and dont forget Little Anthony and the Imperials- that rock and roll group
from the 1950's.
Steve
65 LeBaron
claxton,ga.
>From: John Meyer <donkiyoti@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: IML: The name: Imperial
>Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 19:25:17 -0700
>
>Hi Everyone,
>
>I think we all agree that Chrysler failed to market the Imperial
>effectively, and also failed to separate Imperial as a separate marque from
>the Chrysler name. Imperial started out and ended up as "Chrysler Imperial"
>and that's how nearly everybody refer to our cars today, never mind that
>most of them don't carry the word "Chysler" anywhere. The design and
>engineering of the cars wasn't the problem. I think also that (nearly) all
>of us agree Elwood Engel wasn't at fault.
>
>But what about the name Imperial itself?
>
>We know that Chrysler's use of the name Imperial was meant to connote the
>best of the best, the top, the pinnacle, etc. But many many other companies
>and entrepreneurs had exactly the same idea. Think of Imperial Margarine,
>etc. I look in the yellow pages today and I see Imperial Gem & Jewelry and
>Imperial Transportation services. How many plumbers, roofers, dry cleaners,
>barber shops, etc. do you want to bet used the name Imperial all through
>the 50s, 60s & 70s? I'd bet there were thousands. The name was really
>watered down to the point of being meaningless and having no real identity.
>
>GM certainly never had that problem with Cadillac. Cadillac meant Cadillac
>and that meant prestige. The name Imperial just didn't have the power to
>lend much prestige to Chrysler's top of the line. The beautiful (and now
>highly sought after) Chrysler Imperials of the 30s helped doom Chrysler's
>efforts to establish Imperial as a separate marque: it would always be
>"Chrysler Imperial." The name "300" was much more successful. People never
>forgot that 300 meant a snazzy Chrysler car. The association stayed strong
>enough for Chrysler to revive that name.
>
>Imperial has a lot of meanings, and in the 30s it was just fine to be
>imperialistic. Imperial Navy, British Empire, and so on. Studebaker even
>sold a car named the Dictator. Nowadays using Imperial would be a marketing
>disaster. These days more people would connect "Imperial" to Star Wars and
>Darth Vader than to any kind of car.
>
>All the same, I always just say "It's an Imperial" when someone asks what
>kind of car I'm driving.
>
>Best,
>John Meyer
>1965 Crown
>Tucson
>
>
>
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network