Rover shutdown ??

How many British marques have really maintained there distinctiveness, Rover
is not one of them, what we have is just the tail end of British Leyland.

Yes I think it is unfair that the Government would not guarantee a loan, but
in the end would that have made any real difference to Rovers integrity as a
British car manufacturer, I think not, they sold out to Honda long ago, and
the far East will be able to buy up at bargain basement prices when Rover is
liquidated.


--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes



"Ian Rawlings" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2005-04-08, beamendsltd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
> Our mass-market car industry's never really been viable as most of it
> came from the BL bucket of rot, and never really escaped from the
> rotten management that involved. So many decent car manufacturers
> disappeared down that hole, previous to that we made excellent cars
> and exported them around the world, but the rest of the world caught
> up and overtook BL while the old boy network twiddled their thumbs.
>
> As for the rest of our government-owned industries, successive
> governments have sold off as much as they can to industry and then
> bailed them out with masses of our cash, getting less and less in
> return, it's pathetic. The politicians rarely refer to us as anything
> other than "consumers" (a pet hate of mine) emphasising their view of
> the country as a pool of cash to be shifted around from wallet to
> wallet.
>
> Us citizens meanwhile bicker amongst ourselves about 4x4s, yob
> culture, religious bigotry, rants about travellers and so on. All
> totally irrelevant.
>
> I don't expect it's much different elsewhere, best thing to do is just
> to ignore the mayhem and plough your own furrow, something I think
> that people in this group can do better than many.
>
> --
> For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

So Ian Rawlings was, like

> The politicians rarely refer to us as anything
> other than "consumers" (a pet hate of mine) emphasising their view of
> the country as a pool of cash to be shifted around from wallet to
> wallet.

You've reminded me of another pet hate of mine. In the Patricia Hewitt
Radio 4 interview, she was banging on about the help that was going to be
given to the Rover suppliers as "£40m of taxpayers' money". Every other
time in the last 8 years that they wanted to spend my money on something, it
was always an "investment". It was only Mrs Thatcher who seemed to know
where it came from and called it "taxpayers' money". Now why would New
Labour want to spin it this way, a few weeks before an election?
--

Rich

Pas d'elle yeux Rhone que nous

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 02:42:18 +0100, "Larry" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Yes I think it is unfair that the Government would not guarantee a loan,

Why should they? There was, in reality, feck all guarantee of getting
it back - everyone knew this, which is why suggestions were made that
the gang-of-four, should they believe so strongly in the future of the
company they've habitually raped and asset stripped, should put
something up themselves from the millions they've salted away - ah,
but Johnyboy didn't want to did he...

It's a bit like me going to Heir Blair and saying "Right Tone, I wanna
go buy every single 101 that comes on the market cos I think it's a
very valuable part of the British Motoring Heritage. Therefore I want
you to put up the dosh to buy them and keep Warren in business, but
actually, I can't afford them, neither could I afford to pay you back,
but hey, still gotta be cheaper than invading Iran eh?"...

While he's at it he can also make an unlimited loan to the fag shop on
the corner as it employs a very tasty fit bird and of course, the
offie just down the road, cos I'm buggered if I'm going to drive to
Waitrose every time I want some Vino...

Ten quid for half a Billion quids worth of MG Rover and they then want
us to pay to keep it alive - huh???

In article <[email protected]>, Larry
<[email protected]> writes
>As for Land Rover, they stopped building proper ones in the 1980's didn't
>they
>

I thought it was the early 1970's (shortly after being merged in BL
- coincidence ?)


Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "news" with "adrian" and "nospam" with "ffoil"
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

>
> Ten quid for half a Billion quids worth of MG Rover and they then want
> us to pay to keep it alive - huh???

but the estimates I've seen are for another 10,000 unemployed
that's £200 pound each on the dole so that's 2 million quid a week we've got
to fork out with no return at all

just a thought that's all
--
Andy

SWB Series 2a ( dressed as a 3) "Bruce"
It's big, it's mean it's really, really green

In message <[email protected]>, Andy.Smalley
<[email protected]> writes
>
>>
>> Ten quid for half a Billion quids worth of MG Rover and they then want
>> us to pay to keep it alive - huh???
>
>but the estimates I've seen are for another 10,000 unemployed
>that's £200 pound each on the dole so that's 2 million quid a week we've got
>to fork out with no return at all
>
>just a thought that's all
But in time many will be re-employed. You simply cannot keep pumping
money into failed businesses, otherwise we would still be supporting
capacity in shipbuilding, aerospace, steel making, coal mining, etc etc.

There are different reasons for these failures but largely ineffective
and weak management at some stage, and, at times, an intransigent
workforce. Unfortunately MG Rover seemed to have gone beyond the point
of no return when BMW took over.
--
hugh
Reply to address is valid at the time of posting

On 2005-04-10, hugh <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

> But in time many will be re-employed. You simply cannot keep pumping
> money into failed businesses, otherwise we would still be supporting
> capacity in shipbuilding, aerospace, steel making, coal mining, etc
> etc.

ISTR that the vote-grabbers were talking about pumping cash into the
secondary industries that would be hit by Rover collapsing, which is
more sensible.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

In message <[email protected]>, Ian Rawlings
<[email protected]> writes
>On 2005-04-10, hugh <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
>> But in time many will be re-employed. You simply cannot keep pumping
>> money into failed businesses, otherwise we would still be supporting
>> capacity in shipbuilding, aerospace, steel making, coal mining, etc
>> etc.
>
>ISTR that the vote-grabbers were talking about pumping cash into the
>secondary industries that would be hit by Rover collapsing, which is
>more sensible.
>
Just a thought, and on-topic at that, I wonder if any of these suppliers
also make Land Rover spares for the independent market.
--
hugh
Reply to address is valid at the time of posting