Packard Forum Index » Studebaker Built Packards (1957 - 58)

It's amazing the number of "rare" cars there are available when you go looking for them. And a lot of other things too I imagine.

The internet makes a huge difference in finding all kinds of things. Not that they weren't out there all the time. But now you can find them with a few mouse clicks.

mine are 55-56s, but all 3 of mine were located within a 30 mile radius of my house! it was weird. awsome, but weird

GTO you stated that Packard bought Studebaker, I must be misinformed. I thought it was the other way around. Which is correct? With the last article I read the way the stocks split up, it looked as though Studebaker was the majority share holder, please advise, thanks

Quote:

I got into one hell of an argument at a car show with a guy who claimed just this, that Studebaker bought Packard. When I told him to bring his documented proof the next day to the show, he just scoffed at me and started to walk away. That's when my notorious smart mouth popped off and I said "That's what I thought, another know it all that doesn't know $hit". Never seen him again!

The guy's around me were on the ground laughing so hard they were crying!

I've had similar experiences at general car shows ESPECIALY from Packard owners who show up. The problem is that the name was changed to SP not PS. So many think that Studebaker took over Packard.

Some grey haired old fart at a general antique car meet and driving a less than professional looking restored 51 or 52 jr looked over at my 56 Exec. and remarked "oh that's a Studebaker". I'm sure he knew better. I replied in some manner the same way Eric replied and walked away.

Of course many will consider this an "attitude" problem. THe worse thing that can happen is to let the "experts" get away with painting pictures the way THEY want it to look for THEIR own agenda.

Noone is sending me any paychecks to paint the sisteen chapel or carve any staues of david the way they want it look. I doubt that anyone is sending Eric any similar paychecks either.

Quote:

A case could be made for both points of view. In the book by James A. Ward The Fall of the Packard Motor Car Company, about halfway through the chapter entitled "The Shotgun Wedding", starts the detailed description of the shares and how things were "manipulated" so each company, despite the different prices and outstanding shares, thought they had the best part of the deal in the new company. I think it was quite the performance and based on things apparently done today, would fit right in.

Quote:

Nope, no paychecks here either....

Packard58wagon asks about the purchase of Studebaker by Packard.In the book "Packard, a history of the Motor car and the company" published by Automobile Quarterly and edited by Beverly Rae Kimes on page 575 "But the Studebaker-Packard combination was no merger, inspite of the repeated use of that designation by automotive Historians and Publications.In an agreement dated June 22nd, the terms stated:Packard desires to purchase and Studebaker desires to sell... all the property and assets of Studebaker, including its name, business and good will, in exchange soley for shares of Packard voting stock an assumption by Packard of substantially all liabilities of Studebaker"

GTO, et al

It was Packard's money. Studebaker had been a pauper since Erskine used their cash to pay dividends during the Depression. We all know what happened when he reconsidered...


JHH

One thing that astonishes me is how fast Studebaker and Packard ran out of money.

They had 10 excellent years from 1939 to 1949, the lush profits of the war years plus the post war seller's market when they could sell every car they made. Yet 5 years later they were on the ropes and nearly bankrupt.