why did mg rover go bust?

Answer 1

because they could not make a profit

Answer 2

Problems that had been hacking away at the company for many years.

First it was brought together, starting with the merger of Austin and Morris, which lead to the aquisition of Pressed Steel, and therefore other manufacturers such as Jaguar, Triumph, etc.

Things weren't so bad back then, with the Austin/Morris Mini and 1100/1300, plus sports cars from MG, Austin-Healey, etc. Even then, there was a problem with the SAME company (collectively BMC, later BL) competing with ITSELF in many markets and poor co-operation between the different brands.

The '70s was hit by industrial action, poor build quality and feckless management, aware that they'd be bailed out by the government anyway. Oh, and did I mention the Austin Allegro, or the facelifted MGB with those awful bumpers and crudely-raised ride height?

And I can't go without mention of the Triumph Stag, which probably summed-up many of BL's troubles. INstead of a good Rover V8, which was available, Triumph decided to make their own motor... with disasterous results. Shame realy, becasue it was a pretty 4-seater open car.

Under Gov. ownership, a deal was struck with Honda for some joint projects. The Triumph Acclaim killed off the brand once responsible forgreats like the Spitfire and TR series.

However, it did later give us the Rover 200 and 400, which were respectable cars in their time. And around that time, Rover was sold to British Aerospace... and then BMW.

It seemed alright, but then BMW sold off Rover/MG.

With limited funds, the company was unable to deleevlop new cars, and were left to made do with a line-up that was dated in comparison to the competition... and I think that says it all.

Answer 3

Its a long story.

Part of it goes back to the years of British Leyland and Government ownership, when the products were poorly developed, and not designed with export markets in mind. This left the company with a legacy of poorly developed products, and a strong reliance on the UK market.

Then there is the BMW ownership period, when the Rover 75 was developed with a German idea of Britishness, which didn't appeal to the British, who saw it as twee, or to the Germans, who wanted German products. The 75 was also compromised by being carefully developed with no sportiness, in case it should steal sales from BMW's 3-series and 5-series.

When BMW sold MG Rover to the Phoenix consortium, they did not include the part-completed designs for the new models under development to replace the 25 and 45, leaving the new owners with one recent model (the 75) and three models nearing replacement age (the 25, 45 and MGF). The new owners made a few good decisions in developing the MG ZR, ZS and ZT models relatively cheaply, and updating the MGF to create the MG TF, but they also made a lot of poor decisions. For example, a lot of money was spent developing the v8 versions of the 75 and ZT, and on the MG SV sports coupé, with little chance of a decent return on investment.
Another poor decision was to attempt to develop the 45/ZS-replacing RD/X-60 products on a development on the 75's expensive and heavy platform, and to prioritise this over the development of a 25/ZR replacement (which I believe could have been developed more cheaply and quickly, using most of the existing 25 platform). The RD/X-60 programme was partly subcontracted to TWR after the key planning decisions had been made, and TWR and Rover struggled to make the product meet the targets. The styling of the product left a lot to be desired, and an expensive re-style was ordered at a late stage, delaying the production date further. When TWR entered receivership, the RD/X-60 programme was at a crisis point, with MG-Rover needing to stop engineering work until the re-design was completed - which left the TWR receivers with no choice but to suspend work and lay off the staff working on the project. This caused a further delay to the programme, as the lack of TWR staff meant it took a very long time for MG-Rover to get the digital data that had been held by TWR. By this time MG-Rover's products were very old, sales were falling. The buying public (and the dealers who had seen the RD/X-60 styling models) were losing confidence in the company's future, and sales were falling. Eventually sales income was not enough to support the company's cash-flow, bill became unpaid, and suppliers started to stop delivering parts. This caused production to be halted, the story hit the headlines, and the company collapsed.

Answer 4

They went bust because they did not invest in new designs, and the modern motoring public do like something new. It's a shame really because the cars themselves weren't too bad - I had one and it was reliable and quick but my 1996 Rover 414 looked exactly the same as a 2004 Rover 45.

Answer 5

bmw pulled out taking the only decent car rover made the mini, the management then gave all the plans for their other models to a chinese cosortium, who said thank you very much and screw you. and that was that down the pan they went..

but let's be honest rover haven't made a decent motor for many a year have they...
montego
rover213
the metro
alleggro

enough said?

Answer 6

Jeremy Clarkson single-handedly bought the firm to the ground. He hated the cars and gave them awful reviews, everyone took his advice and boycotted Rover cars.

Answer 7

1

Answer 8

There are multiple kinds of disorders that deal with anxiety. Although most can manifest in similar ways, these disorders generally occur due to different events in your life. Natural home remedies for anxiety https://tr.im/4cJbs
Generalized anxiety disorder includes persistent and unnecessary worries about everyday, common events or activities, which can disrupt concentration and lead to other issues, such as depression.

Answer 9

Because they produced cars few people wanted to buy the general quality control was poor.The management was almost non existent.Dealers were left to pick up the pieces.It was a shame that Honda did not take them over.

Answer 10

The cars were unreliable, poorly constructed (by a lazy workforce), and very dated.

If you were buying a brand new car, would you shell out for yesterdays technology and design? Exactly.

Answer 11

Greed by the board of Directors.