ROVER

[windy]

Rover needs to build better cars which people want to buy. They are not, and never will be again, big enough to be considered a mass manufacturer. They should concentrate on niche, but affordable cars, such as the MGTF.  They cannot compete in the mass market anymore. The 25/45 are ancient, while the 75 is a cracking car, if poorly built. The City Rover was the biggest mistake the company could have made.

That's the point, without money & investment in the whole process of designing & developing a new range of cars after BMW leeched out of them the Mini, there was never going to be a future. The 25/45 was ancient because after BMW they never had an money to replace them. Getting deperate to get new models on sale was when they when on a badge engineeering excercise with the City Rover which everyone knew was an inferior product fom the start. The 75 & TF were their only hope & it was the press that decided to finally put the nail in the coffin for them by continually slagging off an otherwise good product.

[stu999]

That's the point, without money & investment in the whole process of designing & developing a new range of cars after BMW leeched out of them the Mini, there was never going to be a future. The 25/45 was ancient because after BMW they never had an money to replace them. Getting deperate to get new models on sale was when they when on a badge engineeering excercise with the City Rover which everyone knew was an inferior product fom the start. The 75 & TF were their only hope & it was the press that decided to finally put the nail in the coffin for them by continually slagging off an otherwise good product.

It's not though is it? The money/investment hasn't been there for years, well before BMW came on the scene. The 25/45's heretige can still be traced to Honda pinnings - how old is that? It was already getting on a bit, well before BMW were anywhere near the front gates...  

Also, lets be honest, BMC/BL/Austin Rover/Rover have been 'badge engineering' since the sixties - just how many names *could* be invented for an Austin Cambridge?  

As for the press putting the final nail in the coffin - if the cars were good, they would have good reviews, simple as that. The original MGTF's were terrible. I know, I used to have to work on the damn things. The stuff that used to go wrong with them was bordering on the rediculous. I cannot speak for the newer versions of the TF, but *if* they are better (and they should be...), why has it taken ten years to get them like that? Just seems typical of this company in the first place - the customer is expected to do the development...

Lets not even talk about head gaskets...

[windy]

It doesn't matter that the investment hasn't been there for years. You can still turn a company around if you give the engineers some clout in developing their new products fully instead of having accountants ruling the company.

Regarding unreliability - this is 90% public perception generated from clever marketing & brand image. It is only in my line of work which involves testing things that you realise just how poor some really are, yet the public perception may be completely the opposite. It is certainly an eye opener.

[stu999]

Regarding unreliability - this is 90% public perception generated from clever marketing & brand image.

   

Now I know you are winding me up...

The Rover product is undoubtedly better than it ever has been before. But sadly, too little, too late. Are there really many other mainstream manufacturers out there with there 'best selling' model based on a 25 year old platform? that isn't public perception, that is real world. Are all the stories about K series head gaskets *just* a Media hype thing, or does it really exist (I had to mention it...)?

Public perception is very important, granted. But the 'image' is to a great extent self generating, there must be some 'substance' in there in the first place. Get the product right, and it will pretty much sell itself.

[nlash]

The City Rover was the biggest mistake the company could have made.

I agree with this, it's not a great car by any stretch but I also understand why the company went for the deal here.

Rover claim to be getting the car from Tata for about £2.5K. Thats including shipping to the uk. Why on earth didn't they sell it for less margin and offer it as the "cheapest" small car you can buy? If they had been banging these cars out new for £3999 then the press would have had a different story to tell. Instead they marketed it at Panda prices and lets face it, the car isn't a match for the Fiat.

[windy]

Now I know you are winding me up...

No I'm not.  

OK an example - Which new car do you think has less faults in its life cycle?

A) VW Golf

B) Vauxhall Astra

Which of these is the one that has better brand image & customer perceived quality? You might be very suprised.

[stu999]

No I would'nt. There are also annual customer satisfaction surveys as well - *if* people are willing to take any notice of them. And interestingly, the same info out there will also tell you that the other 'makes' of car that are  based on the Golf floorpan have less issues than the Golf itself. Go figure...

The perception of both the manufactutrers you mention are based on previous models, are they not? And not just from ten years ago either, but often going further back than that...

VW tend to get a big thumbs up, because of the cars it screwed together in the seventies/eighties. In their time, the Polo/Golf were probably the most reliable car in their market. Vauxhall however were fighting with a very bad reputation for rot. Even today, generations later, the sales take some clawing back. As we both know, previous reputations have nothing to do with the model in the showrooms today, but father will quite happily tell son not to buy X,Y, or Z because when he had one, it was pants - and the perception sticks.  

Besides which, both mentioned cars are still better than the British offering...

[nlash]

the same info out there will also tell you that the other 'makes' of car that are  based on the Golf floorpan have less issues than the Golf itself. Go figure...

Agreed, the old shape Octavia finished much higher than the Golf in satisfaction surveys when based on the same underpinnings. Much of this though does take into account the dealers level of service too. I can confirm that my local VW dealer is full of arrogant tw*ts that don't provide any care. Just the opposite to the local Skoda dealer who are just brilliant!

[SADDLEWORTH]

Whats happened to the royals not driving rovers when they have there royal  warrants at rover,i remember when they drove round in ROVER SD1 VITESSE V8s not AUDIS.

[amgas]

Had a rover 420 upto last year and it was a GREAT car - reliable and good to drive, also had the old shaped 200 ( K series that never missed a beat in 110,000 miles, no head gasket issues ) and that was a good car even when 10 years old. Lack of investment in new models is why I don't have one now, although would still like a MG ZT just can't afford it ...

Easy to blaim the workforce, and no doubt in the 70's this might have been true, but trying to flog the 1971 Morris Marina in the early 80's or the 1959 mini in the year 2000 shows that lack of investment has been the real killer for the british car industry.

Also get a bit anoyed with comments like "that was a Honda" or "BMW showed them how to build the 75" - sorry you need to give credit where it is due, alot of the work on the design of these cars was done by Rover in Britain - Honda got a lot out of the tie up with Rover as well - lets not forget they were a pretty minor player making cars that did not sell well in the UK before the tie up with Rover. For all the hype around BMW they are not a volume car producer and had some pretty mad ideas as to how to become one .... remember they had management who thought bringing back the Wolseley name was great marketing .... did Rover not have a 45 replacement not far away from completion when BMW bailed out ? I believe Rover did not get to keep the design.

Mini has been succesfull enough - this is a Rover Design made in a British factory.

Any one owned a renault latley .... in my opinion a much more unreliable and poorly built car than a Rover .... but go to France and everyone owns a Renault, Citreon or Peugeot - that is why they have an industry and we don't. We just prefer to spend our time being negative about a country that has great engineering talent ....

Sad.

[Mark Stanton]

A mate of mine purchased a brand new Rover 75 ZT thing last year - bright red very sporty looking, good spec on it - in 12 months its never let him down ............................. however build quality/finish is total     so much flimsy cheapo plastic switches etc ............... notthing has that solid "engineered" feel to it      

Now it ain't rocket science to put those thing right with the extra effort, to appeal to the market and sell better quality  

BL/Rover died years ago ............... gotta agree with Blats Red Robbo era was when it all went wrong ........... long before BMW became involved  

[neilwillis]

They sold just 6000 cars last month.   That's one car for each employee!

[Mark Stanton]

Yeh but the so called sales figures can easily be "massaged" are they all genuine bone fide sales to drivers      

How many were to folks taking out a 90K mortgage with the West Brom BS          

[James]

Without involving sentiment in this the equation is simple you are either doing something right as far as the consumer is concerned or your not, times have changed but it seems to me that Rover has been standing still for years, thepublic expect more today than they used to and you either cater for thoses needs or go out of buisiness I think the cards have been marked for Rover for years its now just finnaly happened.

Harsh to say yes but thats buisiness  if your not doing it right you dont deserve to conitinue, and ultimatley the consumer decides this fate!

[stu999]

Also get a bit anoyed with comments like "that was a Honda" or "BMW showed them how to build the 75" - sorry you need to give credit where it is due, alot of the work on the design of these cars was done by Rover in Britain - Honda got a lot out of the tie up with Rover as well - lets not forget they were a pretty minor player making cars that did not sell well in the UK before the tie up with Rover.

What, and the Triumph Acclaim set the world alight?  

Japanese car makers were pretty minor players in the scheme of things within the UK then, not just Honda. The colaberation (sp?) with Rover had nothing to do with todays sale success for Honda, the fact that they make good cars does. The sad thing is, most early Jap cars were almost carbon copies of British cars, just wrapped up in an modern, if quickly rotting bodyshell. The thing with the Jap stuff is that it was reliable, and it didn't leak oil. British motorcycle industry anyone?