In a message dated 10/19/02 7:16:07 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
owner-mgs-digest@autox.team.net writes:
> Listers,
> What constitutes a Honda, Chrysler, Chevy, Cadillac,
> Jaguar, etc. etc. etc. Stop already. If it is sold
> as an MG and you like it, it's an MG. If it's sold as
> a Jag and you like it, it's a Jag.
These arguments never seem to convince anyone on either side of the validity
of the logic offered by the other side, and they go on, and on, and.....
Perhaps we could agree that when there has been a clear discontinuity in the
manufacturer, that the new car shares nothing but the name with the old?
Examples of this are the newer version called Bugatti, and the recent (RIP)
car called the Jensen. No ties to history or tradition, just someone that had
the money to buy an established name to try and market a completely new
product through name recognition.
Now as to where the name MG fits in here........
Bill
(IMNVHO, 'real MGs', if that term can be used, ceased in 1980, although
Kimber would have been rolling in his grave from about 1975 on....)
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|