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."
Andy Mace replied:
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.
Andy, when considering the 'new' Mini, you have to detach yourself entirely
from concepts
of how it relates (or doesn't) to its predecessor. I am confident the new Mini
will sell
well and I also feel it will open up many new customers for itself that
hitherto may have
been more than critical of the car it replaces. Have seen some of the
prototypes strutting
their stuff in the area around the Gaydon R&D centre over the last year or so,
it will
very likely make a lot of its competitiors sit up and take notice. I definitely
take a lot
of notice of the supercharged version - especially when it overtakes me, which
it does
with monotonous regularity!
> ...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!
Andy, with the greatest respect and recognising that the United States is
arguably the
most consumer oriented market in the world, the fact that Riley did not sell
well in
Albany (or anywhere else in the US) does not mean there is not a tremendous
following for
that make elsewhere in the world. In their day, Riley was a highly innovative
company
(OK - so the glory is essentially pre-war) but this does not mean there could
not be a
future for a relaunched Riley. If that came about, I'd be delighted to see it.
> ...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?
I think the Healey family has withdrawn from being associated in the motor
industry. Why,
is open to conjecture - but I wouldn't be surprised if money and the volume
likely to
hurtle at the Healey family doesn't have quite a lot to do with it. With no
disrespect to
Donald Healey or any of his successors, it's my guess that "if the price was
right" - they
might be found to be more than co-operative!
> 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.
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.
I feel that hope is currently more than competently in the focus of all of us
who are
working hard to preserve the true worth of everything at Gaydon. BMW are
certainly of that
view and I'm confident that none of the guys at Mobile Tradition are willing to
see Gaydon
and its historical collection fall foul of some asset stripper. They recognise
that it has
incredible historical value and many BMW executives have admitted to me over
the last year
or so that they're as jealous as hell that Gaydon has a more valuable and
interesting
collection than they do. I just hope that whoever takes over the running of
BMIHT as it
goes into the future, will see many commercial possibilities that have hitherto
not been
addressed through lack of money (some might even say encouragement) from the
former
Rover-Honda or Rover-BMW association.
As for a "new" Triumph, I don't know.
SNIP
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.
SNIP
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.
Whether Triumph will ever re-emerge is wide open to speculation. My own view is
that BMW
held on to the Riley and Triumph names for purely commercial reasons. I greatly
doubt it
would invest yet more money in developing one or even two new marques alongside
its own. I
feel those names are BMW's 'aces' and are being retained purely to find out the
identity
of the highest bidder. It all comes down to money - and who is prepared to pay
the highest
price.
Jonmac
|