Goodbye MG Rover

  • Thread starter 2scoops0406
  • Start date
2

2scoops0406

Sadly, after 100 years, looks like it is now all over. Feel very sorry for the 6100 workers who will potentially lose their jobs, yet another nail in the coffin of British Manufacturing. Seems like the Govt doesn't want us to make or grow anything, also doesn't give a stuff about research and development, science, maths etc. We're all gonna end up working in call centres, at this rate we'll be the next india :evil:

Must dig out those emmigration papers again.
 
Sponsored Links
I do think it's sad, as I have always preferred Rover, or British Leyland/Morris vehicles. However, they haven't made any money for years, so that is their downfall.
It is the workforce that suffers for the inadequacy of the management in all it's levels.
 
I think it is a real shame... can you imagine the French government letting Renault collapse so spectacularly, or the US government allowing Ford to die after a failed deal with the Chinese?!

I hope some clever bod in Rover or the government figures out a way to keep the company afloat as a profitable company, hopefully without selling it off.

BMW are largely to blame here, according to this anyway.

Kinda glad I was only toying with the idea of buying an MG...
 
I've just thought of something... Lancias sell really well in Italy. "No s**t Sherlock!" you might say, but, have you seen how much they cost? They are bl**dy expensive for what is essentially a Fiat. And they are really, really ugly.

Yet Italians buy them in their droves. I saw loads of this car, the "Thesis". According to the Italian website, the top-spec one is 53K euros inc VAT (£36,400) plus any options. That is a LOT of money for a Fiat! :LOL:

eu_lancia_thesis.jpg


I would imagine it drives very well, but it's ugly, innit? :eek: So why is it that Lancia can get Italians to spend £36K on a Fiat, but Rover-MG can't get Brits to spend £15K on a Rover 45?

(Interestingly enough, you see absolutely LOADS of MG ZR's around Italy. Not sure why, perhaps because they are keen drivers and the ZR is good to drive?)
 
Sponsored Links
Now that is ugly, but there are a few ugly cars on the market now too. My old Montego never looked that bad.
 
lets get it into perspective, the government were prepared to plough £100 million in but on condition that the partnership was approved it's the chinese who pulled out.
Besides that how any government can be held responsible is beyond me when,
The British car industry has been in decline for decades following the path it's sister motorcycle industry.

The decline can be put down to,
Lack of sales, few want to buy british products these days, whether because of quality of workmanship, reliability, or cost.

The germans and japanese had taken a lions share of the market for the simple fact they supplied quality, reliability etc etc.

The british worker and companies must shoulder responsibility for their demise.

It's so easy to blame others(the government)
but they should get their own house in order before shifting blame, you can't keep ploughing money into a business you know is eventually going to go bust.

Solution? british workers need to show a commitment to wanting to work hard and deliver the goods, companies need to do a bit of research in finding out what the public wants from their products, they need to get their business plans working properly in the first place.

Then perhaps when british companies have shown they can produce stuff that people want, the government could risk using taxpayers money to supply loans, not a bail out.

How many small companies have no support but have to make sure they have good working business plans, the big companies should take note.
 
Have to agreed with you kendor but government waste money too, specially Fat Prescott waste £billion so far and wouldn't it be better to prop the company up to save 6100 jobs, I bet that lot won't be voting Labour and I'm surprised Blair didn't see it as vote grabbing near the election time!
Having said this, we don't really know the full story.
 
Last Tuesday (5.4.05) Kevin Morley (former director of Rovers who managed to make Rovers profitable) gave a talk at a B-2-B exhibition in Maidstone. Of course he talked a bit about Rovers. The main thing I remembered was that now the elections are announced, all the parties would have had to agree to the £100 mj 'loan'. And he didn't think that would have happened anyway.
 
There is another way to view this...

6100 workers are out of work, in the local community and tied industries they estimate the total job loss could be 9000 people, the majority of these will be families with mortgages and rent to pay, children to support etc.

Government figures say the average unemployed person with a family of two children, a £40,000 mortgage or £600 a month rent liability will cost the tax payer £398 per week, so do the maths...

398 x 9000 = £3.582 Million per week, now multiply that by 52 weeks and you have a cost to the nation of £186,264,000!!

Ok that is extreme, as I am sure that many may find alternate employment, but the economical cost to the local economy and the national economy will still be around £80 million according to a few commentators.

So as a tax payer I look at this and think..well £100 million as a loan is not such a bad idea, but as a condition I would insist on the apoointment of someone like Sir Alan Sugar or Richard Branson to head the company for a period of say two years to turn the company round.

(These were just examples in my head not actual suggestions as niether would probably accept the role)
 
Does'nt it come down to the fact that rovers are not as good as the competition coz if they were more people would have bought them,it all comes down to supply & demand.no one demands a rover @ the moment though :oops:
 
But is not the reasonn Rovers don't sell is more to do with the public still thinking of Rover as the old British Leyland trash that ws made in the 70s and early 80? Could some of this all be due to narrow minded apathy by the public? I don't know, I never considered Rover when I bought my new car last year so i am as guilty as everyone else. I see the reasoning of FWL_Engineer, but not sure if the fugures are right as it isn't something I would know how to look at. It is like many things in this country to, often neglected until it's too late to save.
 
Sparky Jim said:
But is not the reasonn Rovers don't sell is more to do with the public still thinking of Rover as the old British Leyland trash that ws made in the 70s and early 80?

If that would be the case then the marketing director hasn't done his/her work properly!
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top