MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I must say I was shocked by this announcement. I feel that while the media has not helped in this, the real reasons are in the title.
1) BAE bought/sold MGR just to make money. They should never have sold MGR without being sure Honda was on board. Honda were a shareholder but were not consulted properly. Thank you BAE.
2) BMW bought MGR but the Quandt family didn't want the company if it didn't make money quickly. They could have shared rear drive platforms with MGR but no. The thing was doomed when Honda pulled out. Thank you the Quandts for being so impatient and dumping MGR in a much worse state than when you got it.
3) Thank you the British public for rubbishing all things British and doing stuff all for the British car industry. Despite Britain having more manufacturers than any other European country, over 80% of cars sold are imported. You may support your football team but it matters more to support your fellow workers. Think of all those who are out of work today due to your buying anything but British. Your lack of loyalty is shameful.
4) Apparently the British follow Euro directives to the letter while the French simply find ways around them. I'm sure there are ways the Government could have quietly assisted MGR until the deal was done with SAIC in subtle ways. But no, the letter of the law is more important than its role of helping the British worker. Well done Mr Blair and all your cronies.

Obviously people on this forum are supporters of these fine car marques. It would be a shame if we have just witnessed 100 years of Rover and 80 years of MG history finish. :2c:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,861 Posts
Yes I agree selling to BMW was a big mistake, MGR havent had enough volume for sometime so they needed to share platforms which the could do with honda.

Obviously to be fair the P4 knew this and had some bad luck with brilliance.

But fundamentally some 5 years down the line the company should have not been still talking about a partnership and still be 2 years from a new car.

fundamentally if MGR was unable to find a partner after 2 years then they needed to look realistically at what the company could do as a go it alone operation, and if than meant becoming more of slimline niche market car operation etc then thats what should have been done.

OK its easy with hindsight but I think many people have seen this coming for a while and as far as I'm concerned large portion of the blame lies with the P4

However whats done is done and clearly SAIC are going to be able to walk away with quite a lot of MGR's assests, whether SAIC would be interested in producing cars at longbridge post admin remains to be seen lets hope something can done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,802 Posts
Lets face it, Rover have been screwed time, after time, after time over the last few decades. Its only been in the last five years they've had some control of their own destiny, and even then fate has been against them...

But they're still here....suddenly the media has started getting more positive this afternoon. Some one on PM saying that they had a full EURO4 compliant engine range ready, as well a several models pretty much ready to go...

Pity they could'nt have been more positive a few weeks ago really...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
31,560 Posts
If you trace it back, there's one person responsible... Maggie Thatcher.

She sold RG to BAE as Towers was negotiating with Honda for RG to become their equivilant of Lexus...

She started the rot, BAE just wanted to make some money, but not spend any. BMW, well no one knows what they really wanted, besides 4x4 technology.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,068 Posts
The government (Major, I think) should have vetoed the sale to BMW on national interest grounds.

What would The German government have done if RG/BAE or anyone else for that matter had attempted to buy BMW?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
iburnley said:
But fundamentally some 5 years down the line the company should have not been still talking about a partnership and still be 2 years from a new car. OK its easy with hindsight but I think many people have seen this coming for a while and as far as I'm concerned large portion of the blame lies with the P4
I think you are correct iburnley. I also feel they, in good faith, have given so much technology out to SAIC, that when the cash flow problems emerged, too much of the carrot had already been eaten for them to go ahead with the deal. They have shown business naivety at times IMO.

iburnley said:
However whats done is done and clearly SAIC are going to be able to walk away with quite a lot of MGR's assests, whether SAIC would be interested in producing cars at longbridge post admin remains to be seen lets hope something can done.
Only if they need MGR for more technical info will they do any deal, I would imagine. I hope MGR held enough back to still be appealing
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
1,496 Posts
PonteLad said:
The government (Major, I think) should have vetoed the sale to BMW on national interest grounds.

What would The German government have done if RG/BAE or anyone else for that matter had attempted to buy BMW?
Nothing, I suspect, Rolls Royce plc bought out their joint venture with BMW (making jet engines) a few years back, nobody stopped them.

Daimler Benz merged with that daft Chrysler lot, cost the shareholders half their share value and the Germans didn't complain too much.
 

·
Registered
rover_75
Joined
·
207 Posts
SteveChilds said:
If you trace it back, there's one person responsible... Maggie Thatcher.

She sold RG to BAE as Towers was negotiating with Honda for RG to become their equivilant of Lexus...

She started the rot, BAE just wanted to make some money, but not spend any. BMW, well no one knows what they really wanted, besides 4x4 technology.
Hear Hear! I've been banging on about this for ages. I hope this is not the end,and we prove all the doomsayers wrong
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Oh and I forgot to mention a big thanks to the eggs that run Europe and, by extention, Britain. I read these at the Telegraph:

When the Trade and Industry Secretary, Patricia Hewitt, and the TGWU general secretary, Tony Woodley, say the Government could not have done more to save MG Rover (News, April 8), they take care not to mention that this is only because European Union rules will not let it. In fact, EU constraints on the Government's current proposed aid package are merely the practical execution of the death sentence Brussels pronounced on the company back in 1999. Its decision to "investigate" the £150 million the Government wanted to contribute to BMW's £3 billion Longbridge modernisation plan - in effect delaying the project by two years - caused Rover's then German owners to walk away. A. B. Stone, Oxted, Surrey

..why France can maintain a large car manufacturing industry and Britain can't. The car industry in France is hugely protected by the government in one way or another (the French detest market competition as an alien Anglo-Saxon concept). It's very difficult to import cars into the country, especially from the Far East, and, although Toyota has solved this problem by building a large plant near Paris and Renault owns 47 per cent of Nissan, French cars still occupy nearly 60 per cent market share. The French car manufacturers receive huge hidden subsidies every year, as do their major components suppliers. These come, for instance, in the shape of low-cost preferential loans from the subsidised French banks, which also, like the government, own large chunks of the car makers. Innumerable official and unofficial obstacles are placed in front of would-be importers - even from Germany and Italy.
Bernard Cowley, Blakeney, Norfolk

If the Brussels Sprouts than run Europe can't sort out that blatent assistance to the French car industry while Britain do it by the book, what a corrupt entity Europe is.
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
2,103 Posts
If you trace it back, there's one person responsible... Maggie Thatcher.
Yes. She IS responsible. But to pin it all on her, though it does my heart good to hear it is not the whole of it. Britain itself is to blame for not encoraging manufacturing and not caring about the future. Labour is to blame for not being really 'Labour'. I am to blame for being a snide ****er. We are all collectively responsible for this catastrophe.

Only by pulling together can we all do anything about it. Nationalise MG-Rover - NOW, I say. Print up flyers, tell your friends, shoot people driving Pugeots.

I am deadly serious (except for the shooting Pug drivers.) This cannot stand. It will not stand if we can interest enough people in the plight not only of their car industry but of their country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
625 Posts
Nick Birse said:
Nothing, I suspect, Rolls Royce plc bought out their joint venture with BMW (making jet engines) a few years back, nobody stopped them.

That was only because BMW realised they were never going to be the dominant partner in that. And customers wanted the RR badge on the engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,618 Posts
What have you guys been smoking?
I don't know which drivel needs replying to first.
Here we go: Maggie Thatcher? I am no supporter of hers but linking her name to the current debacle suggests you need more sleep! (And thank you, by the way Steve, for all your efforts in the last few days that led to the sleep deprivation!)
Europe? Whateever side your prejudice is on, Europe had nothing to do with what happened in the last few days.
Britain vs Germany? This is irrelevent. German car companies have had some average to good maagers. British car companies have had some averae to bloody awful managers(recent MGR experience included). The Germans are ahead. I wonder why?
Let's nationaise the car industry - what colour is the sky on your planet?
 

·
Registered
other_manufacturer
Joined
·
2,103 Posts
Right. Got any constructive ideas then? (It's a lovely pissing down blackish purple sky at the moment.)

Nationalise. Now. That it might not happen is not any reason not to say that is what should be done.

As for Maggie and the Germans, you're right. It is largely irrelevant to what happens now. As is your post.
 

·
Premium Member
mg_zt_t
Joined
·
21,916 Posts
RayCee said:
I must say I was shocked by this announcement. I feel that while the media has not helped in this, the real reasons are in the title.
1) BAE bought/sold MGR just to make money. They should never have sold MGR without being sure Honda was on board. Honda were a shareholder but were not consulted properly. Thank you BAE.
2) BMW bought MGR but the Quandt family didn't want the company if it didn't make money quickly. They could have shared rear drive platforms with MGR but no. The thing was doomed when Honda pulled out. Thank you the Quandts for being so impatient and dumping MGR in a much worse state than when you got it.
3) Thank you the British public for rubbishing all things British and doing stuff all for the British car industry. Despite Britain having more manufacturers than any other European country, over 80% of cars sold are imported. You may support your football team but it matters more to support your fellow workers. Think of all those who are out of work today due to your buying anything but British. Your lack of loyalty is shameful.
4) Apparently the British follow Euro directives to the letter while the French simply find ways around them. I'm sure there are ways the Government could have quietly assisted MGR until the deal was done with SAIC in subtle ways. But no, the letter of the law is more important than its role of helping the British worker. Well done Mr Blair and all your cronies.

Obviously people on this forum are supporters of these fine car marques. It would be a shame if we have just witnessed 100 years of Rover and 80 years of MG history finish. :2c:
RayCee said:
Oh and I forgot to mention .... (much snipped)

..why France can maintain a large car manufacturing industry and Britain can't. The car industry in France is hugely protected by the government in one way or another .......

while Britain do it by the book, what a corrupt entity Europe is.
.. and to a certain extent, DITTO JAPAN, GERMANY, SPAIN you name it! ... be in no doubt. We try to play cricket in shark infested commercial waters.... and pay over the odds for the so called privilege..:(

Two excellent post RayCee. Like your style...

SteveChilds said:
If you trace it back, there's one person responsible... Maggie Thatcher.

She sold RG to BAE as Towers was negotiating with Honda for RG to become their equivilant of Lexus...

She started the rot, BAE just wanted to make some money, but not spend any. BMW, well no one knows what they really wanted, besides 4x4 technology.
Good grief Steve, someone who sees things the way I do....

I am not alone ..... Phew! Praise be.... ;)
 

·
Registered
rover_75_tourer
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Blame Mondeo drivers too. If just 10% of Mondeo sales( the bulk of which are from other BRITISH COMPANIES) had been R75 sales instead, then that would probbaly have been enough sales to keep MGr afloat.

Blame BSM for dropping the then RG and giving their massive contract to an American multinational instead of supporting their own country.

Blame Hairdressers who seem obsessed with Clios and 206s. If just a fraction of them had bought ZRs and 25s instead - it would have made a massive difference.

Blame BMW drivers - for being completely arrogant. I really don't know how they can sleep at night - supporting a company that casued so much harm to their own country's native car maker.

Has anyone else found themselves randomly shouting 'guilty!' at these drviers and others over the last few days, while in traffic. I have. Its getting to me now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Mike said:
Blame Mondeo drivers too. If just 10% of Mondeo sales( the bulk of which are from other BRITISH COMPANIES) had been R75 sales instead, then that would probbaly have been enough sales to keep MGr afloat.

Blame BSM for dropping the then RG and giving their massive contract to an American multinational instead of supporting their own country.

Blame Hairdressers who seem obsessed with Clios and 206s. If just a fraction of them had bought ZRs and 25s instead - it would have made a massive difference.

Blame BMW drivers - for being completely arrogant. I really don't know how they can sleep at night - supporting a company that casued so much harm to their own country's native car maker.

Has anyone else found themselves randomly shouting 'guilty!' at these drviers and others over the last few days, while in traffic. I have. Its getting to me now.
"I'm alright Jack"
That sums it up pretty well, unfortunately.
 

·
Premium Member
mg_zt_t
Joined
·
21,916 Posts
smosquito said:
It is largely irrelevant to what happens now. As is your post.
ONLY if you're determined not to learn from past mistakes! Something us Brits excel at ... and look like continuing to do so.

Why are BMWs as common as muck on UK roads now? Simply just another indicator of the continuing decline of the TruBrit ..... and a once truly great Nation.

BMWs are also common on the roads in the USA... but, unlike the UK there's a difference, many of those BMWs are built by 'mericans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,625 Posts
SteveChilds said:
If you trace it back, there's one person responsible... Maggie Thatcher.

She sold RG to BAE as Towers was negotiating with Honda for RG to become their equivilant of Lexus...

She started the rot, BAE just wanted to make some money, but not spend any. BMW, well no one knows what they really wanted, besides 4x4 technology.
100% agree.

Honda would have transformed RG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
RayCee said:
Oh and I forgot to mention a big thanks to the eggs that run Europe and, by extention, Britain. I read these at the Telegraph:

When the Trade and Industry Secretary, Patricia Hewitt, and the TGWU general secretary, Tony Woodley, say the Government could not have done more to save MG Rover (News, April 8), they take care not to mention that this is only because European Union rules will not let it. In fact, EU constraints on the Government's current proposed aid package are merely the practical execution of the death sentence Brussels pronounced on the company back in 1999. Its decision to "investigate" the £150 million the Government wanted to contribute to BMW's £3 billion Longbridge modernisation plan - in effect delaying the project by two years - caused Rover's then German owners to walk away. A. B. Stone, Oxted, Surrey

..why France can maintain a large car manufacturing industry and Britain can't. The car industry in France is hugely protected by the government in one way or another (the French detest market competition as an alien Anglo-Saxon concept). It's very difficult to import cars into the country, especially from the Far East, and, although Toyota has solved this problem by building a large plant near Paris and Renault owns 47 per cent of Nissan, French cars still occupy nearly 60 per cent market share. The French car manufacturers receive huge hidden subsidies every year, as do their major components suppliers. These come, for instance, in the shape of low-cost preferential loans from the subsidised French banks, which also, like the government, own large chunks of the car makers. Innumerable official and unofficial obstacles are placed in front of would-be importers - even from Germany and Italy.
Bernard Cowley, Blakeney, Norfolk

If the Brussels Sprouts than run Europe can't sort out that blatent assistance to the French car industry while Britain do it by the book, what a corrupt entity Europe is.
Both arguments are a load of crap
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top