I'm the first to admit that I don't know what it is that I don't know. And I don't know what I don't know about this.
Re: THE SURVIVOR RESPONDS in this month's TW by Stu Chapman, and some old post comments on this forum, what is "the merger of early '65"? Is this something that everyone (but me) knows about, so it is second-hand commentary? Something no one wants to bring up in decent company? Who the heck was the merger to be with? My biggest question is the WHO? (No, not the great band).
Very intriguing article as a follow-up to the earlier letters and commentary, including that which appeared on this forum. I was raised as a member of a Studebaker family, and accepted them as a part of life, unquestioned. Never knew about the corporate/administrative side of the business. Now it's amazing to learn about this side.
'50 Champion, 1 family owner
Re: THE SURVIVOR RESPONDS in this month's TW by Stu Chapman, and some old post comments on this forum, what is "the merger of early '65"? Is this something that everyone (but me) knows about, so it is second-hand commentary? Something no one wants to bring up in decent company? Who the heck was the merger to be with? My biggest question is the WHO? (No, not the great band).
Very intriguing article as a follow-up to the earlier letters and commentary, including that which appeared on this forum. I was raised as a member of a Studebaker family, and accepted them as a part of life, unquestioned. Never knew about the corporate/administrative side of the business. Now it's amazing to learn about this side.
'50 Champion, 1 family owner
Comment