About the TVR trademark...
Discussion
) 750 
The first TVR's from Malaysia came back with brake pads the wrong way round etc, and one had the steering column break off while 'SUNBED' (where is He now?) was test driving.
The Chinese however are very good at creating vehicluar contaptions and finding unique ways around things. The problem is they cut corners to save money in their own market.
THE WORLD market is a different ball game, and they NOW want part of it, hence the Rover thing.
With a car produced in Asia with the right management, you could really do it...Competitively.., Don't WRITE OFF this idea.
And, you could assemble the cars in the UK too, so that it is British 'BUILT'.
I think this could really work and save the brand from extinction!
Uh oh, here come the firing squad.
The Chinese however are very good at creating vehicluar contaptions and finding unique ways around things. The problem is they cut corners to save money in their own market.
THE WORLD market is a different ball game, and they NOW want part of it, hence the Rover thing.
With a car produced in Asia with the right management, you could really do it...Competitively.., Don't WRITE OFF this idea.
And, you could assemble the cars in the UK too, so that it is British 'BUILT'.
I think this could really work and save the brand from extinction!
Uh oh, here come the firing squad.
Regarding the ELAN
The problem is that they did not develop the Elan, and they did not understand it as they cannot sell low-volume cars in their market.
IMO, that car was a Lemon anyway!
You do NOT see classic cars in Korea, the culture does not support preserving 'classics'
They think a classic car is a 1980 Hyundaia Pony pick-up....I kid you not!
steve-p said:
BossCerbera said:
KirstM said:
I don't fancy a cheap asian built TVR 
It won't happen.
People should pay more heed to Max Attacker's posts about low volume production legislation and homologation. The 90s, that Lotus and the Koreans were not equivalent I'm afraid.
purpletvr said:
Doesn't really say anything that couldn't be inferred from the advert last week though, unfortunately.
As has been noted elsewhere on PH, the trademark/IP ownership will probably be subject to some sort of litigation - after all, it's the only thing of value left.
The notion of making cars in asia is not unexpected, but hasn't been mentioned in any other sources (has it?), and there's not many details here either.
maybe the trademark thing was deliberate part of a convoluted and devious plan to exit.
Mind you noone will buy the company if there is any hint of dispute over the IPR! As a purchaser you would normally get a warranty (the M&A kind) from the seller that the IPR is his to sell and you have somewhere to go should that not be the case (back to the seller for reparations). With a company in liquidation there would be no such thing.
Has anyone worked out who owns the company that's in liquidation?
Graham
Mind you noone will buy the company if there is any hint of dispute over the IPR! As a purchaser you would normally get a warranty (the M&A kind) from the seller that the IPR is his to sell and you have somewhere to go should that not be the case (back to the seller for reparations). With a company in liquidation there would be no such thing.
Has anyone worked out who owns the company that's in liquidation?
Graham
gridgway said:
maybe the trademark thing was deliberate part of a convoluted and devious plan to exit.
No, it was a fu©k up. Even without mystic powers, I could see what has happened happening back in 2005.
This is what Smolenski SHOULD have done when he bought the company IMHO: separated the IP from the operations and maybe (but not necessarily) further split operations into maybe manufacturing on one hand and development/motorsport on the other. The latter to explore the tax breaks available for R&D and in particular motorsport R&D. Furthermore, an IP/trademark audit to register and schedule these assets should have been done at the beginning. Such a move might have been regarded as "devious" - in actual fact it would have been shrewd and sensible given the obvious need to invest in improving the product, to streamline manufacturing and to exploit the potential licencing opportunities of the TVR brand.
In this day and age, securing ownership of one's intellectual property is essential. Oh well Nikolai, look at this way: "You don't lose money, you buy experience."
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff