Here's a point to ponder.

[lstude]

quote:Bob Palma is the only one that has really addressed the situation here, economies of scale. Studebaker workers were the highest paid and their factories were the lowest producing, thus the unit costs were out of line with the rest of the industry. It is hard to win significant concessions from a vendor when you order 100,000 items a year versus the millions that would be bought by the Detroit manufacturers.

You're right, but I didn't address that because Bob said this:

Let's not mire the discussion with specific technical details. Let's assume, for the purpose of fancy, that Studebaker could have sold it for the same price that Ford did.

Leonard Shepherd

http://leonardshepherd.com/

[JRoberts]

Even if Studebaker could have produced the Mustang, did it have the bucks to advertise it, putting it out in front of the publci, that Ford did at the time. It was mentioned earlier that Ford was in some finacial difficulty at the time, but was that difficulty so bad that it couldn't out advertise somebody like Studebaker at the time?

Joe Roberts

[JRoberts]

Even if Studebaker could have produced the Mustang, did it have the bucks to advertise it, putting it out in front of the publci, that Ford did at the time. It was mentioned earlier that Ford was in some finacial difficulty at the time, but was that difficulty so bad that it couldn't out advertise somebody like Studebaker at the time?

Joe Roberts

[8E45E]

quote:Originally posted by JRoberts

Even if Studebaker could have produced the Mustang, did it have the bucks to advertise it, putting it out in front of the publci, that Ford did at the time. It was mentioned earlier that Ford was in some finacial difficulty at the time, but was that difficulty so bad that it couldn't out advertise somebody like Studebaker at the time?

Joe Roberts

I believe that was one of the main factors to the Mustang's success was the advertising & marketing of it. And of course, ready availability!! As Studebaker found out with the Avanti, you got to have the product in stock at your local dealer's as the Mustang was. As for Ford being in financial difficulty at that point; no way! Ford was on a roll even before the Mustang. When the T-bird was made into a 4-seater, sales exceeded expectations, The regular Ford and Mercury line did well. The Falcon did exceptionally well (at the expense of the Lark), and they repeated it again with the Intermediate size Fairlane in 1962. That car caught GM off guard before the Mustang did. The 'A' body GM's didn't come out as an intermediate until 1964. AMC tried to go with a 'full line' approach with the compact American and Intermediate size Classic and 'almost' full-size Ambassador, and their answer to the Mustang, the Marlin. AMC lost more money in 1967 than Studebaker did in it's worst year ($75.8 million v.s 43.8 million)

Now to answer Bob's question if Studebaker came out with the Mustang exactly as Ford did? I would vote YES, going by what happened in 1959 with the Lark. It happened then, and I almost believe it would have happened again in Studebaker's favor.

Craig

[8E45E]

quote:Originally posted by JRoberts

Even if Studebaker could have produced the Mustang, did it have the bucks to advertise it, putting it out in front of the publci, that Ford did at the time. It was mentioned earlier that Ford was in some finacial difficulty at the time, but was that difficulty so bad that it couldn't out advertise somebody like Studebaker at the time?

Joe Roberts

I believe that was one of the main factors to the Mustang's success was the advertising & marketing of it. And of course, ready availability!! As Studebaker found out with the Avanti, you got to have the product in stock at your local dealer's as the Mustang was. As for Ford being in financial difficulty at that point; no way! Ford was on a roll even before the Mustang. When the T-bird was made into a 4-seater, sales exceeded expectations, The regular Ford and Mercury line did well. The Falcon did exceptionally well (at the expense of the Lark), and they repeated it again with the Intermediate size Fairlane in 1962. That car caught GM off guard before the Mustang did. The 'A' body GM's didn't come out as an intermediate until 1964. AMC tried to go with a 'full line' approach with the compact American and Intermediate size Classic and 'almost' full-size Ambassador, and their answer to the Mustang, the Marlin. AMC lost more money in 1967 than Studebaker did in it's worst year ($75.8 million v.s 43.8 million)

Now to answer Bob's question if Studebaker came out with the Mustang exactly as Ford did? I would vote YES, going by what happened in 1959 with the Lark. It happened then, and I almost believe it would have happened again in Studebaker's favor.

Craig

[Roscomacaw]

Well, thanks to at least Leonard and Clark for seeing my question. See, I distinctly said: "Forget all the details. We already know that stuff and since this is just fancy, we won't burden the dream with reality. Let's just say, the new '65 Mustangs (Falcon would be better because it would be in keeping the the bird species theme - Hawk Lark, Falcon [:I]) are at your Studebaker dealers at a competitive price (compared to anything similar). Would John Q Public have pounced or would the stigma of Studebaker have kept them from ever being a hit. REMEMBER NOW...... It hadn't been but a couple of years past that they'd pulled off a hat trick with the Lark -

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle


1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe

[Roscomacaw]

Well, thanks to at least Leonard and Clark for seeing my question. See, I distinctly said: "Forget all the details. We already know that stuff and since this is just fancy, we won't burden the dream with reality. Let's just say, the new '65 Mustangs (Falcon would be better because it would be in keeping the the bird species theme - Hawk Lark, Falcon [:I]) are at your Studebaker dealers at a competitive price (compared to anything similar). Would John Q Public have pounced or would the stigma of Studebaker have kept them from ever being a hit. REMEMBER NOW...... It hadn't been but a couple of years past that they'd pulled off a hat trick with the Lark -

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle


1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe

[8E45E]

quote:Originally posted by Mr.Biggs
REMEMBER NOW...... It hadn't been but a couple of years past that they'd pulled off a hat trick with the Lark -

Provided the product was "available and on the shelf", indeed, it would have sold well. The '59 Lark already proved that Studebaker could succeed for having the right product at the right time at the right price and in your dealers showroom right now! Nothing went 'wrong' at the Lark at introduction time like what happened to the '53 C/K's and the Avanti to snafu sales. But you could only bet the Big Three would have had a reply to a Studebaker-like Mustang in short order, though!!

Craig

[8E45E]

quote:Originally posted by Mr.Biggs
REMEMBER NOW...... It hadn't been but a couple of years past that they'd pulled off a hat trick with the Lark -

Provided the product was "available and on the shelf", indeed, it would have sold well. The '59 Lark already proved that Studebaker could succeed for having the right product at the right time at the right price and in your dealers showroom right now! Nothing went 'wrong' at the Lark at introduction time like what happened to the '53 C/K's and the Avanti to snafu sales. But you could only bet the Big Three would have had a reply to a Studebaker-like Mustang in short order, though!!

Craig

[bondobilly]

quote:Originally posted by BobPalma


The company's last best chance was 1962, a year that would have seen 100,000 cars again produced

Didn't Studebaker have a marketing issue back then? They were part of the "low priced three" yet their GT Hawk when fully loaded came close to entry level Cadillac?

The other question that comes to mind is would the typical US customer accept a "new" vehicle from Studebaker, as for the 1942 photo kind of looks a lot like a Citroin (spelling?)

[bondobilly]

quote:Originally posted by BobPalma


The company's last best chance was 1962, a year that would have seen 100,000 cars again produced

Didn't Studebaker have a marketing issue back then? They were part of the "low priced three" yet their GT Hawk when fully loaded came close to entry level Cadillac?

The other question that comes to mind is would the typical US customer accept a "new" vehicle from Studebaker, as for the 1942 photo kind of looks a lot like a Citroin (spelling?)

[showbizkid]

quote:Originally posted by 8E45E

Provided the product was "available and on the shelf", indeed, it would have sold well. The '59 Lark already proved that Studebaker could succeed for having the right product at the right time at the right price and in your dealers showroom right now!

OK, I'll concede that point. But the rumors of Studebaker's demise by 1964 were so rampant that I'll bet many buyers would have walked away just because they didn't want to get stuck with an orphan. Look at 1964 model sales! Certainly the '64 restyle could be recognized as a warm-over if you knew where to look, but it was at least as sharp as anything AMC was building at the time. In fact, I personally consider the '64-'65 bodies to be beautifully contemporary, especially that front end.

And yet, look what happened - to paraphrase Yogi Berra, the public stayed away in droves. I just don't think Studebaker could have done anything at that point to convince people they were around to stay. (Well, maybe if they'd produced the Sceptre... )


[img=left]http://members.cox.net/clarknovak/lark.gif[/img=left]

Clark in San Diego
'63 F2/Lark Standard

http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

https://www.studebakersandiego.com

[showbizkid]

quote:Originally posted by 8E45E

Provided the product was "available and on the shelf", indeed, it would have sold well. The '59 Lark already proved that Studebaker could succeed for having the right product at the right time at the right price and in your dealers showroom right now!

OK, I'll concede that point. But the rumors of Studebaker's demise by 1964 were so rampant that I'll bet many buyers would have walked away just because they didn't want to get stuck with an orphan. Look at 1964 model sales! Certainly the '64 restyle could be recognized as a warm-over if you knew where to look, but it was at least as sharp as anything AMC was building at the time. In fact, I personally consider the '64-'65 bodies to be beautifully contemporary, especially that front end.

And yet, look what happened - to paraphrase Yogi Berra, the public stayed away in droves. I just don't think Studebaker could have done anything at that point to convince people they were around to stay. (Well, maybe if they'd produced the Sceptre... )


[img=left]http://members.cox.net/clarknovak/lark.gif[/img=left]

Clark in San Diego
'63 F2/Lark Standard

http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

https://www.studebakersandiego.com

[Roscomacaw]

Actually Clark, as I understand it, the dealers were stuffed with unsold '63s and didn't WANT any 64s when they were still carrying a bunch of unsold inventory.

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle


1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe

[Roscomacaw]

Actually Clark, as I understand it, the dealers were stuffed with unsold '63s and didn't WANT any 64s when they were still carrying a bunch of unsold inventory.

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle


1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe