Re: An interesting discussion on the Hemmings blog...

Posted by Mahoning63 On 2013/7/11 19:05:39

su8 - you gotta give hard data if you want to make your case stick because most of what you said is opinion, not fact. Show me a quick & dirty business case with the basics... engineering/design/testing, tooling, facility, marketing, unit revenue, volume, gross margin, amortization and profit/loss... that proves that Packard couldn't make money on a post-war breakeven of 50-80K. Had their breakeven been 300K I wouldn't bother asking, you'd be within a foot of the hole and I'd say pick your ball up. But 50-80K, that's outside 5 feet and you'll need to putt out.

Responsible books stick to describing Packard's demise? No they don't, they're riddled with opinion. There is no parallel universe in which Packard could have been saved? Says who, the historians? How could they or anyone possibly know? The folks running the company in the Forties only knew B-O-P? Then what were the Customs? The company went outside for Torsion-Level, proving that Packard had changed? So did Macauley when he hired van Ranst to investigate FWD. Had it worked nobody would have ever held it against EGB. And finally, the broadest sweeper of them all... all the Independents were (...cue the thunder and lightening...) DOOOOMED!!! Says who, the historians again? They may have been divine in the eyes of the publishing companies that made lots of money off them but sorry, my Ghostbusters's sniffer just isn't picking up anything other-worldly.

Seriously, if we are going to stick to the facts lets all be held to the same standard.