the district court pointed out, however, Mr. Stephens’s statement that he “liked [Salina] a lot” is much closer to sales talk or his own expression of opinion than the positive affirmations commenting on the physical condition, ability to race, and athletic prowess of the horse in Travis. In fact, even Young interpreted Mr. Stephens’s statement to mean “that [Mr. Stephens] thought [Salina] was going to bring quite a bit of money.” Mr. Stephens’s statement did not create an express warranty, and thus we need not decide whether the warranty disclaimer of the COS bars any other outside warranty. Even so, we note that the Eastern District of Kentucky has repeatedly enforced the COS’s “as is” provision. See, e.g., Keeneland Ass’n, Inc. v. Hollendorfer, 986 F.Supp. 1070, 1073 (E.D.Ky.1997) (<HOLDING>); Keeneland Ass’n, Inc. v. Eamer, 830 F.Supp.
holding an arbitration clause contained in confirmations sent to buyer by seller was part of parties course of dealing and therefore part of the contract after buyer had repeated opportunities to object to the clause and had failed to do so holding buyer not entitled to rescission of sale based on unconscionability because of the coss as is clause which properly disclaims all express and implied warranties holding a provision in a contract for sale of a tractor disclaiming implied warranties of merchantability and fitness was not sufficiently conspicuous holding that buyer was saddled by the sale because the cos contains an as is clause and disclaims the existence of warranties either expressed or implied which are not contained therein holding that it is unreasonable for plaintiffs to rely on oral representations made before a contract when the contract contained a clause which expressed