|
I saw a Rover/MG 'Streetwise' on the road today. I don't want to upset HJ's advertisers, but what is it for?
|
Now that Skoda have cleaned up there act, there has to be something out there to act as the butt of all motoring jokes.
A somewhat cynical piece of marketing, but then Rover need to keep the production lines going whilst they work on their next generation of cars.
|
That's a question that does not need an answer. You might as well ask what any car is for. Transport. The Streetwise is just a different look.
A 'cynical piece of marketing.' Not at all like all the other car makers then? They don't do cynical, do they.
imo the Streetwise is not an unpleasant looking car, but each to his own, and it's based on the 200/25, a very well-proven vehicle. You might not like the looks but it doesn't mean it's a bad car. I hear they are selling well, and that's all that matters to MGR. It may be aimed at the young market, but I wouldn't object to owning one.
Skoda became a joke because they made totally unreliable cars. There is no comparison.
|
I should qualify my previous remarks.
Although my last Rover wasn't the best car I ever had, it was far from the worst. I believe MG-Rover deserve a go as in recent years they have shown a real determination to succeed with their pricing, the launch of the 75 and, hopefully, the long awaited replacements for the 400/45 and 200/25.
Most marketing is cynical, with few exceptions. In this instance, Rover have at least maintained a sensible price point and are offering the kind of package that will appeal to those who are not overly bothered about appearance for appearance sake, but are thoroughly miffed at the constant car-park dings on their current car. Just not my cup of tea (but then my car doesn't have any side rubbing strips at all, increasing the distance I walk across the supermarked carpark as I park in the dingy and distant corners to avoid such prangs).
Notwithstanding these points, the general opinion seems to be that the 25 is past its sell by date. It flops around corners, has a horribly dated interior and is the spiritual successor to the Metro. All pretty good reasons for a bit of ribbing.....
|
I'm on my third Rover, although this one is MG badged.
My previous car, a 214Si, was excellent and certainly never, ever 'flopped' round corners! The handling was, ('is' as it's still being used by a friend) very good. I can't believe it's become worse in the 25.
Funny you should mention the Metro in the same sentence as that was the car before the 200, and in 1.4GSi form, was also a great car. It looked dated to be sure, but went like a rocket on rails and had very few faults.
My present MG ZR 160 is absolutely amazing and there can't be much else around for the money that can compete on performance or handling.
After 3 good cars from MGR I have never understood the slagging they continually get. My boss's reaction when I turned up in the ZR? 'I'd never buy a British Leyland car. They're rubbish.' He then admits that his experience of BL cars were a Maestro and a Montego, neither of which cost over £300 when he bought them very used!
That seems to be the problem. People still associate the present company with those bad old BL and Rover days when the cars were, let's face it, pretty poor. Let's hope that products like MG and Streetwise will atract younger people to the brand and improve MGR's reputation.
|
|
I was more concerned with the marketing than the car. I wasn't trying to rubbish MGR, whom I would like to see succeed, and if it's selling well, then that is all that really matters - people buy X5's too, I guess, and they're even dafter...
|
|
|
BL cars were by and large, junk. Anyone around in the 70's has long memories of how awful they were. The company managed to take itself from a builder of cars -BMC- with, by and large, world wide respect a decade earlier and with the help of the unions -- on total golden goose self-destruct, as is the general mindset of unions, along with a management which elevated breath-taking incompetence to an art form, to a global laughing stock.
It takes not very much to establish a bad rep when people are thinking about hi-dollar purchases and an awful lot of work to get back a good one. That's the stark reality and I agree, I have no desire whatever to own a Rover. I don't want anything with a tinge or whiff of unreliability about it.
Let's say I'm hiring a new employee for a significant position. I like him, he looks good, his checks seem to come up OK but he was in rehab a while back for some personal problems. He claims he's cured, but you never really know, do you, it's too big a risk. Well Mr Rover, thank you for your interest, but I regret to inform you your application has been unsuccessful. Mildred will you ask the next candidate to come in please.
I am Mr Consumer with my hard earned money and my car purchase will be the biggest outlay excluding my house. You can tell me everything's changed. Well, you may be right but I'd not risk it, I'd just walk on by and that's how a lot of people think. Call it irrational if you will, but people are often irrational. That's why this woolly profession of fuzz-speak called marketing exists, perception management.
|
|
Interesting point of view there, Mr. Growler. Would you, then, buy a VW without question because they used to make reliable cars?
|
I wouldn't buy anything without question and definitely not a VeeWee!
|
|
|
>>Interesting point of view there, Mr. Growler. Would you, then, buy a VW without question because they used to make reliable cars?<<
Perhaps not. But quite a lot of people do still think VW make very reliable cars. And on the other hand quite a lot won't buy a Skoda because they are still perceived as cheap rubbish cars. There is considerable inertia to be met in changing a generally held view. Which is what MG/Rover just have to work away at.
Rudolf
|
|
|
|
|
|
£23,091was £23,656Details
£5,442was £5,636Details
£10,990was £11,200Details
£17,282was £17,999Details
