MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
other_rover
Joined
·
8,737 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
People on here get very upset when the press say that MG Rover is being taken over. They argue that MGR is not being taken over because MGR will own a share of the new JV and because Longbridge will remain British.

But technically the press are probably right and whilst I criticise them for makinf stories up I think we may be wrong for a change. This appears to have become a takeover. If SAIC has bought the MG brand and the rights to manage the Rover brand as well as ownership of intellectual property, powertrain and the RD60/ 75 platform then surely SAIC has taken over MG Rover. The Phoenix 4 don't even own Longbridge. That's owned by a property management company. So really MG Rover group (UK) is a workforce, some assets (including defunct brands)and a management company, with some huge liabilities which include a pension fund and a huge loan from BMW. Okay it's a bit more than that but lets be honest about this it's a takeover!

On a brighter note whilst the economics of the deal add up to a takeover, the mangement of the new company will probably be HEAVILY influenced by British management and if the Phoenix 4 relaunch Austin Healey then at least that will be British!
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
549 Posts
I think your right MGROVERnut. No matter what happens this will be presented as a JV but if all that is left of MGR is the CityRover, TF and SV it sounds like a takeover in all but name, bit like Merc's 'merger' with Chyrsler. At this stage though I just hope something positive happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,861 Posts
Yeh unfortunatly I think this will be pretty much a takeover I have thought that for a while.

It perhaps didn't start that way but MGR seem to be getting into a weaker and weaker position.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
If this were all true then it would amount to a takeover. However, if the deal is about a joint venture to design cars for two seperate companies to manufacture and included in that deal is an agreement for one of those companies (SAIC) to build the other companies (MG-Rover) current models under licence, and use their brand names in the far east (under licence) then it isn't.

I doubt the people at MGR would give everything away, after all if they have nothing left to play with then what is the point of the deal because the Chinese money is going on the new designs, not into the pockets of the Phoenix four; unless that isn't true either. The truth is nobody except those genuinely involved in the negotiations knows the true state of play. MGR's position isn't strong, but they do have something SAIC need and if they make the deal unpalatable then what is to stop MGR saying that the deal is off. True, it would mean the likely end of MGR as we know it, but sometimes the price asked is too high to pay, whatever the consequences
 

·
Registered
rover_75
Joined
·
417 Posts
It really is very simple. SAIC do not have a clue how to design, engineer and make cars. MGR do. MGR are very good at this usually on a shoestring budget. SAIC have approached VW and GM but they do not want to know.

What SAIC are getting is technology and the rights to use the Rover and MG marques, MGR are getting economies of scale, capital to design and build cars and they will share this in a mutually beneficial way to maximise their respective markets. SAIC want to dominate the East, MGR to increase its market share in the West. If MGR can obtain the same quality yet cheaper components, customers and profitability are going to immediately benefit. We all know that a Rover is a nice car to drive, imagine the same brand values and quality at the price of a Citroen.....

It is not a takeover, I would imagine SAIC want MGR to market themselves in the markets they have experience of, it would be financial suicide to dictate anything else.

As for new markets, SAIC would want a bigger say but they also need MGR here too hence the deal, remember Nanking have a 20% stake so it is 50%, 30%, 20%.

SAIC do hold the purse strings but why would SAIC want to takeover MGR lock, stock and barrel? It makes absolutely no sense at all.

Incidentally, if the press can be believed (which they largely can't) SAIC have not bought the rights to Nexus, they have signed up to it and requested design changes for their market. As far as I know, Nexus at the moment remains MGR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,608 Posts
From what we know it´s a factual takeover. That´s how a German source called it some months ago, and in the meantime there was no turn for the better.
 
G

·
Its a ****ing Joint Venture!!!!!


Can't people understand - MGR will get no direct money only from the transfer of engineering and badge rights to the JV
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
e668ecp said:
Its a ****ing Joint Venture!!!!!


Can't people understand - MGR will get no direct money only from the transfer of engineering and badge rights to the JV
That's what they would like us to believe.

Unless you are party to the details then you know no more than the rest of us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Diesel45 said:
That's what they would like us to believe.
I'd prefer it to be a JV.

But there has been so much rumor and false news over the past months, no one can say what's really going on.

So let's have a :beer: and wait. Nothing else we can do about it, right?
 

·
Registered
other_rover
Joined
·
8,737 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
e668ecp said:
Its a ****ing Joint Venture!!!!!


Can't people understand - MGR will get no direct money only from the transfer of engineering and badge rights to the JV
If you transfer that lot, then what is left? As someone said earlier it would be a factual takeover!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,361 Posts
MGROVERnut said:

They argue that MGR is not being taken over because MGR will own a share of the new JV and because Longbridge will remain British. But technically the press are probably right
How?

If SAIC has bought the MG brand
BMW owns the Rover name, doesn't mean they own MGR. Anyway, I thought we didn't know if the MG name was being sold outright to the JV (not SAIC), or just liscensed (and perhaps in some markets only).

and the rights to manage the Rover brand
See above reply!

as well as ownership of intellectual property, powertrain and the RD60/ 75 platform then surely SAIC has taken over MG Rover.
All we have been told through a few quotes and lots of press speculation is that the rights to existing products such as 25, 45, 75 have been sold to the JV (not SAIC) perhaps in separate agreements - and that the new IP which will come out in the future will be owned by the JV (not SAIC). I'd assume this will include as much of Nexus and any other ongoing projects as has been developed by MGR, but all owned by the JV and lisensed to MGR and SAIC. Powertrain is under a separate deal AFAIK, and involves K-Series manufacture in China using exisitng (maybe obsolete in Europe?) Powertrain equipment. Doesn't mean the new engines will only be made in China (if at all) and doesn't have anything to do with takeovers.

This doesn't impinge on manufacturing, Longbridge, and we really don't know to what degree MGR has freedom to produce products based on JV-owned IP outside of the JV.

The Phoenix 4 don't even own Longbridge. That's owned by a property management company.
Not quite. Longbridge is/was a vast site. The manufacturing core has been retained by PVH, the rest has been sold in a leaseback deal to a property company. If/when PVH can afford to buy it back, they can do so at something like the price they bought it (inflation adjusted?). Even so, how can something not owned by someone be taken over unless SAIC were doing a deal with St. Mogwai property developers or whatever they're called.

Add this to the rest of what you've said, and I see no hint of a takeover. I'm yet to see anyone back up the takeover claim without resorting to half-truths and untruths, such as this:

iga wrote:
No matter what happens this will be presented as a JV but if all that is left of MGR is the CityRover, TF and SV it sounds like a takeover in all but name, bit like Merc's 'merger' with Chyrsler.
I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure I have enough intelligence to look at the facts and draw my own conclusion as to whether something is a partnership, merger or takeover. I suspect, like mgrovernut, you have got your facts wrong, or are relying on complete speculation. Yes, it probably does look like a takeover to you, but that's because you asre not looking at reality, whether that's what you've read or what you think is going on.

For example, you omit the 75 and any new products (such as Nexus) from what you think MGR will be left with. We don't even know if the 25/ZR will be dropped from UK production.

FWIT a merger can easily be a takeover if one partner is stronger or more influential than the other. Happens to most mergers as well. However, a partnership is different. DM is not an example of a partnership. Even if SAIC bought a stake in MGR (which has been denied), that would not mean takeover. We simply don't know if MGR is going to be swallowed up, or SAIC become an extension of MGR.

Atmos wrote:

From what we know it´s a factual takeover. That´s how a German source called it some months ago, and in the meantime there was no turn for the better.
Care to elaborate in what way it's a takeover, I'd love to know after 8 months of empty claims when all I can see is a partnership?

That's what they would like us to believe.

Unless you are party to the details then you know no more than the rest of us.
Now this is getting like a very silly Monty Python sketch. Everything points to a joint venture except denied speculation. There's no point in imagining that something else is going on simply based on the lack of reporting of it :banghead:


 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top