National Homes sat atop the prefabricated housing market at the time the Customliner was built in 1955. In September, 1956, the company produced its 100,000th home and had operating plants in LaFayette, Indiana; Horseheads, New York; and Tyler, Texas.
In 1959, the company was named in a federal antitrust lawsuit. The Justice Department sought to require National Homes to sell off seven recently acquired, smaller prefab firms. This acquisition brought National's market share from 25 percent to 38 percent. In contrast, according to the government, no competitor had more than 5 percent of the market share.
Acting assistant attorney general Robert Bicks wanted to "check [National Homes'] incipiency in what appares to be a tendency to monopoly in this infant industry." (Unfortunately, at this writing I have been unable to determine what became of this lawsuit.)
In early 1961, National celebrated completion of its 200,000th home. At that time, a new model was shipped to and assembled in Seabrook Park Estates in Lanham, Maryland, about 40 miles from the Customliner in Herndon, Virginia. The Washington Post described this home as a "7-room, split foyer Colonial with 1511 square feet, including an 18-by-24-foot recreation room and a 2-car garage." This model was marketed to home buyers looking to trade up, and was the only one of its kind in the D.C. area.
That same year, National Homes presented a children's playhouse, one-third the size of a normal-size house, to the District of Columbia Children's Center in the name of the president's daughter, Caroline Kennedy.
After building more than 650,000 homes across the U.S., National Homes fell on hard times in the 1980's. In August, 1984, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners rejected a proposed 25 percent reduction in worker wages and benefits. The union had previously accepted two wage concession proposals. But National Homes president David R. Price (son of founder Jim Price) argued the latest reduction was the only way to keep the Lafayette plant open. The plant was subsequently closed in December, 1984.
In 1990, the Lafayette Journal and Courier ran a series on the rise and fall of National Homes. Fourteen years after the plant closing, former workers retained unpleasant feelings and memories over the company’s demise. These include belief that a quarter century of work resulted in a negligible monthly pension, the fact that the plant would have been closed whether the union had agreed to the wage/benefit reductions or not, that the company wasted a lot of money, and that David Price seldom communicated with his company’s workers.
Sources:
National Completes 100,000th Home
The Washington Post and Times Herald (1954-1959); Sep 15, 1956; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The Washington Post pg. 50
National Homes Named In Anti-Trust Suit
The Washington Post, Times Herald (1959-1973); Nov. 21, 1959; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The Washington Post pg. B13
National Home Milestone Marked
The Washington Post, Times Herald (1959-1973); Jan 14, 1961; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The Washington Post pg. B1
Mapquest
A Doll's House Is Built for Caroline
The Washington Post, Times Herald (1959-1973); June 16, 1961; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The Washington Post (1877-1992) pg. D3
Homes Withstand Test of Time
Lafayette Journal and Courier, Aug. 16, 1990, pg. A1.
Workers Rejected 25% National Homes Pay Cut
Lafayette Journal and Courier, Aug. 14, 1990, pgs. A1 and A3.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Before actually telling you what happened in the lawsuit, I have this to say:
A market in "prefabricated houses" as distinct from the housing market generally? Particularly when the industry can be described as an "infant" industry it seems very hard to credit the idea that it could form a separate market for antitrust purposes. And I think the historical record would also suggest that this was an unreasonable market definition. But:
The complaint challenged the acquisition of:
Knox Corporation
American Houses, Inc
Lester Brothers Inc.
W.G. Best Factory-Built Homes, Inc.
The Thyer Manufacturing Corp.
Fairhill Inc.
Western Pacific Homes, Inc.
The matter was resolved on December 1, 1962 when Judge Eschbach of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana entered final judgment in the matter pursuant to the consent of the parties. That is, the U.S. and National Homes agreed to settle the case without trial. Under the consent order, National Homes agered to divest itself of Fairhill, American Houses, Thyer, and Western Pacific. I find the divestiture of Western Pacific particularly interesting since the complaint (based on the summary in the CCH reporter) suggests that but for the acquisition of the Western Pacific assets, National Homes would not have a presence west of the Rockies at all. What that suggests is that the west coast was really a different geographic market and National Homes and Western Pacific should not have been competitors at all and the purchase of Western Pacific really didn't have any competitive significance and it's difficult to think of any reason why its divestiture should have been required.
John,
Thanks for the thorough research. In view of what you've said, it would be interesting to find out what (if any) presence National Homes ultimately had on the West Coast.
Post a Comment