to repeat what I have read, and see how this one fits in. I am not trying to be confrontational.

Your ad for this car says, quote: "the first Mustang convertible built on the first day of production" and I think this could be misleading. At least not proveable... One might be led to believe that this was even #1 after reading your ad. Since I know #1 was not SCHEDULED for build on March 9, I was just curious as to what you really had there. You do not list the VIN number in your ad. I felt there was enough confusion about it to at least ask about it.

I actually own a copy of Smart and Haskell's Mustang Production Guide too, and looking at it, along with your pictures, I guessed that we were talking about 5F08F100212. But only because this is the first and only one actually listed that was SCHEDULED to be made that day (with the full door tag info available), and because the car matched the door tag info in the book. It is definately the ONLY convertible that was documented for that buld date in the Production guide when it was printed in 1994.

Do Smart and Haskell have data on all of the cars built that day? Nope. Ford lost / threw all the data out. That is the whole reason those books were created - to try to recapture some of what was lost forever. If you have some more data on the cars made that day, I sure would love to see it. Can you say to me without any doubt that car #211 was not a convertible that was sold to the public? Do you know for sure that #212 was the first car built that day? I do not know - you do not say on the website.

But I think you are going off the data in the Production Guide, which is if anything incomplete and unofficial, and I would like to see you either show otherwise, or come clean about that. I would call it "the earliest KNOWN Mustang convertible scheduled to be built on march 9." to cover my butt.

So as far as we know, you definately have a very early, even remarkable car there. Lots of neat history, and even some potential to document some of the features of the earliest cars (if they were all preserved during the restoration.) I would love to see more pictures of it or even come and take some myself. I know a few MCA gold card judges that would probably like to look it over too.

But I would be curious to see what documentation you have, besides the production guide, that says that this is actually the first one built that day. You don't really say exactly, so I am curious, and skeptical. I am ready to be proved wrong though! There is always more info out there to be found I am sure. I do not know everything, but on this subject, I at least know enough to be curious about this one.

I also know the whole story about the pilot who bought #1 in Canada, and then was later given #1,000,000 in a trade for it. That is definately the car that is in Dearborn, and I agree that it was not meant to be sold that day. Most of what you say in the ad follows the stories I have heard too.

Still a remarkable car to have, and something that could drive feet into your showroom. I could help with that somewhat. I am the president of the Chicago Vintage Mustang Club, and also a local moderator at the Vintage Mustang Forum.

If you would like to host a small tour sometime, or just invite a couple of us to come check out your Mustangs, I think we could get that organized and even photograph it for publicity on the best website for early Mustang enthusiats...

Maybe - it might even lead you to a buyer... if you really want to sell it that is...

Thanks,

Jason Zimberoff
Chicago Vintage Mustang Club
www.chicago-mustang.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: musclecars53@comcast.net
To: zim@svs.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: About Mustang #212

Hi
The Mustang book is nice, but obviously not updated since '94 and not current. The only information we used there is page 59, which gives a good beginning barometer on 5c and 9c cars. By the way , #211 is in a junk yard and it was a coupe.
We have done exhaustive research on these cars putting together pieces of info from every source, including Dearborn, Mustang registries, collectors, authors, etc. Most of this info is out there, but takes hours to contact these people to verify.

As to convertibles, 001 is in the museum. 006 is an unrestorable shell. 093 we also have. 122 is still around. Those are all pre production. There are a couple more undocumented ones that are floating around, but not verified. There is no record in any registry, book, magazine, or on the internet of a production convertible built on March 9 before #212. We just obtained a copy of "Mustang Times" from the Mustang Club of America, October, 2007 that even suggests there may have been as many as 200 pre-production cars instead of the 185 that has always been touted.

As to the first production Mustang built, we NEVER said that. We said it's the first production Mustang CONVERTIBLE built for retail sale to the public. You or your club members may not be familiar with this car, but in inner circles this car is very well known. It was in the Towe Museum for years. Had the same owner since 1982. Has every title change, original document, etc. Volumes of history since day one, including the original internal bill of sale documenting delivery to customer on the 16th. William Clay Ford borrowed the car for his grand daughter's wedding in Florida in 2006. Iococca tried to buy it years ago. We were able to obtain it only because the owner got too old to drive it.

The problem with guys like you is that you start firing your guns without absolutely any proof to the contrary, and assuming we are making up this story. We've spent hours on the telephone, in emails, and talking in person with people. Every early Mustang owner in the world has contacted us in some form or another. We have compiled and saved information, documents, chronicled other owner's vin numbers, etc. Everything dealing with early Mustangs, number 001 through 212.

We have one of the rarest early Mustang collections around, and none of your members have even visited us, as far as I know. My first contact from your club is an attempt to discredit our car.

We have, in addition to convertible 100212- pre production convertible 100093, the earliest San Jose built 64 1/2 Mustang in existence(#40), four '64 1/2 Pace Car Edition coupes, a Mustero, and a D code San Jose '64 1/2. In addition, we have the only '71 T5 Mach One left- 3 were built- 2 were lost to attrition.

Stop in and see us. We are car guys and are very proud of the collection.We're not trying to push them out the door for a quick profit- we are displaying them.

Thanks

Randy


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: zim@svs.com
To: musclecars53@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 11:00 PM
Subject: Re: About Mustang #212

Hi.

I will try to reply to this in line - see my additions below:


[Hi
The Mustang book is nice, but obviously not updated since '94 and not current. The only information we used there is page 59, which gives a good beginning barometer on 5c and 9c cars. By the way , #211 is in a junk yard and it was a coupe.
We have done exhaustive research on these cars putting together pieces of info from every source, including Dearborn, Mustang registries, collectors, authors, etc. Most of this info is out there, but takes hours to contact these people to verify.]

Since you have done a lot of research. I don't think it would hurt your cause to share this info with the Mustang community. Is it possible that you have and we just have not found it yet? I found another source (Bob Fria - owner of #2) who agrees that #212 is the earliest KNOWN car, coupe or convertible, with a retail DSO on the door tag.
What about #211, #210, #209, etc? If there is info about all of these, it would be great to have and lend more credibility to #212.

[As to convertibles, 001 is in the museum. 006 is an unrestorable shell. 093 we also have. 122 is still around. Those are all pre production. There are a couple more undocumented ones that are floating around, but not verified. There is no record in any registry, book, magazine, or on the internet of a production convertible built on March 9 before #212. We just obtained a copy of "Mustang Times" from the Mustang Club of America, October, 2007 that even suggests there may have been as many as 200 pre-production cars instead of the 185 that has always been touted. ]

No arguments here. All I was trying to say is that no proof to the contrary is still incomplete without a history of every car built that day.


[As to the first production Mustang built, we NEVER said that. We said it's the first production Mustang CONVERTIBLE built for retail sale to the public. You or your club members may not be familiar with this car, but in inner circles this car is very well known. It was in the Towe Museum for years. Had the same owner since 1982. Has every title change, original document, etc. Volumes of history since day one, including the original internal bill of sale documenting delivery to customer on the 16th. William Clay Ford borrowed the car for his grand daughter's wedding in Florida in 2006. Iococca tried to buy it years ago. We were able to obtain it only because the owner got too old to drive it.]

Again, no arguments here. Your ad lists no VIN, so it was up to us to figure out what we were looking at. Thus my original question. I have never heard anyone talk about the "first retail car" before, so it was worth asking about.

[The problem with guys like you is that you start firing your guns without absolutely any proof to the contrary, and assuming we are making up this story. ]

"Guys like me" are the reason why guys like you can make a living. When we see stuff like this, word spreads like wildfire. I can't afford this car even if you shave 2 zeros off the price, but I know people who could. If you are argumentative from the start, it makes us all think you are hiding something. Don't jump on us for asking questions. Invite us to come in and see the proof for ourselves. To support the idea that this is somehow a priceless car, we need to know the whole story. But as far as we know, the story is still full of missing info. We would love to believe it. We have no evidence that tells us you are wrong. Nobody has that evidence, as you say. But for anyone to know for sure, we need to know what was on the door tags of all of the cars that were at least between 173 (last known 05C car) and 212. Is this information available? If it is not, then it would be silly to invest that kind of money in a car that could be discredited by the next rusty shell pulled out of a barn somewhere.

[We've spent hours on the telephone, in emails, and talking in person with people. Every early Mustang owner in the world has contacted us in some form or another. We have compiled and saved information, documents, chronicled other owner's vin numbers, etc. Everything dealing with early Mustangs, number 001 through 212.]

Great! This would be fantastic to share with everyone. That is what is needed to back a claim that any of these cars is the "first" anything. Smart and Haskell did not have this info in 1994 and they are both true "inner circle" guys. If you were able to out-do them, then my hat is off to you!

[We have one of the rarest early Mustang collections around, and none of your members have even visited us, as far as I know. My first contact from your club is an attempt to discredit our car.]

Until this morning, January 2, 2008, I had no idea you guys existed. We have been around since 2002.

Someone forwarded me the link to the webpage for this car, joking with me that at 5.5 million dollars, I had better act quickly! With a price like that, it is hard for me to think that you would expect to be taken seriously. Hopefully you can see that from my point of view. People have been studying this stuff for 40 years. It should not surprise you that something like this gets looked at with a bit of skepticism.

[We have, in addition to convertible 100212- pre production convertible 100093, the earliest San Jose built 64 1/2 Mustang in existence(#40), four '64 1/2 Pace Car Edition coupes, a Mustero, and a D code San Jose '64 1/2. In addition, we have the only '71 T5 Mach One left- 3 were built- 2 were lost to attrition. ]

With a collection like this, one could also ask why you have not sought out the area Mustang clubs to let us know these cars were right here under our noses. If you didn't know about us, then I guess we are even!

[Stop in and see us. We are car guys and are very proud of the collection.We're not trying to push them out the door for a quick profit- we are displaying them.]

Sounds good. I will plan on it. If I call ahead and set it up, would you be willing to show us, and even copy for us the documentation you have for #1 thru #212? I would be willing to pay something for the inconvenience to do it, but I think it would be of great service to the Mustang community to share it too. Have you at least shared it with Jim Smart for his next edition of the Production Guide? Many people would gobble it up, and I think it would lend some extra "cred" to your collection.

If the car is what you say it is - it would be cool to get the word out, and I would be willing to help you do that.

Thanks,

Jason Z.


==================

Though he was quick to reply to me up until my last letter, a full 2 days have now gone by with no response...

I do plan on going up there soon though. I will have to see when I get some time (its about an hour away...)

-Zim
__________________
Jason Zimberoff zim@svs.com - 64.5 convertible
260 V8 - C4 Auto - Power Top - Console - 4 Wheel Drums

Zim's 64.5 Mustang -- Mustang Color Archive -- Chicago Vintage Mustang Club

http://www.svs.com/zim/sig4.jpg

"Nobody ever learned anything from listening to themselves talk..." - My grandfather
zim64half is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-04-2008, 08:24 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
RedGTvert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wellington, FL
Posts: 2,230
Default

Good for you. Thanks for the follow-up and let us know what you see when you get there.
__________________
http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h1...s/NEWVMF-3.jpg
MCA 64897
67 GTA Fastback
RedGTvert is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 08:28 PM   #3 (permalink)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I would also think that Jim Smart & Jim Haskell would know more about this car if it was so special.

So their claim is that this is the first convertible that Ford built specifically for retail sale? I'm not sure I understand what is so special about that. Are they saying that all the others built before this were pre-production models and NOT intended for sale?

Also, how can they prove it was the first one sold when each dealership received at least one Mustang prior to the intro date of 4/17/64. Check out this letter from the Buffalo DSO sent on 2/17/64
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles...uffalo_DSO.jpg

I'm with you Zim, without a comprehensive listing of every unit number and corresponding Warranty Plate info before AND after the car they have for sale, I don't understand how they can prove their claim.
  Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 08:56 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
olddustyrelics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Heart of Dixie
Posts: 6,838
Default

Sorry, but anyone that would pay 1/5 of the asking price for that car would be insane. I don't see a $5,470,000 difference in value between car# 212 and car#213.
__________________
I don't know a lot about anything, but I know a little about everything.


Built a 1967 Shelby GT-350 Convertible Replica, a 67 Vert resto-mod and also built a 427 FE 67 Shelby GT-500R (R Stands for Replica). 427 Side Oiler, toploader 4spd, 4 wheel discs, 9" traction loc and a perfect body. What more could you ask for? Now I car hunt and horse trade and I am currently looking for the next project! Always seeking that elusive "reasonable" Shelby.

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2503347
olddustyrelics is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 09:00 PM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
sigtauenus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 2,872
Default

Even if you took 2 zero's off the asking price, is the car even worth that?

I mean, I know its rare and all, and no doubt a very nice car, but is a 64.5 convertable, even that rare, really worth more than $50k?
__________________
Sam

68 J-code Fastback - owned since Jan 1994
68 C-Code Coupe
78 F-150 4x4

http://www.samsgarage.net/folddown4_small.jpg
Got a question about fold down seats or need some fold down seat parts? Check out the new http://www.folddownseat.com

sigtauenus is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 09:39 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
palmaceae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Spirit Lake, IA
Posts: 1,477
Default

Thats great Jason that you contacted him. Not a very kind fellow it would seem, you would think he would be a bit more mature with his communication with you, especially with the stature of the knowledge you have and other people on this forum. Just his attitude shows there is something wrong with this, he is too defensive in my opinion, and 5 million, sorry that just wrong. I think he may have spent too much time watching Barrett Jackson. I wish him luck and hope he is being truthful.
__________________
http://www.palmaceae.tzo.com:8080/ph.../IMG_3286a.jpg

1929 Ford Model A Tudor Sedan
1986 GT Convertible

<><
palmaceae is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 09:59 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Halton Hills, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigtauenus
Even if you took 2 zero's off the asking price, is the car even worth that?

I mean, I know its rare and all, and no doubt a very nice car, but is a 64.5 convertable, even that rare, really worth more than $50k?
+1 on that.

One, you will really feel dumb if another vert prior to 212 pops out of a rusty barn, as said above. (Can you imagine the argument with SWMBO this would cause -- "But honey, I was TOLD it was number one, so about our savings and inheritance..." Ouch!! )

Two, it is after all a 64.5 vert., not a one of a kind Ferrari GTO or some one off Lamborghini Unobtainium. Sure the 64.5 vert is a desireable car, but as said, may worth 50 or 60 if rare. Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC the Mustang #1 wasn't worth 5.5 mill either, was it?

So, what gives with this car? If I am missing something, please inform me and forgive my ignorance. Just my 2ΒΆ, or is it 2.5 million ΒΆ now?
__________________
[/SIGPIC]67 Fastback GT -- original colour (Frost Turquoise), orig engine. Pic is of me and the Mustang taken in summer of '67, with original F70-14 Wide Ovals. Same car is now restored to "as new" but 3 speed tranny swapped out for 4 gear, with tach dash, original Equalock rear, Opentracker roller perches and idler arm, roller bearing pedal cluster, Cibie headlights, 4100 carb (old 4300 put in storage probably forever)
jfstang is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:12 PM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
JohnTheTruckGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The woods of the Finger Lakes, western NY
Posts: 193
Default

Of course he won't respond to you anymore. The only thing you can do to his Mustang is make it worth LESS.

Just sit back and feed the elephants. You'll have fun watching these guys turn themselves inside-out for a long time, trying to bolster up their version of history.
__________________

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/5...tangwgidn7.jpg

"It's always better to be shot out of a cannon than to be squeezed out of a tube" - Hunter S. Thompson
JohnTheTruckGuy is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:17 PM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Vinman12's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Collegeville, PA
Posts: 476
Default

I agree with all above. Even if all his facts are correct and it's the first one, $5 mil is still crazy.

__________________
SOLD...
1966 Coupe, C-code, 289, auto, P/S.
OpenTracker front suspension, shelby drop.
discbrakeswap.com front discs.
Vinman12 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:27 PM   #10 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: california
Posts: 15
Default

Hi I'm new this site but I'm in agreement with palmaceae I believe barrett jacksons ia fad for people with more money than sense and a big thumbs up for zim64half
rks pilot is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:32 PM   #11 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: california
Posts: 15
Default

BTW Guys just so you know I have no good photo's to post for my car butI have a 69 sports roof under going resto
rks pilot is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:46 PM   #12 (permalink)
Supporting Member
Senior Member
 
Midlife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Panama City, FL
Posts: 18,987
Default

Zim:
The seller does have an "attitude", which doesn't help make his case of being an honest seller. He reminds me a bit of Don Barry...
__________________
http://midlife66.com/miscfiles/traylersmiley2.gifhttp://midlife66.com/miscfiles/hotshots.jpg
http://midlife66.com/miscfiles/hotshots.jpg[

'Electrical Guru: Let me Check Your Shorts! Ooops...that didn't turn out right.

MCA Historian
Midlife is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:54 PM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
J.R. Bert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Monroe,Washington
Posts: 1,036
Default

If #212 is worth $5,500,000.00, does that mean #001 is worth $1,166,000,000.00
__________________
AKA "Couped Up"

'68 J-code, 4-speed

'70 Fastback Project
J.R. Bert is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 10:58 PM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
NEFaurora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 4,157
Send a message via AIM to NEFaurora
Default

Excellent Thread... I loved it.... I would die and roll over laughing if someone coughed up any of the cars #186 thru #211..

It would teach people in this new Barrett Jackson market world a lesson....

5.5 mil... Get real! You'd think Caroll Shelby first child was born in it or something..!!

PS: Just out of curiosity....What is the highest price ever paid for a '64-'66 Mustang (non-shelby of course- We are only talking regular production cars here..)

Tony Kovar
1966 Sprint 200 Convertible
__________________


Tony Kovar
Melbourne, FL (Formerly from Long Island, NY!)

1965 Mustang Convertible 200cid I6, 3spd Manual
1966 Mustang Sprint 200 Registry Owner/Moderator
1966 Mustang Sprint 200 Convertible 200cid I6, C4 Auto
2007 Mustang V6 Convertible w/ Pony Package
MCA#70001
NEFaurora is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-04-2008, 11:08 PM   #15 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 83
Default

Would u rather have this "1st" whatever Mustang or Shelby's Super Snake for $5.5M?

No brainer. Not only is the Super Snake 100% DOCUMENTED, but it was Carroll Shelby's personal car. 1 exists. Thats what rare means.

This other car is only worth $5.5M if there is a suitcase filled with $5.45M in the front seat.
__________________
1965 Convertible Stock 289 C Code
Pertronix Ignitor
http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z...7/IMG_0107.jpg
blane17 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.