MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was just watching a BBC news video from the website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4422705.stm# where it said :

“Analyis’s suggest that bringing in the receivers maybe just what the Chinese want”.

“What they really want is the technology, and if they go into receivership then SAIC can ‘cherry pick’ the best bits of the business at a more competitive price” said Paul French, business analysis.

For months now SAIC officials have been snooping around Longbridge sussing out the design and technological capability of MG-Rover. They probably have a damn inventory list. Could it be that SAIC were just stringing MG-Rover along with the joint venture deal, giving them hope and preventing them from looking for another way out just so they could get their hands on the technology when the company when bust.
All very convenient isn’t it. The month that MG-Rover runs out of money SAIC announce they are pulling out of the talks. I have never trusted SAIC.

I reckon the British Government should block the sale of MG-Rover technology to SAIC .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,618 Posts
< N I C K > said:
I was just watching a BBC news video from the website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4422705.stm# where it said :

“Analyis’s suggest that bringing in the receivers maybe just what the Chinese want”.

“What they really want is the technology, and if they go into receivership then SAIC can ‘cherry pick’ the best bits of the business at a more competitive price” said Paul French, business analysis.

For months now SAIC officials have been snooping around Longbridge sussing out the design and technological capability of MG-Rover. They probably have a damn inventory list. Could it be that SAIC were just stringing MG-Rover along with the joint venture deal, giving them hope and preventing them from looking for another way out just so they could get their hands on the technology when the company when bust.
All very convenient isn’t it. The month that MG-Rover runs out of money SAIC announce they are pulling out of the talks. I have never trusted SAIC.

I reckon the British Government should block the sale of MG-Rover technology to SAIC .
It's certainly possible but look at this quote from todays Guardian:

"SAIC, however, denied it had walked away from the negotiations. A spokesman said the company had always sought to ensure that MG Rover and its parent, Phoenix Venture Holdings, could show they were solvent when the deal was signed and for two further years. "

"They failed to do so and no intervention was made to enable them to do so," he said. "We did not withdraw from the talks. We are disappointed with the outcome."

Curioser and curioser!
 

·
Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,497 Posts
davidcalgary said:
It's certainly possible but look at this quote from todays Guardian:

"SAIC, however, denied it had walked away from the negotiations. A spokesman said the company had always sought to ensure that MG Rover and its parent, Phoenix Venture Holdings, could show they were solvent when the deal was signed and for two further years. "

"They failed to do so and no intervention was made to enable them to do so," he said. "We did not withdraw from the talks. We are disappointed with the outcome."

Curioser and curioser!


Well hopefully this means the Fat lady hasn't sung??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
984 Posts
I'm not a conspiracy theorist but yeah I've thought about that one too... they've seen what they could get, and so they'll just wait till the price is right....


Business is business. It would not surprise me if SAIC buys what's left of MG-R and call it their own, sad as it may be.
 

·
Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,497 Posts
Roodosutaa said:
I'm not a conspiracy theorist but yeah I've thought about that one too... they've seen what they could get, and so they'll just wait till the price is right....


Business is business. It would not surprise me if SAIC buys what's left of MG-R and call it their own, sad as it may be.


Then the British public need to stop them from doing so. They should get diddly squat unless they are prepared to return to the deal as planned. I say tell them to take a hike. if the British public allow them to grab bits of MG-R at a knockdown price they should be ashamed. Someone mentioned Virgin or Branson. Perhaps they/he would loan MG-R the 100 million for a small stake in the company. Branson would be a great pitchman for a revived MG-R.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,361 Posts
That Paul French has been wheeled out before. Hasn't got a clue like the rest of them. Another one who thought it was going to be a takeover, another one who cannot understand the difference between partnership/working together, and merger/takeover. Another one who assumes the Chinese are clever but PVH stupid. I guess that's better than assuming they're crooks, because they would have to be pretty stupid crooks.

It all depends on what happens next, and what's been signed off already. I doub't know, and I don't expect the press do either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
838 Posts
< N I C K > said:
I reckon the British Government should block the sale of MG-Rover technology to SAIC .
Nail on the head. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should SAIC be allowed to profit from their appalling actions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,119 Posts
Here, Here they have made their bed and now they can lie it in. They had the chance to be in with producing some bang up to date cars with class and character and they blew it.

Now they should just go back to shining up their ****ty Ssangyongs...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
31,560 Posts
There is one possible life line still, the chinese may have wanted this to happen, even planned for it, just to be able to buy MGR for a bargain basement price.

Just a thought that occurred to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
Stephen K. Hone said:
Then the British public need to stop them from doing so. They should get diddly squat unless they are prepared to return to the deal as planned. I say tell them to take a hike. if the British public allow them to grab bits of MG-R at a knockdown price they should be ashamed. Someone mentioned Virgin or Branson. Perhaps they/he would loan MG-R the 100 million for a small stake in the company. Branson would be a great pitchman for a revived MG-R.
How is it anything to do with the British public what happens to a private company which goes into liquidation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,679 Posts
SteveChilds said:
There is one possible life line still, the chinese may have wanted this to happen, even planned for it, just to be able to buy MGR for a bargain basement price.

Just a thought that occurred to me.
My thought too Steve.

One problem though. BMW is a creditor to the tune of £500m. If the company is liquidated, they get any assets it still has. If it is sold as a going concern, someone has to stump up the £500m in one go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,551 Posts
SteveChilds said:
There is one possible life line still, the chinese may have wanted this to happen, even planned for it, just to be able to buy MGR for a bargain basement price.

Just a thought that occurred to me.
I think this is very likely indeed. Lets face it - the rumours were that around 2,300 would lose their jobs if the deal went through. If that is going to happen in any case, maybe we should focus on saving the other 3,700 jobs. If SAIC come in and are able to safeguard those other jobs, then I think it is great.

Then of course, BMW may have claim to alot of the the MG Rover assets - I wouldn't be adverse to seeing BMW back in the game plan either. I know they did the dirty in 2000, but times change and we have to move on. MG would be a fantastic fit with MINI. The Phoenix 4 have made a great job of promoting the MG brand, so why wouldn't BMW want it back.

Then of course, we have the future models that SAIC were obviously aware of. What future do they hold?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
king arthur said:
My thought too Steve.

One problem though. BMW is a creditor to the tune of £500m. If the company is liquidated, they get any assets it still has. If it is sold as a going concern, someone has to stump up the £500m in one go.
It might be wrong but the Guardian investigation/muck-raking back in 2004 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/executivepay/story/0,1204,1143083,00.html )
says that the BMW loan is to Techtronic rather than the MG Rover Group itself, and that Techtronic's assets are basically just its shares in MG Rover Group - and MG Rover Group (possibly) doesn't have that many assets in its own name.

I just want to know which part of PVH owns the IP on all the stuff that's been under development (Nexus, engines, sportscars etc).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,795 Posts
The difference there is that there is only one set of railways - if that collapsed then there would be none. The car industry is not in any such position - lots of companies trying to get your money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts


Failure of MG Rover deal not a setback for China's SAIC - analysts


400 words
8 April 2005
11:14
AFX UK Focus
English
Copyright AFX News, 2005 All reproduction and presentation rights reserved.
SHANGHAI (AFX) - Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp's (SAIC) retreat from a UK-based joint venture with MG Rover is not necessarily a setback and may even provide new opportunities for the Chinese automaker, analysts said.

'This is not necessarily a bad thing for Shanghai Automotive, and with the bankruptcy of Rover there is now the possibility for future discussions,' said Geoff Liu, representative of Automotive Resources Asia in Beijing.

Liu also noted that talks had gone on for a prolonged period, during which the domestic business environment for SAIC had softened.

'They had a very good domestic market when the talks started, but over the past year things had changed,' he said. 'With the downturn in China, it's only natural that they would be more cautious.'

The Chinese auto market suffered a decline from last year due to government macro-economic tightening, rising competition and a tightening of lending by banks for auto purchases.

UK automaker Rover summoned an insolvency administrator yesterday following the collapse of talks with SAIC. The Chinese side backed away from the venture after failing to secure financial guarantees.

Liu noted that the deal was not a conventional business arrangement in that it had heavy involvement from governments on both sides. SAIC is state owned and the government is promoting its expansion, while in the UK government did not want to see the failure of its remaining independent automaker in an election year, he said.

Prime Minister Tony Blair this week called a parliamentary election for May 5.

In order to secure a deal with SAIC, the UK government had offered MG Rover a 25 mln stg VAT deferral and a 100 mln stg bridging loan.

Yale Zhang of automotive consultancy CSM Worldwide in Shanghai also said that the failure of Rover could provide SAIC with better opportunities.

'After Rover's debts are cleared, it may be possible for SAIC to buy the parts of the company that they are most interested in,' he said, noting that the Chinese firm had been eager to acquire new research and development resources.

SAIC was reportedly concerned over the financial health of Phoenix Venture Holdings, the owner of MG Rover, and about Rover's pension liabilities and its debt to former owner BMW.

SAIC officials could not be reached for comment on Friday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Dan Lockton said:
I just want to know which part of PVH owns the IP on all the stuff that's been under development (Nexus, engines, sportscars etc).
Well, unfortunately/fortunately/not sure if it makes a difference, MG Rover Group Ltd owns the design rights on the exisitng models, plus the MG GT and the 75 Coupé (http://webdb1.patent.gov.uk/rs-bin/...OWSER_TYPE=nav4&PREVIOUS_SEARCH_FORM=EDITION7 and subsequent pages), so probably owns the IP on the new models too (does SAIC already own any?)

Unless the newly-formed "MG Rover Cars Ltd" (formed 22/3/2005 !) as mentioned in one of the other threads has had assets like the IP transferred to it ahead of MG Rover Group going bump...?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,361 Posts
Yale Zhang of automotive consultancy CSM Worldwide in Shanghai also said that the failure of Rover could provide SAIC with better opportunities.

'After Rover's debts are cleared, it may be possible for SAIC to buy the parts of the company that they are most interested in,' he said, noting that the Chinese firm had been eager to acquire new research and development resources.


Surely Rover would have a better bargaining position if all those liabilities were cleared? Then again, if SAIC have the money then Rover might just allow themselves to be absorbed. Mid you, SAIC would have to then foot all the R&D, productionisation, tooling and testing, launch costs etc
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top