<VV> GM Prototypes and show cars

[Seth Emerson]

As yet unmentioned is a big $$ reason for the destruction of the "show" cars. Those cars were built as part of "Research & Development" money. That money can be written off as an expense for tax and profitability. An "expense" like those, can be written off immediately. The cost of building those was expensed as advertising R&D.  If the cars were sold, the cost for the R&D could no longer be called an expense, it would have to be called an investment. And the accountants would have to track that investment and depreciate it for some period of time. If sold, the income would have to be recorded by another set of accountants. Rest assured, it would at a loss, considering the cost of the building of the car.  The corporations didn't want to show all those stockholders how much they were "losing" on these show cars, (no matter how much prestige and valuable customer input they were gaining). But calling it a "Research & Development" expense? Well, that shows forward thinking and planning for the future. <grin>



-----Original Message-----
From: FrankDuVal via VirtualVairs <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
To: virtualvairs <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
Sent: Sun, Oct 21, 2018 9:30 am
Subject: Re: <VV> Two seater prototypes.

And, not many had drivetrains, or working drivetrains. I have a friend who does body work on these for Joe Bortz, the big time collector of these cars. And through him I know Larry Claypool added electric motors to one, IIRC the LaSalle II. The engine in the vehicle is a fuel injected mock up. My friend spent a lot of time in the Corvair museum in Richmond studying the GM show Corvairs and how they were built.Some notable ones that were built to be driven are the Buick Y-Job and the Super Monza.Frank DuValOn 10/21/2018 2:16 AM, Jay Maechtlen via VirtualVairs wrote:> On 10/19/2018 10:56 AM, Smitty Smith via VirtualVairs wrote:>> Smitty says;  Guarding corporate styling secrets was not the only >> reason One-Off cars were crushed.  The studies were not built to any >> safety standards and could not be certified.  A lot of them had >> little or no suspension.  Body frames of square tubing were common >> and existed only to support the body.  Any crash was likely to be >> catastrophic.  So companies did not release the cars to the public >> for fear of being sued by the buyers.>> heh - while some of us might build a car that way, nobody would expect > it to meet OEM standards.> Way different from getting something 'built by GM'.> _______________________________________________This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are the propertyof the writer, please attribute properly. For help, mailto:vv-help at corvair.orgThis list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, http://www.corvair.org/Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.orgChange your options: http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairsArchives: http://www.vv.corvair.org/archive.htm _______________________________________________