I believe the re-badging is a stopgap measure in Alchemy's plan. If you
were to read some recent news stories from the past week or so, Alchemy
intends to have new models within two years working in conjunction with
Lotus for development.
See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_717000/717146.stm
I think Alchemy is handling it quite well, and I would not be pleased to
have a former Rover executive back in the saddle... Alchemy seems dead
focused on marketing to a niche segment and exploiting technologies and
names (the MG name) to help achieve a new image.
There is a reason they call venture capitalists, vulture capitalists...
because they'd rather make money than anything else.
I think the Healey names, and rights to use, are still held by the Healey
family.
Cheers,
--
Kai M. Radicke -- kmr@pil.net
1966 MGB -- 1974 Triumph TR-6
http://www.pil.net/~felix (pix soon)
> NO ARCHIVE
>
> Fellow TR Enthusiasts,
>
> I've been reading what has been happening with the Rover sale, and I
> must say I am not impressed on how it is being handled. I agree with
> the pundits that putting the MG badge on crappy old Rovers is not the
> way to sell cars. Can we say "Triumph Acclaim" or "MG Metro"? Even
> though we all have a friendly rivalry with the MG folks, I really would
> hate to see a good British sportscar name be tarnished. But as I read
> the posts to the list about Rover, I can't help but wonder: who will
> continue to own the other marques, such as Austin/Austin Healey, Morris,
> Wolsley, Riley, Standard, Triumph, etc.? Does BMW still have these, or
> do Alchemy? I'd sure like to see another TR, a TR9? Only time will
> tell. Hey, too bad I didn't invest in one of those hot technology
> stocks a few years ago. *I* could buy Triumph!
>
> Later,
> Brian
>
|