Re: Stuart Blond's History of Packard Revival Attempts

Posted by Craig the Clipper Man On 2016/8/16 14:05:17

Stuart has found several intriguing new designs for future Packards; but one must remember that in this day and age, it costs about $1 billion to take a car from concept to production, with no guarantees of public acceptance or success. Call me a pessimist, but I am of the belief that there will not be a new Packard automobile company during my lifetime.

That said, there are some alternatives that I have not seen mentioned. The Studebaker "Packard" was, like the 1955-56 Clipper, a model; not a brand. Studebaker was in the business of building Studebakers, not Packards. No one who looked at a 1958 Packard Hawk would be fooled into thinking that they were actually buying a genuine Packard. That Studebaker continued to use the Packard logo as long as it did was testament to the gravitas of the moniker itself.

Today, a car company could revive venerable names like Packard, Auburn, Pierce-Arrow, or Stutz as model names for their cars, as opposed to actual car manufactures. Take a new company like Tesla, for example. It has a generally positive public image, is of good quality, and is innovative. And it is an American manufacturer. I see no problem with linking various new models with names like Packard or Mercer. If anything I would see it as a compliment to the quality and innovativeness of those companies. I think it would also help Tesla (a retro name in and of itself!) with brand identity, since names are easier to remember than numbers.

Anyway, just my humble opinion. But at least this would revive Packard and other worthy names under the auspices of a high-quality luxury car manufacturer; as opposed to being "honored" as a kit car atop of a Ford or a Toyota!