Packard Forum Index » General

Elsewhere around here is an analysis of the Ford and GM "floor plans" initiated in the 1950's. No dealer could compete against the floor plans. The increase in sales from the floor plans is inversely proportional to the decline is sales of the independents. Those are your numbers. It's analogous to an appliance dealer who relies on orders trying to compete against a department store that stocks a huge ready to deliver inventory.

When I refer to historians I'm referring to Hamlin, Heinmeuller, Terry Martin, Yost etal. History is always opinionated by virtue of omission. In the case of "The Car and the Company" history has been modified by giving total credit to the editor at the expense of the writers. It's a typical journalistic form of politics. One time I was talking to an editor who took full credit for something they didn't write and knew nothing about.

It's a curious thing that the old car hobby is so loaded with politics. These are, after all, just a bunch of junked cars. I even knew somebody who really didn't care about the cars but was in these clubs because he loved the politics.

Currently I'm reading a book about Lyndon Johnson written by somebody who claimed to be a cowboy. I don't believe he even wrote it. It is an interesting study in crackpot because of the page by page progression into madness. To be sure there are some valid points being made, but when the author calls General Eisenhower a left wing usurper of states rights I realize that this guy is nuts.

The wreckage of every single American independent automaker from Ajax to Willys doesn't provide sufficient evidence that American independents weren't going to survive? Sure, Nash made it into the early 80's (albeit moribund by then) but it was the very last of hundreds that had failed in decades prior.

And, while I am no economist, I'll go out on a limb and say that, among other things, consistently marketing extraordinarily crappy products nearly killed Chrysler in the 1980's; Daimler bleeding Chrysler dry and dumping the corpse on Cerberus Financial nearly killed it in 2008. Similarly, thirty-five years of garbage produced by the General (in addition to unsupportable legacy costs) drove GM into the ditch in 2008. So, no, size doesn't protect you from failure but it sure helps keep you in the game.

I am curious to see how Tesla fares as it seems to be operating in the mode of some of our beloved independents. If the all-electric market ever evolves beyond boutique status, I'd love to see the company thrive although I'd guess it, too, would be swallowed-up or crushed by larger firms.

Honestly, examining the fate of Peerless would be much more fun as it would include a discussion about beer...

Honestly, examining the fate of Peerless would be much more fun as it would include a discussion about beer...

Another top-end luxury mark that I'd enjoy reading more about the demise of, though a far smaller company than Packard, is Pierce Arrow. Unlike Packard (and Cadillac to a degree) they never moved significantly downmarket (you might make a modest argument for the Model 80/81) and lasted barely into 1938. Their purchase by Studebaker benefited them immensely in the short term and gave them perhaps another 6 years but in the end the real top-end luxury market simply wasn't the for them. It's interesting though that their engine lasted well into the 60s with Seagrave fire equipment.

A decent book on Pierce-Arrow is the one by Brooks Brierley though more info would be nice.

Hey, one of those independents is still here you know and very popular.

It's the Jeep (Willys) and they even badge a model called Overland. The only big problem with them was the CVT which has finally been dumped overboard. Proof that not all Jap engineering is better.

HEADLINE: Independents Turn Themselves In

Today the ghosts who led all the post-war independents to failure turned themselves in, admitting that they purposely drove their companies into the ground to make auto aficionados during the period 1960 - 2025 believe that bigness was king.

Said Edward Barit of Hudson: "I spent all our money on the Jet instead of a hot new Hornet, and made it as ugly as possible, to end the whole shebang. And have been laughing hysterically at the people who bought into the idea that we had "no chance" ever since! Was it worth it? The giddiness that came with mind control is intoxicating!! But now I am done, tired of keeping the scam going. Of course we could have saved Hudson. Do you think I'd be that bone-headed to do the Jet when our bread & butter needed tending too?

Nance, another suspect, also admitted to cooking history for the sake of purgatory laughs. "I didn't even know what a car was, and they hired me anyway! I told Barit: 'Let's see how your prototype large new Hudson runs with my V8.' Hottest thing you ever seen. Well... we sent that baby to the crusher before sundown, yes-sir-ee! Then I told my boys to rip up the production line, shove it somewhere else. Boy, did they shove it!"

George Mason also accepted blame. "It was agreed that I would come out looking like the one who knew what he was doing. You know... the one who said bigness was king and all that rubbish. That's what planted the seed in the heads of the folks we swindled. Every time my designers came up with a great design I said: 'That's fine Joe, real fine. Ah, why don't you put some fender skirts on the front wheels? And he would say: 'Hah?' And I would say: 'Just do it, son.'"

The police were tipped off by George Romney, who had refused to go along with the scam. "They wanted me to take the Rambler and put these googly-eyed things up front and one big shark fin down the middle of the trunk and I said: 'Are you kidding? They'll bust us in a Nevada second!' The others were livid when I cracked 400K sales per year. I said: 'this ain't noth'n, I'm just get'n started!' Well, they ousted me by the early Sixties, said they would embarrass me with some trumped up thing if I didn't leave. And they offered me a chance at the biggest job of them all. That's what tipped me over the edge, made me bolt. Just wish I hadn't gotten so used to their favorite word... brainwashing."

The defendants are being held on Cloud #238 without bond pending hearing.

At Last! The Mea Culpa! We knew it all along!

Steve

Mahoning63,
If I were an English professor with a minor in history you would get an A+ in my class!!

Thanks guys... all in fun and with full respect to opposing views.

Wait! What's this on the police radio....

"..................calling all cars...............calling all cars............be on the look-out for Hoffman and Vance"


NEWS FLASH: Former Studebaker Leaders Wanted For Questioning

The ghosts of Studebaker are now wanted for questioning in the scandal that has rocked over five decades of automotive history. Police this morning were informed of their involvement by JJ Nance, former president of Packard. According to his testimony, Harold Vance and Paul Hoffman were peripherally involved in the independent's plan to dupe historians by making everyone believe that all was hopeless for the little guys and bigness was king. "Sure, they were involved. Not directly, mind you... they didn't really understand what we were trying to do. But we certainly knew what they were trying to do... run Studebaker into the ground. Of course, we wanted that kind of talent on our side!"

One person familiar with Nance's statement said: "Nance didn't believe Vance new anything about the scam despite the fact that both of their names rhymed. Nor did Nance think Hoffman was aware. In fact, he said neither of them knew much about cars or the car industry, but someone apparently told them that in automotive purgatory the UAW folks would be allowed to 'bring their wrenches,' which scared the heck out of them. That's what prompted the generous wages and work rules."

In his official testimony, Nance is quoted as saying: "Look, my job was to bring down Packard, and the whole process was moving way too slow because the company had been so healthy and vital. Now, I'm a fella who likes to win, and I don't like good losers, and I wasn't about to leave the other independents at the quarter pole while I helplessly pulled ahead. That quarter pole was mine! In fact, Sloan laughed when I gave his GM horse a whip on the rear as he rode past! Now, in Studebaker I saw a way to accelerate Packard's demise, so I bought them. Had to practically give Packard away to do it, which made my work easier."

Another person familiar with the scandal said that "the conspirators didn't mind Studebaker surviving after 1956 because they knew the company would ultimately fail even without the conspirators' help. What the conspirators were worried about was that historians would correctly blame poor management instead of the excuse that 'forces beyond the poor little independents' control' were at play. But as it turned out, the ineptitude surrounding Studebaker rendered all historical opinions inconsequential." Another person familiar with the subject restated the last comment in plain English: "Nobody but a few diehards care how Studebaker fell."

In a related matter, Charlie Wilson has been cleared of any involvement in the conspiracy. It was originally thought that he steered work away from the independents and towards GM as part of the plan to blame all of the independents' ailments on outside forces. Evidence now suggests that when Ike became president, the Commander-In-Chief systematically sought to create a new type of military that relied less on mass armies and more on advanced technology of the type that Packard and others unfortunately were not producing nor much capable of producing given their weakened state, and that the defense and safety of all Americans was more important than hand-outs to has-beens.

I was looking at some Cadillac material that claimed Cadillac was oversold after 1949 and couldn't build cars fast enough. With the OHV V-8 and hydramatic people just loved Cadillac. It didn't hurt that Cadillac finished at LeMans either.

I think Packard made a big mistake by sharing dashboards with the Clipper. Rubber mats and austere interiors must have been a turnoff. The Buick Dynaflow was a pig but it had a fancy interior which helped it sell. Even Chevy had a fancier dashboard than Packard.

While I like Cadillac front end styling before 1955, with the advent of those hideous "Mae West" bumpers I think they look downright stupid. And I think the rear deck is definitely too heavy. But still, Packard interior styling was not up to the task.

IMO, I still think Packard missed the boat by not being more competive in the late 40's by not bringing out a modern OHV V-block. This is not to imply that a V-block could have saved Packard by itself but running the straight 8 till the mid 50's and still declaring itself as a luxury builder is to me a bit mystifying. I think the money they wasted on the Ultra-Matic could have been put into engine development; if they could produce Merlins under license and tweak them to make them better they could have had a modern V-8 by at least 49 if not earlier. An auto trans could have been procured the same way the other independents did. I have to agree on the interiors, they could have done better. Again, Packard probably would have gone away anyway but I will never understand what senior management was thinking in the immediate post-war years. These mis-steps paved the way for an earlier demise. Of course, IMO only.