In article <091a01c0fd96$efe38140$0100a8c0@lucifer>, Kai M. Radicke
<kmr@pil.net> writes
>I personally actively discourage all young admirers from becoming interested
>in Triumphs, or any British Car.
What on Earth for? By all means warn them about the perils of driving
a classic car built by British workers - the rust, the reliability
problems, the leaks and so on - but how better to ensure that these
little cars are cared for into the next century and beyond than by
encouraging those young people, for whom these perils are merely
challenges, to buy them and look after them?
> Those of you with children will know that
>a child's interest in a particular object or subject matter may be piqued
>for a while and suddenly dwindle and then a complete loss of interest
>follows. EVERY person has had that experience about one thing or another.
Adults suffer from this (some of them, at least), just as much as
"children" - and anyone old enough to have a driving licence is hardly
young enough to be called a "child".
>I view young admirers of my Triumph as potential future DPOs, who will
>purchase a car for all the wrong reasons without thought about future needs
>and become dissuaded with the car in a short amount of time.
Some, possibly; others, probably not.
>
>The argument that if we (the current Triumph owners) do not bring in new,
>younger blood into the ranks that our cars will disappear is simply not
>true. Those of us with the ambition, resources, and the least limitations,
>will fill the void of fewer owners by purchasing and housing greater numbers
>of Triumphs.
And how is that beneficial, or even desirable? Cars are for driving,
not for locking up in a four-car garage.
> Dare I say that the majority of the list membership is headed
>towards retirement, or early retirement, age within the decade (or shortly
>thereafter)?
Thanks a lot. I'm 34, and by no means the youngest list member.
Whilst I would have no objection to retiring before the end of the
decade, it seems an unlikely eventuality.
>There is one exception to my argument, and that is of young enthusiasts
>whose parents (or close family members) are already afflicted with British
>car ownership, and thus the cars have been present throughout the
>influential periods of their young lives.
So young adults who choose to reject a family history of, say, French
car ownership, and find Triumphs attractive and desirable are to be
banned from owning one in your Brave New World? At what age would you
allow them to buy a Triumph? 35? 45? 55?
This is absurd. The only fit owners for LBCs are people who wish to
own them. Full stop. Some will take greater care of them than
others, but so what? Your idealised gerontocracy of Triumph ownership
is about as far from the original target market for these little cars as
it is possible to get. A nineteen-year-old who chooses to buy a
Triumph in 2001 is infinitely more likely to look after it than the
twenty-something who bought it in the first place.
ATB
--
Mike
Michael Hargreave Mawson, author of "Eyewitness in the Crimea"
http://www.greenhillbooks.com/booksheets/eyewitness_in_the_crimea.html
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe triumphs
///
|