Talk:MG Rover Group
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Sales figures
Would you really say it was helpful to include Septembers sales figures? I would suggest if you want to include sales figures you give the full statistics (ie year to date %'s, market share, sales for both marques, which country those sales figures are for etc) and over a longer period than a single month. I don't believe I've seen sales figures quoted other than in broad terms in articles on other manufacturers.
--Pseud 14:15, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)
- I put them in to show the downturn in sales in just one year - perhaps that should be written more explicitly. I don't know any breakdown of those stats, unfortunately, so I can't add any more details to the numbers. violet/riga (t) 18:31, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Changing owners
I changed the amount Rover was sold to the Tower group by BMW to £1 (as opposed to £10) cos it's well-known that it was a pound and it's stated on a BBC News page: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4294709.stm. Dunno where the £10 figure came from but there's my explanation, although if you have proof that it is indeed £10, feel free to change it back and post up your link to prove it. --Smoothy 13:45, April 4, 2005 (BST)
OK... now visited the same page above and BBC News have changed it to £10, so changed it on article, especially as this link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4423181.stm) says £10 also. Very weird! --Smoothy 11:50, April 8, 2005 (BST)
[edit] The End
It seems the end for MG Rover has come. A funny thing is well not so funny but more of a coincidence is that the Longbridge factory was set up 100 years ago exactly. Not to this day but to this year. Wierd don't you think. (Erebus555 13:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC))
[edit] Hope
There is news circulating around the net that when MG Rover liquidates, Sir Richard Branson might acquire some of the assets, even possibly intangibles like the brand name itself. Branson intends to build Europe's first entirely hybrid car maker. There is still hope at least for the name of the company, the jobs on the other hand, well that's another story.
- What evidence is there of Sir Richard Branson's interest in acquisition? This is news to me. I have heard Sir Richard suggesting the hybrid route may be an option, but that's far from saying that he has expressed an interest in acquiring some of the assets. Google News reveals an opinion piece by Sir Richard, but no reports. Stombs 13:05, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Rapid Tense Shifting
The article, especially the opening paragraph, seems to shift between tenses faster than a midge going for a person's exposed arms. Can we decide whether to keep the whole thing in past tense or present? I'm going to put it generally into past tense, but if you disagree feel free to change it back.
[edit] Branson
See [1]. Andy Mabbett 21:48, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Ownership and Year: 1986 Qvale
Statement: 1986 Qvale (date of first car - company was in existence longer) ... this lacks some facts. The Qvale Mangusta was launched back 1996 (back in 1986 the engine and drivetrain didn't exist so De Tomaso couldn't have designed the car by then) and put into the market in 2000. Qvale as car manufacturer was founded 2000 while Qvale (the importer) was founded 1947 in the USA. According to my sources the brand name Qvale still belongs to Qvale and wasn't sold to MG Rover. See also Qvale--NicolasCH 07:34, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Nanjings intentions
I'm a student at the Technology Innovation Centre in Birmingham, it's part of the University of Central England group. Before MGR stopped trading we were one of their major research and development facilities, in this area.
Subsequently, Nanjing have unsurprisingly commited themselves to continue using us as an R&D facility. I say unsurprising because the reasons are that the province of Nanjing has universities that are twinned with UCE, and many of their students are put on placements here. So a lot of the engineering and design knowledge they're gaining is through us.
Their intentions as far as Longbridge is concerned are not quite clear even after the latest announcemnets. The MGTF (or whatever it may be called) will go ahead - but only for a few reasons.
-No one in China understands the car. Of course 2-seater roadsters are not a big seller in the Chinese market, and they see little point in producing it there. The main reason for producing it here is because there's a ready market for it and there's literally only one rival, the MX5.
-The profit made on the MG-TF is 15% - This was what it was designed to do from the outset. The typical profit of a normal car is only 6%, so it is worth producing to the end of its life possibly in 3 years time, in order to make the extra cash.
-Quality Control in China, as far as cars are concerned is terrible and their engineering knowledge is based on use of other companies technologies, so they need the help of the engineers we have in this country to help them develop their products.
Once they have the knowledge on building cars such as this, and once they have developed their engineering know-how, Longbridge is likely to close for good. Chinese labour is cheap, and as in all other areas of industry in China, quality control will improve quickly. I would like to be proved wrong, but it is the most likely scenario.
[edit] Austin-Healey
I've read articles that says Nanjin only owns the Austin name, not the Healey or Austin-Healey name. It appears that the Healey family retained ownership of the Healey name (and recently sold it to HFI Automotive). Anyone else have alternative references?
http://www.namedevelopment.com/blog/archives/2006/02/product_naming_24.html
For now I will remove Austin-Healey as a brand owned by MG Rover Group or now Nanjing.
