play

["Mahoney, John" <jmahoney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>
Hello everyone, been overseas for the past five weeks and still haven't
gotten the latest edition to my herd back to SoCal, a clean 67 440 SW that I
picked up in Las Vegas a month ago. Right now it's in barstow with a clogged
radiator and a BW auto that won't shift in to third gear.
<<

The '67 Rambler Las Vegas edition was so rare that AMC was ahead of both
Ford ('68 CS/HCS) and of itself ('69 500 Special) in the establishment of
limited editioning.    

http://www.californiaspecial.com/history.htm

http://www.amxfiles.com/amx/cal500.txt

Being mean?  No, being silly.  Or serious?

In Winter '05 DCX (die-cast model magazine not German-American car company)
is a car that inspired the AMX/3 (6-7, 96), a car that inspired the Spirit
fastback (77), and a plane that inspired the AMX hood (84-90); Packard
Merlin, not AMC Marlin mentioned.  Remember the P51D and the Me262 this
coming Saturday: on 11/6/44, Chuck Yeager scored a hit with "Glamorous Glen"
(named for his future wife, Glennis), but despite near-hits on "friends"
(Dodge Dart and Ford Maverick) or family ('41 Willys), no real AMCs are to
be found.  Miuras, Vignales and Mustangs?  No Matadors?

Oh well, in 10/04 Scale Auto (13), Johan's '59 Rambler CC wagon kit is
profiled.  An AMC.  No 3-D glasses required.

You expect to see Studebaker, Buick and '55 Plymouth Plaza (two-door post)
in rodding magazines; you don't read 'em to see AMC mentioned.  12/04 Super
Rod surprises with a perfect [burgundy-purple] '71 Javelin (128) that is
"seldom seen [especially this well done.]"  Seen outside little AMC circles,
that is, clearly...

11/04 HR surprises further as Brutsman (68) asks, "Just once, couldn't they
build ... a Gremlin?"  Same old, same old?  Maybe there's something about
the people who build AMC cars.  Or maybe AMC people can't afford Chip
Fooses?

Maybe AMC can attract a younger crowd to its party.

That can't hurt the good ole, old, OLD! AMC future.

>>
My take on this is to try to atract the young crowd to your car dealership--
or at least the people who are willing to spend a lot of money on a model of
car....

My opinion is that the introduction of the (R-11) Turbo Encore would have
done this, and at that time it was just a HOT car-- screamer, cool and the
like..and would have drawn attention-- instead of starting a car line,
running it for 4 years and then trying to boost sales at the END of it's run
with theintroduction of the USA 'GTA'
<<

Another "Learning from AMC" lesson Big-3 Detroit forgot: the 2.0L 170-hp '04
SVT Focus replaced by the 2.3L 145-hp ST just as competition (from 160-hp
Scion to 300-hp Subaru) keeps raising their ante?  Mitsubishi is almost an
AMC as it pumps up the Lancer.  Even Chevy sees a future in 205-hp FWD
marketing.  Beyond drive, what about train?  No Euro Focus (you'll have to
click within this site...)  

http://www.ford.co.uk/

for us either; it's not coming to the US for awhile.  Why?  Not to rob sales
from an "all-new" Mustang during its highest-profit "must-have" initial few
seasons?  Ten years later, will Gen Y buy Fords and Lincolns or Acuras and
upscale Hyundais?  Did Brokaw's "greatest generation" buy Hudsons and
Packards or Lincolns and Cadillacs?  If car companies can't build cars for
both today's and tomorrow's buyers, eventually, they can't count car buyers
at all. 

>>
<http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/ufirst1111111/slideshow?.dir=/da18&.sr>

It looks spectacular. Not only, it photographs well, not all colors look so
good online.
<<

And, unlike what Ford is doing, it's avanti! (the concept, not the car, that
is): the similarly-violet Dark Cherry Pearl --- considered both "expensive
looking" to hot females and "not girlie" to cool males --- is among top
colors (Detroit probably doesn't read scionlife.com message boards 4 market
info so probably thinks that Dark Cherry is a GM color from the '90s...)
today's buyers are willing to pay a premium for.  If car companies can sell
cars at or near MSRP numbers today and tomorrow, eventually, they can become
unstoppable.

GM became unstoppable in the '50s-'60s, VW became unstoppable in the
'60s-'70s, Japan became unstoppable in the '80s-'90s.  Can Ford (which
continues to loose an alarming amount of market share) become unstoppable in
the '00s by selling trucks or NOS (new old style) Mustangs?  Can Chrysler
(which continues to lose repeat buyers to Asian makes) become unstoppable by
hyping HEMI power when Honda hypes trucks?  Can GM (which continues to not
loose as much market share as Ford only by piling rebates upon rebates ---
$10,000 on deVilles and $5500 on Azteks) become unstoppable by offering
fewer platforms and less style?  Or can they all become tomorrow's
Nash-Hudson-Studebaker-Packard-AMC?  It's not over; it's only begun.

In case anyone paints-by-the-numbers, in 1999, domestic makes had 68.5% of
US market share; in 2004, they're down to 59.1%.  And of that remaining
share, in 1999, domestic cars accounted for 51.6%; in 2004, they count for
45.6%.  When an energy crunch ends America's truckin' days, whose cars will
be bought?

Remember, no politician can produce cheap oil --- or create jobs.  (At least
not for anyone but themselves and their hangers-on...)