Monday, April 18, 2005

Wild Rover

Let's just accept John Hemming's view that the DTI pushed Rover over the edge.

Let's just accept John Hemming's view that Rover would have stumbled on for another month before ending up in a heap.

Do you think that the various suppliers who would have continued piling up unpaid invoices for Rover would have thanked the DTI for doing nothing? If the DTI did decide to help Rover over the edge, it may have been a mercy killing and their action may have allowed the supply chain a slightly more cushioned landing than would otherwise be likely.

Ultimately, whatever happened to Rover at the end isn't the issue. With sales tumbling, no new products on the horizon, a poor brand image, no prospect of a partner and the money finally running out, the company was doomed. No matter how hard John H tries to say otherwise, the fact remains that Rover was drifting further up the creek with no sign of a paddle. The behaviour of the DTI is largely irrelevant, whatever the truth of John's claims. The behaviour of Phoenix and Rover management over five years was crucial. The unions and the workers trusted Phoenix and have been comprehensively screwed over as a result of that trust.

1 comment:

john said...

The key here, however, is that the Chinese have a cultural aversion to buying companies out of administration (that's what I was told by a senior Trades Unionist).

It would have been entirely possible to complete some form of deal for continuation whilst MG Rover continued to trade.

The debate as far as SAIC were concerned was about the stability of the PVH residual businesses not MGR and Powertrain.

Now all of this is hypothetical to some extent. It is, however, material to the debate.