I think you are close to the money on this, except consider
that there are many valuable collectible orphan marques out
there which are no longer made - and when they were made
were not the big volume sellers either.
Some of these cars have appreciated nicely in value
because they have strong clubs behind them and because the
people in the clubs care in addition to all of the other
reasons that people collect cars. In the case of Plymouth I
doubt that the values of the special models; Prowler, Cudas,
Furys, etc will suffer at all and in fact will most likely
appreciate. A Savoy sedan may not see much of an
appreciation but it wouldn't have made much difference
anyway because its owner most likely didn't buy it with a
profit motive in mind.
As to a choice of which "rust bucket" to choose, I think
that choice has always been there and the decision to
restore one over another is usually based on one of two
reasons - if for profit then the choice will be obvious, but
if for a nostalgic reason, then the end value won't matter
much. Whether or not Plymouth still made cars doesn't enter
that equation.
Yes, there are more Chevy fans out there and that generates
the market today but the crazy values of 57 Chevies has only
to do with current demand from collectors and little to do
with its initial success since Ford outsold it in 57 anyway!
Finally, I totally disagree with your assessment of
Chrysler:
"By comparison, Chrysler Corporation has a history of
unwanted products and poor management. I say this latest
debacle will go down in history as yet another corporate
bungle."
In fact Chrysler has many desirable, valuable and wanted
products - especially the muscle cars of the 60s & 70s and
the Classic Chryslers of the 30s. The Plymouth decision will
go down in history as only a business decision as did the
DeSoto, Hudson, Nash, Studebaker, Packard, Edsel and other
make elimination decisions. You have to get real about this
decision!
Brian
57 Dodge D500s
Jan Van Hoy wrote:
>
> The current success of a marque has a direct correlation to the value of
> collecting older models. Compare the values of orphan cars to Chevrolets or
> Fords of the same vintage and original price range. Is a '57 Bel Air
> convertible "worth" $30,000 because it's a better car, or because there are
> more Chevrolet fanatics out there?
>
> Not only are your restored Plymouths going to depreciate and be less
> marketable, but there will be less restorations. If you find two rust
> buckets that each will take the same amount of time and effort to restore,
> but one will be worth twice as much when completed, which one is the average
> person going to choose?
>
> Sure making and selling cars is a business, but it is the average, ordinary
> person or family that ultimately decides what makes and models will be
> popular. Much as I've grown to hate GM, they have a solid history of making
> cars that people want, and making people want their cars, clear back to
> Alfred Sloan. By comparison, Chrysler Corporation has a history of unwanted
> products and poor management. I say this latest debacle will go down in
> history as yet another corporate bungle.
>
> Whether you're the sort who takes action, or the kind that goes back out to
> the garage to work on your ForwardLook car, this current situation is going
> to make an impact on you. Would those of the former category please tell us
> who to contact in case we want to make our opinions known?
>
> --Roger van Hoy, '55DeSoto, '42DeSoto, '66Plymouth, '73Duster.
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network