Last year, I applauded Tesla Motors for having a blog, and a CEO who was willing to duke it out with critics in the comments. NAC-MG, even if they did show a ZS (MG 5) and a Mk I ZT (MG 7) at the Shanghai Motor Show (begs the question: why? Do the Red Chinese not understand the harm these will do to the brand, while people are already criticizing the cars’ age?), is getting some things right.
   Many times, I have said nice things about NAC for securing the MG brand. That alone will help propel it ahead of its larger Red Chinese rival, SAIC, which has launched the Roewe 750 (Rover 75 Mk III, for want of a better description) on the mainland. For those who haven’t followed this blog, the Roewe 750 and the MG 7 are both descended from the Rover 75 saloon, after SAIC and NAC had a bidding war over the remnants of British car maker MG Rover in 2005.
   Now, I notice that NAC–MG quality director Paul Stowe, a man who was there at MG Rover through some of its final British incarnations, has started his own blog, The Re-birth of MG.
   It hasn’t been as big as the Tesla blog and there are relatively few comments, but the fact Paul has put himself out there is commendable. Dialogue is going to help get these cars’ awareness on to their prospective export markets, particularly while the NAC-MG site is in simplified Chinese. And we car nuts might let Paul know just what we think of the first-generation MG ZT appearing on the website and at Shanghai.
   In fact, NAC should integrate Paul’s blogging into its own site.
   But I don’t agree with every NAC move, from the point-of-view of a branding guy with some expertise in the automotive industry. I hear that SAIC, whom I’ve cast as a bit of a villain during and after the 2005 bidding, made overtures to NAC about cooperation. NAC turned it down. I don’t think it was a good idea, given the need for economies of scale. An NAC product on the RDX60 (Roewe W2/450) platform might not be a bad idea. Posted by Jack Yan, 11:58  permalink

comments

Post a Comment  Links to this post