Re: Hemmings Motor News June issue reprint of Romney interview...

Posted by Mahoning63 On 2013/5/11 18:05:16

Agree with Mr. Cole's assessment of modern management, Nance having been version 1.0

Romney seemed sensible in all aspects except expecting Packard to reciprocate by buying equivalent value of stampings to the V8. Which stampings??? Big Nashes? Rambler? New tooled parts in the '55 Packard such as front and rear fenders and rear door outers? The latter might have made sense had Briggs still been Packard's body stamper and builder but once Packard leased the Briggs plant from Chrysler it made no sense to farm out work to AMC when Packard now had it in house.

If Romney had expected that Packard would have turned to AMC for all body building and stamping for its 1955 line-up and never leased Conner, how did he think that would have worked? Most of the '55 Packard body was carryover, all of which was made in Conner. Truck all those tools to Wisconsin? Then have AMC stamp and build bodies, then ship mostly air back? Doesn't make sense. Base the '55 Packards on the dumpy Nash? And lose EGB's volume model and the financials that hinged on it? No. Romney couldn't seem to come to grips with the fact that AMC needed Packard's V8 and had little to offer in return.

As to su8's "which Packard"? The only Packard worth saving was the winning Packard of old.