Re: SP merger

Posted by Mahoning63 On 2015/3/8 13:10:50

"I really don't see a viable role for Studebaker. They could make a junior Hudson, to replace the Jet, but, in the mid 50s, there were not enough compacts being sold to keep the entire South Bend complex running, and, for reasons already discussed, it was impossible for Studebaker to offer a product that could compete with Ford and Chevy."


Here's one way to have measured the usefulness of Studebaker at the end of 1955 and, for that matter, Hudson at the end of 1953.

Packard sold 300K units from 1946-49 and another 300K from 1950-53. In those same timeframes Hudson sold 500K and 350K of its larger cars, respectively, which was a tremendous pool of existing Hudson owners to target as repeat customers. And the Hudson buyers from 1948 on clearly liked their step-downs. To offer a step-down to existing Packard owners would have been a lessor risk than a taller body-on-frame Packard to Hudson owners.

With Studebaker it would have been more or less the same logic. From 1946-49 they sold 1M units, from 1950-55 another 1M units, and they had lots of dealers who had built relationships with their customers. Compare this to the number of Hudson Jets that would have been sold from 1953-55 had the model remained available. Probably 65K, being charitable. It's not unreasonable that Nance, as he thought about the next Jet, might have concluded that there was more volume potential in growing closer to Studebaker Champion in size. And he would have been watching Studebaker the whole time, knowing the size of their existing owner base, dealership base and volume potential. When late 1955 came and Studebaker finally conceded defeat, Nance would have already had his plans fairly well laid, the '57 Jet a year into development and a Studebaker front and rear clip easily created in time for new model intro.