What Would a GM-Chrysler Merger Mean?
With the American automotive industry trying to become relevant again, the news that General Motors and Chrysler are discussing a merger has led to some concern in the garage area. And while no one believes the loss of one of the circuit's four automakers would be a devastating blow, two officials that I spoke to acknowledged that it wouldn't be an easy road to travel either.

"You deal with it when it happens," said Robin Pemberton, NASCAR's vice president of competition. "We didn't always have four manufacturers; we didn't always have three. We used to just have GM and Ford. One of the things to always remember is we have drivers, crews and team owners. We make rules and regulations on the cars that are out there available to drive.

"We're not trying to be smug about it," he added, "but they are basically big sponsors. We didn't have any manufacturer participation in the late 1970s -- virtually none. Junior Johnson had a decent Chevy deal at the time and Richard Childress lived off that quite a bit. The Pettys were independent. They would run an Oldsmobile on one track and a Chevrolet Monte Carlo on another one and a Chevy Caprice on another. Kyle Petty would run a Dodge Charger. That was all out of the same stable."

Added NASCAR's Jim Hunter, "The questions to be asked would be what models? Would they pick a car? Would it be Chevrolet or Dodge or would they run both? We have no idea. In the history of this sport, manufacturers have been in and out all the time, going back to 1957 when AMA banned motorsports participation by the manufacturers. In 1964, Big Bill France banned the Chrysler Hemi engines, so it was all Fords. But I still think what wins on Sunday sells on Monday, even in a weakened economy. People relate to what they drive and what their favorite driver drives. That's a given.

"I would not like to see this with no factory participation," Hunter added, "because both the dollars and the support they give the teams help drive the economical engine. However, we have raced before with no manufacturer support before. When there is no manufacturer support, teams will pick a car that is the best car out there. Hopefully, this will eventually work its way out, as it always has. Some may make it and some won't."

Views: 28

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

"But I still think what wins on Sunday sells on Monday"Jim hunter is living in 1957 back then you could go down to a dealer Monday morning and buy the exact same car you saw win on Sunday.today there are so far from something you could go to a dealer and buy that it is stupidity to think that this is true. if there was no name on the car you could not tell which manufacture was backing it.IMO
All Hunter needed to do was to walk into an Atlanta Chevy dealer Monday evening and ask how many Impala's they sold that day.
Trust me it makes a difference. People who follow Nascar are upwards of around 50% more likely to buy a Toyota, Chevrolet, Ford, or Dodge than they are to buy any other vehicle. It's pretty cheap bang for you buck too compared to other forms of advertisement.
If the economy continues to tank, NASCAR will be a full-blown spec series by 2011. Teams will lease spec engines from a single supplier, no manufacturer support or representation. Thirty competitors will compete for the NASCAR Championship in equally prepared "Thunderbolts" or whatever dumb-ass name the Daytona Beach brain trust dreams up.
Here's what I think about Hunter et-al...

RSS

© 2024   Created by TOG.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service