fair to say...
phoenix have seen the light - and the light is getting turned of at MG rover soon.
.............. and failed to produce or achieve anything of note.
I think the BMW chief exec was right - they should have sold it to the other firm - at least MG as a specialist sports car would have been around for 2006.
|
well I think you can say one thing for sure: Rover bosses PR has been so bad that their chances of getting any Gov't aid must be virtually zero..
madf
|
So the fact that independent auditors published that BMW UK has one the largest pensions deficits in the country has nothing to do with that ill-concieved lambast at MG Rover?
Not for the first time have senior BMW execs seeked to torpedo MG Rover, I remember the Piech's stupid ourburst at the launch of the 75.
Yep, they have a pension's black hole of some £500m.
Robert Maxwell would have been proud at that.
But then BMW's deficit won't make the news pages because today's modern journalists are stupid as well as easily led.
MG Rover's workforce including their directors have their pensions liability covered.
And that really grates today's modern journo.
Incidentally, some hat eating maybe required soon.
MG Rover have delayed their 'big announcement'.
All I'm saying is SAIC's money will not be going to waste.
And there will be pictures.....
|
MG Rover have delayed their 'big announcement'.
It's been delayed for several years beyond the date when it could have made a real difference :(
|
|
www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13251713,00.h...l
|
Who would have thought 25 years ago that the Yellow Peril would buy Rover, and the UK government would be borrowing £Billions off them too, creating the largest national debt of all time?
Who would buy a new Rover for £15,000 when the same model is sold in Jalopy coner for £600.
|
I'm afraid Sky has completely and utterly got hold of the wrong end of the stick.
MG Rover is not being sold to the Chinese. It will remain 100% owned by Phoenix Venture Holdings.
However, a new joint venture company is being created which will be 70% owned by SAIC and 30% owned by PVH. This company will build cars in China, providing economies of scale for Rover which John Towers has said will be building around 200,000 cars per year at Longbridge.
SAIC and PVH will not own any part of each other, they will just have a joint-venture collaboration, just like lots of other car makers do.
|
At least you can trust the BBC to get the story straight:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4027839.stm
|
|
|
If only those directors put the money used for their pension funds in to rescuing TWR, then they could have put their designs to practice.
|
If only those directors put the money used for their pension funds in to rescuing TWR, then they could have put their designs to practice.
I think it might have taken a little more than £16m to rescue TWR.
Tom Walkinshaw is rumoured to be working with MG-R right now - sources say he has been spotted around Longbridge recently.
|
Where's Puppetland?
Told you there was a big announcement coming.
Incidentally, there's a few more to come over the next few weeks.
Bar all out nuclear war, MGR are back in business.
|
From PA Newswire this afternoon:
MG Rover to pass into Chinese hands
MG Rover, Britain's last volume car-maker, is to pass into Chinese hands. The Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) will pump an estimated £1 billion-plus into the company in exchange for a majority share, if the Chinese Government gives the go-ahead in the New Year. The deal is due to be signed next year and will see the formation of a new joint venture company, which will design, develop and produce cars.
|
I think king arthur may be more along the right lines, it seems selling actual MGR would cause problems with, amongst other things, the BMW loan. The JV company seems to be a way to circumnavigate this.
Thing is, in the long run the JV company will own the designs, rights and bulk of the sales with MGR as is just becoming a production company for Europe so the true value will be in the JV, not the rump of MGR. The effect is that MGR & SAIC become 30/70% partners which looking at the current mess MGR are in is probably a positive step not a negative one.
|
Phoenix Venture Holdings will remain a British company, that includes the Rover and MG marques, Powertrain et al. They will received a substantial cash injection to gear up for production of the RD/X60 to serve the domestic and European market.
PVH will supply a 30% stake towards the new company. The joint venture company will have a 70/30 split between SAIC and PVH. MG Rover and SAIC will share the intellectual rights to the cars developed and a license free ability to make and market the cars on both sides.
Remember MG Rover are supplying the design and manufacturing technology which is not to be underestimated.
The only mess MGR are in is an aging set of cars, the plant and the workforce are state of the art in car terms. New metal will sort that out and with the economies of scale of 1,000,000 cars they will be very competitive. The RD/X60 range of cars will be launched from 2006 and a new small car soon after with several derivatives probably including the beautiful 75 Coupe.
There is talk of hitting the Chinese, European and American market in 2006-7. SAIC will serve the Chinese and Far East market, MGR the rest. The rumours are that MG is being launched back in the USA with the MG GT, SV and SV-R and also there is talk of an SUV, of course an MG SUV as Rover are not allowed to use that marque name for a 4x4. Finally, the 75 Coupe may also be included as an MG as it is unmistakably sporting the twin exhausts of the RWD V8 version.
MGR is still a British company, still being ran by the same people that saved it.
Finally, don't forget the former Daewoo/FSO Poland plant, MGR and SAIC are still in the bidding for that.
|
the plant and the workforce are state of the art in car terms.
Sorry to disagree with you but have you seen the outside of the factory, its falling apart. The window frames are rotten, the place hasn't seen a lick of paint for years and the car park that you see from the A38 has plants and weeds erupting through the tarmac. Last time I went past there were as many Citroen's as Rover's parked outside the place.
|
I think king arthur may be more along the right lines, it seems selling actual MGR would cause problems with, amongst other things, the BMW loan. The JV company seems to be a way to circumnavigate this. Thing is, in the long run the JV company will own the designs, rights and bulk of the sales with MGR as is just becoming a production company for Europe so the true value will be in the JV, not the rump of MGR. The effect is that MGR & SAIC become 30/70% partners which looking at the current mess MGR are in is probably a positive step not a negative one.
Possibly but there's nothing to stop MG-R developing its own models that the Chinese wouldn't be interested in - sports cars for example. Apparently SAIC aren't interested in the MG brand as it means nothing in China. Yes, I know, you'd be surprised that Rover means anything either, but it seems the Chinese like the Britishness of the 75 and the Rover name. My guess would be that we can have sports saloons and roadsters etc, built on the platforms developed by the JV, for the European market, and these cars will be 100% MGs (or Rovers) and 100% British. But until we hear the full details of the deal, we can only speculate. All I know is, the BBC article is the closest to the truth.
|
JV was always the future for MGR. Major development of their own models never made sense at the volumes they work at. I don't think the cars need to be "100%" MG or Rover. The current range isn't and new Volvo's aren't 100% Volvo or new Fords even 100% Ford.
On the face of it, this deal seems to give MGR pretty much what they want. A development company supplying them with new technology combined with a reasonable level of independence.
However, the devil is usually in the detail and I think the whole picture will only be know when the deal is signed and details released. Has it been stated anywhere whether the deal is excusive? I presume not (as SAIC have deals with BMW) so MGR can still, for example, look for joint development deals on powertrains and other components?
|
I suspect that the chinese investment in MGR (or takeover, if you prefer. 70% gives them the whip hand whatever Rover management may believe or say)is more to do with getting a foothold in Europe rather than any desire to save the existing company. China's long term aim is to become an economic superpower to rival the States, and having established production plants in Europe is one step towards achieving that. If Rover think that they are being aquired so they can sell cars in China I think they will get a rude awakening. Long term I can see the plant producing Chinese designed cars for a Chinese owned company, rather like the Nissan plant already does.
We have no real history of mass manufacturing success in the UK, apart from when we had no competition, and I think the days of a major British owned car manufacturer are numbered.
|
I suspect that the chinese investment in MGR (or takeover, if you prefer. 70% gives them the whip hand whatever Rover management may believe or say)
Okay, I'll clarify the situation once more!
MG Rover is not being acquired, merged with, taken over, or anything!
When GM and SAIC formed a joint venture to produce "Shanghai-Buicks" for the Chinese market, SAIC did not acquire a stake in GM.
When VW and SAIC formed a joint venture to produce VW Santanas for the Chinese market, SAIC did not acquire a stake in VW.
MG-R and SAIC are forming a joint venture to design and build cars for the Chinese market. SAIC is not acquiring a stake in MG Rover!!!
|
As well as the big story, the SAIC 70% one, I noticed on the cover of Autocar a picture of 2 new concept MG Rovers - didn't have time to read article. One is a 2-door coupe version of the 75 - quite neat but very late in the day for an ageing model. The other looked like a coupe version of the MGF - ditto.
Cheers, SS
|
So on that premise then Soft Spud, the Volvo coupe and cabrio from the S70 would be described as 'aging'. Both were launched after some years of the S70 being on the market.
The 75 platform is six years old, as a platform is it recognised as still being one of the best in the sector especially the ZT version which has the unusual thing of superlatives thrown at it by the automotive press. It is also one of the most reliable cars in Britain. In terms of a key attribute, torsional stiffness, it is better than the new 3-series and 5-series platforms, a testament to its design. Sure it might be six years old, the Aston Martin DB7 platform was based on the Jag XJS but no-one held that against them.
And to reiterate King Arthur's point. SAIC have a 70% stake in the JV company which is an IPR/R&D holding company. All Western manufacturers in China have to go this route usually on a 50/50 partnership to get into the Chinese market.
Does that mean then on the premise proposed here that GM, VW, BMW, Ford etc, etc are 50% Chinese owned or are going to be taken over?
Of course not.
MG Rover is still British, SAIC is still Chinese. The only thing that has changed is MG Rover is the first car company in the world to offer an R&D share to a Chinese manufacturer albeit SAIC having a 70% stake in the R&D. Actually that is a very good deal, they will be putting up the lion's share of the money for new models. However, the devil is in the detail which no-one knows yet. MG Rover have brought know-how and also the RD/X60 to the table which are going to have a substantial value especially when looking at the volumes.
And when you look at the volumes, it dwarfs BMW's deal in China of 50,000 cars and equals GM and VW's share at 800,000 cars for the Chinese market.
It is THAT big a deal.
|
Carl_a.
Sure the building could do with a lick of paint, I'm talking about the stuff inside.
Having seen the plant with my own eyes and also knowing a couple of production engineers going way back to my schooldays, MGR own some of the best robotic plant in Europe. Its assembly technology is only about six years old compare that to the technology that built the M2 to Mk5 Golfs, which lasted for almost 20 years, it's still very young kit.
I can supply case studies on the 75 production line which is held up to be a very modern production line. To really talk spod-like terms, one paper details how the 75 production line set a new world standard for body-in-white manufacture. Also Rover pioneered flexible manufacture in the 1980s with help from Honda which if you know your manufacturing processes was a big shift in JIT/MRP techniques at the time.
For example, the robotised line that does the spots welds for 75 fabrication, performs 80,000 welds per chassis, every weld monitored for accuracy. That is still one of the highest numbers in the business using some of the best robots available.
It's apprenticeship scheme is more oversubscribed that the equivalent scheme ran for Peugeot at Ryton and well, sadly Jaguar at Browns Lane. If you study engineering in the Midlands, MG Rover is well know as having some of the best stuff to learn the trade on.
If you want to read a bit about how good these people are, at the time of BMW disinvesture of MG Rover, they had to move the 75 line from Cowley to Longbridge in 28 days, that's from shutdown at Cowley, disassemble, move and reassemble and start production again. It happened on time, to plan and on budget. Not only did they preserve the quality standards, it's well accepted that quality rose once MG Rover reverted back to Honda production techniques for the 75.
Mainly thanks to BMW's money, even the 45 production line which was heavily modified in the late 1990s is considered as good as anywhere else.
Finally, BMW did one thing right when investing in the kit. Longbridge now has the capacity to build 350,000 cars.
|
|
|
So Rover are going to be bedfellows with the Chinese, that's good news for the ailing company at last.
So come on backroom let's be positive for a change, as me for one am getting tired of reading such negative comments about Rover in these pages (you know who you are). I wish them all the best and hope that the venture is a roaring success. Who cares if ultimatly it may become another British company in foreign hands it's the survival of the company name and it's cars/employees that counts to me.
I'm looking forward to Rovers (hopefully) bright future and some fresh metal to drive.
|
In what must be the most ironic twist of all in this strange saga, Britain's last volume car manufacturer is apparently to be 'taken over' (70 per cent owned) by a company based in one of the world's few remaining communist states, which has an appalling record on human rights and still favours public executions.
So that's all right then as long as we can have a new car that impresses the neighbours...
|
www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?hpF...0
Looks like Rover were not too straight forward with their partners. Also note that they were buying Citirovers for 3500 pounds and trying to flog them for 6500 - what a mark-up for that pension fund !!!!!!
|
At least they're not making the same mistake as the old British Leyland and selling cars (eg, mini, BMC 11/1300, etc) for less than their manufacturing cost!
I agree that £6,500 for a poorly equiped car from a third world manufacturer without a proven track record is a bit steep though.
|
I can hear it now - "Good God, that's £3000 profit!!!"
However anyone with an ounce of business sense will know this is not that case. Tata sell them to MGR for £3.5K, yet this will exclude the following:-
Shipping and transport costs - probably around £500 per car
MGR mark up - lets say £750
Dealer mark up - lets say £750
VAT at 17.5% - 3500+500+750+750+17.5% = £962
Total cost = £6462
I wouldn't say MGR's markup was too excessive. Even if their markup was slightly higher than £750 and one of the other costs was slightly lower - let say for example shipping costs was £250 - then MGR's markup would still only be around £1000 per car.
|
|
For comparison's sake, how much does it cost Ford to get a new Fiesta to the factory gates?
|
"For comparison's sake, how much does it cost Ford to get a new Fiesta to the factory gates?"
Not very much I imagine.
I understand that BMW can build a 5 Series for around £6,000.
|
|
Somewhere in the BR archives is the 'factory gate' cost of a Touran, which was between 4K and 6K EUR IIRC.
|
RE: "Tata sell them to MGR for £3.5K"
Tata are over-pricing them then, there are far better equiped cars around for the money. Even the cheapest Ford Ka is less than £6,000.
I think this discussion is probably now just academic, Tata have threatened to terminate the contract now that the new Chinese deal has gone through. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
|
>>I understand that BMW can build a 5 Series for around £6,000.
Right, I'll go and order one straight away! No, make that two! At that price I can put up with the 'disguised prototype' styling!
What was it they sold MG Rover for? £10? £1? 10p? 1p?
cheers, SS
|
>>I understand that BMW can build a 5 Series for around £6,000. Right, I'll go and order one straight away! No, make that two! At that price I can put up with the 'disguised prototype' styling! What was it they sold MG Rover for? £10? £1? 10p? 1p? cheers, SS
If only we could!
Sadly I imagine that whilst BMW (Factory) can build a car for £6,000 they sell it to BMW UK (importer) for something like £10,000 to cover the cost of developing new cars etc.
BMW UK (importer) then sell the car to BMW Sometown (Dealer) for £20,000 using the profit to market the car in the UK, cover warranty claims etc.
BMW (Dealer) then sells it to you or I for £25,000 using the profit to cover the cost of staff, premises etc.
And, of course, everyone along the line wants to make a profit as well!
|
OK, so say there are 5s available in Munich at 6 grand apiece. I'd go for one, maybe three. But:
How would we know it was there or what it looked like? No marketing budget, remember!
Who would PDI it for us? There would be no budget to build a nice gleaming dealership.
Who would take the £6k off us? Someone has to pay the accounts dept salaries.
How would we have known the 5 series was a decent car*? There was no budget to lend one to the journalists.
Would we whinge when we were prosecuted for driving it on UK soil? Remember - no-one has crash-tested it etc so there is no Certificate of Whatever to say it is legal to use.
And so on. We can complain all we like about people making a profit (horrors!!!) along the way, but the other way of putting it is that their salaries are being met and thus they bother to turn up in the morning and help us get our lovely new shiny car.
--------------------------------
*just for the sake of argument, let's assume it is....
|
|
I have re-read my comment and it does sound like I was criticising BMW for making profits when in fact I was trying to justify them.
|
I wasn't aiming at you, rjr!
"Profit" just seems to be a dirty word in public debate these days.
|
I wasn't aiming at you, rjr! "Profit" just seems to be a dirty word in public debate these days.
NW will be along to tax so called profit from cars at a much higher rate in a min.
H
|
NW will be along to tax so called profit from cars at a much higher rate in a min.
No I won't.
|
"Profit" just seems to be a dirty word in public debate these days.
Funny isn't it? The people behind MG Rover get continually slated for not managing to make a profit since they bought the company, but then when it is revealed how much they are buying the CityRover for, they get slated again...for trying to make excessive profits!!!
|
Oh look! It's Muppetland the Troll!!! He's been banned from all MG Rover enthusiasts forums for posting troll posts. This guy has a serious vendetta against MGR, I sometime wonder if he's Clarkson in disguise or if he works for The Guardian.
Muppetland is infamous on most MGR enthusiasts forums. He now posts on forums like this and the only posts he's make are anti-MG Rover related ones. I have NEVER seen him post about anything else.
Muppetland - change the record please, your just plain boring now!!!!
|
|
Puppetland is a pain. A boring, repetitive pain at that. But there is more than one of them in this world.
|
|
|
|
