By on March 29, 2012

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has come in for some criticism for awkwardly relating what he characterized as a “humorous” story involving his father, former American Motors CEO and later Michigan governor, George Romney. In 1954 George Romney became head of the newly merged (from Hudson and Nash) American Motors Corp., following the sudden death of his corporate mentor and patron, George W. Mason. One of the first things Romney did was to close the money-losing Hudson assembly plant in Detroit and consolidate all Hudson and Nash assembly in Nash’s Kenosha facility, which put about 4,300 Michiganders out of work. The story that Mitt Romney related had to do with his father’s campaign for governor in 1962, eight years later. The senior Romney was in a parade and apparently the high school marching band in front of his parade car didn’t know how to play The Victors, the fight song of the University of Michigan. Instead they kept trying to play On Wisconsin, much to the chagrin of Romney’s campaign staff, who didn’t want Michigan voters reminded of the plant closing. Though it’s clear to me from the context that Mitt Romney found humor in the parade incident, not in the plant closing, Democrats have seized on his remark, saying to it betrays a callous attitude towards working people.

Obama campaign spokesperson Lis Smith said:

“The only things more out of touch than Mitt Romney’s ‘joke’ about his dad closing a factory are his policies that would give massive tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires and allow insurance companies to discriminate against individuals with pre-existing conditions. He continues to be callous about the struggles that ordinary Americas face and his policies would make it harder-not easier-for anyone but the very wealthy to succeed.”

Sen. Debbie Stabenow said it

“was no laughing matter when our jobs are exported to other states or other countries. Outsourcing has had a devastating impact on the middle class. Americans deserve leaders who understand the challenges working families face. It’s no laughing matter when jobs are shipped away.”

Sara Wallenfang of the the AFL-CIO, said:

“Mitt Romney made light of his father’s decision to close a Michigan auto factory. Does he take current Michigan jobs any more seriously?”

Plant closures and outsourcing are issues that Michigan workers have been facing in the last two decades as the domestic auto industry has declined, so it’s not surprising that Democrats tried to amplify Romney’s gaffe, but is it really a good idea to make political hay over a factory that closed in 1954? If Smith, Stabenow and Wallenfang were in George Romney’s position, they probably would also have closed the Detroit Hudson plant. That is, if they had AMC’s survival at heart. Yes, 4,300 Detroiters lost their jobs, well, most of them, some transferred to Kenosha or other AMC facilities, but the factory was doomed. The Hudson plant that George Romney closed had a break even point of about 65,000 units. In 1954 that factory was on track to make less than 30,000 cars, producing only 13,373 in the first five months of 1954. It was an old, inefficient factory and while some Hudson facilities were acquired by other automakers like Cadillac, the Detroit Hudson plant was torn down by the early 1960s. By closing that plant, Romney made AMC a more viable company. A company that continued to employ thousands of people in Michigan into the 1980s, when Chrysler bought American Motors from Renault. There are many current Chrysler employees in Michigan who have jobs today in part due to George Romney’s decisions as head of American Motors.

I can understand Mitt Romney’s political opponents teeing off on his gaffes. He is indeed very wealthy and not the most glib speaker off the cuff, but the notion of tying George Romney’s closing of the Detroit Hudson plant in 1954 to the outsourcing and  offshoring of manufacturing jobs that goes on today is a bit of a stretch. If that plant closure in the 1950s does resonate today, it’s because the auto industry still faces the problem of worldwide overcapacity and money-losing factories, not because a few thousand Michiganders lost their jobs before I was born.

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can dig deeper at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don’t worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks for reading – RJS

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

66 Comments on “Mitt Romney Slammed for Joke Referencing Plant Closure… in 1954...”


  • avatar
    morbo

    Here, let me translate for you.

    “They Took Ma JERB!”

    “took his jerb.”

  • avatar
    Robert.Walter

    My grandfather, a Hudson millwright with about 25 years at Hudson, was one of those laid off. He was offered a job at Kenosha, which he turned down due to wanting to stay in Detroit. He hired in at one of the Big-3 and worked there until he retired in the mid 1960’s. He and my grandmother both hated the UAW and believed them to be parasitic.

    • 0 avatar
      siuol11.2

      While begrudgingly taking advantage of the perks membership gave them?

      • 0 avatar
        Robert.Walter

        Actually their complaint was that the union promised them a kind of unemployment coverage which it never delivered on. Not when my grandfather lost his job during the depression. Not when Hudson went down. Not when he got cancer and had to stop working shortly before his 10 year service date at Chrysler. Thus no Hudson or Chrysler pension and no UAW continuing benefits.

        My grandmother had to make it for the next 33 years on what she had saved plus her S.S. benefits. Her beef was that if the union had not skimmed so much off the top of his paychecks, or provided the survivor’s benefits they claimed they would, that her situation might have been markedly better. She was very bitter about their big promises little delivery approach.

        I could probably develop arguments both for and against her position, but that us not my purpose here. My purpose here is to merely convey that although my grandfather lost his job when Hudson went down, he bore no ill will against Geo. Romney, because he realized that without that move of consolidation to the better plant in Wisconsin, the whole company would have failed. The Romney name was always well-respected in both my grandmother and my parent’s households.

  • avatar
    Mark MacInnis

    Liberals, I will grant you, possess ONE ability: They can make a leap of logic as wide as the grand canyon….

    Debbie Stabenow is the biggest idiot in the Senate. How and why this pig gets elected term after term is a Hoffa-sized mystery to me…I don’t wanta go all Hollywood Henderson on her, but I doubt she could spell “cat” if you spotted her a C and an A….

    • 0 avatar
      aristurtle

      This isn’t a liberal/conservative divide, it’s a media pundit thing. Conservatives do it too; witness, e.g. Sean Hannity utterly freaking out about some random old video of Obama in college because he was friends with a professor Hannity didn’t like.

    • 0 avatar

      Mark,

      I’ve interviewed Stabenow. She’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I wouldn’t say she’s the biggest idiot in the Senate. There has to be at least one or two senators duller than she is. On a personal level, she’s a nice lady, so equating her with swine is a bit over the top. Also, in the wake of the Limbaugh/Fluke brouhaha, it’s not smart politics to call women names. She is, however, political just about 100% of the time. Carl Levin, the senior Michigan senator, is unquestionably brighter than Stabenow but there’s not a hairsbreadth between them in terms of policy. At least the Stabenows don’t treat the government like it’s their family business.

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      Mark – I think Senator Inhofe would compete strongly for the title your bequeath.

    • 0 avatar
      ruckover

      I am offended. Here in Wisconsin, we elected a man who vies for the coveted title Biggest Fool in the Senate: Ron Johnson.

  • avatar
    aristurtle

    This is how the modern political “debate” works. Let’s say you’re a “journalist”. You have an opinion about a candidate. This opinion has been said over and over again for the past few months, but hey, nowadays we want the political race to be a two-year-long national media circus. So we need an excuse to turn this opinion into another round of re-stating the same stuff we’ve been saying since last August. Easy enough: just listen to the candidate’s every word until you can find some throwaway comment in some relatively unimportant speech that nobody would otherwise pay attention to that vaguely relates to what you wanted to say in the first place. Congratulations, you invented the “gaffe”!

    This is not how we have historically run election campaigns in this country. Welcome to the grim future.

  • avatar
    Volt 230

    Mr Spock says: “This is highly illogical”

  • avatar
    daviel

    [facepalm] I believe that the point is that Romney the candidate thought the 1954 event, that involved Michiganders losing jobs because of a plant closing, and involved his then candidate father, humorous. The point is not whether the plant should have been closed or not in the 1950’s. The Republicans’ Romney would have virtually shut down GM if he had been running the show. Lots of plant closings. These ‘gaffes’ show his character much more accurately because they are real-time and the real Mitt shines through. He does not care if the blue collars lose jobs. Mitt has a job; that’s what counts.

    • 0 avatar
      Mark MacInnis

      And this makes him unqualified to be president how?

      As opposed to a Hawaiian-born Kenyan who is too stupid to know when the mike is on, who thinks there is 57 states, who grasp of economics is limited to what his communist handlers tell him? A teacher of constitutional law is so inane his “signature” accomplishment is about to be Matumbo’d into the second row by the Supreme Court? And all the people on the left can come up with against Romney is, “He relayed an anecdote which might, under a carefully parsed microscope, reveal a certain cavalier attitude toward Americans in 1954 losing their jobs.”

      Get a grip, America. We’ve got MUCH bigger problems than whether a candidates sense of humor is a tad off….

      “Don’t blame me. Ronnie started it…”

      • 0 avatar
        daviel

        [another face palm] There’s plenty besides his callous attitude toward job loss for blue collar workers that makes him a poor politician and poor choice to run the USA. His cavalier attitude was about losing those jobs – ’50-2012. He saw humor in that. He can’t distance himself from the Bozo opponents in his party’s race. Been watching Letterman lately – you’d love it!

      • 0 avatar
        morbo

        You missed a Soros meme in your screde. Can’t sound ludicrous without including a Soros / gold conspiracy in there somewhere.

      • 0 avatar
        newcarscostalot

        @Mark: Read this and enlighten yourself. Pay close attention to this section: 1.2 Political

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphone_gaffe

      • 0 avatar

        “Don’t blame me. Ronnie started it…”

        Wait a second. I tried very hard to keep this as impartial as I could. The only opinion I expressed was that it was silly to connect events of 1954 with plant closings today.

        I’m planning on voting for Romney this November, but the guy is a walking gaffe machine. Not as bad as Joe Biden, but then Mitt doesn’t have the MSM covering for him. I personally find his awkwardness, his tendency to say things that his political opponents will pounce on, to be kind of charming. YMMV.

      • 0 avatar
        mzr

        Purestrain gold. Wake up sheeple, google Ron Paul!!!

    • 0 avatar

      If you listen to the recording or read the transcript it’s quite clear that he was talking about the events of the ’62 gubernatorial campaign being humorous, not the plant shutdown. As for plant closings, the restructuring of GM and Chrysler under Obama appointee Steven Rattner led to the closing of at least 11 factories and 2,000 dealers. Now those shutdowns may have been just as necessary as shutting down the Hudson plant in 1954, but the workers there were just as unemployed.

      • 0 avatar
        OldandSlow

        Hudson sales were tanking by 1954. The plant was producing below 50% of capacity.

        All of the independents – Hudson, Kaiser-Frazer, Nash, Packard and Studebaker could not keep up with the redesign cycles of the Big 3.

        The uni-body, a.k.a Monobilt design of the Hudson made it necessary to redesign from the ground up versus just redoing the top-hat above the frame. The Hudsons were last redesigned in 1948.

        Nash-Kelvinator had the cash when George Mason merged Nash with Hudson. Hudson on the other hand was losing money and going broke. Romney had to make the merger work just when Henry Ford II decided to have a price war with Chevrolet.

        George Romney did what he could. He axed the unibody Hudson – which wouldn’t have been competitive in 1955, a year that saw major all new introductions. Hence, the 1955-57 Hudson Hornets were essentially upscale Nash Ambassadors, which didn’t fool Hudson buyers. At least the air conditioning worked well.

        http://blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2010/09/SIA-1956Hudson_08_1000.jpg

        George Romney would soon ax both the Hudson and Nash brand. He fast tracked an in-house V-8, which made the 1957 Rambler Rebel a nice car, capable of doing 0 to 60 mph in 9 seconds. The redesigned Ambassador followed in 1958, with a really nice hard-top station wagon.

        All right, I’m done trashing George Romney for the night. Thanks for letting me Ramble.

      • 0 avatar
        dtremit

        Yep, he was laughing at the campaign fallout of the plant closures, not the closures. It still stands that his idea of politically appropriate childhood anecdote is “When Daddy was governor, this silly marching band made the most awkward reference to when he slashed jobs as a millionaire CEO!” He’s terminally tone deaf — see also his “I can’t hire illegals — good god, I’m running for office!” remark.

        He never misses an opportunity to inadvertently portray himself as rich, out of touch, and politically opportunistic — whether you like him or not, it’s a huge liability.

  • avatar
    Volt 230

    All these Bozos who have allowed jobs to go to China and now Mexico for decades and now we’re worried? What ever happened with the I scratch your back, you scratch my back mentality? that said it would be ok to turn us from an industrial powerhouse to a service and consumer one???

  • avatar
    gottacook

    Mitt Romney has been running for president essentially since 2007 when he left the Mass. governorship. No matter what one thinks of Romney’s positions (or those of his opponents within and outside his party), I think at this point it must be agreed that he is simply not a good politician.

    • 0 avatar
      aristurtle

      Compared to the pack of has-beens and lunatics that “The Guy Who Lost Last Time” is running against now, how can anyone be surprised that he’s the party front-runner?

  • avatar
    ajla

    What marching band in the state of Michigan doesn’t know how to play “The Victors”? And they wanted to play “On Wisconsin”?

    Did Romney use a school from Iron Mountain or something?

    • 0 avatar

      I was wondering the same thing. Most kids in Michigan (even those who end up at Michigan State) learn The Victors as little kids. It very well may have been an event in the Upper Peninsula. That’s perceptive of you. It wouldn’t surprise me if there were more Wisconsin fans in the UP than Michigan fans. There are certainly lots more Green Bay Packers fans in the UP than Detroit Lions fans.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        >> What marching band in the state of Michigan doesn’t know how to play “The Victors”?

        In my Michigan School, we had “The Victors” down cold by the time we were in 5th grade. By the time we were in 7th grade, we didn’t even need to look at the sheet music. It seemed to be standard band curriculum and they really drilled it in.

      • 0 avatar
        ruckover

        Wisconsin Badgers do not have the draw in the UP that the Packers have. The Badgers were second tier in athletics for years, and the Wolverines have, until very recently, been national title contenders. Also, because of out of state tuition, folks do not head to Wisconsin for college, even if Wisconsin schools are much closer for many residents of the Upper Peninsula. The Packer/Lion thing is another story. Green Bay is closer, and the Packers play professional football. I am not sure what my once-beloved Lions have been doing since 1957.

  • avatar
    OldandSlow

    A tempest in a tea cup only in Detroit. Not even a tempest in a tea pot.

  • avatar
    relton

    Many of the Hudson engineers and related jobs went to AMC’s Plymouth Road facility (next to Detroit), which became AMC’s main engineering headquarters. Over the years it grew to employ many people.

    When Romney took over, he was a devout Mormon. So, on eof his first actions was to ban coffee in the plants and offices. The plants went out on strike almost immediately, so the order was rescinded for plants. But the engineering people had to resort to many and varied subterfuges to have their coffee. Eventually Romney gave in, and coffee pots were allowed again. But for years there were strict rules at the Plymouth Road facility about how and when you could drink coffee.

    Bob

    • 0 avatar
      OldandSlow

      Is this a true story about the ban on coffee? I want a fact check.

    • 0 avatar

      Relton, it’s not “next to Detroit”, it’s on Plymouth near Hubbel, between Greenfield and Schafer, well within the city limits of Detroit. During WWII, the attached Kelvinator plant built Sikorsky helicopters. After Chrysler bought AMC, the offices were used for Jeep Engineering. I think Chrysler last had people there in 2007.

  • avatar
    Educator(of teachers)Dan

    Putting on hip-waders for the um… “mud” that’s about to be slung in here.

    A pox on both your houses (Republican and Democrat).

  • avatar
    geeber

    I hope no one jokes about the closing of the Jordan factory in Cleveland during the Great Depression. That will really set everyone off…

    And don’t even get me started about what happened to Hupmobile.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    “He is indeed very wealthy and not the most glib speaker off the cuff”

    He’s out of touch and elitist. Personally, I don’t care. I value some intelligence and capability in a major world leader, which is why, though I don’t agree with them, I respect the likes of Angela Merkel or Steven Harper (or, say, H.W. George Bush)

    The difference between, say, HW. Bush, Harper or Merkel and Romney is that the former don’t pretend to pander to anti-intellectualism the way the latter does. And pandering is okay, but Romney’s so bad at it he comes off as insultingly insincere.

  • avatar
    jeremie

    I get this kind of nauseating partisan politics from the left (Huffington Post) and the right (Politico). Then I come here to read about cars and here’s a guy who want’s to defend a millionaire who thinks there is something funny about 4300 (or most of them) losing their jobs.

    • 0 avatar
      gottacook

      So TTAC should ignore any intersection of national politics with the auto industry? I was looking at Hemmings Motor News’ blog earlier today, and one item includes a number of photos of LAX airport parking lots circa 1970. The smog is thick. It would still be, if not for federal law (although I suppose you could try to argue that California would have developed its own standards even in the absence of federal pollution rules).

      National politics may be unpleasant, but you can’t just ignore it if it has an impact on you in terms of pollutants, highway safety, tire grip, or any other auto-related topic you can think of. Not even the most wild-eyed libertarian would ever suggest (would they?) that anyone be able to drive unlicensed in an unregistered car that pollutes and is a crash hazard to its occupants or people in other cars.

      • 0 avatar
        jeremie

        How legislation affects the industry is certainly fair game.
        Each parties stance on regulation, organized labor, bailouts etc., are all relevant.
        I don’t think Romney’s comments qualify as an intersection without expanding and politicizing the argument.

      • 0 avatar
        kenzter

        California did, CARB. Created in 1967 under Governor Ronald Reagan.

    • 0 avatar
      nikita

      California actually had the first automotive emissions law before CARB was formed and long before there was an EPA and Federal standards. All 1961 model cars sold in California had a closed PCV system. Exhaust emissions standards for CO2 and HC applied to 1966 models.

  • avatar
    GS650G

    I’m looking forward to the fine tuned examination and outrage of Barry O in the media, I’m sure that will happen right about when they find yogurt on the moon.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    I know Ronnie is a Righty-Tighty, but really TTAC is this just political baiting? Yeah it was an auto plant (and I, too think Romney’s comment is irrelevant) but is this just for trolling?

    • 0 avatar

      Thanks for the hearty laugh. Juxtaposing a plaint against political baiting and trolling with “Righty-Tighty”. Call it ironic or call it hypocrisy, it’s hilarious. Thanks. If it were intentional satire I would call it brilliant.

      I tried to be fair. I gave Romney’s remarks in context, quoted three of his critics, laying out their main points, and confined my opinion to the matter of just what it was that Romney thought was humorous and the irrelevancy of a 1954 plant closing to today’s circumstances, or at least how the critics framed that issue.

      Much of my motivation for writing this has to do with the fact that I like automotive history. I’m a big fan of George Romney, one of the most competent automobile executives ever, and I had Charles Hyde’s book on Nash, Hudson and AMC sitting about 3 feet from where I sit. Hyde spends some time talking about the closing of that plant and then the subsequent problems AMC had trying to build Hudsons and Nashes in the same factory. This was long before flexible manufacturing. Those problems and Romney’s own passion for the Rambler, were why AMC killed the Nash and Hudson nameplates in 1957. I guess he had to weigh trashing brand equity with giving the company a new, modern identity (most consumers not knowing that Rambler in fact is one of the oldest nameplates, dating to the Jeffery company, a Nash predecessor).

      Did you know that George Romney coined the phrase “gas guzzling dinosaurs”? The guy might have been a bigger missionary for compact cars than for the LDS church.

  • avatar
    panzerfaust

    Of course what George Romney should have done was declared Hudson ‘too big to fail’ lobbied Washington to get a gigantic loan (bailout) so that AMC could keep the Detroit Hudson plant open and build their 1956 Hudson Hornet powered by a bank of 6 volt batteries and a Briggs and Stratton engine, over state the demand for the new car and then lay off those self same Hudson employees because they’ve produced more cars than the company can sell.

  • avatar
    shelvis

    As predicted after the anti-chrysler piece a few days ago, TTAC shows its editorial slant more and more as we get closer to the election.
    Howzabout some real content? More reviews. More Baruth. Cool junkyard finds. Insights into the used car industry. Auto history. Cool pics. Fun stuff.
    We don’t need another supposed news source providing us with pre digested slant.

    • 0 avatar

      Auto history? You mean like about the early days of American Motors, in 1954, when George Romney closed the unprofitable Hudson plant in Detroit, and consolidated all AMC production in Kenosha?

      • 0 avatar
        shelvis

        I like my auto history presented as history, not to prop up a viewpoint.

      • 0 avatar
        OldandSlow

        Oooo, well said Shelvis. I wonder of if Ronnie is able to stay away from politics at a Thanksgiving Day dinner.

        Hudson was doomed before the company fell into the lap of George Romney.

        As I mentioned earlier Hudson did not have the cash on hand in 1954 to properly redesign both their Hornet / Wasp line up. What money there was available had been poured into the ill-received Hudson Jet.

        http://home.comcast.net/~sarahdyoung/CollectibleAutomobileApril1995.html

      • 0 avatar

        A. E. Barit was not the most effective auto executive in history. The Jet wasn’t a bad idea to begin with but was, as Aaron Severson put it, a horse designed by a committee.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        @shelvis: “I like my auto history presented as history, not to prop up a viewpoint.”

        +1000

        @Ronnie Scriebner: ” a horse designed by a committee.”

        You mean a camel?

        Sorry, old engineer’s joke. Actually not at all sorry — while I can be baited in to political discussions, I’m really tired of politics. I’m ready to vote for the candidate I dislike less and get it over with.

        So, old engineer’s joke:
        Q: What is a camel?
        A: A hose, designed by committee!

        For the three people who don’t really get it, a horse is optimized for one set of needs and it doesnt have anything it doesn’t require. A camel, on the other hand, can do anything (pull a wagon, be ridden, be raced, go without water for a week, etc), but it’s not really optimized for any of those jobs, and it looks kind of all of those features kinda bolted on to satisfy different people on the committee.

        My Toyota Prius is a horse. It is optimized for my family’s daily driving and has nothing that it doesn’t need.
        My Ford Escape is a camel — it can do many things pretty well, but it’s not ideal for any of them.

  • avatar
    mikey

    I read TTAC for information, and entertainment. Ronnie Schreibers piece fits both criteria.

    End of story.

  • avatar
    shaker

    If Mitt hadn’t publicly stated that he was against the auto bailouts, his “gaffe” would likely have not been news.
    What the media (and the “left”) has pounced on is that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.
    George Romney did what was necessary, from an executive’s standpoint, but he probably had some feelings for the furloughed workers that he never communicated to his son; thus Mitt’s cavalier attitude about the plight of the middle class.
    Or, George Romney *was* a pr!ck, and “like father, like son”.

    Well, I guess that Jeep lovers should consider G.R. as a minor deity.

    Edit: Here’s hoping that my co-workers and I hit the Mega Millions drawing tonight – then maybe I would be able to sympathize with Mitt’s world view a bit more.

    • 0 avatar
      geeber

      Romney did what was necessary for AMC to survive – it was the
      “executive’s viewpoint” only from the standpoint that he, as the chief executive, was smart enough to take the tough steps critical for the company’s survival.

      Considering that, by 1959, AMC sales were over 400,000 units (up from barely 100,000 units in 1956), the company was threatening to knock Plymouth out of third place (which it would do in 1961), and the company was raking in the profits, it is apparent that Romney, Sr., knew what he was doing.

      I guess the “UAW viewpoint” is to keep workers on the payroll even when they are not needed (as with the Jobs Banks), never close any plants (even if there is no demand for the product the plant makes), never touch wages or health care benefits, wail about people buying Accords instead of Malibus, make up stuff about what happens in the transplant factories, and then whine about the need for a government bailout when all of this becomes unsustainable.

      I’ll take the “executive’s viewpoint” over this one any day.

      • 0 avatar
        shaker

        One side benefit of the big jump in oil prices (and thus shipping rates) is that the transplants are bringing manufacturing back closer to their market. I think that the reason (besides the “jump-start” of generous tax subsidies) that they can offer competitive wages and benefits is because the unions have historically fought to increase the relevance and value of the middle-class worker. That said, the over-powerful, overreaching union has done its part to hurt the corporations that are the lifeblood of the existence of their members; a form of slow suicide.
        If unions wish to survive, they need to go back to their roots – fighting injustices – not necessarily to every individual worker – but to the collective workforce, and they need to partner with industry to do what’s best (collectively) for their membership, even if it means flexible work and wage policies to keep their members “in the loop” with inevitable business cycles. They can also become a clearinghouse for ideas that would increase productivity without onerous corporate “policies” that aren’t the optimal solution, and cannot be challenged. They can administer benefits, and tailor them to the needs of the members, relieving the company of these costs and responsibilities. They can provide a “value-added” function that members would gladly pay for, rather than a rigid, unyielding behemoth that must drain money from members (and competitiveness from their employer) to support itself.

  • avatar
    Campisi

    This struck me mainly as a pretense to talk about a time in AMC’s history. Disregarding politics, Mr. Schreiber strikes me as a class act and his well-written and interesting articles serve as a pleasant bright spot in TTAC’s content.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dal20402: It was the 2002 concept that had suicide doors. The 2015 concept was nearly identical to the production...
  • Jeff S: The late night comedians do miss those late night tweets of Trump as he is sitting on the can. Never was that...
  • Jeff S: Very true you cannot have a mineral lease into perpetuity if you have not exercised the option to extract the...
  • Jeff S: @EBFlex–Now we both agree on something that Putin is full of it. See there is some room for...
  • Jeff S: @EBFlex–Again you are looking for an argument I said the car was not feasible until the Model T. Early...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber