Should Jaguar be bailed-out????

epz_2

IMHO the fundamental issue with car manufacture is theres only about 10 years left where it will be a major employer.

Fuel cells and will mean there will be no need for engines, gear boxes dive shafts, brake discs & pads, if they transfer the motors to inside the wheel hubs the suspension and chasie can be a lot lighter as it will be supporting MUCH less weight.

Now there is still the interior and to a much lesser degree the electronics but car manufacture will be a substantially less labour intensive process.

Instead of propping up an industry which has been destroyed by market forces and engineering advances they should look to the oppertunites it will create. The power to run these cars has to come from somewhere and oil is on the way out.

I say they direct the cash at new tech areas that stand a chance of making money and employing someone.

neverdespairgirl

confused31 wrote: »

Why should Tata help put food on the table for 100,000 uk tax payers,

You make them sound like some benevolent charity!

Generali

epz wrote: »

IMHO the fundamental issue with car manufacture is theres only about 10 years left where it will be a major employer.

Fuel cells and will mean there will be no need for engines, gear boxes dive shafts, brake discs & pads, if they transfer the motors to inside the wheel hubs the suspension and chasie can be a lot lighter as it will be supporting MUCH less weight.

Now there is still the interior and to a much lesser degree the electronics but car manufacture will be a substantially less labour intensive process.

Instead of propping up an industry which has been destroyed by market forces and engineering advances they should look to the oppertunites it will create. The power to run these cars has to come from somewhere and oil is on the way out.

I say they direct the cash at new tech areas that stand a chance of making money and employing someone.

It's an interesting point. Basically the US propping up the car makers is like the UK doing the same for the ship builders or steel workers in the 1970s as what hey're doing has been superseded by others with better technology or cheaper labour.

neverdespairgirl

Peter Mandelson says:

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson has dampened hopes of speedy state intervention to help Jaguar Land Rover.

The car maker has asked the government for financial support and its case has been backed by unions which say the industry needs aid "within days".

Labour peer Lord Bhattacharyya had suggested ministers were discussing a £667m loan package for Jaguar.

But Lord Mandelson told the Observer the state would act only as a "lender of last resort".
The firm's owner, India's Tata group, must "look to their own resources," he said.

"The government cannot be the first call for help in these circumstances," Lord Mandelson insisted.

"If there is anything the government can appropriately do for any such company, then they will have to meet - and pass - some pretty tough tests," he added.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7794234.stm

so that's a done deal, then, no doubt the cash is already being counted for handover! We can all trust him, can't we....?

confused31_2

Generali wrote: »

Limited liability is the concept that you are missing for most of your post.

Sheesh!

So your saying then currys will have the receivers in???? Whilst the other 2 companies in the group, will carry on trading as normal???

Limited companies have limited liability, currys is not a limited company, DSG group limited is a limited company and they own currys, dixons and pc world derrrrrrrrrrrhhhhh so they are not seperate limited companies.

The sharholders of DSG, do not pick what company there shares are in they are in DSG Goup.

A limited company are the only companies that can have limited liability, and these companies have to have shareholders.

Thats why when Tata bought Jaguar Landrover a lot of shareholders were concerened of them buying the two together, now they Jaguar Landrover are under TATA MOTORS LD, so no they can not just have limited liability like you said derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhh

It dont really matter what i think, or you because its going to happen, its just a matter of time.

As for the post above about future technology i totally agree, but it still has to be manafactured somewhere, so why not here? they reckon Jaguar Landrover have got the best research centre in the country for future vehicles.

Infact Janguar landrover are the only car manafacture that have got a research centre in the Uk for future vehicles.

People are still going to want to drive, i read some where earlier that if Jaguar Landrover goes it could potemtially put 850,000 people out of work the 100,000 i said earlier would just be the midlands.

Thats a hell of a lot of benefits to be paid out, mind you the way things are going there will be plenty of jobs at the dole office.

confused

confused31_2

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

You make them sound like some benevolent charity!

Its better than a taxpayers charity putting food on peoples tables.:rolleyes:

If its true and its saying it could effect up to more that 850000 peoples jobs, i think the government should be bending over backwards to help otherwise its going to cost them a lot more in handouts.

confused

Zagu

confused31 wrote: »

People are still going to want to drive, i read some where earlier that if Jaguar Landrover goes it could potemtially put 850,000 people out of work the 100,000 i said earlier would just be the midlands.

As I understand it, the 850,000 figure is the whole British car industry. Toyota salesmen, independent garage mechanics, part suppliers to our manufacturers, everything. I'm sure that a significant amount will lose their jobs if it goes under, but not 850,000.

Generali

confused31 wrote: »

So your saying then currys will have the receivers in???? Whilst the other 2 companies in the group, will carry on trading as normal???

Limited companies have limited liability, currys is not a limited company, DSG group limited is a limited company and they own currys, dixons and pc world derrrrrrrrrrrhhhhh so they are not seperate limited companies.

The sharholders of DSG, do not pick what company there shares are in they are in DSG Goup.

A limited company are the only companies that can have limited liability, and these companies have to have shareholders.

Thats why when Tata bought Jaguar Landrover a lot of shareholders were concerened of them buying the two together, now they Jaguar Landrover are under TATA MOTORS LD, so no they can not just have limited liability like you said derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhhhhhh

It dont really matter what i think, or you because its going to happen, its just a matter of time.

As for the post above about future technology i totally agree, but it still has to be manafactured somewhere, so why not here? they reckon Jaguar Landrover have got the best research centre in the country for future vehicles.

Infact Janguar landrover are the only car manafacture that have got a research centre in the Uk for future vehicles.

People are still going to want to drive, i read some where earlier that if Jaguar Landrover goes it could potemtially put 850,000 people out of work the 100,000 i said earlier would just be the midlands.

Thats a hell of a lot of benefits to be paid out, mind you the way things are going there will be plenty of jobs at the dole office.

confused

There really is no call to be rude. Ad hominem arguments just lower the tone.

If DSG is a holding company then my understanding of company law (limited admittedly as I've only run 3 companies) is that they could put Curry's into receivership and have the other parts of the company continue, depending on how their debt is structured. Do you have a qualification in law or accountancy that provides a deeper insight? I'm always happy to learn from those with greater knowledge. I'm also disappointed to be insulted by the clueless. Where do you sit, please?

It will cost a lot less to pay benefits to unemployed car makers than to pay their wages. I'm not resident in the UK for the purposes of tax so it's not really my problem but I'd take a look at wages vs benefits if I was.

confused31_2

Zagu wrote: »

As I understand it, the 850,000 figure is the whole British car industry. Toyota salesmen, independent garage mechanics, part suppliers to our manufacturers, everything. I'm sure that a significant amount will lose their jobs if it goes under, but not 850,000.

Even half of that 850,000 people would cripple the government.

Like i said before if 100,000 people are put out of work, and where claiming dole which is about 100 pound a week, it would workout the government paying 5 millions pounds a week out in handouts.

Jaguar Landrover are the only plant in the country with a research centre if the government are not going to help them none none of the other car manafacturers have got a chance.

The government have people who can work out the sums, thats why this is a done deal, and for anyone to think its a bad idea, they havent got a clue.:beer:

Anyway im off for a pint seeya :beer:

confused

confused31_2

Generali wrote: »

There really is no call to be rude. Ad hominem arguments just lower the tone.

If DSG is a holding company then my understanding of company law (limited admittedly as I've only run 3 companies) is that they could put Curry's into receivership and have the other parts of the company continue, depending on how their debt is structured. Do you have a qualification in law or accountancy that provides a deeper insight? I'm always happy to learn from those with greater knowledge. I'm also disappointed to be insulted by the clueless. Where do you sit, please?

It will cost a lot less to pay benefits to unemployed car makers than to pay their wages. I'm not resident in the UK for the purposes of tax so it's not really my problem but I'd take a look at wages vs benefits if I was.

Look you havent got to be a genius, you must be really thick if you have had three companies and you still dont know how limited companies work???

Go and take a look at the shares, then go and google limited liability and it will tell you how it works with the shareholders.

Its not rocket science its just people come out with rubbish like currys are going to go into recievership, when there is a much bigger picture with other companies involved.

I dont know whether its ignorance or thickness, but the last thing we want in this present climate is a load of idiots spouting a load of rubbish, which is completely wrong.

Did your companies go under???

seeya

confused