Reviews
The performance magazine industry in the 1960s and 1970s were essentially marketing tools for the domestic car companies. Advertising by the "Big Three" (GM, Ford, and Chrysler) funded most of them in large part. AMC - a Johnny-come-lately initially wanted no part of the performance market and didn't begin to buy into the hype until the 1967 model year although they had been conducting performance related projects including the AMX before that time.When AMC finally did enter the performance game, the marketplace had been lying in wait for them for some time. It was a marketing ambush in every sense of the word. AMC's first efforts at performance were met with derision by the public who had essentially no knowledge of American Motors products. Their views were shaped entirely by what appeared in the newspapers and car magazines.
For example, Hot Rod magazine published a February 1970 article by Steve Kelly, "Too Much of a Rebel" stated, "AMC's Rebel Machine reminds us of a great defense lawyer who, despite losing his biggest case, still boasted that it was his greatest courtroom scene. The Rebel Machine is a good effort on American Motors' part but it isn't a winner. If there is an attempt here to chase down the well-known middle-class supercar market nobody but American Motors need worry. Here's a car that lists for $3,500 at the starting point, but lacks and appealing interior, feels way too big (and is) to be a handler, and is marked with more identity than Peter Fonda's two wheeler, with about the same taste. Not many of the folks we talked with while we had the car could think of any reason they'd want this car, with 36 months to pay and all the bright paint."
In a press release of 16 October 1969, AMC VP R.N. McNealy noted, "the supercar buyer is usually young, relatively affluent and has a "critical awareness" of exterior styling. At the same time he wants to be treated as an individual and stand out from the crowd. The Rebel Machine's distinctive paint job, rakish nose-down attitude and obvious performance characteristics lets the supercar buyer express his identity, or, in the words of today, 'Do your own thing'. Being different from the crowd today does not necessarily mean being against something, but rather in reinforcing certain specific ideas. We anticipate that the Machine will identify with this new brand of rebel, who demonstrates for something."
This was very bold marketing statement for its time and remains unique to this day in automotive marketing history. Essentially, this statement aimed the car at a very specific sort of person and that type of person is almost never the target of a marketing strategy. AMC were looking for future leaders. And in truth, they did find them. A very high proportion of Machine owners went on to become professionals and business owners. The original owners were generally of the same age and income level. AMC misunderstood, perhaps intentionally, the sales potential for the Rebel Machine by a fairly wide margin.
That misunderstanding was compounded by misunderstanding the demands of muscle car buyers, for the Machine was underpowered and overweight. Unlike the SC/Rambler, the Machine could not win in stock classes at the drag strip, because it was at the heavy end of the weight scale vs. horsepower in its class. The only way to have overcome that would have been to introduce more Service Package components. The cost of obtaining the required emissions certificate was too high for no perceived financial return, AMC was caught in a classic "Catch 22", and the Machine proved a failure. Why AMC had not chosen to continue using the smaller Rambler American chassis is not known.
0 comments:
Post a Comment