[Shotimes] RE: OT - Autoweek stuff

[Donald Mallinson]

Carl,

The one thing....nameplate importance, and how well the SHO 
did or didn't do aren't really related for purposes of the 
previous discussion.

You just seemed to be bewildered by why anyone would be 
loyal to a name or brand.  The facts are that for MOST of 
those that are buying more than just transportation, the 
enthusiasts, brand and even model within brand matters a 
lot.  As for the SHO having no predecessor, that is of 
course, true.  So is it true for Bel Air, Impala, Galaxie, 
RX7, Cobra, Corvette and Mustang.  EVERY name at one point 
was new.  The most successful names of course have lived on 
beyond a few years, thus Mustand, Corvette, the BMW 3 and 5 
series etc get to be legends.  SHO built a small cult 
following and is off the radar scope of most enthusiasts, 
now that the car has been out of production for 5 years. 
This is normal and no surprise at all.  Few limited 
production nameplates achieve the legendary status of 
something like a GTO Pontiac.  The SHO has already joined 
the hallowed halls of orphan names like Edsel, Torino and 
many others that enjoyed some success, even if fleeting but 
were abandoned by the manufacturer, but are still loved by a 
small, loyal group of followers.

The reason for new nameplates is to try to build a brand 
without the baggage of the previous model.  Ford management 
in general and the dealer body in particular don't have warm 
fuzzy feelings about the SHO, so the likelyhood of our 
favorite Ford coming back in the future is real low. 
Sometimes though, manufacturers toss away model names for no 
good reason.

Don Mallinson

Carl Prochilo wrote:

> You just made an argument that says nameplate matters.  That's fine.
> 
> Just remember that by the same token, the SHO had no predecessor. 
> When the car was launched it was a "star" and did build up a cult
> following despite some obvious design flaws.  I still contend that
> Ford can at least compete with BMW on price/performance if they took
> it as seriously as they took the Mustang.  So in this case one could
> argue that not associating a new car with past model might be
> better.