Jaguar and Land Rover being packaged to sell by Ford?

Really bad idea. The story says the Rover is making money and that they share execs and and tech support. The problem with Jaguar is product. Ford is investing money in product but in the wrong places. The S TYpe is years old, it should have been redesigned 2 years ago and been given some balls. Jaguar cars are not competitive in the market and thats due to poor design and management. Ford cannot expect to make money with non competitve designs and powered cars. It doesn't make sense. Jaguar needs to get the new S Type to market with a high power 6 and a redesigned 8 cylinder engine soon. The 8 cylinder should really debut in the XJ be carried over to the XK and dropped into the S Type within months of each other. The new engine it conjunction with a new body style car will bring people into the showrooms. If they could add some technology with it sales would rise.
T

Well, they haven't been making Ford any money lately, usually loosing.

The only reason Land Rover is profitable is that it's still riding off of the things BMW did to it. Also, SUV's are popular.

The reason BMW bought Land Rover in the first place was because they wanted their 4WD technology.

got some change lying around, d3wade?

Both brands are very troubled overall. Ford mgmt doesn't seem to grasp on how to fix them. So a sell off would be in order for Ford to stay afloeat..

Rover damn near bankrupted BMW when they had them, so the buyer needs to have pretty deep pockets.

planoa4, please stop getting rover and land rover confused. rover does not exist anymore. bmw sold land rover at the wrong time though, the range rover then started to make a lot of money.

Rupert. BMW sold Land Rover becuase they had a choice. They could make it profitable, however they did not have the funds to make it that way without outside assistance.

Sad to see the two brands go...unless the germans save the day!

Huh? Germans save the day? What does that mean? The rumormill has Renault looking at Jaguar. With the LR2 coming out soon to an eager audience, I think Ford should consider holding on to Land Rover and dumping Jaguar. I'm not sure how it will affect engine choices for the Range Rover though.

I believe BMW sold Range Rover because they had already decided to develop their own range of SUV/SAV's and wanted them to clearly be branded as BMW's

rupert- BMW bought both Rover and Land Rover in the deal. And they basically bit off more than they could chew.

in early 1994 the Rover Group was taken over by German carmaker BMW. Under the new owner, Rover could begin to fulfil its potential, and 1995 saw two important new models. First the 400, a medium-sized car available in saloon and five door versions, and then at the end of the year, the new 200, a three or five door hatchback with a youthful appeal. Both featured versions of the well-established K Series engine, and also Rover's new much acclaimed L Series diesel engine. In 1996, the ageing Honda V6 engine in the 800 series was replaced by Rover's own new KV6 2.5-litre engine, pointing the way to future developments for the brand. The development of a new, classic but modern Rover was being developed to be everything that a forward looking Rover should be, and was being prepared for launch in 1998.

URL: http://www.rovercarclubaust.asn.au/history1.htm

So I am not really sure what the difference of the two for you may mean. But BMW owned both at one time, so the simple fact remains that BMW bought them, robbed the technology they needed, and split them up after failing to have the financial resources to fix them.

Plano, seems to me that you are pushing your conclusions as facts, based on articles found to support you arguments.

BMW got what they needed from Rover --- the right to use the Mini name... which has been a whopping sucess. And as a note, they didn't abandon rover either... as an ex-emloyee of Rover Cars my fathers company pension is now paid by BMW.

matt635- Actually I find the article period and whether I agree or not I post them. I have no agenda. That is why you see a favorable review on a

vehicle, and then the next day a slam on the same vehicle both posted by me.

On a secondary note, many of you know I do not agree with the Hybrid concept at all. However since it is an important topic, I post the about hybrid advances. Actually I post most pro-hybrid articles on the site by far. Why? Because there is a solid argument in their favor, and it needs to be posted. It doesn’t matter what I think on it.

Here is a link about the relationship of BMW to Rover. While I believe it started in earnest or not, the end result rang true to my previous statements. The end result was the same, Rover lost out.

http://www.austin-rover.co.uk/index.htm?whydbbrf.htm

These are the points I would like to make:

Once the X5 had been developed and launched (with Land Rover technology, know-how, etc for sure), BMW no longer needed Land Rover. It has been said that Land Rover was raped and pillaged by BMW and that without it BMW could not have produced the X5. It was also questionable at the time as to why BMW developed the X5 when they had the Land Rover brand in their portfolio. Looking back, it could be argued that they never intended to keep Land Rover, only to gain the knowledge that this world leader possessed

It could be argued that BMW purchased Rover for a bargain-basement price in order to stop it from becoming a competitor to BMW itself. They also put back Honda by four years, preventing another competitor from stepping on their toes. They invested selectively, only in the areas that they could sell on at a profit once they had acquired capability in those areas themselves. The crippled Rover that was left was 'set free' as a manufacturer with no development facilities or on-going development to use, with a largely outdated model range and, initially at least, dependent on BMW for the purchase of components (engines and panels) without which they could not build any cars. Leaving BMW with the modern facilities, the products in the pipe-line that it had wanted all along

the biggest success story in the life of Land Rover is ALL thanks to BMW. They brought them from the dead, made them appealing and therefore profitable, and now, Ford is reaping the benefits of BMW's work on the rovers, and now realise that they have to continue the success, and CANT DO IT. so now they will dump it. Dont you see the trend here? Just like jaguar with their boring cars, land rover once again become boring and a LOSER if Ford doesnt dump it now.

The latest Range has been the hottest thing in the world (under BMW's arms) When has it ever been this profitable and successful? For the past 30 years before BMW took over, they have almost dissapeared.

plano, bmw was a bit of bitch with rover. thing is, mg-rover also encompasses triumph, austin, wolsley, morris and all the other british leyland names that got dumped. thats why bmw didn't call the new 3 series coupe the 4 series (they wanted to), because it would mean no 418 or 420, as rover owns the rights to that name.
bmw did the right thing when it split land rover and rover, but it did pillage land rover's technology.
land rover got them back with the range rover sport and new discovery though. and the new freelander will steal sales from the x3.

I believe BMW did get the technology out of Rover that it wanted along with the rights to the 'Mini' brand. That's fine and that's the way of competition. If Ford weren't so big and family-controlled, it would've been swallowed up & dismantled a few years ago. If GM wasn't as large and didn't have the huge pension payouts, it would've been merged with some other mid-sized, deep pocket company too.

Ford is in trouble. They have ideas, but those designs are too far away from being released to make a difference now. OK, the Range Rover has not been updated b/c if Ford alters it in such a way that makes it look more "Ford-like" (like they've been doing to everything) their RR sales will tank...real quick. BMW built the current RR and then literally "broke the mold". And Ford can't top the current RR design...it's obvious. That's why all the current Land Rovers look like the Range Rover.

Ford's problem is that their current designs try to be so bland (like Toyota used to be) that it should be a "no-brainer" to by a cheap, reliable, American car. Now, consumers want a little pizzaz! Ever sit in a '05-'06 Camry? The electro-luminescent instrument panel screems "future tech" and "gadgetry". It's simple but adds value to the overall package. What does Ford have? The 3-bar grill, newer radios, etc. Ford is the kid that's always late to class and always behind in his work. You remember those guys, I hated working in groups with them and I definitely won't buy their cars!

Ford should not sell Jaguar and Land Rover simply because with the money they will get from these brands, if Ford continues to slip, then the money will all be gone. I say let the brands stay as is, and concentrate on their home brands, Ford, Lincoln and Mercury. It is these three brnads that are pulling Ford down and not the European Brands.