Jump to content

Why low end Packards after WWII?


poci1957
 Share

Recommended Posts

To Bob "Constellation" thank you for your response, since the previous string was getting lenghty I am posing my question as a new post. To new viewers, the question is why did Packard not move back upmarket after the war? Of course we know George Christopher was the 120 and 110 guy, and we know that the real, low volume senior cars were phased out with more "platform sharing" with the 160 and 180 lines. And we know Packard made plenty of money during the war and it was likely enhanced by Christopher's timely transition to more mass production, which probably enhanced his standing all the more. So, do we think that his professed dislike for "that ******* Senior stuff" totally colored his decision? Do we think that his only wish for Packard was to rival GM in the heart of the middle priced market against Buick? An obvious mistake in my opinion, especially looking at the 1942-48 Buicks, one of the all-time sharp mid-priced cars. It would seem to me, with the demise of LaSalle and the debut of the 1941-48 Cadillac that it would be apparent Cadillac was positioned to be the luxury leader. It seems Packard would have looked to the higher price class to reap (a)more profit per unit to cover their higher production costs and (b)the cash-flush postwar boom. Obviously coachbuilt cars were not coming back, but the Cadillac example of a production luxury car with some prestige would seem like it would have attracted SOMEONE'S eye. And someone should have also noted that while it costs a little more to build a luxury car than a mid priced car, you can charge a LOT more IF the car is prestigious and desirable, as a 1941 Cadillac certainly was. What do you think? Todd Crews

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd:

Of course you are absolutely right in your analysis in your last post, in quoting a Packard executive's famous tirade

"That God-Dammned Senior Stuff"

that comment just about sums it up. Bottom line - Packard's new management hated Packard and everything it stood for !

Of course we know that Packard's decision to walk away from the luxury car market was a fatal error - given the "economy of scale" in the middle-price car, no way could Packard have EVER competed, and "kept up with the Jones'" in that price range.

As I've noted in previous "posts", when the war was over, the luxury car market took off like a rocket, leaving Packard with NO "Senior Division" luxury cars to sell (after the destruction of the SENIOR DIV. plant and production facilities in July 1939, ALL Packards were essentially "Jr. Division" cars, and yes....THEN...from that point on, there is much parts interchangeability between the cheaper Packards, and the "gussied up" JUNIORS Packard was trying to "palm off" as luxury cars).

But you ask "WHY". My own personal prejudice is that your question cannot be answered, without psychiatric analysis of the kind of mind that would say "That god-dammed Senior Stuff".

Now we are getting into an area that is really too esoteric for a car buff chat; anyway, I really don't have an anwer. The resentment of the lower classes, for their "betters" is hardly a unique phenomena to the Packard Motor Car Company's new executives....!

The traditional Packard luxury cars were SO "eliist" in their arrogant superiority, that just LOOKING at one at an auto show today STILL fills a lot of on-lookers with envy, jealousy, etc, and a need to say something to demean them. One of my favorite sadistic "sports" these days, is to park my '38 Packard V-12 at some car event, and stand back and "blend into" the crowd, and listen to the comments.

The fact is....there ARE people with money, and they DO like their expensive things. The roaring success of Cadillac in the 1940's, up until Cadillac "caught the Packard disease" in the 1970's....the the current success of the expensive Damiler Benz products, Lexus, and so on, show us you can make a LOT of money, if you "deliver" on what the upper classes DEMAND from the products they buy. Why Packard chose to self destruct - again...ask yourself why our friend Bob felt a desire to tell us that JUNIOR and SENIOR Division Packards used the same parts....!

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Pete, I had been looking forward to your views and we seem to be together on this. I cannot critique Bob's alleged post about the junior and senior interchange, as I can't find this post and I am sure there was just an error as Bob seems much the Packard historian. However, to the casual car fan there probably is increasing misunderstanding of the "classic" Packard and the junior Packard (a regular subject of yours, of course). I am about to go to Hershey, and a favorite treat for me there is to spot a thirties era senior car and compare it to a nearby 120 or 160. If one looks at pictures in a book, they appear similar, and I agree the 120 was the right car for the thirties. BUT if one sees a V12 in person, one can see beyond the grille outline that this is another breed entirely, and one can lament the "pregnant elephant" and the other postwar cars that diminished the prestige so much.

So Pete, you mentioned a new crew of executives after the war, can you expand on this a bit? We know the last V12 was in 1939, the 1940-41 cars used shared platforms, and the Clipper was the new generation. We also know the wartime mindset of the company was about mass production and not the "carriage trade". So 1945 dawns and postwar plans are to be made. What has changed in the board room to make executives so blind to the upper priced field? The company has plenty of money, the factory needs some work, but is functioning and staffed. The Clipper body is somewhat fresh, although the vertical grille may be passe compared to Cadillac and Buick and a (tasteful) restyle may be needed. Had 6-7 years been long enough for everyone to forget what Packard had meant in the thirties and before? Or did they just give up, thinking they couldn't match Cadillac anymore?

I recall reading that someone at Packard was analyzing their market position in the fifties and pointed out that Buick and Cadillac were perfectly positioned in their markets, even in the mind of the casual observer, but Packard no longer had prestige brand recognition as they had before the war. As you said, this repeated itself at Cadillac in the seventies and (especially) eighties and carries on today. I still feel this has to be the turning point to oblivion, and I wonder why long-time board members and execs, who probably were upper-class themselves, could not see the mistake about to happen. One would think they would compare their Packard to a Cadillac and see the slide beginning. Or do we think they had the arrogance not to? Hope to see your comments and thanks, Todd Crews

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was writing before on the other thread I said, "within a couple of years" that was not to mean 1937. It was a generalized statement. By 1940 it was true about sharing parts. In your post you mentioned someone that analyzed Packard's position in the market. That person was James J. Nance and the comment was made during a speach to Packard Execs. in 1952.

The reasons were many as to why Packard went down market. More Volume sales to try and keep the modernized factory running. It worked for a while in 1948 and 1949. Even in 1951 Packard did very well and again in 1953. If People didn't want a Packard they wouldn't have bought them.

Some people take this stuff to seriously <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" /> and try to nit-pick it apart. No offense intended Pete.

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This term 'Intershangeable parts' can take on different meanings relative to WHO is being addressed. It depends on how dis-similar the parts are! In many cases a part can be easily modified to fit and operate just fine. SO, just because there is a wheel base difference between Sr and Jr it does NOT NECESSARILY mean that the Sr frame is so different from a Jr. that mods couldnt be made from one to the other. I know very little specifics about 20's, 30's and 40's Packards. But my point here is the term Interchangeable is often used as a technicality for minor differences that COULD be easily overcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another point of interest is that Packard was sitting on Milions of Dollars in War Profits after the war and into the 50's. Packard was a veritable financial institution. The Engine plant at Utica was built with some of this, starting under Ferry. Nance squandered the rest of it. Its sad that some of this money wasn't taken and put into Product Development. The only thing that some of the money was used for was the Ultramatic. Packard never borrowed money for tooling, but had to for the 55th and 56th Series Cars.

Bob Bosworth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob, would you say this borrowing for tooling probably had to do with the sale of Briggs to Chrysler, meaning that Packard would HAVE to buy tooling for bodies, rather than buying them from Briggs? Also, what projects did Nance squander the money on? Todd C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What bearing if any did Pres. Eisenhower, appointing G.M President, Charles Wilson, the Sec. of Defense, and his EIGHT MILIONAIRES and a PLUMBER Cabinet, have, besides taking Packards military contract away, awarding it to G.M. of course, costing Packard $323 million, plus a reported 4 million in contract money already owed? Had Packard Completed this building jet engines and diesel engines for Navy, would this have given Packard the money to get back building like they were used to? Mabe by this time some one would have seen they were going in wrong direction, (NEW PEOPLE) and could have survived, no merger, with out taking the the beating Studebaker gave them. Still cant believe they took Studebakers word on there inflated production figures with out checking, if this really did happen??????? Quality I think surly had to suffer.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Packard V-8

What on earth are you trying to say...? "Interchangeability means different things...you are not clear on the difference between so called "Jr" and SENIOR Packards..? Are you serious ? Or are you just trying to justify a position that has no merit ?

The cars in Packard's line up in the late 1930's were so different, they might as well have been built by different manufacturers !

Again, up to the day the last Packard Twelve rolled out of the old SENIOR DIVISION plant, and its "gutting" in July 1939, there are NO...I say again...NO parts that are interchangeable....again...oddly enough...with the one exception of the dome light !

Let me give you an example...A Packard Twelve, coming down the assembly line, ready for, but not quite under the "body drop"...just the bare chassis, engine, running gear, etc.....WEIGHS MORE THAN A COMLETE "JUNIOR' PACKARD that is road-worthy ! The bigger, heavier cars had bigger, heavier parts, from the wheels and the frame up. It is that simple.

And even within the "Senior Division" there wasn't all that much interchangeability, as you spent more and more money, to get a faster, more powerful car. My 1934 Super Eight shared BODY sheet metal with the Twelves, but underneath....the springs, axles, brakes, wheels, all were MUCH heavier, reflecting the much greater power of the Twelve. My "PACKARD SERVICE PARTS" book for 1938 has some excellent pictures showing how much heavier and better quality the suspension components were, compared to the "Super Eight"...which, incidentally, wasn't a bad car for its price range.

All this is what created that famous "Packard Mystique"...the idea, that whatever you spent for your Packard, you damn well got your money's worth at that price level..and then some ! Packard had its "golden years", because of its reputation......that its customer would receive his money's worth.

Sure, after the war, wierd things happened with govt. contracts. But it didn't MATTER ! There is NO way the company could have survived with sales declining as fast as they did.

Again, I have NO answer for the "why" of it all, without practicing psychiatry, for which I do not have a license. But.....Christopher wasn't the ONLY one who would watch a "big" Packard go by..and mutter under his breath " that god-

damned Senior Stuff.....".

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete is correct that the Senior and Junior cars from 1935-1939 are totally different, and while one can certainly appreciate a nice 120 or a postwar Packard, they are totally outclassed by the V12 era big cars. Pete, what was the old story I once read, that they split the work force in half, 5000 people on each model line, and the senior people built 5000 cars to 50,000 120's? It seems it was something like that. Also, excellent point regarding Engine Charlie Wilson, I had forgotten about that. Todd C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the discussion on this thread is "relatively" civil, I have a "what if" question for those chatters who know more about this than I do.

There was a significant downturn in auto sales in 1958, as I recall. "What If" Packard had survived the 1956 demise and yet encountered the 1958 downturn. Didn't that downturn essentially kill any chances the "Edsel" had, even with the $$$ resources of Ford? If Packard had introduced it's 1957 models and if they had been well received without significant quality control or manufacturing problems, would Packard have survived 1958?

Just wondering. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Poci 1957 and Craig !

"what if"...c'mon...you are missing the point....there was NO chance of any "what if"....the public simply rejected Packard products. I know you dont like to hear this, but THAT is what happened. As another "poster" noted, Packard simply hadn't a CLUE any more what it was doing. The new car buyer "smelled" it...and the rest is history.

Your bringing up the EDSEL fiasco reminds me - just the other day I was browsing in the automotive section of our big book store down in Prescott...damn...should have bought the article - good summary of what killed Edsell. In a sad re-play of Packard's failure of a few years earlier, Edsell EXPLODED onto the market with much fuss and fanfare. But the cars were terrible ! ( Actually, there were two series of Edsells - the "Ford based" one made of off-the-shelf Ford/Mercury running gear, and the "Lincoln based" one with the 430 cu. in motor of the Lincolns. ) The article repeats what I remember from actually "being there" at the time - the dealers were furious, just as Packard dealers had been, with the CRAP they had to practically re-build before they could foist it off on rapidly declining buyers. Word got out, the buyers rejected the thing, and that was that.

Again, of COURSE these things, as is the case with the later post-war Packards, can be made serviceable with a little tinkering. But new car buyers are NOT "tinker-buffs" like you and I. That you guys like your "last of the packards" is fine. That you can get good service out of them (probably because SOMEONE did a LOT of "tinkering" to get em right...IS NOT THE POINT.. is IRRELEVANT to our discussion.

Pete Hartmann

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First let me try to explain the Tooling. After the War, Packard was sitting on something like $17,000,000 or thereabouts. Any money spent on tooling the 22nd and 23rd Series cars was re-couped. So was the the tooling for the 24th, 25th, and 26th series. Some of this nest egg was spent by Ferry on the Utica plant. That facility was built to build Jet aircraft engines in and was next door to the Proving grounds. It never panned out although some jet and diesel engines were built there. In 1953, after Ike became President and appointed Charles Wilson Sec. of Defense, the roof caved in. Wilson came up with his "narrow based procurement policy", cutting Packard out of the loop. The J-47 and other contracts went to G.M., Wilsons former employer. This is one for the books. Today they'd never get away with it. Wilson knew darn well that Packard couldn't survive without that Defense Work. The money coming in from the Defense end was offsetting the marginally profitable Automobile manufacturing operation.

So here was Packard Utica sitting there, The V-8 wasn't ready for production due to, you guessed it, lifter problems. Nance and Co. desided to build the 359 cu. in. 1954 eight there. He spent a fortune on Utica to turn it into an Automated Car Engine Assembley Facility. In the mist of all this Packard set up a body plant at Conner, more money spent foolishly. It could have been set up at East Grand. Then in a more foolish move, the Whiz kids decided that Conner would be a better faciliy to build cars in and talked Nance into the Move, more money committed and squandered. You never could have built more than 75,000 cars a year at Conner and that was a stretch. East Grand was capable of 200,000 cars a year. There also was the Famous Packard Pension Program that Nance started which ate up a considerable sum of dough. Then there was the Studebaker Deal and the well was already dry. By now Packard had to go to the outside for tooling money on the 55's. Nance even tapped AMC for tooling money for the V-8.

So you can see some of the Picture as it existed.

Bob Bosworth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Craig, Pete, and Bob. This Edsel question is very good. Between Bob's tooling costs and Pete's quality control, what WOULD have happened in 1958? This Edsel comparison may bring up another point, I have read up on the Edsel and one issue there was the dealer network. What about the Packard dealer network after WWII? Obviously a dealer will sell whatever he can to make money, after the growth of the 120 and 110, and the local dealer strugling through the war, what was the dealer thinking about luxury cars? Do we think THEY put pressure on for a volume postwar car rather than high end? OR was there a loss of dealers during the depression and the war, and the postwar dealer was so far removed from the classic era that high end cars were just forgotten? Any comments? Todd C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter,

I'm sorry, I didn't know you had a V-12 Packard. Why that was the best car ever produced in this country. It can't compare to to much except a Duesie.

I will say that there would have been no comparisson to a Junior with the V-12 of the era.

There is one point I will make about its assembley methods. There was a lot of hand work on the Senior Packards. The basic assembley methods were cost intensive. By the late 30's with rising labor costs it couldn't be justified any longer.

You could play a game of what if? What if the depression never happened. There would have been no F.D.R., no big labor unions, no S.S.A., no 40 hr. work week, etc. etc. and Packard and the others could have more than likely continued doing business as usual.

This had a major effect on some of the other makes that survived the first 1/2 of the depession such as E.L. Cord's automotive empire, Pierce-Arrow and others. They couldn't weather the storm using 1920's and prior assembley methods that were labor intensive.

Bob Bosworth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack,

I will say this. I will preface this remark with "In My Opinion" (no one can bring suit against you for expressing your opinion, even though it may be fact or not)

In my opinion, People should have gone to jail over the Studebaker merger- purchase deal in 1954. It was fraud. The Packard stockholders were defrauded. The Studebaker stockholders were defrauded. The employees who lost there jobs when Packard Detoit-Utica closed down were defrauded. By the least Nance, Vance and Hoffman should have been given Striped suits and sent to the Federal Penal Facility at Alkatraz to do hard labor.

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edsel was all done before the first one rolled down the assembley line. Robert MacNamara never wanted to let Edsel go into production. It was quashed from within. The car was doomed from Day 1. By the way just so you know one James J. Nance was named the head of the Mercury Edsel Lincoln Division by Ernest Breech. Nance was a buddy of Breech's. Breech must felt sorry fo his pal Nance and gave him a job after the debacle at S-P.

One thing of interest take a good look at a 1958 Edsel and see the front end of Black Bess the '57 Packard proto. Edsel Tel-a-Touch is very simular to Packards electric shift. Think about it.

Bob Bosworth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi again, Bob :

Hey..buddy...dont get carried away - Packard Twelves were great cars for the money....but...every era has cars that had some features that make em more fun to own then the ordinary car of that era.

Fact is, my '38 was obsolete years before it was built! I also owned a '38 Cad. Series 90 ( V-16 Formal Sedan )....and, frankly, it was a better all-around car ! Sure, the Packard Twelve had that certain extra aura of "class" which Cadillac had not yet figured out how to package into a motor car, and the Packard Twelve's much larger, much more powerful motor would blow the doors of the Sixteen in a drag race. ( Yeah..I know...Caddy CLAIMED 185 hp against the Twelve's 175...but just drive the two side by side......! )

I was born into a Packard family, and, face it...NOTHING in those years matched a Packard Twelve for sheer snotty arrogance !

But...dammit...man...do you have ANY idea how vastly superior the all-metal GMC bodies were, to those "chicken coop" bodies on the last of the "big" Packards...? ( John Shinerman likes to call big Packards "chicken coops", because he correctly points out they are built of wood and chicken-wire, with the sheet metal just nailed on...sure..it had an incredible "bank vault" sound and feel....but gawd help the guy who either "rolled" one...or just left it out in the rain for a few years.....!

The short - stroke V-16 the Caddy had in 1938-1940 (dont confuse this with the earlier hopelessly inefficient over-head valve V-16 from '30 to '37) was down-right futuristic - only thing that held it back from being a real "performer" was its low compression ( you GOT to have high compression to get power if you have a short stroke ) ( yes...it was a flat-head...over-head valves really didn't "pay off" for their extra weight, until compresson ratios got much higher...and this wasn't possible with the fuels commercially available prior to World War Two.

Frankly, if I were a new car buyer in '38....I just might up and buy a Caddy V-16......!

Of course the WAY Packard built its last "real" cars was an inefficient nightmare - but so what....the same more modern methods that made the post-war Cadillacs such good sellers, were used by Packard...but to produce lesser cars.

Pete Hartmann

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter,

The kind of People who owned Packard Twelves did not as a general rule go out and roll 'em over. The Hoi-Poloi weren't those kind of people and usually didn't associate with the non-country club types that would. You are right about the all steel Fisher Bodies that came out in the mid 30's as compared to other makes. However, the rest of the industry caught up.

Wood frame bodies with the steel tacked on was an old way of doing things. Labor intensive work done by real craftsmen. Hand forming steet steel or aluminum panels, though beautiful, was very costly.

Did you know that the body building capital in the United States was in Amesbury, Mass.? Not far from me. Some bodies for Packards were built in Amesbury many years ago.

This has gotten way off the subject now and we continually get to far away from the discussion. The mid price issue is what was the original disscussion was about.

A comment was made about the differences between the Junior, Standard 8, 200 and 53+ Clipper and the Super, Custom, Patrician, 300, Cavalier, 400's and Caribbeans of the post war era. From outward appearence there wasn't enough to talk about thru 1954. This is true. I surmise that the general public was confused as to where Packard actually stood in the Market. In 1951, you could at extra expense get grille teeth, Patrician 400 chrome rear fender ports and Cormorant hood ornament all installed by a dealer on your new Packard 200 that you ordered with an optional 327 C.I.D. Eight. You could have the expensive Packard look and power the cheap and save $1,000.00 doing it. In 1952, Packard actually turned out 200 Deluxes with all the chrome goodies from the factory.

Anything to sell a car. Dealers had alot to do with this. However, with it down the road went some of the prestige of owning a Packard. I believe the Rich & Famous saw this and went to Caddy <img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/frown.gif" alt="" /> .

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob:

I repeat my "dare" or "challenge" to you, that I made earlier to John Shinerman ('53 Packard) who, naturally, feels very impassioned about his views of post-war Packards. The challenge, is to go to an auto show (or wherever else you can find one ) and look underneath the front end of a '53 Packard and then under a '53 Cadillac, Buick, or Oldsmobile. Then raise the hoods, and see further evidences of a difference in philosophy, in how the hoods are braced.

Side-note here - personally, I think the '51 - '54 Packards were of a much more pleasing body design, including, but not limited to being able to see all fenders so much easier, and the broad flat hood, while the '53 GMC cars still had a more '40's "art deco" rounded hood - but again..there's the rub...an arch or rounded hood, is much better able to handle "flutter"...and yet..STILL, they were braced better than the Packard, which couldn't be bothered having ANY bracing at all - no wonder, except under ideal conditions, those Packards had "body flutter".

Now - where was I - yes....all the fancy theories, discussions about "Engine Charlie" (Wilson), getting shafted by the govt, calling the Clipper a Packard instead of a Clipper...all this is very fine...and was no doubt a factor in SOME degree, to why Packard failed.

But again...bottom line - had Packard management not gotten increasingly self-destructive by shoving out the factory door miserably assemlbed products,it probably would still be here. The spectatcular sales figures of the first months of the introduction of the '55's prove that beyond any question. If Packard had made good on its representations in its advertising....it is obvious they would have sold LOTS of cars. If PACKARD had still made PACKARDS, they would have sold em !

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting comparison. I have a 1956 issue of Auto Age magazine, which has a copmarison test drive between a '56 Buick Century, Chrysler Windsor and a Clipper Custom. The drive report definitly marked the Clipper as the slowpoke, but praised it for its incredibly smooth ride. Go torsion-level (which worked, unlike Cadillac-GM air suspension of the late 1950's)

I'll try and scan the article and post it on my website for y'all to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

Bob - I think you are right...all of us are just repeating ourselves. It is interesting comment about human nature - how determined people are to hold on to a "belief" system they are comfortable with. The simple fact is, Packard went out of business because it made increasingly poor quality cars that drove its sales down...down...down.

Interesting, in SPITE of Packard's determination to self-destruct, there is STILL enough left of the "mystique" of the Packard name, to cause some people to like the very cars that marked its destruction, simply because they have the name "Packard" on their data plates. Heck - who am I to talk - I kept monkeying around with post-war Packards clear up thru the early 1960's..!

So - I think you are right - we are all just repeating ourselves, and I too dont see how much more anyone is going to learn from re-hashing what has already been said. A re-reading of the "thread" you rescued, certainly does cover just about everything that can be said about Packard's sad fall. I think you are right - re-hashing this stuff is NOT going to add to our knowledge; it is just going to bore most of the people who come in here looking for something interesting.

Which explains why, in my thirst for new and interesting developments... I am increasingly interested in the latest Britney Spears Dance Video......

Perfidious...etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read through this and its preceeding thread on the value and decline of the Packard with great interest. I see now why my question in an earlier post was not answered with much interest. I have rated this as 3 stars because it gave me a better understanding of the history, engineering and development of the Packard from the 1930s through to its demise in the mid-1950s.

Excellent posts gentlemen. It was a long read but well worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BOB: This business of why Packard went out of business has been talked to death. I want to say thanks for bring up the past posts. The thing that bothers me so much is Packardbuffs reason why Packard wnet out of business. There are many reasons why Packard went out of business and its more than just his simplist reason, which I might add is incorrect to a certain extent. People like Packardbuff know alittle of the history of Packard and fail to know the whole story. Then they try to impress other poeple with thier limited knowledge on the subject matter. It doesn't matter if he uses the so called flaws of the high pockets models that doesn't bother me. Again I will state that Peter does know his his stuff about Packard 12's. How ever what does bother me with Packardbuff is his lack of knowledge of Packard history and and the same old bull he spouts off with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But now wait a minute!!!!! What about the 1965 Packard V12 that so inpressed Mr. Eggbert????? IS everyone trying to forget about that one?????? I WON't let it rest. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember that Yellow Brick Road.. when I was a child in kindergarten...I would skip merrily down the street (even then I loved to watch Packards go by)...singing " WE ARE OFF TO SEE THE LIZZARD...THE WONDERFUL LIZZARD OF OZZ"...

Look...guys..I was a little kid...it was war-time in Arizona...I had never heard of a "wizzard", and probably, as a child, didn't pay attention all that well.. not having seen Wizzards...but..knowing all bout Lizzards...well..you see how that happened.....

Perfiedious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...