This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
The energy crisis was clearly a failure in planning, mostly by the US government and perhaps also by oil investors. If policies in the 50s and 60s had been more realistic, Panhard might have survived or even greatly expanded.
--
David R. Ingham22:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)reply
The original text blamed the energy crisis on the failure of Panhard. I felt that this causality was flawed - that ignorant of energy policies led to both the demise of Panhard and the energy crisis. Shall we discuss? --
SFoskett 19:44, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
What I meant was that the failure of Panhard is an example of how the energy policies (and un-informed investments?) let to the energy crisis. Maybe I was not clear.--
David R. Ingham15:43, 9 August 2005 (UTC)reply
The Energy Crisis was OPEC punishing the west for its constant support of Israel plain and simple. It had nothing to do with energy policies or investmants. it was strictly political.
User:Tomtom904115:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Not Dead Yet?
"The last Panhard car was built in 1967." and yet there's a picture of the "VBL" which was "developed during the 80s and entered operational service in France in 1990" and there are "1100 in use in France".
So which is it?
I think that means that Panhard quit the civilian car business in 1967 and since then has made only military vehicles. The
VBL is the Véhicule Blindé Léger -- "Light armoured vehicle".--
GagHalfrunt19:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)reply
Panhard bought by Swedish Volvo
In late october 2012 Swedish truck company Volvo bought Panhard for 538 million SEK.
Note, Volvo (truck company) is not the sam as Volvo PV (cars) that is owned by Geely. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
62.182.222.40 (
talk)
08:57, 7 February 2013 (UTC)reply