MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
rover_75_tourer
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone see the awful negative article by Richard Stott slagging off John Towers and MGR in todays's Sunday Mirror? This is his opinion and not that of the paper, but its the kind of nonsense that is doing no good at all.

I've sent him this email below. Am tired so not as good as it could be, but I had to do something. If anyone can upload the actual article, that would be good.


Dear Richard

I was most disappointed to read your opinions of John Towers and the MG Rover management in today's Sunday Mirror.

Although there maybe questions to be answered regarding the pension fund, Towers et al have worked tirelessly over the last five years to secure a partnership and long term future for MG Rover. The company has reduced its losses from £800 million in 2000 to just £77 million in 2003. On extremely limited funds, under the Towers management the MG range of cars was introduced, the very cars you admit are selling well at the moment.

MGR was well and truly shafted by BMW, who took the MIni (which was 90% designed by Rover) - the profits from that alone would have funded the development of the new Rover medium sized car (45 replacement). They also took with them and ditched the then development plans for Rover's new medium car, leaving the new Rover board with nothing. So of course they've had to continue with the 25 and 45.

How can you say MGR produce lousily designed cars? The 75 has won countless awards for design, reliability, used car, business car etc. Further back the 600 was voted 'Most beautiful car in the world' by ...the Italians! The relaunched Rover Metro in 1990 was described by What Car Magazine as 'The Finest Small Car in the World'.

The truth is, Rover has always produced wonders with very limited funds - the MGF for example was cited as being developed on the same budget Ford had for the Mondeo's dash board!

The real problem this company has suffered is a continual negative press in reports such as yours, which has dented and eroded public confidence over the years, culminating in the events of last week.

We all know that the 25 and 45 are old designs, MGR are working on replacements, but simply do not have the funds to complete the job without a partner. Articles such as yours imply that MGR simply can't be bothered to produce new metal. Of course they want to, and to see the genius that is present within the MGR design team just look at the stunning Rover 75 Coupe concept.

The Towers take over in 2000 was an excellent plan, and the evidence suggests that had the SAIC deal been pulled off this month as was anticipated, it would have secured a long term future for Longbridge and MG Rover, with a stream of new models being launched over the next two years. John Towers' heart has always been in the right place. Please do not treat the man with the contempt and derision you have shown. To many the man is a hero for attempting to salvage the
heart of the British motor industry. Its a shame not many of his fellow countrymen share
the same conviction and pride in their nation's products.

John Towers has tried his damndest and very nearly made it. For that he should be saluted.
 

·
Registered
rover_800
Joined
·
3,497 Posts
Mike said:
Anyone see the awful negative article by Richard Stott slagging off John Towers and MGR in todays's Sunday Mirror? This is his opinion and not that of the paper, but its the kind of nonsense that is doing no good at all.

I've sent him this email below. Am tired so not as good as it could be, but I had to do something. If anyone can upload the actual article, that would be good.


Dear Richard

I was most disappointed to read your opinions of John Towers and the MG Rover management in today's Sunday Mirror.

Although there maybe questions to be answered regarding the pension fund, Towers et al have worked tirelessly over the last five years to secure a partnership and long term future for MG Rover. The company has reduced its losses from £800 million in 2000 to just £77 million in 2003. On extremely limited funds, under the Towers management the MG range of cars was introduced, the very cars you admit are selling well at the moment.

MGR was well and truly shafted by BMW, who took the MIni (which was 90% designed by Rover) - the profits from that alone would have funded the development of the new Rover medium sized car (45 replacement). They also took with them and ditched the then development plans for Rover's new medium car, leaving the new Rover board with nothing. So of course they've had to continue with the 25 and 45.

How can you say MGR produce lousily designed cars? The 75 has won countless awards for design, reliability, used car, business car etc. Further back the 600 was voted 'Most beautiful car in the world' by ...the Italians! The relaunched Rover Metro in 1990 was described by What Car Magazine as 'The Finest Small Car in the World'.

The truth is, Rover has always produced wonders with very limited funds - the MGF for example was cited as being developed on the same budget Ford had for the Mondeo's dash board!

The real problem this company has suffered is a continual negative press in reports such as yours, which has dented and eroded public confidence over the years, culminating in the events of last week.

We all know that the 25 and 45 are old designs, MGR are working on replacements, but simply do not have the funds to complete the job without a partner. Articles such as yours imply that MGR simply can't be bothered to produce new metal. Of course they want to, and to see the genius that is present within the MGR design team just look at the stunning Rover 75 Coupe concept.

The Towers take over in 2000 was an excellent plan, and the evidence suggests that had the SAIC deal been pulled off this month as was anticipated, it would have secured a long term future for Longbridge and MG Rover, with a stream of new models being launched over the next two years. John Towers' heart has always been in the right place. Please do not treat the man with the contempt and derision you have shown. To many the man is a hero for attempting to salvage the
heart of the British motor industry. Its a shame not many of his fellow countrymen share
the same conviction and pride in their nation's products.

John Towers has tried his damndest and very nearly made it. For that he should be saluted.



Actually it was the 75 that was described as the most beautiful car in the World by the Italians. Perhaps the 600 won the acclaim earlier? Great rebuttal though!
 

·
Registered
rover_75_tourer
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
This is the reply I got from him today. (Yes the 600 won too - good old Italians)

The huge losses now being revealed give the lie to your ridiculous
suggestion that Towers and his mates "very nearly made it". They didn't.
They were miles away - so why did they asset strip the remaining profitable
businesses, set up massive pension funds for themselves - leaving the
workers' one in a £400 million deficit - and take big money out? Rover
sales are fading fast and with no new models that could only get worse. It
is absurd to suggest they have
done well.


He obviously does not like pepole dis-agreeing with him.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top