ROSSIKE:

So the hell WHAT if Innoson vehicles ''are not their design''? In the grand scheme of things, ie Nigeria becoming a vehicle manufacturing power, it matters little if Innoson 'designed' their cars or if someone in China or Korea did. What matters is output. South Africa exports 300,000 cars per annum, which contributes over $40 billion annually to her GDP. The main players there are GM, Honda, Toyota, Mercedes, BMW etc. They have their car assembly plants there. None of their cars was 'designed in South Africa'. Also, many car component manufacturers exist in SA, serving the car assembly plants. The plants also import some parts etc. Nobody goes around SA saying ''this manufacturer is only 'assembling'', or ''that manufacturer is not really producing cars because he imports components from Germany'' etc etc. The most important thing is OUTPUT. Output means economic activity. The more cars produced the more money is being made, and the more Nigerians are getting paid. Simple. The Innoson plant today employs over 7,000 Nigerians! It's not some backyard enterprise. Worrying yourself over the manufacturer's production system or ethos, as opposed to counting the output, is a total waste of time and energy.

Nobody in SA goes around saying Honda, Toyota, Mercedes etc are South African cars.

Mee234:
U sound more dumb than a Nigerian. Where are you from?

You can't refute my points so you resort to personal insults.

I'm a proud Ghanaian from Cape Coast, Ghana.

ghananotnaija:

You can't refute my points so you resort to personal insults.

I'm a proud Ghanaian from Cape Coast, Ghana.

What is there to refute in ur rant?

AlfaSeltzer:


Nobody in SA goes around saying Honda, Toyota, Mercedes etc are South African cars.

Untill you change that product's name from iNNOSON (IVN) then u need shut up right away

CHESSBOARD:

Untill you change that product's name from iNNOSON (IVN) then u need shut up right away

The product's name is not INNOSON. The badge is. The 4x4's name is G5, made by GAC group under the GONOW trading name. IVM is just a badge.

AlfaSeltzer:


Nobody in SA goes around saying Honda, Toyota, Mercedes etc are South African cars.

Nobody in SA CARES what nationality claims the 'title' to the 300,000 vehicles manufactured (ie assembled) there per annum, making SA one of the world's leading automobile exporters!!! IE WHERE NIGERIA IS HEADED, WITH INNOSON AND OTHERS THE PIONEERS!!! Nobody in the UK cares that the main car assembly plants there are owned by Toyota, Fiat, Honda, BMW etc. Even Jaguar was sold to the Indians (Tata), so is no longer ''an English car''. Do you hear anyone in England complaining? No! Why? Because the industry employs millions of people and directly contributes to economic development! So you see, you're worrying about the wrong things...

ROSSIKE:
Nobody in SA CARES what nationality claims the 'title' to the 300,000 vehicles manufactured (ie assembled) there per annum, making SA one of the world's leading automobile exporters!!! IE WHERE NIGERIA IS HEADED, WITH INNOSON AND OTHERS THE PIONEERS!!! Nobody in the UK cares that the main car assembly plants there are owned by Toyota, Fiat, Honda, BMW etc. Even Jaguar was sold to the Indians (Tata), so is no longer ''an English car''. Do you hear anyone in England complaining? No! Why? Because the industry employs millions of people and directly contributes to economic development! So you see, you're worrying about the wrong things...

But they don't lie about it. Why is INNOSON lying?

princefunmi:

Prove it

Answer this question and the answer relates to my first comment, why did BMW purchase Rover Group PLC and then sell it back 6 years later (actually its was sold back for £1m), what was their motive

YES he can if only we can support and patronize him the way we are patronizing the foreign car manufacturing companies

omar22:


Answer this question and the answer relates to my first comment, why did BMW purchase Rover Group PLC and then sell it back 6 years later (actually its was sold back for £1m), what was their motive

2 reasons - The surface reason (probably the only one you know about) or the enlightened reason ( the one I happen to know about).

On the surface, BMW purchased Rover as a means to expand its limited market without diluting the BMW brand. BMW plays in the high end market and as such has limited options for expansion. Rover on the other was in market that was lower. Infact Rover had some prestigious brand names, MG, Land Rover, Morris etc. So acquiring Rover was seen as an opportunity to play in a lower market without having to build a new brand from scratch or impacting on the status of an already built BMW brand.

Now was that a good move? Well that depends on how you look at it. If you want to look at it on the surface, it looked like a bad move because for a deal that was done in 10 days you might be tempted to ask did they really do their homework? Eventually, Rover was recording losses of up to £2 million per day.

However, if you look deeper, you would actually see as evidence points that BMW's purchase was actually a tactical move.

And by the way my friend, its not entirely true that BMW sold Rover at £1m. The proceeds they got from the sale of Land Rover alone was put at £1.8 Billion. That's a whooping £1 billion profit when compared to the £800k which they used to acquire Rover.


Now its my turn. What was the real reason BMW bought Rover in the first place, and what did BMW retain after sales of Rover? Let me give you a small hint - the launch of the X5 and the sale of Land Rover happened not too far apart from each other.

princefunmi:

2 reasons - The surface reason (probably the only one you know about) or the enlightened reason ( the one I happen to know about).

On the surface, BMW purchased Rover as a means to expand its limited market without diluting the BMW brand. BMW plays in the high end market and as such has limited options for expansion. Rover on the other was in market that was lower. Infact Rover had some prestigious brand names, MG, Land Rover, Morris etc. So acquiring Rover was seen as an opportunity to play in a lower market without having to build a new brand from scratch or impacting on the status of an already built BMW brand.

Now was that a good move? Well that depends on how you look at it. If you want to look at it on the surface, it looked like a bad move because for a deal that was done in 10 days you might be tempted to ask did they really do their homework? Eventually, Rover was recording losses of up to £2 million per day.

However, if you look deeper, you would actually see as evidence points that BMW's purchase was actually a tactical move.

And by the way my friend, its not entirely true that BMW sold Rover at £1m. The proceeds they got from the sale of Land Rover alone was put at £1.8 Billion. That's a whooping £1 billion profit when compared to the £800k which they used to acquire Rover.


Now its my turn. What was the real reason BMW bought Rover in the first place, and what did BMW retain after sales of Rover? Let me give you a small hint - the launch of the X5 and the sale of Land Rover happened not too far apart from each other.

Actually I was meant to write £1 not £1m

Towards the late 80s and early 90s the growth of the small car industry was staggering most especially the front wheel drive cars and this was from Volkswagen, Renault, Peugeot and the Japanese car firms; also BMW was keen on breaking into the all wheels or 4 wheel drive industry. The cost of developing the front drive was a concern. On the other side Honda owned 20 stake in over Group PLC they were still negotiating with BAe the owners of Rover Group PLC to increase their stake further. In 1994 Rover was sold to BMW for £800m, the last British owned car industry has been sold off. What was regarded as the family silver has been sold off. Honda felt betrayed by the Brits, But BMW had acquired a fast route into 2 car industries. Honda was encouraged to continue to provide the engines, chassis and gear box for Rover, but eventually Honda pulled out leaving BMW turning to other car industries to provide these parts for Rover
Yes as you mentioned they acquired the technology which they were eager to develop but had some concerns about the cost of developing them.

The small car they wanted came inform of the Mini Cooper which was retained when Rover Group PLC was sold to Phoenix
The technology from Land Rover helped BMW in developing the X5

Remember that the Land Rover Freelander was built based on Honda's own 4 wheel drive I think its the CRV in Swindon (Honda's plant)

BMW provided the Diesel engines for Rover 75 models but in the end they all flopped. Rover was loosing money by the day, but BMW didnt want to break the original agreement they signed when they acquired the Car firm, by moving it back to Germany where they thought it will be cheaper to run.

omar22:


Actually I was meant to write £1 not £1m

Towards the late 80s and early 90s the growth of the small car industry was staggering most especially the front wheel drive cars and this was from Volkswagen, Renault, Peugeot and the Japanese car firms; also BMW was keen on breaking into the all wheels or 4 wheel drive industry. The cost of developing the front drive was a concern. On the other side Honda owned 20 stake in over Group PLC they were still negotiating with BAe the owners of Rover Group PLC to increase their stake further. In 1994 Rover was sold to BMW for £800m, the last British owned car industry has been sold off. What was regarded as the family silver has been sold off. Honda felt betrayed by the Brits, But BMW had acquired a fast route into 2 car industries. Honda was encouraged to continue to provide the engines, chassis and gear box for Rover, but eventually Honda pulled out leaving BMW turning to other car industries to provide these parts for Rover
Yes as you mentioned they acquired the technology which they were eager to develop but had some concerns about the cost of developing them.

The small car they wanted came inform of the Mini Cooper which was retained when Rover Group PLC was sold to Phoenix
The technology from Land Rover helped BMW in developing the X5

Remember that the Land Rover Freelander was built based on Honda's own 4 wheel drive I think its the CRV in Swindon (Honda's plant)

BMW provided the Diesel engines for Rover 75 models but in the end they all flopped. Rover was loosing money by the day, but BMW didnt want to break the original agreement they signed when they acquired the Car firm, by moving it back to Germany where they thought it will be cheaper to run.

So how do you explain holding on to certain components of the Rover company instead of letting it all go. BMW still owns Mini.

Sorry Mini was retained by BMW

Common this is just pure future analysis, the Mini stopped BMW delving into a mass production of building small front wheel drive cars, also they have a product that could compete directly against the Golf, the civic, the Corolla etc. The mini cooper was rebranded and released

Sorry Mini was retained by BMW

Common this is just pure future analysis, the Mini stopped BMW delving into a mass production of building small front wheel drive cars, also they have a product that could compete directly against the Golf, the civic, the Corolla etc. The mini cooper was rebranded and released.

Definitely not now