hellshighway.DeleteThis@popstar.com wrote:
> On Aug 27, 6:06 pm, Steve <n....DeleteThis@spam.thanks> wrote:
>
>>Bill Putney wrote:
>>
>>>NapalmHeart wrote:
>>
>>>>"NapalmHeart" <olson....DeleteThis@iserv.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:13cs7659rq5df9a@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>
>>>>>Is there a resident expert on the wing cars, specifically the
>>>>>Superbird? I recently had a coworker claim that all Superbirds were
>>>>>painted Petty blue. I know this isn't correct and would like to find
>>>>>a source for a listing of Superbird factory colors.
>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>
>>>>>Ken
>>
>>>>Thanks to all who replied. I've got the information that I need. I
>>>>think it's really something that a limited production car that dealers
>>>>had trouble selling almost 40 years ago can generate the response I
>>>>got here and in the other NG I posted in. Are you listening Mother
>>>>Mopar?
>>
>>>>Ken
>>
>>>What's the lesson for Mother Mopar? I thought then that they looked
>>>silly. I still think they look silly. 
>>
>>>Bill Putney
>>>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
>>>address with the letter 'x')
>>
>>And more importantly to Ma Mopar, they were a money losing proposition 
>
>
> Not really, it all depends on how you look at it.
> I believe any car that was built solely for the purpose of
> homologation lost money
> on the showroom floor due to the small number made.
> But if you look at it from the perspective that by having the car able
> to compete and
> most importantly WIN it ended up bringing more people into the
> showroom who then
> bought a Charger or even a Valiant instead. Then it was not a losing
> proposition.
> "Win on Sunday Sell on Monday" as the adage goes.
>
> I've actually heard that Ford lost money on every Escort that was
> produced but
> made it up on the Tauruses and Lincolns when people come in looking
> and
> ended up being upsold to a better car with a healthier padded sticker.
>
Well, the "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" theory has been around a long
time and may be true. But then its kinda hard to prove. What isn't hard
to prove is that Superbirds sat unsold for months and even years, and
were often sold at bargain prices or with their noses and wings bobbed
to look like regular Roadrunners (which were a huge money MAKER, by the
way).
If the Superbird has any "lesson" for a manufacturer its that from time
to time it is necessary to create a performance vehicle that generates a
heritage and collector interest, even if it isn't a huge market success.
Right now, Mopar has had a good run with the Viper, the Prowler is
already collectible, and odds are that the PT cruiser will have a
collector niche (although so many were built that it will be more like
collecting a Mustang or Roadrunner than a Superbird or Prowler). But
only the Viper has a race heritage. Of the American 3, I would say that
GM has most completely forgotten that lesson. Who wants to collect a
front-drive Malibu? The Corvette is the only collectible performance
car they've built in a long, long time, although they had a chance with
the GTO and blew it with lame styling.
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
