Re: 2nd Round: How the Luxury Market Dominance was Lost
Posted by Mike T On 2010/2/17 0:01:39
Quote:
Actually the best merger would have been Nash and Packard, Both were financially healthy immediately after the war, whereas Studebaker and Hudson were not. Merging with Studebaker and Hudson just dragged Packard and Nash down. However I understand the presidents of Nash and Packard hated each other, making a merger impossible. Packard probably would have been better off forgetting about Studebaker and producing their own line of less expensive Clippers and significantly different from the Clippers senior Packards.
I agree that Studebaker and Hudson were the least healthy of the group. But Packard just forgetting about them and building there own different line of less expensive cars could'nt work. That's the problem Packard had all along. They just didn't have pockets deep enough to do it.
Think of it in modern terms. GM needs to have a fresh sub-compact on the market. Instead of spending losts of $$$$ developing there own from scratch. They make a deal (or acquire) and established model, say from Korea. Market it in the US as there own and make higher margins. Yes maybe Studebaker could be left out of the picture completely. So then that means that a current Hudson or Nash line becomes the new Clipper, and Packard stays everything that a Packard should be.
This Post was from: https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=47491