triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TR] Range Rover (now with more Triumph content)

To: triumphs <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [TR] Range Rover (now with more Triumph content)
From: Steven Newell <steven@newellboys.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:22:08 -0700
Greg wrote:

>  I wouldn't think that Chrysler would have much effect on MB.   Daimler is 
>the parent company who bought Chrysler.  Not the other way around.
>  
>
Chrysler has had a big effect on MB -- Chrysler Group's gains offset 
Mercedes Car Group's losses. Maybe the Chrysler 300 saved my free can of 
diesel! ;)

>  And regarding Land Rover, Ford has done a fairly remarkable job of starting 
>to turn that beast around towards efficiency after years of losses.  Keep in 
>mind that BMW owned LR before Ford and eventually threw in the towel without 
>success (which is how Ford picked it up from the bargain bin)....
>  
>
Not to mix boxer's towels with bath towels, but BMW bought the entire 
Rover group for #800,000,000 and sold Land Rover and Rover for 
#1,800,000,010, so it wasn't a complete bath for BMW. Granted Rover was 
only #10 of that, but BMW also got 4x4 technology for their X5 and X3, 
the MINI ... and 'Triumph' too. Here's a link to my favorite conspiracy 
theory site about Rover ownership -- featuring more bonus Triumph 
speculation at the end:
    http://www.austin-rover.co.uk/index.htm?whydbbrf.htm

BMW developed as much of the current Land Rover product line as Ford, 
but Ford deserves credit for marketing them all better.

Steven Newell
Littleton, CO USA
'62 TR4 x 2
'91 Range Rover SWB
etc.


===  This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register
===     http://www.vtr.org



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [TR] Range Rover (now with more Triumph content), Steven Newell <=