On Thu, 11 May 2000, Peter Gerald Cahill wrote:
> Quote John Towers verbatim when asked a question at the Longbridge Press
> conference this week, about the Heritage marques: " Triumph...Triumph we
> wanted - that was a clear objective of ours ...it wasn't a deal breaker,
> but I think it might have been from BMW's point of view. BMW were very keen
> to retain title to the new Mini and also to the name Triumph and in fact
> Riley...and basically we've got everything else .So..we have Rover, we
> have Wolseley, we have MG, we have lots of brands that we can take
> advantage of and we have some good platforms that are flexible in that
> respect."
Am I the only person who is, at best, skeptical about possible success of
this "new" Mini, whoever ends up building it? I do understand the
following of the "original" Mini, but I just don't see the new Mini
succeeding the way the new VW Beetle has. In a way, I hope I'm wrong, but
I really wonder if there is a market in North America in particular for
the new Mini. Frankly, the original didn't fare very well in the US at
all; I'm not sure it sold evan as well as either its 'big brother'
MG/Austin 1100 (and the later and much beloved by several Austin America)
or even the mighty Triumph Herald! The VW Beetle was and remains an
American (worldwide, even) icon, but the Mini is not something that most
Americans remember or even know much about. We'll see what happens.
> ...Not odd, therefore, that they have retained an interest in Triumph,
> but odd that they wanted to retain, according to John Towers, an
> interest in Riley marque....
Here again (and again no disrespect intended), how much of a current
following could Riley have? Again, never a big seller in North America,
and I don't recall the name having a particularly sporting image in
decades. Am I mistaken there? I mean, I like Rileys, but I don't know as
I've seen 10 on the road in the Albany, NY, area in my whole lifetime
there. And Albany was a very good foreign car market in the Northeast!
> ...There has been speculation over recent
> years about the revival of Austin Healey and the motoring press has carried
> stories, along with specifications and colour visuals of BMW proposals.
> Presumably this is one of the marques that has come into John Tower's new
> orbit( it was not mentioned at the conference) and with Tower so keen
> originally to acquire the Triumph marque ...was there an across the table,
> a glib, off the cuff, trade off - BMW releasing Austin Healey for their
> retention of Triumph.
The "Austin-Healey" name puzzles me most of all. Again, PLEASE correct me
if I am wrong: did not Donald Healey's contract with BMC/BLMC run out
after 1969, after which time the last of the Sprites were badged simply as
Austins? Is the Healey name NOT under control of the Healey family; does
it, in fact, belong to Rover or BMW or whomever? If so, where does Jensen
fit in, since there was the Jensen-Healey of the 1970s?
> Hold onto yours hats! Me thinks that the Triumph
> roller coaster could be on the move again - it will be interesting to see
> what form it takes. Would value your comments and opinions.
>
> Best wishes to all friends of Triumph.
At this point, I'm beginning to think I'd be happiest simply knowing that
the Heritage Trust and Museum were being looked after properly and well,
that the history not be forgotten, but rather preserved, and there
continue to be avenues of approved supplies and suppliers to keep Triumphs
running so long as there are folks to care.
As for a "new" Triumph, I don't know. Seems that, as noted above, the
"new" Beetle has the retro market well covered in the US for that type of
car, and the unabashedly retro Miata pretty well takes care of the old
Spridget/Spitfire/MGB niche. Not that there might not be room for an able
competitor, but at this point I think it would be akin to trying to
dethrone OREOS with a new creme-filled cookie!
On the other hand, if the Miata keeps inching up the price/ equipment/
luxury scale, there might again be room at the entry level for a new
Spitfire. Meanwhile, a new TR probably also could find a place for itself
in a market that seems to be expanding still (it must be, if makers
are still introducing new cars to compete in it: Honda S2000, new Toyota
MR2, etc., or the next level up, including the BMW Z series and Porsche
Boxsters, etc).
Oh, and "tradition"? Well, seems to me that, from about December 1945 on,
Triumph started up again with virtually NO mechanical connection to its
prewar past, rather another company's parts bins. The wonderful wet-liner
four is long gone, as are all derivatives of the original 803cc "SC"
engine that evolved all the way to TR6 PI specification and beyond. As
much as I learned about cars by tinkering with the old Triumphs in the
last 30 years or so, I think it might be rather fun to have a sporting car
that requires virtually no maintenance whatsoever. Then maybe I could use
it to tow home my nearly- maintenance-free Ford Explorer when it breaks
down or, more happily, tow around the Hardly Boys RaceSpit 4! ;-)
I have a feeling that any new Triumph (we can still hope, right?) will be
a good car for whatever niche its makers choose to fill, but its success
will depend primarily on marketing. I can already envision the TV ads:
blurry shots of Ken Richardson streaking down the highway in Belgium or
across a snowy Alpine pass, Bob Tullius racing to victory at Road Atlanta
and Watkins Glen, John Buffum flying through the woods, then quick-cut to
the "new" Triumph XKGJFK400 (10 points to anyone who recognizes that
reference)....
OK, enough musings for now! ;-)
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register <www.vtr.org> *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|