[avdhesh15]

Hell no! Then Toyota is the bigger culprit with the Glanza! They changed 7 badges from Suzuki and called it a Toyota.

MG / SAIC are within their legal rights to do this. Period.

[myavu]

Originally Posted by avdhesh15

Hell no! Then Toyota is the bigger culprit with the Glanza!

I agree 100% percent with you. If SAIC's marketing Hector as MG is unethical then Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd. marketing Glanza as Toyota is the most unethical marketing practice. MG is a new entrant so they are doing their best to build their brand.

But Toyota? Lakhs of Baleno are on the road these days and anyone can simply recognize Glanza as Baleno. Still Toyota is hatching their Glanza.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I am a bit surprised to see some pretty strong condemnations. Again, believing into what a brand stands for, is a personal choice. If you feel happy thinking you bought a British design and produced product, who cares. If you feel the brand value doesnt line up with what you believe are the facts, or what is important to you, fine, do not buy it. We are adults here. Everybody's own choice to what extend you follow your heart/gut and how much facts you like to dig up.

Big salute Sir, you nailed it perfectly.

Cheers!

[racer_ash]

As things stand now, looks like we have a clear majority of 'Yes' here. Infact, the total number of votes is just a tad bit more than the number of Lok Sabha seats. The naysayers can now humbly accept defeat and retrospect on what went wrong.

Can we now please close this thread as arguments are only getting repetitive? I don't see any more value add and new point of views coming out.

Before the naysayers bash me, it may be good to know that I too am from the same group

[Hayek]

Voted No. Why?

1) MG is a British brand.
2) MG is owned by SAIC, which has the right to use it the way it wants to.
3) There is no product which is fully engineered or manufactured in a single country. Even an Apple iPhone, which proudly says “Designed by Apple in California” uses parts designed in Japan, Korea et al.
4) As lots of people have pointed out, everybody does this. Some Mercedes cars use Renault engines. The Dacia Duster is sold as a French Renault in India. The Subaru Forrester, the Isuzu Panther and various Daewoos were sold as Chevrolets in India. And German Opels are sold as British Vauxhalls in the UK. And will soon be replaced by French Peugeots masquerading as German Opels.
5) Finally, all you have to do is Google MG Hector and you will have all the information you need about it (including this thread).

PS: Just remembered that the Indica was launched in the UK by none other than MG Rover (before SAIC bought the brand) as the City Rover

[swiftdiesel]

I wish we had this thread when Tata fooled the British public by badging the Indica as MG Rover. Case of double standards? I think so. Full disclosure: I’m a huge fan of Chinese products - right from their kids toys to cars. I have a Chinese phone, Chinese TV, Chinese furniture, Chinese laptop and I love Chinese noodles. If I was in the market for a SUV, I’ll buy the Hector because it’s from China.

BTW, I haven’t voted because this thread is pointless.

[ajmat]

Originally Posted by swiftdiesel

I wish we had this thread when Tata fooled the British public by badging the Indica as MG Rover. .

Thats a bit harsh!! Tata merely supplied the cars much before it even thought of buying JLR

MG Rover bought the cars of Tata and badged them. Tata got the opportunity to sell cars, that was it

[VaidhiR]

Originally Posted by motorworks

First up, Geely bought Volvo as a company. They did not just buy the Brand, which is what SAIC did. Volvo still functions as an independent division, almost most of their R&D is still based out of Europe.

Im not saying that SAIC is wrong to do what they are doing in India. They paid for a marquee brand, only the brand and not a manufacturing division. And for sure they are milking the brand in markets like India. Thats a clever marketing ploy. Since SAIC owns the brand MG, they can use it any way they want. But then, talking about the Hector as something with a British heritage is a little unethical since the car is basically a Baijoun 530! Did we all not get annoyed with the Kaptur / Captur trick from Renault? If that is not ok, from a moral angle, then how do we justify this ?

Under M&As 101, it is less profitable for a lesser known company to become the lead marketer in case of an M&A. I think both of us agree here.

When Geely bought Volvo in 2010, Volvo was a reputed Swedish brand. There was no point in rebranding them as Geely. When SAIC bought MG, MG were a reputed brand. SAIC are only known inside of China. So it made no sense to launch cars under the SAIC branding when MG name still commands respect and nostalgia.

With all due respect, R&D location doesnt play any role in determining where the company is based. OEMs are going to setup their shop at places where it makes business sense (Read $$$$) to develop and manufacture their cars. Volvo does its R&D in Sweden & China BTW. The laborious and costly work gets researched in China. While the peripherals gets developed in Sweden. The same with Mercedes (Germany & India), PSA (France & Morocco), GM (USA & India). See the pattern?

SAIC are the legal owners of the brand MG. If they decide to launch a SAIC car with MG branding, they are well within their right to do so. We, as educated and well informed Indians, have to make a choice of whether we are ok with it or not. There is no moral in a business world. Either you make money or you file bankruptcy.

In 1996 when Mercedes Benz launched the W124 E220, we were pretty pissed off at Mercedes Benz cars because the newer generation W210 E Class was launched world wide. It made Mercedes Benz look like they looked at India as a dumping place for their older generation cars worldwide. What information did we have in 1996? This was before the entire google/internet boom. Was Mercedes Benz fooling customers? No. They didnt say that the W124 was the latest. But we knew that W210 was.

Here, we took our frustration out by refusing to buy a car that was older than the then current generation. So likewise, here we have a choice. Either we buy the car or we dont. We are all educated enough to make this choice for ourselves.

But are SAIC fooling prospective buyers? No. They are well within their right to launch their car with the MG branding for one simple reason. Cheap manufacturing + nostalgic branding = $$$$$.

[narayans80]

Originally Posted by vivekgk

3. The difference is that Dacia products were designed, engineered, sold and serviced by Renault, which has a global reputation, and that the solid engineering has proven itself on our roads. The Duster built bthe Renault brand in India, I would say.

That's akin to saying Fiat designs Ferrari and Volkswagen designs Lamborghini

Dacia is based out of Romania, and are responsible for Sandero, Logan, Lodgy, Duster. They are all sold under the Dacia brand in Europe, Renault has its own Clio, Captur, Kadjar, Scenic, Megane selling in Europe.

At launch, Renault too were 'unethical' in introducing Duster as theirs. Its easy to say 7 years in retrospect.

If SAIC was really doing something unethical, discussions would happen in court not in some automotive forum.

As a wise well wisher once advised me 'Buying is one time affair. Maintenance is lifetime'. If SAIC or MG or whatever they like to call themselves are able to respond to that, what's the big deal?

[motorworks]

Originally Posted by VaidhiR

Under M&As 101, it is less profitable for a lesser known company to become the lead marketer in case of an M&A. I think both of us agree here.

When Geely bought Volvo in 2010, Volvo was a reputed Swedish brand. There was no point in rebranding them as Geely. When SAIC bought MG, MG were a reputed brand. SAIC are only known inside of China. So it made no sense to launch cars under the SAIC branding when MG name still commands respect and nostalgia.

With all due respect, R&D location doesnt play any role in determining where the company is based. OEMs are going to setup their shop at places where it makes business sense (Read $$$$) to develop and manufacture their cars. Volvo does its R&D in Sweden & China BTW. The laborious and costly work gets researched in China. While the peripherals gets developed in Sweden. The same with Mercedes (Germany & India), PSA (France & Morocco), GM (USA & India). See the pattern?

SAIC are the legal owners of the brand MG. If they decide to launch a SAIC car with MG branding, they are well within their right to do so. We, as educated and well informed Indians, have to make a choice of whether we are ok with it or not. There is no moral in a business world. Either you make money or you file bankruptcy.

In 1996 when Mercedes Benz launched the W124 E220, we were pretty pissed off at Mercedes Benz cars because the newer generation W210 E Class was launched world wide. It made Mercedes Benz look like they looked at India as a dumping place for their older generation cars worldwide. What information did we have in 1996? This was before the entire google/internet boom. Was Mercedes Benz fooling customers? No. They didnt say that the W124 was the latest. But we knew that W210 was.

Here, we took our frustration out by refusing to buy a car that was older than the then current generation. So likewise, here we have a choice. Either we buy the car or we dont. We are all educated enough to make this choice for ourselves.

But are SAIC fooling prospective buyers? No. They are well within their right to launch their car with the MG branding for one simple reason. Cheap manufacturing + nostalgic branding = $$$$$.

Sorry, but the examples of Volvo, Apple, Tata JLR and all such have no correlation with SAIC-MG.

In the case of Volvo, it was a simple case of a complete auto manufacturing company changing ownership. Geely has not started selling Geely cars under Volvo. Similarly, Tata bought JLR and it has let the company exist on its own with its own identity. And the whole discussion on Apple was simple production out sourcing.

Again, my point is that this is a clever marketing ploy by SAIC, nothing illegal. From a moral angle, I see it in the same way that many of us saw Renault, in the Kaptur / Captur incident. Not the same kind, but just not right, at least not in my book.

Thats about it. Lets call a spade a spade rather than trying to bring about inaccurate examples.

[NiInJa]

Voting for Yes: SAIC is fooling people, but I am not going to say that they are wrong in doing so, because in the end it really won't matter as the product matters.

If MG 'branding' helps SAIC run business here and get people jobs, there is no harm in marketing it that way. It will fail anyway if the car itself is very bad. I've seen Tata Tiago salesperson telling prospective buyers how the car shares some parts with Jaguar in a small town dealership, so this is just fine.

As for me, if I were to go to a MG showroom tomorrow and the salesperson started talking about MG's history and legacy, I would politely request him to skip to the next chapter (Sorry, I really can't take misinformation nicely). Like they say, its ghor kaliyug and the only way out of it is self-awareness.

[jailbird_fynix]

Brilliant marketing nevertheless. And now they've abruptly stopped bookings too. Nice.

[FrodoOfTheShire]

I think the title of the thread should've been "Is SAIC being unethical by selling the Chinese originated Hector under British heritage MG brand?"

Had voted NO when the thread was just 2 pages but commenting when it's 12 pages in! Is it unethical? Yes, but then there's hardly anything ethical in marketing and advertising.

Are they fooling people? I don't believe that people buy car (atleast, in this price segment) based on brand history/heritage, else Ford would've sold like hot cakes in India. I don't believe people are foolish enough to plonk ₹15 - ₹20 lakh on a new entrant (let's face it, the Indian aam junta hardly knows about this "iconic British brand") without due research. So NO, they're not fooling anybody. In India, where most people would rather buy the tried and tested and trusted Maruti Suzuki or Hyundai, people would do even more research on a new brand, thereby learning the "truth". If someone has booked/bought the Hector solely on the basis of brand heritage without testing the car itself, then I would be really sceptical about their life choices.

Originally Posted by vishy76

If Indians hate Chinese goods, its entirely MG's problem, not ours.

Originally Posted by digitalnirvana

That said, their branding exercise doesn't sit right with me

Originally Posted by motorworks

Again, my point is that this is a clever marketing ploy by SAIC, nothing illegal. From a moral angle, just not right, at least not in my book.

Yes, its absolutely SAIC's problem that Indians hate Chinese goods. As GTO mentioned -

Originally Posted by GTO

If it was launched as a "Baojun", the car would have sunk without a trace.

The "Chinese" baggage is evident from the fact that no one created such a thread when GM launched Korean products with an American badge .

So if SAIC had launched the Baojun 530 or Wuling Almaz in India, people wouldn't have stepped foot into their showrooms, no matter how competent the product itself might have been. By launching it under MG and harping about the British heritage, SAIC has carefully distanced the Chinese tag from the car, thereby giving the Hector a chance to prove itself as a product to prospective buyers.

My question to people who have strongly voted and advocated YES in this thread - How would you have handled the whole marketing if you were in SAIC's shoes? What would you have done differently so as to be ethical in marketing/promotion while still making business sense? Let's steer the discussion towards positive creativity and solutions. Please don't take the shortcut by saying it's not your problem, since you seem to have lot of problem with SAIC's solution

Originally Posted by boniver

Just to put things in perspective, this is the sight that greets you when you open MG's website

True. And when you scroll down and click on "About MG", it shows this -


And clicking on "Know More" takes you to the SAIC Motor website -

[sparky@home]

The Chinese own MG. and I think it gives them the right to sell their products any way they like to sell it. The customers are buying it simply because they like the end product. Even if it had been under a Chinese name, I am sure the car would still have still sold, probably due to the butch look, size and the loaded to the gill factor. They know what will sell and it did.

[SmartCat]

We are here to disrupt the Indian auto market: Rajeev Chaba, President & MD, MG Motor
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/70413588.cms

Highlights:

- Bought (not leased) a 46,000 sq ft office for Rs. 150 cr
- Out of 1,200 employees, only 20 are Chinese. 30% of employees on shop floor are women.
- Startup culture. Management wears smart casuals to work.
- In another 3 years, MG Motors will have 5 products on sale
- Rs. 5,000 cr investment planned
- To ensure profitability of dealers, only one dealer per city (except New Delhi & Mumbai)
- Chinese management open to suggestions. Changed grille design (to suit Indian tastes) in 2 weeks.
- Rajeev Chaba is reporting directly to President of SAIC. No multi-layered management structure
- Originally planned to launch a sub-5 Lakh hatchback, but changed course to launch a premium SUV.
- American companies like GM are too Wall Street focussed (Quarter on quarter profits). But SAIC is patient and ready to invest.

The Wall Street bit is an interesting comment. Most big automobile company CEOs do not take investment risks because they have to face the shareholders every quarter!

[CarBot]

Take any car brand nowadays, almost all of them have changed hands and are now owned by a handful of "mother-brands". After the new takeover most of the heritage and values also change inline with new management. Designers switch companies, quality and localization comes in to keep cost low.

What I liked about MG in India is that it is creating jobs for people and also the product hector has been decent and seems value for money.

Regarding fooling people with British Heritage I doubt outside of our forum and few others hardly anyone knows MG, its 90+ years history and so called heritage. People are buying / booking solely based on comparison on price vs features compared to Creta or Harrier or XUV500 or Compass.