|
Rover are adamant that they have NOT gone into receivership. They have accussed Patricia Hewitt of jumping the gun and making it inevitable that they will have to call in the receivers tomorrow. They were apparantly hoping to hold out till early next week to avoid accusations of disrespect and trying to bury the bad news by going under on the day of the popes funeral.
|
Well puppetland, you've finally got what you wanted.
Now please leave us alone.
|
|
But hang on Imagos. No offence, but looking at your profile, it doesn't mention driving Rovers, or you aspiring to own one. This is the problem, isn't it? I entirely agree with you about the dreadful implications of the problems at Rover, but they have come about because neither you, I, nor very many other people want to buy them or see them as desirable. This situation should not be happening, I agree, but I can't pretend to be incredibly sorry any more than most other posters on this forum.
|
You don't mention driving Rovers, or aspire to own one.
I am passionate and angry about the demise of the Mining, shipbuilding indusrties in this country although never worked in either but have followed them closely over the years. The same thing applies to MGR. Never owned one or worked there but have driven them many many times.
But that does not stop me being angry about rover too.
|
|
|
|
I don't buy any of that, I'm afraid. The harsh facts of business life are that suppliers began pulling the plug by demanding payment on delivery because of outstanding debt. That puts pressure on cash flow, the hares start running across the supplier network and this evening's debacle is inevitable. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
As for delaying it until after the Pope's funeral...contemptible bad taste.
|
Read this site www.austin-rover.co.uk/ for what is being lost. Have aGOOD read of it. then WEEP.
So what have we lost exactly? A manufacturer that has less than 6% of the market? Less than 100,000 cars a year.
When i look back at the output from this basket case I can look back with fondness and pride to...
The Rover 3500s a great car
The Rover SD1 (vitesse) should have been a great car if built right
The Mini, utter design brilliance in every way, shamefully thrown together by cheapskate beancounters and slipshod engineers.
And
AND
Errr
Thats it
Thats the best they ever did in the last 50 years
|
|
Whatever emerges fm this mess (and be sure that with politicians involved at Election time, it will get messier), I hope, and believe, the MG name survives, perhaps as a niche producer.
|
|
|
"The Rover SD1 (vitesse) should have been a great car if built right"
Oh come on. The word 'if' is an amazing word. With it we could have won wars that we lost, IF things had worked out differently. We could have the cure to cancer IF we had discovered it.
Rover has gone down the pan because not enough people want their cars. The only reason it's taken this long is that successive governments have poured millions into the company to keep it going.
|
Oh come on. The word 'if' is an amazing word. With it we could have won wars that we lost, IF things had worked out differently. We could have the cure to cancer IF we had discovered it.
:-D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rover are adamant that they have NOT gone into receivership. They have accussed Patricia Hewitt of jumping the gun and making it inevitable that they will have to call in the receivers tomorrow.
>>
Latest.
PH made her statement after talking to Powers, who is in China, at 9.20 and 9.40.
Jeff Randall of the BBC was calling Rover Comms Director at the same time as PH was making her statement.
Rover Coms Director, who was with other directors, said on the record NO administrators called in.
Latest is that PWC have been called in to advise Rover.
A real case of L/H R/H ?
PH certainly appears to totally unaware that she should have been more careful with her statement as it is normal to call in advisors before anything else happens.
|
|
|
|
Tobyn, you wouldn't be saying that if you were (trying) to follow me in my P5B - Come to think of it you probably don't know what a P5 is!
Other than my thoughts going out to the families whose livelihoods have almost cetainly diappeared, my main concern is that a once great name, in gact 2 great names, in British motoring history have been blackened when in fact it is really still in effect BL and not MG and Rover that have gone under.
Rover quality cars stopped being made in about 1975 with the last of the P6's and MG's about 1980.
I sincerely hope that BL/Rover/MG/BMW/China Motors continues in whatever guise for the sake of the PEOPLE if not the history!
|
Listening to BBC News 24 I could scarcely believe my ears and by the look on his face neither could the anchorman.
Rover is not in administration, Patricia Hewitt jumped the gun and this has been confirmed by a call to Price Waterhouse Coopers by the BBC's business correspondent.
The BBC business correspondent said the whole thing was a complete farce.
So it is business as usual then..
|
Absolutely extraordinary for Patricia Hewitt to make that statement but probably not terribly relevant.
In UK if a company trades whilst insolvent:
1. it is a criminal offence for which the directors can be jailed
2. the directors become personally liable for any debts incurred during such a period
PWC will be called on to pronounce whether the company is insolvent, as the consequences of calling this wrong are dire for all concerned they will err on the side of caution so expect the company to announce its stopped trading and called in the administrators Monday after the accountants have spent the weekend going through the books.
|
|
This country used to have one of the major, indiginous car industries in the world. It is still a major market for new cars and yet we will not have a significant home player in this market when MG Rover disappear. It would not have been allowed to happen in Germany, France or Italy. We seem to have a lack of pride in our industrial heritage (except when it is too late).
|
|
Last week, the pope had a slow death, and this week Rover...unless a miricle happens, maybe Tata could step in an complete the R&D with Rover and form a dual manufacturing strategy in UK and India. Tata needs to replace the Indica soon
|
I am glad the go. have not spent a large amount of money to prop up an ailing company.
According to R4 several parts of Rover are quite successful e.g. the car finance arm. Curiously the profitable parts are now all owned by the directors. Given that they have earned £40 million in salary and pensions, and the workers pension scheme is in debt (£80 million?) it seems to me that the directors have done very very well from this. John Moulton was on R4 saying "I told you so".
Leif
|
|
NB: go. = gov = government. Typo!
|
|
|
|
A company and its products are only as good as the people it employs ~ from the CEO downwards. I suspect that Rover has not kept up with either modern business doctrines or modern technology. The company I worked for turned itself around when it started to practice Business Process Reengineering as preached by Mike Hammer. Not nice for the rank and file employees individually but good for the company as a whole.
--
L\'escargot by name, but not by nature.
|
Its very sad that another british company will collapse with the lost of thousands of jobs both within the company itself and within its suppliers. However, Rover is no different to any other business out there, if their product doesnt sell then it goes bust. The company my husband used to work for closed down last year with the loss of many jobs. It had been in existance for well over 100 years, but the product they produced was never modernised and as a result buyers went elsewhere to purchase the more up to date alternative.
I know of very few people who own a Rover car, with the exception of a few 100 and Mini owners, both of which are ranges which they stopped producing a good few years ago. Their current styles are rather outdated, and although they do appeal to many they obviously dont appeal to enough people otherwise the company would not be in the financial difficulty it is now.
|
From Rover's Web-Site ...
"Our vision for MG Rover Group is to be a successful, profitable and respected business, building outstanding cars that people want to buy - for personal and for fleet use. This passion, matched with realism and determination, will form a strong platform for future development, and one that you as a customer will continue to benefit from."
Oh, dear ....
|
|
|
Very sad for all the employees and the suppliers who depend on Rover.
However it's not a charity, and if they can't build cars to compete then that's not what they should be doing.
Is Britain's biggest car maker now LTI (London Taxis), TVR or Morgan? Bristol seem to be doing ok when I pass their showroom too....
|
Are they dead yet?
Seems like a good time to get a deal if anyone wants a TF.
|
|
|
|
<< Their current styles are rather outdated, and although theydo appeal to many they obviously dont appeal to enough people otherwise the company would not be in the financial difficulty it is now.
Their cars' reliability, by all accounts, doesn't appeal to enough people either.
--
L\'escargot by name, but not by nature.
|
There seem to be a lot of unanswered questions about the current structure of MGR which will probably take a while to become clear.
The company seems to consist of several different entities and it's not clear which one has gone into administration. It's also not clear whether the MG & Rover marques, the 25 & 75 rights and the Powertrain business were sold to SAIC or not. If they were, then there doesn't seem to be much left for the administrators to sell off. It would also mean that MG, Rover and the K-Series engine will appear again as a wholly Chinese affair before too long.
MGR appears to consist of a number of seperate companies with PVH the main holding company. Is it PVH which has gone into administration or the manufacturing arm? What about sections like the MG Sport & Racing division which makes the SV car? Who precisely does own the marques, intellectual rights, the Powertrain business etc.?
Some very basic facts appear to be very unclear at this stage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>It would not have been allowed to happen in Germany, France or Italy.
Fiat is not doing well and there is speculation about its future.
Fiat owns all the Italian motor brands except Lamborghini, which belongs to VW Group.
Sweden has no home-owned car industry any more - Volvo belongs to Ford and Saab to GM. Who would have foreseen that 15 years ago?
Cheers, SS
|
This morning a minor lifeline has been thrown to Rover in then form of £40 million govt. money to pay suppliers. So it's not all quite over yet.
Nissan, Toyota, Honda, BMW(New Mini) and Peugeot, Ford and GM all have large volume car factories in Britain. So it's not a case that it isn't profitatble to build cars here. Rover simply didn't have the models to compete in the Golf/Focus/Astra/307 category.
MG-Rover might be gone soon, but I wonder if the Rover and MG names will survive.
Cheers, Sofa Spud
|
"This morning a minor lifeline has been thrown to Rover in then form of £40 million govt. money to pay suppliers. So it's not all quite over yet."
Errr Sorry, no lifeline to Rover. This is money to help the suppliers while they adjust to new customers.
|
|
|
Have to agree with that statement the Rover 45 is not competative in the small family class, however I think the 25 still looks better than most rivals in its class and quicker engines too and the 75 is a quality motor period, can't agree that Rovers are particulary unreliable either.
I think the real problem is image with Rover, since we have become wealthier as a nation we like to impress our neighbours with a BMW 3 series/VW on the driveway reagardless of that fact that they are overpriced and not as reliable as everyone thinks. We also tend to think anything British manafactured as bad quality/rubbish but still buy unreliable french cars( for those that can't afford BMW/VW ) buy the bucketload.
What i am saying is that I think generally Rover has a good product to sell at a fair price and if we supported our own car industry the company wouldn't be in the situation it is now.
|
"good product to sell"
Mostly not
"at a fair price"
Nope
"and if we supported our own car industry"
We didnt because of the above
"the company wouldn't be in the situation it is now."
It is
|
"good product to sell" Mostly not "at a fair price" Nope "and if we supported our own car industry" We didnt because of the above "the company wouldn't be in the situation it is now." It is
>>
Tell me whats not so good about it then you disagree but have no argument to back it up.
I think Rovers are quite reasonably priced also remember the R25 and R75 are larger cars than fiesta/mondeo equivalents.
Well I think with your forum name says it all you must like French cars (nice !!) then so will obviously be anti rover.
|
First, cut the personal rubbish out.
You may well like and choose to buy Rovers feeling them to be excellent, reliable and desirable vehicles - good luck to you that is your choice and provided that you are happy with it, everything is as it should be.
Sadly the position is that over the last 30 years insufficient amounts of people have consistently agreed with you.
A major function of a car manufacturer is to ensure that their car is desirable and desired. Rover failed in that.
|
Personal rubbish.....such as ??
I am not a current owner of a Rover or a particular MG Rover enthusiast I just don't agree with alot of rubbish I hear on this board about Rover and I'm not just going to jump on the anti Rover bandwagon like so many people do. Like I said I believe this country has a mentality of running down anything 'British' and anything foreign must be better when I think in this case there are some worse foreign cars on our roads than Rover but seem to get a better press and reputation.
R75 sales were holding their own and MG sales are up so the company can't be all that bad it just needs an immediate replacement for the 25/45. SO I guess Rover aren't totalling failing in the desirability stakes.
|
Personal rubbish.....such as ??
Er,
"Well I think with your forum name says it all .... etc"
Nuff said.
|
>> Personal rubbish.....such as ?? Er, "Well I think with your forum name says it all .... etc" Nuff said.
Hardly personal rubbish, its an observation - must be a fan of French cars or something, didn't realise everyone is so sensitive here !!.
|
We are not, its just that the mods try to keep things non personal so slanging matches dont break out as they do on most other boards
RF because *at this time* the family is running and has been for the last 6 years purely on Renaults.
You will see I have in the past run most of maintstream UK production. Which, sadly (for me) included a new Maestro, which to be fair was quite a well handling car with a bit of go and good space/size for its time. Alas it was a pile of junk build wise and doid not survive its full lease term. A new car that could not survive 3 years and less than 70,000 miles?
|
I don't doubt that there were problems in the past, however my argument is based on the current products which I happen to think are not as bad as everyone else makes out. I currently have a ford at the moment and its been nothing but trouble since I bought it, this has put me off Ford.
To answer your question about market share etc - I say again Rover have had an image problem from being frumpy old mens cars to unreliable cars, this is why sales and market share have been bad not because of the product. Most people who have had Rovers that I know in the last 10 years have generally had no complaints its only people who don't have one that seemed to have the most negative things to say about them which means only one thing and that is ignorance !.
|
Then rover never managed to educate the buying public did they.
Either way - its down the toilet.
|
Then rover never managed to educate the buying public did they. Either way - its down the toilet.
>>
No your right they didn't and it's a shame because with the R75 and since the split with BMW they WERE turning it around up until end 2004 losses were approx 77m compared to year 2000 which was hundreds of millions I believe and who knows with that extra bit of investment and a succesful new model MG Rover could of made a profit and grown as a company - Guess we will never know now !!.
|
end 2004 losses were approx 77m compared to year 2000 which was hundreds of millions I believe
Wow - only losing £1M+ per week! Now there's a good business! Where's my chequebook - I'll buy it!
Seriously, Rover should have been left to the market decades ago. If Benn hadn't stuck his nose in, HMG would not have felt morally bound to rescue it in the 70s. And the whole waste of everyone's money could have been avoided.
Loss of Rover and the jobs attached to it would have been/will be a terrible catastrophe for the locality, but we haven't prevented that. We've just spent money delaying it. And if the site had been cleared in the 70s just think how many profitable businesses could be operating there now - something we'll now have to wait some time for.
|
Wow - only losing £1M+ per week! Now there's agood business! Where's my chequebook - I'll buy it!
Your sarcasm is hilarious !!! Point i'm trying to make is losses until end of 2003 were 88 or something million . losses end of 2004 77m so they WERE turning it around and a succesful new model may of put them back operating a profit which would of saved a lot of jobs.
But don't worry I'm sure alot of people in this thread aren't too concerned tucked up in their nice secure jobs with no worries and 'I'm all right jack' attitudes.
|
"But don't worry I'm sure alot of people in this thread aren't too concerned tucked up in their nice secure jobs with no worries and 'I'm all right jack' attitudes"
Err Mr B quality. I work in the IT game. Its very cyclicle and very commercial. Since 1998, I have had possible redundancy papers thrust into my hand twice. Every year I get appraised, and If I dont perform I am out. The bottom 10% performers are outed. I doubt I can survive past 55. No one does its a young mans game.
A lot of people are working to similar "perform or get binned" deadlines.
Its a pity the Austin Rover workers in the 60's 70's and 80's were not given such good incentives.
|
Your sarcasm is hilarious !!!
You're too kind.....
losses until end of 2003 were 88 or something million . losses end of 2004 77m
So at that rate they'll be operating at break even by 2011, by which time they will have burnt £396M. With interest at 5% pa they'd be roughly half a billion in the red. And they'd only have to wait until 2023 to have paid off the past losses with interest.
That's not a business that's turning round, in my book at least.
But don't worry I'm sure alot of people in this thread aren't too concerned tucked up in their nice secure jobs with no worries and 'I'm all right jack' attitudes.
Speak for yourself, maybe. Me, I live off the money I earn. If I stop earning it, I will lose my house. No-one will pay me a redundancy packet or give my suppliers £40M. No way HMG will let me stop paying VAT - they'll pursue me for every last penny.
|
losses end of 2004 77m so they WERE turning it around and a succesful new model may of put them back operating a profit which would of saved a lot of jobs.
Maybe, but the cost of developing a new model would have seen that £77m loss be a LOT higher. All they've been doing for the last few years is polishing the existing models and hoping nobody notices, that doesn't cost a lot and isn't the same as developing a new model
|
its only people who don't have one that seemed to have the most negative things to say about them which means only one thing and that is ignorance !.
Not necessarily - I've never owned a BMC etc car other than a 1972 MG Midget, but having had several on company car fleets I've had long term experience of the 25, 600 and 800. When the garage has had the car for as long as you have, it doesn't bode well....
I've heard a few people having problems with the 75, but I've also heard lots of people being happy with them, so I can't comment but it takes a long time to shake off a bad image - ask Lancia, and it takes a long time to shake off a good image - ask Volkswagen!
|
Firstly, if you look back through volume 1 of this thread you will see where I say that the 75 is a good car.
"have no argument to back it up."
I dont need any, the facts speak for themselves. IF they had been good products, IF they had been well priced WE WOULD have supported them and THEY WOULDNT be in the situation we are now.
They folded because they didnt sell cars.
Now you tell me WHY they had less than 6% of the market and folded.
|
|
|
>>Rover quality cars stopped being made in about 1975 with the last of the P6's and MG's about 1980.
I once had an early (1965) P6 2000, made by the Rover Company Ltd. before the BMC / BL era. It was a well made car, probably better than the late model facelifted P6's that were made during Red Robbo's time.
Cheers, Sofa Spud
|
Although I abandoned BL for daily drivers in desperation many years ago (see above) my last British car was a 1969 Rover Three Thousand Five, which I owned until I jumped ship for France three years ago and entrusted it to a good friend. It was a very fine motor indeed and, apart from lack of electrical gadgets and its thirst, as good a drive as anything available in modern times.
I am very sad that the proud name of Rover has been dragged through the mud like this. But it's worth remembering that even back in the 1960s the old independent company couldn't make enough money to develop its own new engine and had to cast around for something suitable - in this case the lightweight Buick etc V8 that didn't appeal to the USA market.
|
|
|
|
>>It would not have been allowed to happen in Germany, France or Italy. Fiat is not doing well and there is speculation about its future. Fiat owns all the Italian motor brands except Lamborghini, which belongs to VW Group. Sweden has no home-owned car industry any more - Volvo belongs to Ford and Saab to GM. Who would have foreseen that 15 years ago? Cheers, SS
>>
Only time will tell but I have no doubt that Fiat will carry on being a major volume manufacturer. The Italians won't let them sink into oblivion.
As far as Sweden is concerned, they don't have the history of volume car manufacturing that this country once had, and the Volvo brand carries on, even if it is owned by Ford.
|
>>Errr Sorry, no lifeline to Rover. This is money to help the suppliers while they adjust to new customers.
I said "minor lifeline". The £40 million means production might not have to shut down immediately.
Cheers, SS
|
|
Production has already been haltd for some time.
|
- In Rover's recent history, I see two milestones which seem to stand out:
- Honda were doing a pretty good job at turning things around in the early 90s (the Honda-based 200-400 range was pretty well-received I recall), but Honda were unceremoniously dumped for a quick deal with BMW;
- In 2000, the Alchemy venture capitalists had it right: time to go niche. There's a huge overcapacity of new car production in the world. Volume manufacturers have to turn out HUGE volumes - often in low-cost countries - to benefit from economies of scale. Even if the cars are deemed good (& my new Rover 220D in 1996 wasn't bad at all), if you're not churning out a million units a year it ain't gonna pay.
Why do you think we have so many cheap Citroens in the UK now? Because it's cheaper for the French to dump them here at low prices whilst they benefit from keeping their big factories running at maximum levels of efficiency.
Can't see Ryton staying open either unless they get a big-selling model to replace the 206...
|
I am a student at Warwick University studying Manufacturing and Management Engineering. With regard to Nickdm's comments about Ryton I'm afraid I have to agree with him. As part of the course I have been round the BMW Engine Plant at Hams Hall, I've also been round the PSA Ryton Plant.
Internally there is a huge difference in how these two operate. Every single one of the "best practice" procedures for operations management was in place at BMW. Not one worker was standing idle, workers are on flexi time so if they make the target before the end of the day they can leave early, but equally if more demand is there they stay later. All stock control was accurate down to the last bolt, and when asked what the scrap rate for the plant was, it was somewhat less than 1% total of every unit in. They have scrapped 2700 units in total out of 385,000 units produced at the time of the visit. That is efficient production. (Normal scrap rates even in better companies are nearer the 5-8% mark and higher in non modernised industries). BMW's workers also get paid more per year than you'd expect for a factory worker.
At Ryton the situation was different, production generally was fairly efficient, and most let downs were due to suppliers. The main thing though was in order to keep the plant running efficently the lines operate 24/7. If the line stops for reason of a contractor (it did whilst I was there due to hydraulic maintenance being needed) then that contractor gets billed £10,000 PER MINUTE until the line starts again. Scrap rates were higher, I can't remember the exact figure but mainly due to supplier faults. Things like stock control and stock movement though was all done by staff while BMW's plant runs on automated stock control and intelligent vehicles that know when to pick stock up and set stock down. Both plants are impressive, but the BMW plant is significantly more impressive as an example of how a factory should be. Workers at BMW seemed to have more pride in their work, and the factory as a whole was cleaner and brighter.
I feel sorry for the people working at Longbridge, they will suffer undoutedly from Rover going into administration. I fully expect to see a huge knock on effect on the economy in the West Midlands too, but keeping a plant online that's losing money for the sake of keeping people in work won't work and in the end only makes the world poorer. What of the government puts £100m into MGR, with 6000 workers there, you could say that the workers funded £11m of that from their income tax alone in a year. Why prolong the death throwes? You wouldn't expect a sales person who loses £77m a year to stay employed, why should Rover get special treatment just because it was once state owned?
|
|
It seems that SAIC arn't in great shape either, in recent months the cars they build (VW and Buick) have not been selling so well. Hyundai (Now best selling brand in China) and Honda have taken lots of market share and SAIC have lost 35% of their sales since last year and dropped to the sixth largest manufacturer. Perhaps because of the market drop in China SAIC disn't have the funds to buy MG-Rover and leaving MG-Rover to run out of cash was a good way of getting out of any deal.
|
I don;t take a daily newspaper, but I wouldn;t mind betting there is at least one with the headline something like 'Hewitt blew it'.
Eight years in govt. and still blundering about.
|
|
If Rover Cars still owned the site rather than (AFAIK) it being owned by another company owned by the four then the suppliers might still be dealing with Rover! Land is an asset and can be borrowed agains!
|
If Rover Cars still owned the site rather than (AFAIK) it being owned by another company owned by the four then the suppliers might still be dealing with Rover! Land is an asset and can be borrowed agains!
I think that was sold to pay the suppliers last year,
|
What's left for anyone to buy, mind you ?
SAIC have bought the K-series engine family
SAIC have bought the Rover 25
SAIC have bought the Rover 75
Sonalika have bought the updated L-series diesel engines
The site is owned by St Modwen Properties
Rover's car finance firm MGR Capital is owned directly to the four directors of the Phoenix consortium.
|
|
If the final legacy of Rover is to die in such a way as to cause a huge political fallout at just the right time and thereby take the present bunch of spinners with them, I might start to like the company.....
|
I read in todays Daily Mail that the output at Nissans in Sunderland is 320 cars per worker per annum.the output at Rover Longbridge is 16.3 cars per worker per annum,pretty obvious that this could not continue.
ndbw
|
I was watching central news this afternoon and Patricia Hewitt was doing crocodile tears. What a performance. She must be heartbroken over all those marginal seats...
Hopefully someone like Toyota will buy the good bits and shift production over to their more hi tech site and instill a bit more of a quality control ethos into the company. If they built MGR cars then they'd be something decent. Market forces are quite effective. If people don't want them, they don't buy them. Look at the uphill battle Skoda brand had when it was taken over by VW. It would take something like that amount of time and money before Rovers would sell well again. The MG badge doesn't seem to be so tainted so I think it is the one that should be concentrated upon.
teabelly
|
|
When I was at school the term "spinner" meant liar! Heres hoping eh!
|
When I was at school the term "spinner" meant liar!
Still does ;-)
|
Just switched from Aintree coverage on BBC2 to Sky News and caught the last couple of minutes of HonestJohn's appearance, giving his views and comments with regard to the Rover situation...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
