MG factory shipped to China

I wonder if they will be making classic minis!

Steve.

formatting link

Reply to
Steve68s
Loading thread data ...

Actually, timmy boy, they are making "NEW CARS". Idiot!

Reply to
madmax

Who is this "Madmax" and why is it arguing, insulting and disrupting this forum?

Reply to
DJ

I see that our sad f*ck of a troll is still here and still not taking his medication....never mind one day his sad life will become all to much even for himself and he'll go out into the back yard and swallow some lead.

and MAX for your own information a 3 doorhatchback is not a Austin/Morris/Leyland/BMC or Rover based vehicle. Its is built by a toatly different company, on a toatly different platform with a totaly different engine, the only thing it has in common with a Mini is that its name uses the same letter but all in upper case.

What part of those simple facts is it that you just f>

Reply to
Tim

Notice the way it's MG and no mention of Rover ? (They must have experience of things like the Rover 75 et al) Some quick legal reasoning, it should be possible to make and MG S or if Cooper put a seal on it an MG Cooper S perhaps ?? :-) It aint gonna happen but, it would be nice.

Jim

Reply to
Jim

Tim,

Slow down and read what I said. They are making a new car. I didn't say anything about the old models of the mini cooper. Maybe you have been drinking to much coffee. Really, slow down, take your time, perhaps this will help you make some kind of sense. On the other hand it is quite probable that you are mentally challenged. You are a genuine fool. As far as me eating lead....I will keep my sights on you, little man.

Tim wrote:

Reply to
Madmax

I am YOUR God! And I am here to annoy you little hobbits.

Reply to
Madmax
*sic* NG for the Mini, so the discussion is the Mini....simple really for anyone but a total idiot to understand.....now head for the back door and swing that length of rope you have plattedinto a noose and do us all a favour.....like a good little troll
Reply to
Tim

You didn't listen to me, did you. Slow down on the caffeine. Really tim, you are such a nervous little man.

Tim wrote:

Reply to
madmax

I think mg and rover are 2 different licenses

formatting link
either way saic wants to own MG and najing owns rover

madmax wrote:

Reply to
Chinacarforums

when you have somthing of value to say on the NG subject, IE The Mini then we will all listen, in the meantimes...the way out is behind you...

Reply to
Tim

Maybe, but I got your attention. The way out may be behind me, but I will continue forward.

Reply to
madmax

if living your life as an inbreed troll is your idea of forward, go ahead, but its a sad lonely excistance and only confirms what most on this NG already think.....

so why not go all the way forward to the decompos>

Reply to
Tim

Maybe when I get to be as old as you timmy. Not yet anyway. Why don't you get buried in your little go cart of a car, old man.

Reply to
madmax

This is how I understand it.

Saic pulled out of the bidding once they got the Rover 75 and MG-F car rights, Nanjing bought and now own MG (that's about a quarter of the Longbridge site, machines and the MG name).

Rover however is still owned by BMW, it is up for sale as a name and Ford have first refusal. This was agreed when Ford got Landrover.

The Rover/MG 45/ZS can no longer be built as Honda have repossessed all of their technology and licences.

This leaves Nanjing with just the 25/ZR and the Cityrover, However Nanjing think that they can build the 75 as the ZT but Saic actually own the rights last I heard. Nanjing were supposed to be setting up a small sports car manufacturer (MG) at Longbridge employing 5000 workers. And NO, they will never be able to rebuild the Mini even with a different name. The French put a stop to the Mini by branding it an unsafe (out of date) car compared to modern cars.

Things could have changed again buy now but that's how I understand it.

Reply to
DJ

WOW! The French are smarter than I thought.

Reply to
pooper

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.