I’m not an expert in automotive history by any means, but it just seems to me that there are a huge number of similarities between the current implosion in Detroit, and the death of Studebaker in the 1960s. Like the Big Three, Studebaker suffered from inept management, absurdly high labor costs, economic hardships, and, at the very least, an inability to get the government to care about their fate, if not outright malfeasance. They also were a victim of unfair competition, which, depending upon your perspective, the Big Three might also suffer from, as well. Towards the end of their days, even though many in the company knew that the end was at hand, there was a burst of creativity and innovation which was strangled in its crib, before it had a chance to have an impact upon the company. The resulting closure of the main plant once operated by Studebaker caused severe economic hardships in the community in which it was located for many years after, even if the country as a whole, was little impacted by this. Had the company been larger (and if the proposed merger between the four largest independent car makers gone through as planned, they would have formed a company larger than the smallest of the Big Three automakers at that time), it is possible that they wouldn’t have been allowed to fail, or if they had, the effects would have been much wider spread.
I know that it can be a bitch to read long posts on-line, so I’ve tried beak this up, and weed it down to the bare essentials as much as I can, but I’m sure many people are going to have TLDR reactions over this.
I had hoped to be able to reread Studebaker: The Life and Death of an American Corporation by Donald T. Critchlow before writing this, but I seem to have mislaid my copy of the book, so I’m going to have to write this from what I can remember and source from on-line materials. I’m not sure how folks can benefit from what I know, but I’ll leave that up to wiser minds than mine.
Studebaker’s first crisis came, as is somewhat expected, from the Great Depression. It was not the lack of demand, however, that caused their problems. On the contrary, when the Depression hit, Studebaker was flush with cash, having been highly profitable in the years leading up to the Stock Market Crash. No, what harmed the company was the reaction of their president to the Crash.
Instead of hoarding the profits of the company to tide it through the Depression, he paid out one of the largest dividends in the history of Studebaker. His reasoning was that not only would the payouts stimulate the economy, but they’d also inspire the heads of other corporations to do the same. This, he was certain, would turn the economy around. Naturally, the money Studebaker paid out wasn’t enough to change things, and nobody else chose to follow his lead. When it became obvious that he’d made a mistake, his response was to commit suicide.
The company was able to recover, and returned to profitability before 1941, the war was not much of a help for Studebaker. There was a mild recession prior to the US entering the war, and the government came up with a somewhat flawed system to manage costs during the war. In order to ensure that the government could afford to pay for the war, they came up with a formula to determine what companies could charge the government for the equipment they provided. This formula used the profits a company made the year before the US was attacked as the basis for determining the amount of mark up a company could charge. If you had a highly profitable year, you got a larger mark up than someone who’d lost money or hadn’t made much of a profit.