Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Studebaker Today? (If the Mercedes Benz Merger Had Been Completed)
Collapse
X
-
Studebaker Today? (If the Mercedes Benz Merger Had Been Completed)
HTIH (Hope The Info Helps)
Jeff
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain
Note: SDC# 070190 (and earlier...)Tags: None
-
Originally posted by Lou Van Anne View PostStudebaker was MB distributor.....I never heard of any merger talk?
It had no chance of happening in 1963. Studebaker was still teaching M-B how to sell in the American Market, too. Even though Studebaker had bigger problems themselves. Studebaker gave Mercedes it's "elite" market position by promoting it that way. They enjoy more "status" in the U.S. than in many other markets, and that is primarily because of the way Studebaker marketed them.
Comment
-
Example: My father was hired by Roth Plating, Studebaker's plating supplier, in 1959-1961. His first job was to buff down Mercedes bumpers damaged on the boat. If only one bumper was damaged, they had to re-plate both front and back because the Roth plating was so much brighter and shiny than the German plating.
Mechanically, the M-B's were solid. But, in those days, Europeans didn't care about things like paint runs and dull plating.
Studebaker taught M-B about the importance of aesthetics in the U.S. Market, for just one thing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 8E45E View PostI read Chrysler got MB's hand-me-downs.
Craig
Comment
-
On the other hand, my wife owned a Mercedes manufactured in the middle years of the Mercedes/Chrysler partnership, and the quality of that car was awful. The body started to rust thru after 3 years and out of warranty, there were multiple mechanical problems, and the repair costs were Mercedes high. Although she loved that car, we got rid of it after 4 years. And every Mercedes that I have personally looked at from that time frame had similar issues.
Frankly, I think that Chrysler almost destroyed Mercedes, not the other way around, by bringing Mercedes quality down. Have you ever seen a Sprinter Van from that era? They were also prone to rust thru. I almost bought one, but decided to wait a few years; glad I waited, because I would have been sorely disappointed. Never did buy one; bought a Chevy van instead, and traded it in 8 years later almost rust free.
I can't comment on the outcome of a Mercedes/Studebaker partnership except to say that it would have been interesting.
just my observations and experience.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hulleywoodworking View PostFrankly, I think that Chrysler almost destroyed Mercedes, not the other way around, by bringing Mercedes quality down.
This resulted in a drop in M-B quality, and as a Chrysler customer at the time, also a HUGE drop in quality at Mopar. My 2007 Town & Country was junk compared to all my previous Mopars. The "merger" did neither company any favors, because much of each company's independence was destroyed. It also caused hard feelings at both companies that were never overcome.
Comment
-
Originally posted by drpreposterous View PostI've heard it suggested in more than one corner that Mercedes plundered Chrysler for operating capital.
Back in 1963, Studebaker Automotive was hemorrhaging money. It's hard to imagine Mercedes wanting Studebaker for anything other than their dealer network. Which ironically, is why Fiat was interested in Chrysler (besides Jeeps and Trucks). It's hard to imagine any merger scenario that would have benefitted Studebaker in 1963. Probably why the M-B Sales Division just went out on their own.
A good read for anyone interested in the Chrysler story is: "Taken For A Ride - How Daimler-Benz Drove Off With Chrysler" by Bill Vlasic & Bradley A. Stertz. Likely used copies available on eBay.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 556063 View PostThe main motivation for Mercedes in the Chrysler situation was to become big enough to avoid Mercedes becoming a hostile takeover target.
Craig
Comment
-
Originally posted by 8E45E View PostI tend not to believe that. Craig
Comment
Comment