I will never buy a bmw (a must read for the Rover bashers)

Product wise, they hadn't competed for many years. Red Robbo et al were credited with starting the dawnfall in the 70's, and even in the late 70s many products were terribly outdated its amazing they trundled on really, especially through the 80s with the maestro/montego and rover/honda models...
 
Remember too that at the time of the acquisition BMW and Rover built about the same number of vehicles..


and the company was profitable, granted their products were ageing, but the rover storey could have been very different. I mean, how good were seat and and skoda pre vag?
 
crud":t3m2ahyp said:
Remember too that at the time of the acquisition BMW and Rover built about the same number of vehicles..


and the company was profitable, granted their products were ageing, but the rover storey could have been very different. I mean, how good were seat and and skoda pre vag?

Very good point
 
The bits harking on about the 100 and 800 are a step too far, these were both truly dire cars that had no place in the modern market.

Even the Chinese wouldn't touch it for a cheap copy when they got all the tooling.

The 75 was arguably the best modern Rover and largely a result of BMW funding, the rest of the Rovers were at the end of the lifelines, no reasonable amount of cash could have prevented further decay - the rust had set in years before BMW took over.

Sad for everyone that kept the brand afloat by buying sub par motors trying to keep a British workforce in labour. Very sad for those that lost their jobs and all the companies that relied on Rover for their business.

Rowe are still bashing out those MGF's, who honestly would buy one of those for the asking price?
 
Skeelsie":3lo63g93 said:
The bits harking on about the 100 and 800 are a step too far, these were both truly dire cars that had no place in the modern market.

Even the Chinese wouldn't touch it for a cheap copy when they got all the tooling.

The 75 was arguably the best modern Rover and largely a result of BMW funding, the rest of the Rovers were at the end of the lifelines, no reasonable amount of cash could have prevented further decay - the rust had set in years before BMW took over.

Sad for everyone that kept the brand afloat by buying sub par motors trying to keep a British workforce in labour. Very sad for those that lost their jobs and all the companies that relied on Rover for their business.

Rowe are still bashing out those MGF's, who honestly would buy one of those for the asking price?

i don't know if you have read the op....
 
John":3vfof2be said:
fingers":3vfof2be said:
At the end of the day, its a brutal world, no more so than in business.


Quite. Sadly there is no sentiment in business.


Please lose the Nazi reference too. Please remember this is an cycling forum with international readership.

Sorry John, didn't mean to offend anyone , just using it in the context of the slightly bonkers story I heard.
 
andrewl":28cg05yi said:
Well even after reading all that I'd still buy a BMW - if they weren't so stupidly overpriced.

Its great, not only do they make great cars, theyre cut-throat pirates! Ace!
 
fingers":2egxrcio said:
andrewl":2egxrcio said:
Well even after reading all that I'd still buy a BMW - if they weren't so stupidly overpriced.

Its great, not only do they make great cars, theyre cut-throat pirates! Ace!

:?:

I can only comment on the Rovers we got over here, but even to the end they were less reliable than they should be and fell apart if driven on dirt roads (excluding Rangies and Landies - they just stopped for no reason). By the late 90s even Alfas were considered better built and more reliable!!

BMWs on the other hand are pretty reliable and you could drive them on a dirt road without pieces of plastic falling off. Price wise though everything is an option and they cost a lot more to get the same spec as their competitors.

When it comes to BMW and Rover, its no wonder a lot of people chose neither and just got something else.
 
Back
Top