http://english.eastday.com/eastday/englishedition/business/u1a2725829.html

The intellectual property rights dispute between Nanjing Automobile Corp and China's leading car maker Shanghai Automotive Industrial Corp has resurfaced following the launch of the former's MG 7 series this week.

Nanjing Auto's MG 7 is considered a rival to the Roewe 750, a Rover 75-based sedan unveiled in October last year by SAIC as its first own-brand high-end model.

The problem lies in the fact that the IPR of both the Roewe 750 and the MG 7 is derived from the original Rover 75 model.

Nanjing Auto outbid SAIC in 2005 to acquire the failed British car maker MG Rover Group and its engine producer for 53 million pounds (US$103 million).

But SAIC bought the technology for two Rover models - the 25 and 75 - and their engines for 67 million pounds in 2004.

"According to the technology transfer agreement between MG Rover Group and SAIC, SAIC owns the IPR to the 25 and 75 models and any company must get approval from and pay SAIC for the use of the technology," yesterday's Shanghai Securities News quoted an insider close to the deal between SAIC and MG Rover as saying.

But Nanjing Auto disputed this view, saying it owns the IPR over the patent license because it is the actual purchaser of the British company and not SAIC.

Zhang Xin, the head of the MG project, said: "The difference between the two cars is that Nanjing Auto's MG 7 is a pure English breed".

SAIC declined to provide a detailed comment on the issue but a spokesman said: "Looking at the legal documents, it is clear who the IPR owner is. What SAIC is focusing on is the development of its own-brand models and we hope Nanjing Auto will also do a good job in developing its own-brand models," he added.

"An asset sales agreement signed before a company's bankruptcy is protected by the law," said Bill Fisher, executive vice president of AmAsia International Inc, the leading importer and distributor of Chinese automobiles to North America.

Fisher issued a warning to future overseas distributors of the MG 7 to be aware of the risks of IPR disputes.
No MGs for the US and EU markets.
Nanjing can sell only MG TF.

...SAIC own IPR's but not EXCLUSIVE IPR's. They own IPR's to the K series Euro 3 engines but not the Euro 4 engines. So SAIC are stuffed if they want to sell Euro 4 complaint K series engines in Europe.

NAC did the better deal. The real question for me as a consumer is:

- Is the Roewe 750 as safe as the MG 7?
- If NAC have the most advanced factory in China then how are SAIC making their models? Bit of cardboard and glue?
- NAC have said they will use high grade steel on their designs. Will SAIC?
- MG brand is well known and respected in Europe. Will the Roewe 750 depreciate badly?

Personally I just don't see why anyone would want a 750. NAC's models look much better and they come with the legendary MG badge. They also make a Rwd version of the MG ZT!

Also interesting at the lack of legal activity from SAIC...why are they not already threatening legal action if they feel so confident of the deal they have done?

Trouble is NAC has run out of money...........simply that. Also the US is facing a Major recession which will catch China out. Cab drivers and bar tenders are borrowing cash to buy into the stock market.........China is going to STOP buying US bonds very soon.

CRASH!

Oh well.......................:)
Always look on the bright side of life!
Mega

NAC did the better deal. The real question for me as a consumer is:

- Is the Roewe 750 as safe as the MG 7?
Probably not since it has been stretched.

- If NAC have the most advanced factory in China
It doesn't.

then how are SAIC making their models? Bit of cardboard and glue?
Using their experience of building Chevrolets and VWs.

- NAC have said they will use high grade steel on their designs. Will SAIC?
They said they would not price compete.

- MG brand is well known and respected in Europe. Will the Roewe 750 depreciate badly?
Again, who knows.

Personally I just don't see why anyone would want a 750.
It's legal. The other one is not.

Also interesting at the lack of legal activity from SAIC...why are they not already threatening legal action if they feel so confident of the deal they have done?
The communist party doesn't like one state-owned Chinese firm suing another state-owned Chinese firm in foreign courts.

Trouble is NAC has run out of money...........simply that. Also the US is facing a Major recession which will catch China out. Cab drivers and bar tenders are borrowing cash to buy into the stock market.........China is going to STOP buying US bonds very soon.

CRASH!

Oh well.......................:)
Always look on the bright side of life!
Mega

NAC hasn't run out of money. It's asking for more cash to expand more quickly. SAIC did the same thing...Like SAIC they are also floating off some of the business so that they can rapidly develop new products and become the first truly global Chinese motor giant.

Real_I_hate_china please could you explain why Eversheds (a top UK/US firm of lawyers) has advised NAC that the IPR's for MG models are separate to the IPR's for Rover models? Could you also explain why PricewaterhouseCoopers also carried out the same due dilligence when liquidating MGR and came to the same conclusion?

Do you believe everything Roewe distributers tell you?

The MG production line is actually able to make several cars on one production line. As I understand it, it can actually make more different models on the same line than any other line on the PLANET. It has 650 state of the art welding Robots alone. Most Chinese car plants use labour to do the same thing. I would rather a reliable Robot welded my car than a person. Can you tell me with CERTAINTY that the Roewe line is as good as the NAC line developed by BMW and Rover? If so please verify this with facts.

Also WHY on earth will US consumers want Euro 3 compliant engines with head gasket problems from Roewe when Nanjing has Euro 4 compliant engines with no head gasket issues?

50 million bought NAC one hell of a lot.

Apparantly PwC said that SAIC only acquired 2% of MGR's IPR's and the were not even exclusive. The reason the SAIC K series is only Euro 3 compliant is because from what I understand they aren't even able to modify it in case they enfringe on NAC's IPR's. If anything the legals case will go the other way.

Real_I_Hate_China perhaps now you share my excitement. MG is going to make it big time!

Stop brand bashing with out the facts !!

I don't know how you can so one is better than the other without even seeing them 1st hand.

As for SAIC, well SAIC and FAW are the most wealthiest Auto brands in China.
SAIC builds cars for VW and GM and yet your saying Nanjing is better without seeing any of the 3 (S-GM, SVW & MG) ????
FYI VW and GM assist with SAICs Engineering.

So if you think thats bad then why did MG fall into Chinese hands ?

BTW I'm not too sure MG or Roewe will succeed with dated technology in EU or US ;)

Yes it looks like I'm more biased towards SAIC but thats because they have the cash and resources to build and better Nanjing and while they have to build on their brand while MG is ok.

I still think China has a way to go yet with convincing the rest of the world.

BTW nothing against you mgrovernut ;)

Phaeton to put this simply. I have read how badly Brilliance and LAndwind have done in road and safety tests in Europe. I personally wouldn't buy one because they simply can't be trusted to be a safe or as good as a Western or Japanese car. Cherry made a car that ooks like the Daewoo Matiz but we all know that it's no where near as good.

So as a Westerner who just reads the car mags and the web then what are you asking me to do? Trust SAIC who have surely just approached the Roewe 750 like Cherry did the Matiz. Or Nanjing who have shipped state of the art Robotics to China and have inherited assets from Longbridge?

Also why is it that NAC are doing the NCAP crash tests for Europe but SAIC are not? I'm sorry but I won't risk my families lives in a car from China that has NO known NCAP ratings.

TRUST has been earned by NAC. SAIC have yet to demonstrate this to me.

Real_I_hate_china please could you explain why Eversheds (a top UK/US firm of lawyers) has advised NAC that the IPR's for MG models are separate to the IPR's for Rover models?
Never heard of this. The term of original Rover 25/75 IP to SAIC was that SAIC would own them(it is recorded as such in British Patent Office), but reverse license them back to MG Rover free of charge.

Could you also explain why PricewaterhouseCoopers also carried out the same due dilligence when liquidating MGR and came to the same conclusion?
PwC's arguement was that they were selling remaining MG assets to a company located in 3rd world where the IP rights weren't going to be respected.

The MG production line is actually able to make several cars on one production line. As I understand it, it can actually make more different models on the same line than any other line on the PLANET. It has 650 state of the art welding Robots alone. Most Chinese car plants use labour to do the same thing. I would rather a reliable Robot welded my car than a person. Can you tell me with CERTAINTY that the Roewe line is as good as the NAC line developed by BMW and Rover? If so please verify this with facts.
MG linese are old just like cars they used to build. It certainly doesn't have the efficiency and precision of the latest Hyundai assembly lines, capable of putting out 150 cars/worker-year or 72 cars/hour per line.

50 million bought NAC one hell of a lot.
That's because Nanjing didn't get much with their $100 million.

Apparantly PwC said that SAIC only acquired 2% of MGR's IPR's and the were not even exclusive. The reason the SAIC K series is only Euro 3 compliant is because from what I understand they aren't even able to modify it in case they enfringe on NAC's IPR's. If anything the legals case will go the other way.
SAIC owns K-series IP, and are free to modify what they own.

Trust SAIC who have surely just approached the Roewe 750 like Cherry did the Matiz. Or Nanjing who have shipped state of the art Robotics to China and have inherited assets from Longbridge?
SAIC actually built millions of cars.
It is Nanjing, a truck maker, that never built cars until MG7.

TRUST has been earned by NAC. SAIC have yet to demonstrate this to me.
Roewe 450 was the first and "only" Chinese developed car that I think was competitive enough to go west; none of Chery & Geely garbages even come close. And how did SAIC come up with Roewe 450? Money.

Real_I_hate_China on the first point Eversheds and PwC bth reached the conclusion the SAIC bought the IPR's to Rover models but crucially NOT MG Models. So effectively they did not buy exclusive rights. SAIC certainly do not own the IPR's on the MG cars Nanjing does.

The reason SAIC are only making dodgy Euro 3 K series engines with head gasket problems is because Nanjing bought the IPR's and development work to the Euro 4 engines. As IPR's are inherited under UK law it's not clear how exclusive they are but Nanjing are certainly in a better position.

Finally Nanjing may not be making cars yet but they already have international dealer networks ready to go. They will be the first Chinese car maker to be truly international. By the end of this year they will sell cars in the UK, Europe, the Common Wealth and the USA. They are already unlocking investment from Europe and the USA because they own the MG and Austin brands.

SAIC may be rich but remember the tortoise beat the hair!

So then what have been the results of the Nanjing MG Crash tests ?

How do you know they're state of the art robots ?

What standards does the factory meet ?

How do you know they're state of the art robots ?

I wouldn't argue if I was you http://forums.mg-rover.org/images/smilies/xyxnervous.gif

These are the ones:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffLt1z7pBNw (Spot the MG)



http://byfiles.storage.msn.com/x1piYkpqHC_35lkeIbFgPFBdJAoD-c8xJG1pVhMi9l2DcgEZOaN_Dkx2A6FSp48I9l5Ai-e7uLar7xzxeoLV31hsPsZHiDwbuGKukx-l5Uz-9nrdhYSgkFNRg

Are they really the best in China ?

I'm not arguing just asking legitimate questions ;)

I don't expect that they are the very best in China as most of them are a few years old now but, there are literally hundreds of them all working together. All other Chinese auto makers have a few tens at best, they don't come anywhere close!

Well thats what the chinese press are saying, so unless anyone knows better...

I don't expect that they are the very best in China as most of them are a few years old now but, there are literally hundreds of them all working together. All other Chinese auto makers have a few tens at best, they don't come anywhere close!

Well thats what the chinese press are saying, so unless anyone knows better...

From the Chinese reports that I read I understood that MG's robots are cabable of being programmed to weld and build more models on a production line than any others in China. You are right though, according to reports no other car maker can compete with Nanjing in the number of Robots count.

So then what have been the results of the Nanjing MG Crash tests ?

How do you know they're state of the art robots ?

What standards does the factory meet ?

Nanjing MG's are going to be built in exactly the same way as the Longbridge versions. Therefore the MG 7 will get one of the best NCAP rating possible (at least 4 out of 5) and the TF will get an excellent 3 out of 5, which is excellent as Sportscars generally do badly in safety tests. Think the all new Mx5 will beat it, just but I think I'm right in saying that until the new Mx5 arrived it had the best safety rating of any sportscar in production in it's class.

How do I know they are state of the art Robots? Most of them were installed by BMW who spent a lot of money making sure that they would be the best for some time to come (e.g can be programmed to build many different cars at the same time). As far as I know they can also intoduce a new model within weeks rather than months.

I wouldn't argue if I was you http://forums.mg-rover.org/images/smilies/xyxnervous.gif

These are the ones:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffLt1z7pBNw (Spot the MG)



http://byfiles.storage.msn.com/x1piYkpqHC_35lkeIbFgPFBdJAoD-c8xJG1pVhMi9l2DcgEZOaN_Dkx2A6FSp48I9l5Ai-e7uLar7xzxeoLV31hsPsZHiDwbuGKukx-l5Uz-9nrdhYSgkFNRg

Love that vid!

Suppose this is why Nanjing have the ability to make 200,000 cars of one production line alone. SAIC can only make 50,000 a year so I hear...

Love that vid!

Suppose this is why Nanjing have the ability to make 200,000 cars of one production line alone. SAIC can only make 50,000 a year so I hear...
And SAIC's cars, being partly (Or given the small numbers appearing, maybe that should be largely) hand made will vary in quality, NAC-MG doesn't just have robots but has a lot of automatic quality control equipment - everything gets checked, and not by a tired human who has lost concentration!

And SAIC's cars, being partly (Or given the small numbers appearing, maybe that should be largely) hand made will vary in quality, NAC-MG doesn't just have robots but has a lot of automatic quality control equipment - everything gets checked, and not by a tired human who has lost concentration!

So very true. Humans simply can't compete with Robot's. This is why I worry about how safe Chinese buyers should feel driving a Roewe? Will those human welds hold properly if not done consistently? Has the right grade of steel been used? Why does the Roewe 750 have lap belts in the back but the MG7 have proper seat belts?

At the end of the day the MG 7 is made more efficiently, with better engine's, guaranteed safety standards and western technology. MG believe in their product so much they are going global. Why bother with a car from a company called Wrong Way...I mean Roewe, which probably won't take the EU NCAP test? :)

Nanjing MG's are going to be built in exactly the same way as the Longbridge versions. Therefore the MG 7 will get one of the best NCAP rating possible (at least 4 out of 5) and the TF will get an excellent 3 out of 5, which is excellent as Sportscars generally do badly in safety tests. Think the all new Mx5 will beat it, just but I think I'm right in saying that until the new Mx5 arrived it had the best safety rating of any sportscar in production in it's class.


I'll believe it when I see it ;)

On the robots I see what your saying now ;)

ps did MG get engineering from China or UK for these new models ?

I'll believe it when I see it ;)
Always a wise move :)

On the robots I see what your saying now ;)

ps did MG get engineering from China or UK for these new models ?
Most of the new engineering was done by MG-Rover before it was sold to Nanjing. There are actually a very small number of the new EU IV engines on UK roads! I suspect some of the new interior trim, seats etc was done in China, although MG-Rover didn't do all that in the UK anyway.

Most of the new engineering was done by MG-Rover before it was sold to Nanjing. There are actually a very small number of the new EU IV engines on UK roads! I suspect some of the new interior trim, seats etc was done in China, although MG-Rover didn't do all that in the UK anyway.

Thanks Windy ;)

268 Robots to build the MG-7 body - Paul Stowe (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/ondemand/rams/nh13225____2007.ram)

MG-7 test drive - Link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/ondemand/rams/nh13226____2007.ram)

Compare the road noise on that to the Roewe video! - video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SnA5ulx33M)

1.In Chinese user forums no buyers complain road noise of Roewe750, actually they are very satisfied with this aspect. The video you give is from Sina, if you've viewed some columns of this test in QianDaoHu on Sina/Sohu/Autohome, they give very high evaluation of Roewe's "Road Noise" :)

2.All engines of Roewe750d/e/i sold now is EU IV.

3.Even those companies not famous of its qulity, like Chery/Huachen, have very modern facilitie from SCHULER/DURR/KUKA/ITCA/FUJI. As far as I konw Junjie's robots are from KUKA, Chery's DURR line is one of the only 5 in the world, and they all listed far below SAIC in JD Power report Chinese version.

4.I dont know how many cars could these 268 Robots shifted from LB produce, from NAC's plan their total expectation sale number of MG7/3/TF is 10k this year. On the other side SAIC have alrealdy got around 10k orders for 750 since they entered the market.

I dont want to offend you MG enthusiasts, that's why I quited from MGR forum. But in this forum I think we could share some another version of facts, which are believed by most customers in Chinese market, and not be afraid of being besieged and hatted as NAC bashers. LOL

1.In Chinese user forums no buyers complain road noise of Roewe750, actually they are very satisfied with this aspect. The video you give is from Sina, if you've viewed some columns of this test in QianDaoHu on Sina/Sohu/Autohome, they give very high evaluation of Roewe's "Road Noise" :)
I have heard two recordings and the Roewei one has much more road noise than the MG7, maybe it is partly the way it was recorded but the noise must have been there in the Roewei. I guess we will only know the facts when some of the press get their hands on the MG7 to do a comparison, so far that recording is the only review of the MG-7 I have seen and it was obviously very quiet and the reporter was impressed.

4.I dont know how many cars could these 268 Robots shifted from LB produce, from NAC's plan their total expectation sale number of MG7/3/TF is 10k this year. On the other side SAIC have alrealdy got around 10k orders for 750 since they entered the market.
By the time they have installed another 200 of the robots (total of over 400) they expect to produce 200,000 per year with them.

How many cars have SAIC actually sold so far? (not just orders)

I dont want to offend you MG enthusiasts, that's why I quited from MGR forum. But in this forum I think we could share some another version of facts, which are believed by most customers in Chinese market, and not be afraid of being besieged and hatted as NAC bashers. LOL
On this forum, I hope SAIC and MG are treated equally along with all the other Chinese companies/brands. The problem with SAIC is that we see very little information, there is almost no news, we don't even see the basic facts. For example I would like to know when their 1.8L engine will be available, it was launched last November but never appeared, or at least I have never heard of one. As a result I don't have much trust in what SAIC say even when they do say something, which isn't very often!

It would be good if someone could post some SAIC news in the SAIC sub-forum...

Thanks for the vids Windy but only the Roewe version works :D

Are the others on YouTube ?

Its my pc its very dated were updating very soon ;)

I agree with Windy to a point.

You see visitant as our markets UK & Australia have had cars for along time :D

We crave every bit of info we can get on a manufacturer's model to help our buying position for some that includes factory info & origin of parts etc.

If SAIC does not release info on factories, parts etc it does not help their cause.

Anyway I don't think too many of us can judge the cars via net, once both are released we'll see lots of versus tests & 1st hand experiences lol.

Are we sure SAIC are using Euro 4 complaint engines?

All this uncertainty around the SAIC model means that for the average buyer the MG version is a much safer bet.

We are talking about different things. Sale number is always more important than how many cars you could produce on paper, that is why NAC-Fiat is doing nothing with their capability of 40k each year, while SAIC-GM(450k) and SAIC-VW(350k) are all urgently building new plants to double the figures.

NAC's 200k is long term number on paper, it doesnt mean anything. I would rather say their maximum capacity being put into use in 2007 will be 20-30k, for their expectation sale number is 10k. On SAIC side, my estimation is 50-60k for their expectation is 30k. It's undertandable both companies will limit their production when they enter the market as a new brand and havenot so many orders. btw answer your question about Roewe's figure on paper, existed Yizhen plant is 120k per year, Lingang plant being built near deep water port is 150k(2008), 300k(2009).

It's not a problem to get information about Roewe. Since SAIC is listed as 600104 in Shanghai Stock Exchange, their info release is much more mature and accurate than black box companies like NAC. Take 1.8L rw750 for instance, the schedule SAIC released earlier this year already show it will enter the market in Sep/Oct, and then a new platform W261, so called rw450 on net, will be launched in Dec. It's a very common marketing strategy to continuously stimulate customers, but you all have seen how people interpretate this in mgr forum.:D

Yes language obstacle is part of the reason, it's true, and I also wish people could treat these two companies equally, but it seens a mission impossible. Comments in mgr forum are more on MG rather than two Chinese companies it seens to be, both SAIC and NAC are Chinese properties appear on the stage:) The other side of the picture in Chinese forum is quite the same, people are talking more about SAIC and NAC, one they have been trusted for a long time, the other troubling few people really care, MG or Rover is nothing more than an unknown bankrupt foreign brand for them:) Sound crazy for you, but it's the reality in Chinese market. It is the same, how MG and Rover are viewed in UK or Commonwealth of Nations, that FAW's Hongqi(red flag) and SAIC's Shanghai brand are viewed in China (Shanghai brand has been suspended in 1980s, and now being used as SAIC's new energy, hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell, test and showing platform).

And SAIC's cars, being partly (Or given the small numbers appearing, maybe that should be largely) hand made will vary in quality, NAC-MG doesn't just have robots but has a lot of automatic quality control equipment - everything gets checked, and not by a tired human who has lost concentration!

At the recent NAC anniversary day introduction, China Daily photographers focused on this questionable operation. Are we setting our expectations of NAC's passenger car production capabilities too high?
In the same way that Chery's former FAW-VW manager, Yin Tongyao has lots of hard passenger car experience behind him, the SAIC managers have much of the same seasoned background. And given SAIC's strong financial backing I would lean toward the "partly hand made".