MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
hi all

I must say too many people downing the P4 i think if they didnt take control one way or another MGRover / Rover Group would have been shut or seriously reduced , ok they messed up ona few things dont we all but they should have been givern the credit they deserve for trying and keeping those people in a job for 5 yrs longer than they would have had under BMW or alchemy.
The fact people laugh and critasize you for owning an rover even though it was an MG , all becouse of the BL stigma. Faced against this i dont think they did bad the out come was bound to come i just hope one day in a few yrs a british firm buys back the MG and rover names like triumph motorcycles have done over the last 10 yrs. I make no apologies for defending the P4.

Download the Radical ESQ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,488 Posts
MG ZS 120+ said:
hi all

I must say too many people downing the P4 i think if they didnt take control one way or another MGRover / Rover Group would have been shut or seriously reduced , ok they messed up ona few things dont we all but they should have been givern the credit they deserve for trying and keeping those people in a job for 5 yrs longer than they would have had under BMW or alchemy.
The fact people laugh and critasize you for owning an rover even though it was an MG , all becouse of the BL stigma. Faced against this i dont think they did bad the out come was bound to come i just hope one day in a few yrs a british firm buys back the MG and rover names like triumph motorcycles have done over the last 10 yrs. I make no apologies for defending the P4.

Download the Radical ESQ
The thing is that most of us members here and others associated with rover appreciated the P4 coming to the rescue at first, there is no denying it but once the cracks started to appear such as losses in sales, negative media coverage, lack of money etc, we became frustrated - and the pensions fund and the collapse in 05 could be described 'the tip of the iceberg' :) We lost faith in them.
 

·
Registered
other_rover
Joined
·
8,737 Posts
Rover_King said:
Well yes they kept jobs for people for five years. But they still crashed.
True but they crashed in such a way that volume car making has a chance at Longbridge. Nanjing are already talking about employing 400 people so it won't be soon until we can prove that the Alchemy plan was not the best plan for maximising jobs at Longbridge....and that's before people add the number of people who will be working for dealers to the equation...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,387 Posts
MGROVERnut said:
True but they crashed in such a way that volume car making has a chance at Longbridge. Nanjing are already talking about employing 400 people so it won't be soon until we can prove that the Alchemy plan was not the best plan for maximising jobs at Longbridge....and that's before people add the number of people who will be working for dealers to the equation...
And if the P4 hadn't set up the links with Nanjing around three years ago, I doubt very much that you could have written anything like that today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
I dont see how it would be possible to do a worse job than what the P4 did.

all that 'yeah well they kept the place going for 5 years', well - big freakin wow, i am gonna say that I could have done that! FFS if you gave me a fully staffed, fully operational car factory (and engine plant) knocking out what was then a fairly competitive, complete range of vehicles, a huge mountain of new unsold cars, a and half a billion quid and said 'there you are, get on with it then', I can assure you that I would have a damn sight more to show for 5 years' work than those clowns.

I will thank them for bringing us the 75 V8 though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,119 Posts
The sad thing is, everything was going so well until TWR went bust with their hopeless F1 venture...

I wonder if people woud hold to same opinions if: A. They brought a TWR-sourced Rover 55 to the market; or B. Managed the deal with SAIC or Brilliance?

Up 'til mid 2002, they were doing fine...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,531 Posts
The P4 may have been the best option in 2000, but that doesn't automatically mean they did the best job possible thereafter. The period from 2000-2005 was basically lurching from one crisis to another, and the P4 clearly weren't up to the challenge. They might have hired someone who was (Iacocca?), but they didn't. The fact remains that Longbridge collapsed on their watch, by which point MG Rover no longer owned their own plant, their own engine designs, or even the rights to their most popular models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
Liam Olf said:
I wonder if people woud hold to same opinions if: A. They brought a TWR-sourced Rover 55 to the market; or B. Managed the deal with SAIC or Brilliance?
Admittedly, probably not, I would be hero worshipping them if that had happened, and asking for a job with their company. Unfortunately, they failed to hit both of those targets, along with pretty much every other target they aimed for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,119 Posts
e668ecp said:
How was it there fault that TWR went bust? How was it their fault that HMG ****** up the deal with SAIC
I think everything just tailed off from the TWR collapse.

HMG can't really be to blame as the EU had their hands tied, and MG-Rover needed a new car if they were ever going to see an improvement in their finances.

It doesn't help when £100,000,000 is thrown down the ****er when greedy TWR administrators claim what is rightfully yours either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,531 Posts
TWR was a mistake in the first place, MG Rover was perfectly capable of doing the job in-house. Contracting out was a waste of money and time, especially since it left MGR's own resources underutilized.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,119 Posts
It's easy to say in hindsight, but I'm sure TWR could have done it a damn sight cheaper than what it would have cost MG-Rover to do it themselves, and at that time MG-R really were counting the pennies and I for one don't blame them for that.

Who could have guessed TWR going into administration?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
well, thats the clincher, I agree that was quite a massive kick in the nads for MG-R and the P4.

Unfortunately thats business so theres not a lot you can say. Perhaps MGR should have done a more detailed audit of TWR including their finances before they decided to get them on board? Its pretty common in the car industry to evaluate a supplier's financial position before signing contracts for stuff with them, for exactly this reason. Admittedly TWR could theoretically 'cook the books' or something, but ultimately MG-R failed to take adequate steps, whatever those steps may be, to insure themselves against this catastrophe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,861 Posts
Im definatly in the blame camp but having said its easy to be wise after the event, and clearly TWR and china brilliance didnt help.

Clearly they had a difficult task overall and MGR had no long term without a partnership or partnerships with other car companies.

However I would blame them for the following.

1. SV, 75 V8 complete and utter waste of time and money, unless you are selling in USA

2. No short term stratagy to give a major revamp the 25 or the 45, 25 better choice as could be sold along side RD60 even though meant to be a replacement. Most MGR projects have a history of slippage therefore if they had spent say £70 million for a fairly major revamp in 2003 at the latest, could have helped maintain sales.

3. CityRover. Made a pigs ear of it, either needed to be a better car for the money or sold cheaper not under the Rover brand. I believe I have read comments from the P4 along the lines that the CR would have been OK if it hadnt been for the Panda. Absolute Rubish.

4. Partnership, did they try had enough for this afterall it was critical to MGR's long term survival, Proton came and went, Fiat came and went one wonders why.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,551 Posts
iburnley said:
Im definatly in the blame camp but having said its easy to be wise after the event, and clearly TWR and china brilliance didnt help.

Clearly they had a difficult task overall and MGR had no long term without a partnership or partnerships with other car companies.

However I would blame them for the following.

1. SV, 75 V8 complete and utter waste of time and money, unless you are selling in USA

2. No short term stratagy to give a major revamp the 25 or the 45, 25 better choice as could be sold along side RD60 even though meant to be a replacement. Most MGR projects have a history of slippage therefore if they had spent say £70 million for a fairly major revamp in 2003 at the latest, could have helped maintain sales.

3. CityRover. Made a pigs ear of it, either needed to be a better car for the money or sold cheaper not under the Rover brand. I believe I have read comments from the P4 along the lines that the CR would have been OK if it hadnt been for the Panda. Absolute Rubish.

4. Partnership, did they try had enough for this afterall it was critical to MGR's long term survival, Proton came and went, Fiat came and went one wonders why.
Just one correction there iburnley - MG Rover walked away from Proton, not the other way around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Liam Olf said:
Who could have guessed TWR going into administration?
A quick credit report such as those from Dun & Bradstreet, Experian, Equifax, Graydon etc has a credit rating which would indicate the possibility of a company failing, explained below by D&B:

"D&B are confident that the D&B 'risk indicator' can be predictive of business success or failure. The risk indicator ranges from 1 to 4 where 1 indicates a minimal risk and 4 a significant level of risk. In fact, a business with a risk indicator of 4 is 150 times more likely to fail than a company with a 'risk indicator' of 1

Without the intelligence a D&B Business Register brings, do you think you could accurately access the risk of doing business with each new customer or business partner you approach?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
MG/Rover should have been a small niche manufacturer making the prestige cars they did. There was never enough market to absorb what the large operation and workforce put out. But now there is ...a massive market market .....all of China.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top