Being a car designer who lost his job (or notice of) before the Rover problems, so now know it will be even harder to find a job in the UK after this weeks news. Plus being the proud owner of not only 1 but 2 Rovers, my pride a top of the range Rover 75....I am fed up. What is this country coming to in the world on manufacturing, closure after closure of manufacturing sites in my area all the time...Before you know it, will we be buying our caravans from China, Poland and other low cost countaries. I was forced to send work to India at under £5 an hour for top design work rather than pay our own people to do the work 12 months ago and now this.....Is it ever gonna get any better or just worse...sorry not caravan related directly this post, but I am at home, fed up and this is something that will catch up with us all in the end in one form of way I am sure...........If you have been affected by this post, please contact 'grumpy young Rover drivers with no job and feeling poorly' helpline on 08991 676...!
Rover - What is this country coming too?
- Thread starter HomerMarge
- Start date
Sadly like most things manufactured In Britain today it is a question of quality. look at the quality of British caravans when compered against their European counterparts. Nothing wrong with a Rover 75 but the fact that at one stage quality was bad, now lingers on. They should manufacture a totally different car there that has no association with Rover. By the way, I seem to remember that not so long ago these guys stage a strike but I do not know the details. Either way it is very sad for a rover employee.
I would rather buy British everytime- but the British products just aren't up to scratch- most products that involve technology in my home are sadly from overseas- they are just better quality and decent value. Even Aston, Rolls Royce, TVR etc have input from overseas. I work in the car industry and Rovers downfall, I feel, was continuing to dress up old models and try and sell them against better competition- the Rover 25 is years old and you can still buy one! 75 and MG range are good however. The workers should be better protected by our government though- the company has failed from the top- and those below are suffering. Its a sad time.
Anyway, look on the bright side... my caravan is british- although towed by a Geramn car!
Anyway, look on the bright side... my caravan is british- although towed by a Geramn car!
I know what you are both saying and don't despute any of this as i do tend to agree. I think Rover did have a good product (I should know I worked on it) the new mini, now under the BMW group. A lot of the 75 is actually BMW parts as well. I do not work for Rover but in the the industry in general on many designs both british and foreign (or did rather)!
The bigget mistake was not launching the RDX60 which was the new look Rover, this went on hold when the BMW problems hit and never came back to the drawing board. Had it off, we may be seeing a different story as this car looked great...I should know..cause I worked on it!
The bigget mistake was not launching the RDX60 which was the new look Rover, this went on hold when the BMW problems hit and never came back to the drawing board. Had it off, we may be seeing a different story as this car looked great...I should know..cause I worked on it!
Personally the or any government should no interfere in any business otherwise they will just mess it up. After all they will not bail you out if you got into debt and could not pay the debt.
its the old merry go round revolving again.
labour rates for production of goods and now services are being undertaken by countries whose labour rate is immensely lower than ours.
even as far back as the 1960's firms were transferring low added value operations to the third world.
The UK (like most of Europe)is fast becoming a museum for evolving countries to visit and comment on the quaint ways we use to (and still do) operate.
IMHO when these eastern countries fully emerge the works which have transferred to them may return here when the labour rate is lower than theirs. Regards from one who felt the wind of change many years ago
labour rates for production of goods and now services are being undertaken by countries whose labour rate is immensely lower than ours.
even as far back as the 1960's firms were transferring low added value operations to the third world.
The UK (like most of Europe)is fast becoming a museum for evolving countries to visit and comment on the quaint ways we use to (and still do) operate.
IMHO when these eastern countries fully emerge the works which have transferred to them may return here when the labour rate is lower than theirs. Regards from one who felt the wind of change many years ago
Hello Paul & Ruth, I too worked for a British company that was ultimately purchased by a German, competitor, who despite initial pronouncements about keeping the company and the brand going, 6 months down the line promptly closed the whole thing, after cherry picking the best bits. The story has a lot of parallels with Rover, so I have considerable empathy with the workforce.
It is my view that British Leyland whilst they had some some really difficult issues with quality, their products had many technical strong points. BL's management, were at fault in that they never grasped the need for improving quality, in the systematic way that other companies abroad managed. The break up of BL was necessary, though with the benefit of hindsight the split lines may not have been the best choice. We of course lost our heavy truck manufactures to DAF. Though to be fair they did continue to produce in the UK.
The British aircraft Corporation which took control of the car division, should have been more radical in applying quality assurance methodologies, but failed or were prevented from doing so by labour relations. During this time the products did improve but never to the extent they should have done. Export opportunities were also lost, especially as the UK were a member of the EU, I suppose that having a home market that drives on the left, meant that designing product for the Left hand driving position was never taken as seriously as it should.
Ironically it was the fact that Japan and the Britain share the same driving position meant that we were always going to be an easy market for car makers from the land of the Rising Sun.
Honda had managed to turn around their European products from the dreadful rot boxes of the 70s to the ultra reliable models of the 80s with innovative engineering in the power plant But they still lacked a proper understanding of the European mind set of values.
Rover were struggling to develop new models and the link was established, Honda cars became significantly more Europeanised and successful and Rover benefited from sharing development costs and economies of scale. This symbiotic relationship was in danger of threatening the major European players, so much so that when the Rover 600 series was announced it was clearly seen as a threat to BMW.s medium sized market. This broadly coincided with BA's wish to dispose of Rover. BMW became very active in the takeover stakes.
It is widely known that Honda were more than just upset when BMW outbid them for control of Rover. Why did BMW do that? Rovers strengths plus the access that to Honda's shared technology were seen as very desirable, also the 600 series could be watered down to reduce the threat to BMW's major market.
Not withstanding BMW only controlling Rover for 5 years, in that time BMW was able to extract a lot of technological know how, cherrypick the key brands like mini, and drip feed Rover with the funds and access to new technologies to prevent them from really threatening BWM.
Note how BMW has introduced several smaller cars, and of course the X series has more than just a smattering of Range Rover.
Over this time BMW may have been outwardly appearing to support Rover but in reality they were applying a commercial strangle hold. It was not in their interests to have a strong UK manufacture, They knew that with the UK's relationship with the USA improving Rovers would undoubtedly begin to impact the American markets. National policies on interest rates also rested against UK manufacturing.
Effectively BMW asset stripped Rover, and although the manufacturing plant was sold to Phoenix for
It is my view that British Leyland whilst they had some some really difficult issues with quality, their products had many technical strong points. BL's management, were at fault in that they never grasped the need for improving quality, in the systematic way that other companies abroad managed. The break up of BL was necessary, though with the benefit of hindsight the split lines may not have been the best choice. We of course lost our heavy truck manufactures to DAF. Though to be fair they did continue to produce in the UK.
The British aircraft Corporation which took control of the car division, should have been more radical in applying quality assurance methodologies, but failed or were prevented from doing so by labour relations. During this time the products did improve but never to the extent they should have done. Export opportunities were also lost, especially as the UK were a member of the EU, I suppose that having a home market that drives on the left, meant that designing product for the Left hand driving position was never taken as seriously as it should.
Ironically it was the fact that Japan and the Britain share the same driving position meant that we were always going to be an easy market for car makers from the land of the Rising Sun.
Honda had managed to turn around their European products from the dreadful rot boxes of the 70s to the ultra reliable models of the 80s with innovative engineering in the power plant But they still lacked a proper understanding of the European mind set of values.
Rover were struggling to develop new models and the link was established, Honda cars became significantly more Europeanised and successful and Rover benefited from sharing development costs and economies of scale. This symbiotic relationship was in danger of threatening the major European players, so much so that when the Rover 600 series was announced it was clearly seen as a threat to BMW.s medium sized market. This broadly coincided with BA's wish to dispose of Rover. BMW became very active in the takeover stakes.
It is widely known that Honda were more than just upset when BMW outbid them for control of Rover. Why did BMW do that? Rovers strengths plus the access that to Honda's shared technology were seen as very desirable, also the 600 series could be watered down to reduce the threat to BMW's major market.
Not withstanding BMW only controlling Rover for 5 years, in that time BMW was able to extract a lot of technological know how, cherrypick the key brands like mini, and drip feed Rover with the funds and access to new technologies to prevent them from really threatening BWM.
Note how BMW has introduced several smaller cars, and of course the X series has more than just a smattering of Range Rover.
Over this time BMW may have been outwardly appearing to support Rover but in reality they were applying a commercial strangle hold. It was not in their interests to have a strong UK manufacture, They knew that with the UK's relationship with the USA improving Rovers would undoubtedly begin to impact the American markets. National policies on interest rates also rested against UK manufacturing.
Effectively BMW asset stripped Rover, and although the manufacturing plant was sold to Phoenix for
There was nothing wrong with Rover - the independent Rover. Until 1967 quality was key. Unfortunately, due to takeover they did not have an indepndent body company they could use and therefore sold out to Leyland. Whilst Rover managed to operate relatively on their own Leyalnd did force certain requirements on them. The 3500S Auto was launched in the US in 1969 with all sorts of emission controls on that made them very difficult to tune. Rover wanted to wait until the fuel injected V8 was ready. The result a disaster. With the SD1 Michael Edwards is on record as saying about Rover 'all you want is quality not quantity'. Thus the decline and a demoralised workforce. Contrast Rovers attitude with Austin and there is the root of the trouble, along with commentators taking any shot they can at the current Rover - the 75 is rated highly in a number of countries around the World - but a colleague of mine did not buy one 'because of all the problems with them'. In addition, the buyes of Rover did not have the funding available for the R&R for new models. Perhaps if Rover could become the old Rover and just concentrate on one large car then perhaps the public would buy them. After all, the P4 'Auntie' Rover is still in a large number of peoples memories as may also seeing people pulled over by a Police P6.
John L is absolutely spot on. My Father in Law worked for Wadham Stringer & Dutton Forshaw when they were the main BL outlets in the South. He was there when the joint venture Triumph Acclaim was launched. He told me of many instances where BL/Rover expertise in body design and creating space within a car astounded Honda.
In his view Honda were an honourable partner who were well and truly shat upon by the government of the day when they sold to BMW who as John L says simply asset stripped.
Ford are working wonders at Land Rover on basic quality and new product design - Honda where in it for the long term and would have done the same for the whole company.
I feel reasonable certain that had Honda been allowed to continue what was a truly synergistic relationship we would be looking at a successful manufacturing plant at Rover.
Instead BMW where allowed to act like a parasite and simply took what they wanted - the Mini.
Sad day
Clive
In his view Honda were an honourable partner who were well and truly shat upon by the government of the day when they sold to BMW who as John L says simply asset stripped.
Ford are working wonders at Land Rover on basic quality and new product design - Honda where in it for the long term and would have done the same for the whole company.
I feel reasonable certain that had Honda been allowed to continue what was a truly synergistic relationship we would be looking at a successful manufacturing plant at Rover.
Instead BMW where allowed to act like a parasite and simply took what they wanted - the Mini.
Sad day
Clive
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
12v supply to fridge fault after testing voltage !! Help please
- Started by Joggerdude
- Replies: 4
-
-
Facebook
Twitter