Save MG Rover

John Redman ( snipped-for-privacy@hotmailREMOVETHEBLEEDINOBVIOUS.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

No, BMW own the name. MG-R were using it under licence.

SAIC wanted the engine technology, and the 25 & 75 manufacturing rights. Which they'll buy/have already bought from the administrators dirt cheap without having to muck about with closing Longbridge down.

: As a philanthropic : organisation dedicated to the survival of the MG and Rover marquees, Save : MGR would like to take this opportunity to invite : "pledge investors" to pledge their potential investment in respect of the : possible acquisition of MG Rover or constituent parts : (ie. MG/Rover/both marquees).

Quite apart from trying to save a couple of tents, you think you can get a few folk to chip in and make up losses which neither BMW nor the Chinese government could contemplate?

Ian

: Ask yourself why both BMW and SAIC thought there was something worth : investing in. Personally I have more faith in their evaluation of the : Rover/MG technologies and brands than I do in the views of some sections : of the British public who can't think beyond the 1970s.

Exactly. BMW were willing to pay a billion pounds (interest free loan) to get the company off their hands and the Chinese, having licenced most of the IP they wanted, seem happy to wait and pick up a few machines at the sale.

Both of them have made a very clear evaluation of Rover.

Ian

: You should have watched James Dyson's Dimbleby lecture last year, for : example. It's of vital strategic importance that design and engineering : leadership and skills are retained.

Remind us, will you, where Mr Patriotism now makes his vacuum cleaners?

Ian

: Rover never made good small cars - think of the Metro, Maestro and 100. : Rover made larger, executive cars - the car "my bank manager drives", as : they said in the 1960s. The P5, P6, SD1, 800, 75 - those are the cars : that are "Rovers".

But the modern Rover has, basically, nothing whatsoever to do with that Rover except the badge. If anything, it's Austin - and they did make small cars.

Ian

: It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the : drugs began to take hold. I remember "Save MG Rover" : saying something like: : : >Many thanks for your time - keep MG Rover rolling! : : : : : : Here's a galvanised washer.

Galvanised? What's galvanised? For Rover it should be a mild steel washer, and preferably one which has been left outside over a weekend ..

Ian

It wasn't a new GS, though, was it? What you are describing sounds to me like a GS without lobes on the camshafts.

Why? The directors have already sold off the rights to build the 25 and 75 to SAIC, the land to a lease-holder and pretty much everything else. The Rover brand belongs to BMW and the directors have hived off Rover Financial Services and engine manufacture to their own slush-fund.

Corporate greed.

David

We're not just counting jobs as though they were beans. There's for more to it than that.The point was that it isn't just the jobs in manufacturing, it's the control over the design and engineering. Dyson claimed that he employs more people in the UK as a result of moving assembly to Malaysia. Those UK jobs are more skilled, many of them in engineering design. Furthermore, the assembly of vacuum cleaners is far less skilled than the assembly of cars.

Michael

I assume you are talking abouthe Rover 75? That was what I was referring to. No, the quality of the trim, the ride comfort and style is very much Rover.

Michael

After pumping several billion into it in the first place, because they recognised the positive aspects of the brand image. Failing to convince the miserable British public probably wasn't something they envisaged.

So let's see:

So what exactly of any significance is left from the MG-Rover range as a whole that made it such a disaster?

Michael

: Dyson : claimed that he employs more people in the UK as a result of moving : assembly to Malaysia.

And I saw Ian Paisley crying at the Pope's funeral.

Ian

: > Exactly. BMW were willing to pay a billion pounds (interest free loan) : > to get the company off their hands : : After pumping several billion into it in the first place, because they : recognised the positive aspects of the brand image.

And that was part of the problem. Suddenly digging up the Rover brand /and/ trying to wind its image back to the sixties was never going to be terribly convincing.

: Failing to convince : the miserable British public probably wasn't something they envisaged.

OK, so their market research wasn't too bright.

: So let's see: : : 1) Ford were very happy to take Land Rover.

Which is now going down the tubes

: 2) BMW were more than happy to keep Mini.

Which they had invented, and basically had bugger all to do with the UK car industry.

: 3) SAIC were rather keen on the production rights to the Rover 75

So they could make it a modern factory where troublesome union types can expect twenty years in a concentration camp ...

: 4) Sales of the MG-ZR rose 10% in the first 3 months of 2005.

From? To? At what profit per unit?

: 5) MGF is a very popular sports car.

Sales compared to the MX-5? : So what exactly of any significance is left from the MG-Rover range as a : whole that made it such a disaster?

OK, so they managed to flog a few chavved up Rover 200's and 400's. Big deal. Quality (except, I am told, on the 75, which I think is jolly nice looking, apart, obviously, from the Max Power MG version) continued to be appalling.

Ian

: > But the modern Rover has, basically, nothing whatsoever to do with : > that Rover except the badge. If anything, it's Austin - and they did : > make small cars. : : I assume you are talking abouthe Rover 75? That was what I was referring : to. No, the quality of the trim, the ride comfort and style is very much : Rover.

Except that Rover had nothing to do with it. The Rover you are referring to ceased to exist, in any meaningful sense, when the SD1 came along. The 75 - nice as it is - is a BMW design made in an Austin factory. "Rover" is the badge, and nothing else.

Ian

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember RichardK saying something like:

Not quite. People were using small portable cassette players and headphones long before Sony stole the idea.

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Andy Dingley saying something like:

Gaud nose how they managed to kill a Perkins Maestro engine. Those things were almost indestructible.

Must have been well knackered. A fairly new GS I had many moons back could fairly motor and was amazingly comfortable.

I have similar fond memories of my '59 DS19, but I know that it's a performance dog by today's standards, or even by the standards of 20 years ago.

In news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-KfI0JqMFBNQd@localhost, Ian Johnston decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

The SD1 was a David Bache design, and was derived from the P10 project of the 1960s.

The SD1 was the last *real* Rover, and as far as I'm concerned one of the greatest cars ever built - in V8 form, obviously. The others were all crap.

I'd like a 75 or ZT V8, but I suspect they'll be bloody rare if Rover does go the way it seems destined to, unfortunatly this will probably stop me owning one.

Rover could have, and should have, been looked upon with the same eyes people have for the likes of BMW and Audi. The P6, in it's day, was the equivalent of the BMW 3 series - a sporting saloon for middle management types that was comfy transport for bank managers. The P5B Coupé is a fantastic looking car. The SD1 Vitesse is, in my eyes, probably the best looking car of its type and possibly one of the best looking cars ever. I still miss my old SD1 Vitesse and want another.

It's just a crying shame that the staff at Rover persisted in strike action in the 70's, they didn't manage to screw together an SD1 properly until around 1983, this isn't good when it first went on sale in 1976. The 800 was, and always will be, a bloody travesty even if it does look quite good as a coupé.. The 400 / 45 rides well, but is basically a Roverfied Honda, the 200 / 25 was meant to be a Metro replacement that was misguidedly pushed upmarket - along with the 400, the 600 was a joke although the Ti goes well. The MG's handle very well, the V6 powered 45 being a particularly subtle variation. It's just ridiculous that a company with the heritage of Rover should still be peddling stuff based on ancient Honda bits in 2005.

I blame Derek "Red" Robbo, but for the staff not to manage to reliably put cars together in the 25 odd years since he went is taking the piss.

They've got the design capabilities, the handling of the MG versions proves that. The KV6 is a bloody good engine, as is the K series if looked after properly. It's just crazy that they've never had decent dealer support, and that they've credited the people who drive them with the ability to do weekly checks.

I suspect Rover will stay dead this time.

Anyone got an SD1 Vitesse / VP EFi for sale??

: In news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-KfI0JqMFBNQd@localhost, : Ian Johnston decided to enlighten : our sheltered souls with a rant as follows : : > Except that Rover had nothing to do with it. The Rover you are : > referring to ceased to exist, in any meaningful sense, when the SD1 : > came along. The 75 - nice as it is - is a BMW design made in an Austin : > factory. "Rover" is the badge, and nothing else. : : The SD1 was a David Bache design, and was derived from the P10 project of : the 1960s. : : The SD1 was the last *real* Rover, and as far as I'm concerned one of the : greatest cars ever built - in V8 form, obviously. The others were all crap.

I agree with you there. But what I meant was that the SD1 marked the end of the "sedate travel for the bank manager" image of Rover.

Ian