boneheads at jeep corporate
01-26-2005, 05:45 PM
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Yes, and the sites I listed came back to life, that's why I deleted
my post. But that wasn't so last year when Daimlers ***** were suing for
them.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Rusted wrote:
>
> You just named off 9 sites, but did you know there are currently 4,084 sites
> out there right now with the phrase "jeep" in the url? I have one of them.
> Domainsurfer.com is one of the utilities you can use to look for these
> things.
my post. But that wasn't so last year when Daimlers ***** were suing for
them.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Rusted wrote:
>
> You just named off 9 sites, but did you know there are currently 4,084 sites
> out there right now with the phrase "jeep" in the url? I have one of them.
> Domainsurfer.com is one of the utilities you can use to look for these
> things.
01-26-2005, 05:59 PM
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
DCs...
UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
jeep.com.
Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:CMmdnRloMOyFYGrcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Which is the basis of trademark law.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> news:Z7qdnXSA7pbhSGrcRVn-1Q@ez2.net...
> > The "legal" argument was that consumers could be confused that Nathan's
> > site
> > was somehow to be construed as an official site.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:hY6dnS4AyOlPDWrcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> >> You neglected to mention the pictures of nekkid wimmin on his website,
> > which
> >> D-C, the owner of the trademark "Jeep," objected to.
> >>
> >> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> >> news:RqednUxowbsbmmrcRVn-3g@ez2.net...
> >> > He used "jeep" in the URL to his website. DC got a little testy and
> > flexed
> >> > their muscles. I think that today, Nathan could probably fight them
and
> >> > win
> >> > because there have been recent rulings that product names in a
website
> > are
> >> > not indicators by themselves that consumers can be confused.
Basically,
> > DC
> >> > said that consumers will go to Nathan's site and be confused about
the
> >> > product offerings.
> >> >
> >> > It was more complicated than that, but this is the reader's digest
> >> > version.
> >> > I think DC was WAY off base in their attacks on Nathan, and many
others
> >> > for
> >> > that matter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Marc" <none@all.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:MPG.1c60be254354f497989696@netnews.mchsi.com. ..
> >> >> I'm somewhat new to the group, why was he sued by DC?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <l4DJd.19259$xu.18295@fed1read05>, jerrypb@***.net
says...
> >> >> > Is this the same Nathan W. Collier that swore publically MANY
times
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > he would never buy another Jeep after being sued by DC? Doesn't
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > make your second Jeep purchased since making that loud and
> >> >> > vociferous
> >> >> > pledge? ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> >> >> > > first some bonehead down at jeep corporate decides to drop
yellow
> > and
> >> > sienna
> >> >> > > from the wranger lineup (if either color were available it would
> > make
> >> > my
> >> >> > > color choice easy. if both were available, id probably flip a
> > coin).
> >> > next,
> >> >> > > some bonehead decides to replace the black top/flares with
> >> > grey...luckily
> >> >> > > that mistake was corrected. in preparing to order my '05
rubicon
> >> >> > > i
> >> > finally
> >> >> > > decided on another khaki with the black top/interior (just like
my
> >> >> > > '03
> >> >> > > http://7slotgrille.com/reviews/performance/doors/6.jpg ) and
when
> >> >> > > i
> >> > went
> >> >> > > down to make the final order, i found out for '05 some corporate
> >> > bonehead
> >> >> > > decided that you cannot get the khaki wrangler with the black
> >> > top/interior.
> >> >> > > you can get a green jeep (rolling off the same assembly line)
with
> > a
> >> > black
> >> >> > > top/interior, but you can only get the khaki top/interior on the
> >> >> > > khaki
> >> > jeep.
> >> >> > > i cant help but wonder what the hell these people are thinking
in
> >> > making
> >> >> > > stupid decisions like this. it just makes no sense why you can
> >> >> > > get
> >> > the
> >> >> > > black top/interior on EVERY color rubicon except the khaki. if
> >> >> > > you
> >> > have
> >> >> > > some insight on why this bonehead decision was made, please
share.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
DCs...
UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
jeep.com.
Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:CMmdnRloMOyFYGrcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Which is the basis of trademark law.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> news:Z7qdnXSA7pbhSGrcRVn-1Q@ez2.net...
> > The "legal" argument was that consumers could be confused that Nathan's
> > site
> > was somehow to be construed as an official site.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:hY6dnS4AyOlPDWrcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> >> You neglected to mention the pictures of nekkid wimmin on his website,
> > which
> >> D-C, the owner of the trademark "Jeep," objected to.
> >>
> >> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> >> news:RqednUxowbsbmmrcRVn-3g@ez2.net...
> >> > He used "jeep" in the URL to his website. DC got a little testy and
> > flexed
> >> > their muscles. I think that today, Nathan could probably fight them
and
> >> > win
> >> > because there have been recent rulings that product names in a
website
> > are
> >> > not indicators by themselves that consumers can be confused.
Basically,
> > DC
> >> > said that consumers will go to Nathan's site and be confused about
the
> >> > product offerings.
> >> >
> >> > It was more complicated than that, but this is the reader's digest
> >> > version.
> >> > I think DC was WAY off base in their attacks on Nathan, and many
others
> >> > for
> >> > that matter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Marc" <none@all.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:MPG.1c60be254354f497989696@netnews.mchsi.com. ..
> >> >> I'm somewhat new to the group, why was he sued by DC?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <l4DJd.19259$xu.18295@fed1read05>, jerrypb@***.net
says...
> >> >> > Is this the same Nathan W. Collier that swore publically MANY
times
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > he would never buy another Jeep after being sued by DC? Doesn't
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > make your second Jeep purchased since making that loud and
> >> >> > vociferous
> >> >> > pledge? ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> >> >> > > first some bonehead down at jeep corporate decides to drop
yellow
> > and
> >> > sienna
> >> >> > > from the wranger lineup (if either color were available it would
> > make
> >> > my
> >> >> > > color choice easy. if both were available, id probably flip a
> > coin).
> >> > next,
> >> >> > > some bonehead decides to replace the black top/flares with
> >> > grey...luckily
> >> >> > > that mistake was corrected. in preparing to order my '05
rubicon
> >> >> > > i
> >> > finally
> >> >> > > decided on another khaki with the black top/interior (just like
my
> >> >> > > '03
> >> >> > > http://7slotgrille.com/reviews/performance/doors/6.jpg ) and
when
> >> >> > > i
> >> > went
> >> >> > > down to make the final order, i found out for '05 some corporate
> >> > bonehead
> >> >> > > decided that you cannot get the khaki wrangler with the black
> >> > top/interior.
> >> >> > > you can get a green jeep (rolling off the same assembly line)
with
> > a
> >> > black
> >> >> > > top/interior, but you can only get the khaki top/interior on the
> >> >> > > khaki
> >> > jeep.
> >> >> > > i cant help but wonder what the hell these people are thinking
in
> >> > making
> >> >> > > stupid decisions like this. it just makes no sense why you can
> >> >> > > get
> >> > the
> >> >> > > black top/interior on EVERY color rubicon except the khaki. if
> >> >> > > you
> >> > have
> >> >> > > some insight on why this bonehead decision was made, please
share.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
01-26-2005, 05:59 PM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
DCs...
UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
jeep.com.
Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:CMmdnRloMOyFYGrcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Which is the basis of trademark law.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> news:Z7qdnXSA7pbhSGrcRVn-1Q@ez2.net...
> > The "legal" argument was that consumers could be confused that Nathan's
> > site
> > was somehow to be construed as an official site.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:hY6dnS4AyOlPDWrcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> >> You neglected to mention the pictures of nekkid wimmin on his website,
> > which
> >> D-C, the owner of the trademark "Jeep," objected to.
> >>
> >> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> >> news:RqednUxowbsbmmrcRVn-3g@ez2.net...
> >> > He used "jeep" in the URL to his website. DC got a little testy and
> > flexed
> >> > their muscles. I think that today, Nathan could probably fight them
and
> >> > win
> >> > because there have been recent rulings that product names in a
website
> > are
> >> > not indicators by themselves that consumers can be confused.
Basically,
> > DC
> >> > said that consumers will go to Nathan's site and be confused about
the
> >> > product offerings.
> >> >
> >> > It was more complicated than that, but this is the reader's digest
> >> > version.
> >> > I think DC was WAY off base in their attacks on Nathan, and many
others
> >> > for
> >> > that matter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Marc" <none@all.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:MPG.1c60be254354f497989696@netnews.mchsi.com. ..
> >> >> I'm somewhat new to the group, why was he sued by DC?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <l4DJd.19259$xu.18295@fed1read05>, jerrypb@***.net
says...
> >> >> > Is this the same Nathan W. Collier that swore publically MANY
times
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > he would never buy another Jeep after being sued by DC? Doesn't
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > make your second Jeep purchased since making that loud and
> >> >> > vociferous
> >> >> > pledge? ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> >> >> > > first some bonehead down at jeep corporate decides to drop
yellow
> > and
> >> > sienna
> >> >> > > from the wranger lineup (if either color were available it would
> > make
> >> > my
> >> >> > > color choice easy. if both were available, id probably flip a
> > coin).
> >> > next,
> >> >> > > some bonehead decides to replace the black top/flares with
> >> > grey...luckily
> >> >> > > that mistake was corrected. in preparing to order my '05
rubicon
> >> >> > > i
> >> > finally
> >> >> > > decided on another khaki with the black top/interior (just like
my
> >> >> > > '03
> >> >> > > http://7slotgrille.com/reviews/performance/doors/6.jpg ) and
when
> >> >> > > i
> >> > went
> >> >> > > down to make the final order, i found out for '05 some corporate
> >> > bonehead
> >> >> > > decided that you cannot get the khaki wrangler with the black
> >> > top/interior.
> >> >> > > you can get a green jeep (rolling off the same assembly line)
with
> > a
> >> > black
> >> >> > > top/interior, but you can only get the khaki top/interior on the
> >> >> > > khaki
> >> > jeep.
> >> >> > > i cant help but wonder what the hell these people are thinking
in
> >> > making
> >> >> > > stupid decisions like this. it just makes no sense why you can
> >> >> > > get
> >> > the
> >> >> > > black top/interior on EVERY color rubicon except the khaki. if
> >> >> > > you
> >> > have
> >> >> > > some insight on why this bonehead decision was made, please
share.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
DCs...
UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
jeep.com.
Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:CMmdnRloMOyFYGrcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Which is the basis of trademark law.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> news:Z7qdnXSA7pbhSGrcRVn-1Q@ez2.net...
> > The "legal" argument was that consumers could be confused that Nathan's
> > site
> > was somehow to be construed as an official site.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:hY6dnS4AyOlPDWrcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> >> You neglected to mention the pictures of nekkid wimmin on his website,
> > which
> >> D-C, the owner of the trademark "Jeep," objected to.
> >>
> >> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> >> news:RqednUxowbsbmmrcRVn-3g@ez2.net...
> >> > He used "jeep" in the URL to his website. DC got a little testy and
> > flexed
> >> > their muscles. I think that today, Nathan could probably fight them
and
> >> > win
> >> > because there have been recent rulings that product names in a
website
> > are
> >> > not indicators by themselves that consumers can be confused.
Basically,
> > DC
> >> > said that consumers will go to Nathan's site and be confused about
the
> >> > product offerings.
> >> >
> >> > It was more complicated than that, but this is the reader's digest
> >> > version.
> >> > I think DC was WAY off base in their attacks on Nathan, and many
others
> >> > for
> >> > that matter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Marc" <none@all.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:MPG.1c60be254354f497989696@netnews.mchsi.com. ..
> >> >> I'm somewhat new to the group, why was he sued by DC?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <l4DJd.19259$xu.18295@fed1read05>, jerrypb@***.net
says...
> >> >> > Is this the same Nathan W. Collier that swore publically MANY
times
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > he would never buy another Jeep after being sued by DC? Doesn't
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > make your second Jeep purchased since making that loud and
> >> >> > vociferous
> >> >> > pledge? ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> >> >> > > first some bonehead down at jeep corporate decides to drop
yellow
> > and
> >> > sienna
> >> >> > > from the wranger lineup (if either color were available it would
> > make
> >> > my
> >> >> > > color choice easy. if both were available, id probably flip a
> > coin).
> >> > next,
> >> >> > > some bonehead decides to replace the black top/flares with
> >> > grey...luckily
> >> >> > > that mistake was corrected. in preparing to order my '05
rubicon
> >> >> > > i
> >> > finally
> >> >> > > decided on another khaki with the black top/interior (just like
my
> >> >> > > '03
> >> >> > > http://7slotgrille.com/reviews/performance/doors/6.jpg ) and
when
> >> >> > > i
> >> > went
> >> >> > > down to make the final order, i found out for '05 some corporate
> >> > bonehead
> >> >> > > decided that you cannot get the khaki wrangler with the black
> >> > top/interior.
> >> >> > > you can get a green jeep (rolling off the same assembly line)
with
> > a
> >> > black
> >> >> > > top/interior, but you can only get the khaki top/interior on the
> >> >> > > khaki
> >> > jeep.
> >> >> > > i cant help but wonder what the hell these people are thinking
in
> >> > making
> >> >> > > stupid decisions like this. it just makes no sense why you can
> >> >> > > get
> >> > the
> >> >> > > black top/interior on EVERY color rubicon except the khaki. if
> >> >> > > you
> >> > have
> >> >> > > some insight on why this bonehead decision was made, please
share.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
01-26-2005, 05:59 PM
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
DCs...
UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
jeep.com.
Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:CMmdnRloMOyFYGrcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Which is the basis of trademark law.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> news:Z7qdnXSA7pbhSGrcRVn-1Q@ez2.net...
> > The "legal" argument was that consumers could be confused that Nathan's
> > site
> > was somehow to be construed as an official site.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:hY6dnS4AyOlPDWrcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> >> You neglected to mention the pictures of nekkid wimmin on his website,
> > which
> >> D-C, the owner of the trademark "Jeep," objected to.
> >>
> >> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> >> news:RqednUxowbsbmmrcRVn-3g@ez2.net...
> >> > He used "jeep" in the URL to his website. DC got a little testy and
> > flexed
> >> > their muscles. I think that today, Nathan could probably fight them
and
> >> > win
> >> > because there have been recent rulings that product names in a
website
> > are
> >> > not indicators by themselves that consumers can be confused.
Basically,
> > DC
> >> > said that consumers will go to Nathan's site and be confused about
the
> >> > product offerings.
> >> >
> >> > It was more complicated than that, but this is the reader's digest
> >> > version.
> >> > I think DC was WAY off base in their attacks on Nathan, and many
others
> >> > for
> >> > that matter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Marc" <none@all.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:MPG.1c60be254354f497989696@netnews.mchsi.com. ..
> >> >> I'm somewhat new to the group, why was he sued by DC?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <l4DJd.19259$xu.18295@fed1read05>, jerrypb@***.net
says...
> >> >> > Is this the same Nathan W. Collier that swore publically MANY
times
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > he would never buy another Jeep after being sued by DC? Doesn't
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > make your second Jeep purchased since making that loud and
> >> >> > vociferous
> >> >> > pledge? ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> >> >> > > first some bonehead down at jeep corporate decides to drop
yellow
> > and
> >> > sienna
> >> >> > > from the wranger lineup (if either color were available it would
> > make
> >> > my
> >> >> > > color choice easy. if both were available, id probably flip a
> > coin).
> >> > next,
> >> >> > > some bonehead decides to replace the black top/flares with
> >> > grey...luckily
> >> >> > > that mistake was corrected. in preparing to order my '05
rubicon
> >> >> > > i
> >> > finally
> >> >> > > decided on another khaki with the black top/interior (just like
my
> >> >> > > '03
> >> >> > > http://7slotgrille.com/reviews/performance/doors/6.jpg ) and
when
> >> >> > > i
> >> > went
> >> >> > > down to make the final order, i found out for '05 some corporate
> >> > bonehead
> >> >> > > decided that you cannot get the khaki wrangler with the black
> >> > top/interior.
> >> >> > > you can get a green jeep (rolling off the same assembly line)
with
> > a
> >> > black
> >> >> > > top/interior, but you can only get the khaki top/interior on the
> >> >> > > khaki
> >> > jeep.
> >> >> > > i cant help but wonder what the hell these people are thinking
in
> >> > making
> >> >> > > stupid decisions like this. it just makes no sense why you can
> >> >> > > get
> >> > the
> >> >> > > black top/interior on EVERY color rubicon except the khaki. if
> >> >> > > you
> >> > have
> >> >> > > some insight on why this bonehead decision was made, please
share.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
DCs...
UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
jeep.com.
Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:CMmdnRloMOyFYGrcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Which is the basis of trademark law.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> news:Z7qdnXSA7pbhSGrcRVn-1Q@ez2.net...
> > The "legal" argument was that consumers could be confused that Nathan's
> > site
> > was somehow to be construed as an official site.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:hY6dnS4AyOlPDWrcRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> >> You neglected to mention the pictures of nekkid wimmin on his website,
> > which
> >> D-C, the owner of the trademark "Jeep," objected to.
> >>
> >> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
> >> news:RqednUxowbsbmmrcRVn-3g@ez2.net...
> >> > He used "jeep" in the URL to his website. DC got a little testy and
> > flexed
> >> > their muscles. I think that today, Nathan could probably fight them
and
> >> > win
> >> > because there have been recent rulings that product names in a
website
> > are
> >> > not indicators by themselves that consumers can be confused.
Basically,
> > DC
> >> > said that consumers will go to Nathan's site and be confused about
the
> >> > product offerings.
> >> >
> >> > It was more complicated than that, but this is the reader's digest
> >> > version.
> >> > I think DC was WAY off base in their attacks on Nathan, and many
others
> >> > for
> >> > that matter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Marc" <none@all.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:MPG.1c60be254354f497989696@netnews.mchsi.com. ..
> >> >> I'm somewhat new to the group, why was he sued by DC?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> In article <l4DJd.19259$xu.18295@fed1read05>, jerrypb@***.net
says...
> >> >> > Is this the same Nathan W. Collier that swore publically MANY
times
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > he would never buy another Jeep after being sued by DC? Doesn't
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > make your second Jeep purchased since making that loud and
> >> >> > vociferous
> >> >> > pledge? ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> >> >> > > first some bonehead down at jeep corporate decides to drop
yellow
> > and
> >> > sienna
> >> >> > > from the wranger lineup (if either color were available it would
> > make
> >> > my
> >> >> > > color choice easy. if both were available, id probably flip a
> > coin).
> >> > next,
> >> >> > > some bonehead decides to replace the black top/flares with
> >> > grey...luckily
> >> >> > > that mistake was corrected. in preparing to order my '05
rubicon
> >> >> > > i
> >> > finally
> >> >> > > decided on another khaki with the black top/interior (just like
my
> >> >> > > '03
> >> >> > > http://7slotgrille.com/reviews/performance/doors/6.jpg ) and
when
> >> >> > > i
> >> > went
> >> >> > > down to make the final order, i found out for '05 some corporate
> >> > bonehead
> >> >> > > decided that you cannot get the khaki wrangler with the black
> >> > top/interior.
> >> >> > > you can get a green jeep (rolling off the same assembly line)
with
> > a
> >> > black
> >> >> > > top/interior, but you can only get the khaki top/interior on the
> >> >> > > khaki
> >> > jeep.
> >> >> > > i cant help but wonder what the hell these people are thinking
in
> >> > making
> >> >> > > stupid decisions like this. it just makes no sense why you can
> >> >> > > get
> >> > the
> >> >> > > black top/interior on EVERY color rubicon except the khaki. if
> >> >> > > you
> >> > have
> >> >> > > some insight on why this bonehead decision was made, please
share.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
01-26-2005, 06:01 PM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Ditto.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
> DCs...
> UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
> jeep.com.
> Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
> DCs...
> UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
> jeep.com.
> Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
01-26-2005, 06:01 PM
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Ditto.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
> DCs...
> UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
> jeep.com.
> Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
> DCs...
> UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
> jeep.com.
> Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
01-26-2005, 06:01 PM
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
Ditto.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
> DCs...
> UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
> jeep.com.
> Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> Nobody was so totally braindead as to get confused between Nate's site and
> DCs...
> UNTIL DC chose to capitalise on it by re-directing hardcorejeep.com to
> jeep.com.
> Really brainy given their distaste for nekkid babes ...
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
01-26-2005, 06:12 PM
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
The Sandman probably sold a couple extra Jeeps:
http://www.----------.com/hardcorejeep.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
http://www.----------.com/hardcorejeep.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
01-26-2005, 06:12 PM
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
The Sandman probably sold a couple extra Jeeps:
http://www.----------.com/hardcorejeep.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
http://www.----------.com/hardcorejeep.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
01-26-2005, 06:12 PM
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: boneheads at jeep corporate
The Sandman probably sold a couple extra Jeeps:
http://www.----------.com/hardcorejeep.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------
http://www.----------.com/hardcorejeep.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------