MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
other_rover
Joined
·
8,737 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just been reading Keith's site and I the articles that have been posted on BMW and the Triumph brand.

Reading the blogs I got the impression that BMW is divided on whethe or not to relaunch Triumph. They seem to recognise the strength of the brand but appears frightened to take a risk on relaunching it. Which is weird because if they are convinced that it's a strong brand then the logic would be that the risk is acceptable....

One of the blogs also suggested that BMW may have tried to buy Triumph Motorbikes. Possibly demonstrating that their masterplan would be to re-unite a car and motorbike operation.

One of BMW's concerns is fitting another brand into their dealers. But if the MINI brand is to spawn a family of cars then perhaps MINI and Triumph should begin developing their own dealer network anyway?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,748 Posts
MGROVERnut said:
Just been reading Keith's site and I the articles that have been posted on BMW and the Triumph brand.

Reading the blogs I got the impression that BMW is divided on whethe or not to relaunch Triumph. They seem to recognise the strength of the brand but appears frightened to take a risk on relaunching it. Which is weird because if they are convinced that it's a strong brand then the logic would be that the risk is acceptable....

One of the blogs also suggested that BMW may have tried to buy Triumph Motorbikes. Possibly demonstrating that their masterplan would be to re-unite a car and motorbike operation.

One of BMW's concerns is fitting another brand into their dealers. But if the MINI brand is to spawn a family of cars then perhaps MINI and Triumph should begin developing their own dealer network anyway?
I don't think John Bloor (owner Triumph Hinkley Motorcycles) would even let BMW through his gates, Bmw already make Bikes, plus Triumph Hinkley Motorcycles are doing very well in the Usa at the moment as well.
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
1,496 Posts
MGROVERnut said:
Just been reading Keith's site and I the articles that have been posted on BMW and the Triumph brand.

Reading the blogs I got the impression that BMW is divided on whethe or not to relaunch Triumph. They seem to recognise the strength of the brand but appears frightened to take a risk on relaunching it. Which is weird because if they are convinced that it's a strong brand then the logic would be that the risk is acceptable....

One of the blogs also suggested that BMW may have tried to buy Triumph Motorbikes. Possibly demonstrating that their masterplan would be to re-unite a car and motorbike operation.

One of BMW's concerns is fitting another brand into their dealers. But if the MINI brand is to spawn a family of cars then perhaps MINI and Triumph should begin developing their own dealer network anyway?
With regards to the dealer network, the easiest approach would be for the existing dealers to expand and buy/develop seperate sites for Triumph and MINI sales, so you've still got just one set of dealers and just one supply chain, but twice as many outlets, half BMW, half Triumph/MINI.

BMW have seen from both MGR and from VAG that multiple brands focusing on similair markets is no bad thing. The Rover 75, and MG ZT didn't just steal sales from BMW, but also from Audi, Mercedes, Volkswagen and others.

Even if a new 3-Series or Z3 based Triumph Stag takes 10,000 sales pa from BMW, hopefully it will do the same to Audi, Volvo and SAAB, increasing BMW Group overall market share by 30,000 units pa. That's the way BMW Group need to look at things. Trouble is, they've never been brave enough to think like this before...
 
G

·
Sadly Triumph died 25 years ago. Let it RIP.

Lets concentrate on MG and Rover and help develop them into strong Anglo-CHinese brands
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
625 Posts
cirian75 said:
I don't think John Bloor (owner Triumph Hinkley Motorcycles) would even let BMW through his gates, Bmw already make Bikes, plus Triumph Hinkley Motorcycles are doing very well in the Usa at the moment as well.
Can you imagine the sheer envy, greed, malice and absolute desperation BMW must feel when looking at the success of Triumph Motorcycles? And combined with the brand issue, I am surprised that they have not made a bid before now.


The only outcome to that would be something along the lines of another story which has a familiar ring..........To take a profitable motor company, turn it into a company making a claimed loss, slash the range, shut down the UK operations whilst running away with a valuable brand to use to their own ends and throwing the workers to the dogs. And the great British public would only shrug their shoulders. Again.
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
1,496 Posts
Interloper said:
Can you imagine the sheer envy, greed, malice and absolute desperation BMW must feel when looking at the success of Triumph Motorcycles? And combined with the brand issue, I am surprised that they have not made a bid before now.


The only outcome to that would be something along the lines of another story which has a familiar ring..........To take a profitable motor company, turn it into a company making a claimed loss, slash the range, shut down the UK operations whilst running away with a valuable brand and throwing workers to the dogs.
Rover Group was only profitable under BAe thanks to not spending any real sums of money on R&D during the 5 years it was under BAe ownership. If you factor in R&D and licencing Honda technology, an ill forceived BAe idea, then it's little wonder Rover lost so much money at the hands of BMW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Nick Birse said:
Rover Group was only profitable under BAe thanks to not spending any real sums of money on R&D during the 5 years it was under BAe ownership. If you factor in R&D and licencing Honda technology, an ill forceived BAe idea, then it's little wonder Rover lost so much money at the hands of BMW.
Absolutely right, and had B*M been serious about making Rover work they would have fully integrated model development and allowed sharing of platforms just like VAG do. Imagine a ZT but with a chassis from an M3 and an M5 V8 engine...all wrapped up in a british designed body. SWEET.
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
679 Posts
Given how paranoid BMW were over letting Rover have any sporty models I can't see them wanting another (cheaper) brand with sporting pretentions now that the 1-series is around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,392 Posts
Thing is Mannor - as the ZT V8 shows - you don't need BMW to prepare a brilliant floorpan for you. The ZT V8 is a beautiful car to drive, and will give a BMW a hard day in the old handling/fun department any day.


I really hope BMW don't get their filthy hands on any other british marques.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,428 Posts
Addict said:
Given how paranoid BMW were over letting Rover have any sporty models I can't see them wanting another (cheaper) brand with sporting pretentions now that the 1-series is around.
Exactly - BMW killed all the Rover sporty models save the MGF which was too far developed. They were **** scared and rightly too - hence the MG ZT kicking the 323's arse in an independent test.

Anthony.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,748 Posts
It's prob why the 200Vi left the factory without the suspension and tyres it should have had, the ZR160 is prob what the Vi was originally planned to be.
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
1,496 Posts
red_rover said:
Thing is Mannor - as the ZT V8 shows - you don't need BMW to prepare a brilliant floorpan for you. The ZT V8 is a beautiful car to drive, and will give a BMW a hard day in the old handling/fun department any day.


I really hope BMW don't get their filthy hands on any other british marques.
Indeed, your totally correct when it comes to the engineering side of the argument, the RWD 75/ZT chassis is as good as any BMW chassis, but when it comes down to simple economics, neither BMW nor Rover really had the hundreds of millions it cost to develop the Rover 75 platform.

The Rover 75 should have been, under all the pretty retro clothes, nothing but a BMW 3-Series, making use of as many BMW components as possible and it should have been competing with the Volkswagen Passat and other high quality rep mobiles. Leave the 3-Series to fight it out with the Audi A4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,608 Posts
Interloper said:
Can you imagine the sheer envy, greed, malice and absolute desperation BMW must feel when looking at the success of Triumph Motorcycles?
No.

In the global scheme of things the BMW motorcycle business is tiny and Triumph Motorcycles very tiny. It has no real importance for BMW.
 

·
Registered
rover_75
Joined
·
2,596 Posts
Interloper said:
The only outcome to that would be something along the lines of another story which has a familiar ring..........To take a profitable motor company, turn it into a company making a claimed loss, slash the range, shut down the UK operations whilst running away with a valuable brand to use to their own ends and throwing the workers to the dogs. And the great British public would only shrug their shoulders. Again.
And more familiar than we often think too.

1. Borgward - clearly the late '50s/early '60s German 'Ultimate Driving Machine', from the United Kingdom Borward Drivers Club:
On 31st January 1961 a sensational newspaper headline appeared "Borgward Stops Payment!" and suppliers' credit lines were cut off and the Bremen Senate stopped all cash flow. Less than a year earlier Senator Eggers and Dr. Johannes Semler had 'saved' BMW, which had been in a far worse state than Borgward. They came in to help but rumour has it that Herbert Quandt of BMW did everything in his power to hinder any rescue of Borgward.
.....
The replacement Isabella with its new 1600cc engine never came to fruition. However its Frua styled body became the basis of the Glas 1700, eventually to become a BMW.
BMW then employed Borgward's designers.

2. Glas - by the md 1960s Glas had moved into the space left by Borward's demise and their cars from the Goggomobil to the GT and 'Glaserati' V8 were better than BMW's cars. The Goggomobil was a proper 4 wheeled car unlike BMW's licenced Isetta bubble cars, the GT was a true sports coupe and Glas had a V8 engined supercar...

With Glas, BMW rebadged most of the cars as BMWs and took over most of the factories.

Sound familiar? Name me another company they've treated in the same way?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,608 Posts
The Glas V8 (and the Borgward luxury model P100) were complete failures and major reasons for the downfall of those companies.

BMW bought Glas in 1966, the only mentionable Glas model that was continued as a BMW was the Glas GT (sold as the BMW 1600 GT up to 1968 with BMW engines and drivetrain).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
MGROVERnut said:
One of the blogs also suggested that BMW may have tried to buy Triumph Motorbikes.
I can't imagine that happening. Triumph is a privately owned company and the owner, John Bloor, has put 20-odd years and countless millions of his won money into building the company.

Triumph are definitely stealing sales from BMW in the USA. There seems to be a healthy market for European brands and Triumph are making strong inroads.

Curiously, most Triumph dealers in the states seem to also be BMW dealers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,777 Posts
Atmos said:
No.

In the global scheme of things the BMW motorcycle business is tiny and Triumph Motorcycles very tiny. It has no real importance for BMW.
So why did BMW recently tried to buy Triumph motorcycles? Additionally Triumph are hardly 'very tiny' - outselling their German competitor* in the US and turning in a nice profit too. Notable points include sales up 18% in Germany where BMW have slid backwards 9%. And lastly, Triumph plans to reach 80,000 units in 2008, which would appear to attainable considering that production was over 30,000 last year. Yes, BMW produced 91,000 units in 2005 - but that's two years on the trot that the company has suffered a decrease in sales.

Rather than it having no real importance for BMW, I would counter that it is the opposite - BMW have tried to move in on what they see may be an opportunity to buy a resurging brand and cash in on the profit wave it will produce.

*If you can consider such dull and stolid bikes as competitors. I should know - I had one.
 

·
Registered
other_rover
Joined
·
8,737 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
V8King said:
So why did BMW recently tried to buy Triumph motorcycles? Additionally Triumph are hardly 'very tiny' - outselling their German competitor* in the US and turning in a nice profit too. Notable points include sales up 18% in Germany where BMW have slid backwards 9%. And lastly, Triumph plans to reach 80,000 units in 2008, which would appear to attainable considering that production was over 30,000 last year. Yes, BMW produced 91,000 units in 2005 - but that's two years on the trot that the company has suffered a decrease in sales.

Rather than it having no real importance for BMW, I would counter that it is the opposite - BMW have tried to move in on what they see may be an opportunity to buy a resurging brand and cash in on the profit wave it will produce.

*If you can consider such dull and stolid bikes as competitors. I should know - I had one.
Yes all that is true. But I think the icing on the cake for BMW is that they control the car brand. Re-uniting the two would be a dream move. They would have a growing motorbike brand that sells different bikes to BMW and then they could roll out the car brand gradually alongside the Motorbikes. Triumph could use a lot of BMW's components and work on the same product cycles as other Beemers....
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top