dazcapri:
BMC was failing/failed from the time when it effectively black mailed Jaguar into bailing it out.Some say to the point where its true liabilities were hidden from Lyons when he mistakenly signed up to the deal.
Also contrary to the hype BMC’s front drive products were rightly as toxic in the motor trade as its balance sheet was to the respective BMH and BLMC groups that it predictably helped to bring down.
Which leaves the question of that being the intended aim of our government as part of the deliberate and eventually stated, move away from being a manufacturing based economy.
Lyons was worried about the supply of body shells BMC owned pressed steel who made all the bodies for Jaguar,he also had no heir to leave the firm to after the death of his son. He probably felt like he had no other options although I would imagine he probably regretted it for the rest of his life.
The main trouble with BMC is they were badly managed there cars (regardless of what you think of them) were best sellers. The Mini and 1100/1300 were regularly in the top ten sales lists but everyone was sold at a loss no wonder BMC didn’t last. The profits from the successful companies,the trucks landrover etc.were used to prop up the car side which meant no money for development of new ranges.
Rover were never part of BMC or BMH. Leyland took them (and Alvis who Rover had bought shortly before) over in 1967. Whatever was keeping BMC alive it wasn’t the landrover.
[/quote]
That’s what happens when you don’t double check your posts, I should of added another line in there about it being the same under BL they couldn’t develop the T45 earlier because the truck etc.money was propping up the loss making cars
Star down under.:
Ramone, none of the European manufacturers offer a conventional control truck*, only Australianized versions of of the European offerings.
Volvo and Scania are preferred amongst the Euros. Mercedes are making inroads, but only due to availability and price.
*Mack (bonneted) are available with minorly modified Volvo engines and transmission equipment.
Australian transport fascinates me with such diversity.I’ve watched the Outback Truckers series and there’s such diversity and inginuity amongst the drivers. Some in their super shiney new motors and the ones who keep the old stuff going ie Steve Graham. I’ve seen an AEC Mammoth Major still in use in Cober Perdy ? used occasionally and an old mickey mouse Foden both on Outback Opal hunters. There must be a treasure trove of old english lorries over there and they keep them running
So were Rover , Triumph , Jaguar , Daimler aĺl seperate companies that had been bought by Leyland. If so of all the companies within the group Austin Morris would have been the one not to invest heavily in. I remember watching Jeremy Clarksons documentary on BL Cars and he pointed out they were losing money on every Mini sold ■■? What was the point , he also mentioned new body shells being transported from one factory to an other exposed to the eliments . And still they poured money in at the expense of the CV side. Maybe if BMC had been given a wide birth there might still be a BL
[/quote]
Austin and Morris merged in the early 50’s to form BMC,on paper they probably looked the better company as their cars were top sellers and accounted for approximately 40 percent of the groups total sale but they were actually losing money on several products. Ford bought a mini and stripped it down and priced every component,they worked out that every car was losing them £16 (some sources say £30) per car. Others losing money were the 1100 range,the Morris Minor(£10 per car) and the Austin Westminster.
As for Labour the same Labour that put Europhile Callaghan in as leader.While ditching Benn and Shore who both knew that our economy and industries couldn’t withstand such a biased unbalanced trading regime and resulting imports onslaught…
It was Benn,at that time the Minister of Technology,who was partly behind the BMC takeover of Jaguar he knew the profitable Jaguar would be a good buy for BMC. He was also involved in the later BMC/Leyland merger which ultimately ended up as BL.
dazcapri:
BMC was failing/failed from the time when it effectively black mailed Jaguar into bailing it out.Some say to the point where its true liabilities were hidden from Lyons when he mistakenly signed up to the deal.
Also contrary to the hype BMC’s front drive products were rightly as toxic in the motor trade as its balance sheet was to the respective BMH and BLMC groups that it predictably helped to bring down.
Which leaves the question of that being the intended aim of our government as part of the deliberate and eventually stated, move away from being a manufacturing based economy.
Lyons was worried about the supply of body shells BMC owned pressed steel who made all the bodies for Jaguar,he also had no heir to leave the firm to after the death of his son. He probably felt like he had no other options although I would imagine he probably regretted it for the rest of his life.
The main trouble with BMC is they were badly managed there cars (regardless of what you think of them) were best sellers. The Mini and 1100/1300 were regularly in the top ten sales lists but everyone was sold at a loss no wonder BMC didn’t last. The profits from the successful companies,the trucks landrover etc.were used to prop up the car side which meant no money for development of new ranges.
Rover were never part of BMC or BMH. Leyland took them (and Alvis who Rover had bought shortly before) over in 1967. Whatever was keeping BMC alive it wasn’t the landrover.
That’s what happens when you don’t double check your posts, I should of added another line in there about it being the same under BL they couldn’t develop the T45 earlier because the truck etc.money was propping up the loss making cars
[/quote]
TBH I don’t know if there would have been a great clamour for the T45 earlier as BRS had only just finished the collaboration that produced the Scammell Crusader in the late 60’s so another model coming in so soon would have been unwelcome. The Marathon though was always going to be nothing more than a stop gap. I think that, if anything, the introduction of the Seddon Atkinson 400 range was probably the catalyst for the T45 as the cab was extremely stylish (by British standards) when it was put on sale. As the T45 was another collaboration with BRS it was always going to take a good few years before they could agree on a finished article anyway. I have a book somewhere that BL produced telling the story of the T45. If I can ever find it I’ll get it scanned and put up. It’s an interesting read.
dazcapri:
As for Labour the same Labour that put Europhile Callaghan in as leader.While ditching Benn and Shore who both knew that our economy and industries couldn’t withstand such a biased unbalanced trading regime and resulting imports onslaught…
It was Benn,at that time the Minister of Technology,who was partly behind the BMC takeover of Jaguar he knew the profitable Jaguar would be a good buy for BMC. He was also involved in the later BMC/Leyland merger which ultimately ended up as BL.
As I’ve said in a previous post decisions taken by the 64-70 government were, in my opinion, done for the benefit of the companies concerned. Not, as has been suggested, as a way of destroying the motor trade to allow for a wave of foreign imports. It was clear to anyone who looked at it that Britain had too many companies competing for the same business at a time when the Commonwealth countries were gaining independence and using this freedom to explore other markets for their needs. Vehicle manufacturing needed to be rationalised but the problem with that was the number of jobs that would be lost.
That it didn’t work out can be attributed to a lot of factors not least of which was the 1973 Arab-Israeli war which turned the world economy on its head and inflation soaring.
Regarding Callaghan, and again this is only my opinion, I think he knew that the country didn’t have the financial werewithal to keep Benn and Shore in line so they had to go. Pity as they were both ■■■■ good politicians who certainly had Britains interests at heart unlike the rabble that followed them into the 80’s.
TBH I don’t know if there would have been a great clamour for the T45 earlier as BRS had only just finished the collaboration that produced the Scammell Crusader in the late 60’s so another model coming in so soon would have been unwelcome. The Marathon though was always going to be nothing more than a stop gap. I think that, if anything, the introduction of the Seddon Atkinson 400 range was probably the catalyst for the T45 as the cab was extremely stylish (by British standards) when it was put on sale. As the T45 was another collaboration with BRS it was always going to take a good few years before they could agree on a finished article anyway. I have a book somewhere that BL produced telling the story of the T45. If I can ever find it I’ll get it scanned and put up. It’s an interesting read.
[/quote]
Yeah I think you’re probably right,look at the Ford Sierra sales were disappointing at first because it was too futuristic compared to the outgoing Cortina. Maybe if the truck side of the company had access to its profits the Marathon would’ve at least had a new cab,as opposed to the rehashed ergo. The Marina was also a stop gap and the Allegro was supposed to be the new future of the company but they actually spent more money on the Marina. Without getting into the fwd/rwd arguments and which car is better etc.why would you as a company throw more money at the stop gap product.
dazcapri:
As for Labour the same Labour that put Europhile Callaghan in as leader.While ditching Benn and Shore who both knew that our economy and industries couldn’t withstand such a biased unbalanced trading regime and resulting imports onslaught…
It was Benn,at that time the Minister of Technology,who was partly behind the BMC takeover of Jaguar he knew the profitable Jaguar would be a good buy for BMC. He was also involved in the later BMC/Leyland merger which ultimately ended up as BL.
As I’ve said in a previous post decisions taken by the 64-70 government were, in my opinion, done for the benefit of the companies concerned. Not, as has been suggested, as a way of destroying the motor trade to allow for a wave of foreign imports. It was clear to anyone who looked at it that Britain had too many companies competing for the same business at a time when the Commonwealth countries were gaining independence and using this freedom to explore other markets for their needs. Vehicle manufacturing needed to be rationalised but the problem with that was the number of jobs that would be lost.
That it didn’t work out can be attributed to a lot of factors not least of which was the 1973 Arab-Israeli war which turned the world economy on its head and inflation soaring.
Regarding Callaghan, and again this is only my opinion, I think he knew that the country didn’t have the financial werewithal to keep Benn and Shore in line so they had to go. Pity as they were both ■■■■ good politicians who certainly had Britains interests at heart unlike the rabble that followed them into the 80’s.[/quote
Yeah I’ve never understood that lets destroy our own motor trade in favour of foreign imports argument. Especially as the government’s of the time put taxpayers money into the company to keep it going. How bailing them out and investing money in them is a ploy to destroy them has always baffled me.
Yeah I’ve never understood that lets destroy our own motor trade in favour of foreign imports argument. Especially as the government’s of the time put taxpayers money into the company to keep it going. How bailing them out and investing money in them is a ploy to destroy them has always baffled me.
[/quote]
If it’s any consolation most of Carryfasts posts baffle me.
Star down under.:
Ramone, none of the European manufacturers offer a conventional control truck*, only Australianized versions of of the European offerings.
Volvo and Scania are preferred amongst the Euros. Mercedes are making inroads, but only due to availability and price.
*Mack (bonneted) are available with minorly modified Volvo engines and transmission equipment.
Australian transport fascinates me with such diversity.I’ve watched the Outback Truckers series and there’s such diversity and inginuity amongst the drivers. Some in their super shiney new motors and the ones who keep the old stuff going ie Steve Graham. I’ve seen an AEC Mammoth Major still in use in Cober Perdy ? used occasionally and an old mickey mouse Foden both on Outback Opal hunters. There must be a treasure trove of old english lorries over there and they keep them running
