Re: The Demise of the Independents

Posted by PackardV8 On 2017/4/3 14:06:59
Studebaker, Hudson and Nash suffered from a very sparse dealer network and poor parts availability practices.

NEW car sales are only as good as used car sales. If difficult to obtain service for the car then customers will not return to buy a new one.
As i understand it, Packard always had a good dealer networrk so i'm not sure why Packard failed. Probably failed due to same reason Chrysler failed: corporate inscest.

Show me ANY company, big or small that is full of in-laws,ex-laws and outlaws and i'll show u a company that isn't going to last more than a few years. That was Chryslers problem. Not sure about Packard.

Note that Studebaker often boasted in some of it's advertisements about fathers, sons and grand fathers working side by side in the company. A bad case of corporate incest.


FINANCING is another issue that may have contributed to the fall of the so-called "orphan" car companies..

This Post was from: https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=189990