MG Rover going bust (again)

Ok then, subsidise instead of assist.

It's another bale-out.  The difference is it'll fail miserably - because that's the only thing they seem to be any good at doing these days!

The Call Centre "hype" is just that too.  There are also a heck of a lot more jobs at risk too - immeasurably.

I reckon it will be a last minute recovery, making Tony out to be a hero - and thus giving him another few years to remove all our Britishness in favour of the euro and higher taxes (including a suspspected tax on food)
I may be wrong of course, its only my opinion.

Philip wrote: Have Ford ruined Jaguar, or taught them how to build good cars, and make some money in the process?

Ford have ruined Jaguar. As already mentioned, they tried to turn a niche samll volume producer of high end luxury saloons and coupes into Britain's BMW. The S-Type, while well engineered and pretty to look at tries to milk the heritage a little too much. It smacks of tackiness. Superb car - if there had never been a mk2. The X-Type is an abomination, essentially a reskinned Mundaneo with some olde english wood and leather chucked in for effect. The new XJ is a sublime piece of engineering, designed in Britain and shows the world the way forward in luxury saloons IMO. I remember John Egan coming in after the BL fiasco when Jag almost went under last time and turning the company around, this needs to happen again before Ford starts to pull Jag down with it - Brown's Lane is gone, akin to the Queen selling off Buckingham Palace to save a few quid. Farcical, but then the decision was made by some faceless American board who care little about British jobs.

Almost all the major manufacturers are feeling the pinch with predictions of big changes ahead for most of them. What worries me most is the seeming ability of some of you to throw away jobs in the Midlands because it takes a few quid out of your pocket. Golden Brown is taking taxes off us like never before. If all the car factories and related industries go up the swanny, what's left? Electronics - no wait, all those are going/have gone already. Call centres - nope, gone too. Clothing - long gone. Manufacturing in general is gone. Design still exists here, but more and more foreign workers are being drafted in because they are willing to work longer for less. And don't say it's beacuse we are lazy - the french refuse to work over 35 hours a week and their manufacturing sector is thriving. Where do Renault, Peugeot and Citroen build their cars? France. So why could/should MG Rover be allowed to do the same here? If it costs me an extra 20 or 30 quid a year then I'm happy for that to be used in that way.

well, talking about business going kapput, Terry's in York has closed, Nestl� (Rowntrees) is hovering with production of Kit Kat going to Germany I believe. Next thing is the sugar beet plant may be going as the EU has decided we are priducing too much sugar and we have to buy so much in from europe.. WHY? The campaign counts for a lot of jobs in York, and its rumoured that one or two may have to close..

I know, Brum has Cadbury's - but York has/had Rowntrees, Terry's and Cravens.. oh well, there's progress for you..

jeeesh you guys are on a good rover tangent.......lets face facts here .

1

rover make extremly good shopping trolleys..and as a car for shop runs and cheapish price range ..it carnt be faulted

2

the peaple that buy the trolleys are fans of rover and laura ashley.your classic rover type wouldnt dream of shopping at ikea.

3

there normal customer that buys a rover .are over 50 [just check out who was daft enought to buy a city rover the next time you actually see one on the road] .....  sorry i just forgot .i did see a young girl in her early 20s driving one ..either for two reasons only ...1 she listens to her ageing father too much and goes on his car buying advice..or she was dropping it off to him after having to borrow it for the hour because her car was in for repair

4

if you do see a mint metro still driving on the road etc .its been owned by mr grandad from new .and has done 14000 miles  in a zillion years [glasse trade guide now have there own 15 miles per yr  on old rovers pricing]

5

oh i could go on and on and on and on and on ..but iam sure ive made my point   and MY  point only...

lets face it rover is as english as an indian summer these days ...the management   have had there bit of glory of resurecting the company from the grave yard .[i give them ten out of ten for having king kongs bits to do it].they have all pensions/and other perks in place and its time for them to ship out .i do give them good credit were its due ..who else would have risked there own money ?????? ok ok i know it was a bit of a steel at the money it was sold for ..but they still put some of there own money were there  mouth was

as much as id like rover to be inotive as a manufacturer  ..it isnt really going to hapen is it ...and yes they have been bold in the odd project   ..but as a marketing gimic to woo peaple in to thinking they actually mite something good.....well it worked quiet well didnt it .

good bye rover .your arnt a mans best freind anymore .

R.I.P

you will be missed from some peaples hearts ..but not many

Edited by pma1ums

B 7 VP wrote: [QUOTE=Peter Fenwick] Yes I think the loan is a good idea, I just hope that the management learn from their mistakes  AND if they DONT learn from THEIR Mistakes-What Then????????????? Yes!!!!! Perhaps the TAXPAYERS can give them �200 million next time. Words like Naive---------Gullible--------spring to mind--BUT-this is a family forum--so, In respect to our Mods--I will desist from further ---- --        Cos nigel may    and you would miss me

It kind of anoys me when people dismess my views as Naive. It's a bit like saying 'you would agree if you understood but you're not really clever enough'.

I still think it is a good idea.

You are right though when you say that our problem is that we are unable to make buisnesses work. You only have to look at what happened to ICI to realise that there is a significant problem with some of the decsion makers in big business in this country. As an example ICI sold the Petrochemicals business to Huntsman for a fairly small sum several years ago. They also wanted to get rid of the aromatics business as well but since it never made a profit they paid Huntsman to take it off them. In fact Huntsman were given something like the equivalent of 5 years loses.

Within 2 years Huntsman had turned the Aromatics business around as was making a profit. Why did it take the Americans to come in and show us how to run a business?

IMO one of the big problems in this country was the importance placed on education, class and status, as opposed to actual business sense and abillity.  

 

Right, so let me get this straight:

Peter Fenwick wrote: You are right though when you say that our problem is that we are unable to make businesses work.

and

Peter Fenwick wrote: Within 2 years Huntsman had turned the Aromatics business around as was making a profit. Why did it take the Americans to come in and show us how to run a business?

Peter Fenwick wrote: Nigel wrote: It is better for a local economy to subsidise someone to work, who then pays taxes, buys his shopping from local shops, heas self esteem etc etc, than paying the same money to someone on the dole. Nigel , I made a very similar point in the who will you vote for thread. I agree totally.

I'm guessing that Huntsman did not rely on state subsidies to turn the business around and did not give a monkey's about the local economy. The reason that British business is not competitive is not some class or education thing, it's the urge to provide welfare that gets in the way. You can't have both a lean, competitive economy and a welfare state.

I've got a bone to pick with Nigel's assertion as well: it's the implication that you have to be given a job or you'll sit on the dole. What happened to the option of starting your own business, or finding a menial job and building yourself up? You wouldn't bother, because you know that the state will provide.

The failure of British business and the impending economic entertainment is a systemic failure, largely caused by the current belief that "somebody" will provide. When the state or a business runs out of money and cuts benefits or means tests them, we all know we're paying for something we know we're probably not going to get when it's our turn to need it.

spokey wrote: Right, so let me get this straight: Peter Fenwick wrote: You are right though when you say that our problem is that we are unable to make businesses work. and Peter Fenwick wrote: Within 2 years Huntsman had turned the Aromatics business around as was making a profit. Why did it take the Americans to come in and show us how to run a business? Peter Fenwick wrote: Nigel wrote: It is better for a local economy to subsidise someone to work, who then pays taxes, buys his shopping from local shops, heas self esteem etc etc, than paying the same money to someone on the dole. Nigel , I made a very similar point in the who will you vote for thread. I agree totally. I'm guessing that Huntsman did not rely on state subsidies to turn the business around and did not give a monkey's about the local economy.

You obviousley know very little about Huntsman. You should try looking on there website.

Huntsman takes a much bigger interest in the local economy than ICI ever did. They have a department that provides charitable donations and supports good causes. They encourage employees to take part in supporting the local comunity by going into schools and colleges. They regularly bring in school children to show them round and provide equipment for leaning. However the biggest they do is cancer research. Since the comnpany started they have put massive amounts of cash into finding a cure for cancer and they now have there own cancer instititue that provides treatment for people who otherwise would not get the care they need.

Aswell as this they also do a great many other charitable acts within both the local comunity and elsewhere.

But above all else they made us believe in ourselves again and made us believe that together thay could make it work. They have done more for the local economy than any government could ever be bothered to.

I genuinely believe that Huntsman are an example to other companies and that if everyone behaved in the way they did we wouldn't be in such a mess.

The only problem is that they have become a victim of their own success. They have become too big for a Privately owned company and have been pushed into floating a percentage of the company on the stock market. Eventually shareholders will put paid to charitable work as it will have an impact on the dividend they recieve.

 

So Rover make cars that people don't want eh?

One of the most fashionable cars to have in
Hamburg (Germany's wealthiest city) is a Rover 75
Estate. Classy, subtle, well finished and BRITISH!!
Just like Cricket and Barbour clothing, some more
things Hamburgers like. The Italians also like them.
Rovers are not Rubbish - why do Brits always do
themselves over? Sure, the Montego and 800's were
pretty awful but if you want an example of a really
crap car, look no further than the C Class Mercedes.
made in Poland or wherever out of bean cans and
recycled bin liners.

No, bring back the 1750 Austin Maxi, all is forgiven!