Talk:British Motor Holdings

message: Whichever it really is/was, so far as is possible it will be labelled a "merger" so it doesn't frighten horses, children, employees, investing public etc. Eddaido (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Power grab, acquisition, merger, takeover

message: Jaguar was very much a minnow. Pressed Steel employed 26,000 at the time it disappeared into BMC. Pressed Steel did almost everything for Jaguar yet Jaguar was a small customer to Pressed Steel. Can anyone find how many Jaguar employed in 1966? 
:The answer appears to be around 7,000 because that was the number at the time of the creation of BL in 1968.page 202, David Thoms, Tom Donnelly, The Motor Car Industry in Coventry Since the 1890's Croome Helm, Beckenham 1985  Eddaido (talk) 06:12, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Minnow

message: It was stated at the time that in view of the changed nature of the business it had been decided to change the name of the holding company to British Motor Holdings. I suppose half a century later Jaguar alone is still recognisable and it is forgotten how small it was. Most WP articles about cars and their manufacturing businesses are written by editors interested in just the product and any "personalities" they might choose to find. Eddaido (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Name again

message: Cassius Clay redirects to Mohammed Ali so using that precedent then we should make the article British Motor Corporation a redirect to British Motor Holdings and not have two different articles. Will give the above my best attention in about another 12 hours, regards, Eddaido (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Clay

message: "Under a jointly agreed £18,200,000 deal announced last night, the Jaguar group of companies and the British Motor Corporation are to merge. In financial terms it is a take-over of Sir William Lyons's Coventry company by Sir George Harriman's Longbridge giant, the result of which will be a new group, comprising Jaguar, BMC and Pressed Steel-Fisher."
"Sir George Harriman, BMC's chairman , said the merger should be seen as a joining of forces designed to strengthen the motor industry in general. Jaguar will continue to operate as a separate entity "and with the greatest practical degree of autonomy" still under the chairmanship of Sir William Lyons, who is 65. Sir George Harriman is to be chairman of the new group and Sir William a director."
"News of the merger did not come as a surprise in the motor industry, where it had been known for some time negotiations were in the offing. . . .  "
"BMC as Great Britain's biggest vehicle manufacturer hold 42 per cent of the market represented by an annual production of about 890,000, currently running at 19,500 units a week. Jaguar will give them only an extra 2 per cent of the market. or 30,000 vehicles per year.
===Estimated production of cars and commercial vehicles in the UK 1965===
Brand           	Quantity	         	Share
BMC             	890,000 	         	40%
Jaguar          	30,000  	         	1%
BMH             	        	920,000  	42%
Standard-Triumph	125,000 	         	6%
Rover           	25,000  	         	1%
Leyland         	        	150,000  	7%
Ford            	        	590,000  	27%
Vauxhall        	        	333,000  	15%
Rootes          	        	220,000  	10%
Rolls-Royce     	        	1,200    	0%
Total           	        	2,214,200	100%
===Terms for Jaguar Shareholders===
From our City Editor
"The British Motor Corporation bid of £18,200,000 for Jaguar cars in financial terms is a take-over, but from a management point of view it will not happen in that way." (hush, children)
"The intention is for Jaguar BMC and Pressed Steel-Fisher to form a new group with a single holding company on top to be called British Motor (Holdings) under the chairmanship of Sir George Harriman, the present chairman of BMC. Sir William Lyons, chairman of Jaguar, will have a place on this main board. There is no question of the Jaguar name disappearing." (see—nothing will change, really)
"The terms offered to shareholders in Jaguar (the chairman and his family control more than half the voting shares) are:for each A ordinary share, two ordinary shares of British Motor Corporation, plus 10s. 3d. of a new 7¾ per cent unsecured loan stock;for each ordinary share, two ordinary shares of BMC plus 22s. 6d. of the new 7¾ percent unsecured loan stock.This puts a value on the widely held A shares (those without a vote) of 38s. each which compares with a closing price last night of 32s."
I do not know the answer but history will have on record the fate (and the fate of their investment) of the Jaguar shareholders who took BMC (BL) shares and "unsecured loan stock" Still, Jaguar might well have gone bust all by itself. Eddaido (talk) 00:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jaguars to join up with B.M.C. from our Motoring Correspondent. ''The Times'', Tuesday, Jul 12, 1966; pg. 1; Issue 56681

message: From our City Editor
"The British Motor Corporation bid of £18,200,000 for Jaguar cars in financial terms is a take-over, but from a management point of view it will not happen in that way." (hush, children)
"The intention is for Jaguar BMC and Pressed Steel-Fisher to form a new group with a single holding company on top to be called British Motor (Holdings) under the chairmanship of Sir George Harriman, the present chairman of BMC. Sir William Lyons, chairman of Jaguar, will have a place on this main board. There is no question of the Jaguar name disappearing." (see—nothing will change, really)
"The terms offered to shareholders in Jaguar (the chairman and his family control more than half the voting shares) are:for each A ordinary share, two ordinary shares of British Motor Corporation, plus 10s. 3d. of a new 7¾ per cent unsecured loan stock;for each ordinary share, two ordinary shares of BMC plus 22s. 6d. of the new 7¾ percent unsecured loan stock.This puts a value on the widely held A shares (those without a vote) of 38s. each which compares with a closing price last night of 32s."
I do not know the answer but history will have on record the fate (and the fate of their investment) of the Jaguar shareholders who took BMC (BL) shares and "unsecured loan stock" Still, Jaguar might well have gone bust all by itself. Eddaido (talk) 00:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Terms for Jaguar Shareholders

message: B.M.C. / Jaguar
"BMC is not in the habit of making generous bids (see the offer for Pressed Steel) so its terms for Jaguar will be examined carefully.  . . .  Accurate assessment, it must be admitted at once, is impossible in the absence of Jaguar's profit figures for the year, which will close at the end of this month. Sir William Lyons, the chairman, refused to be drawn on this point yesterday evening. But on the 1964-65 outturn, Jaguar is being valued at around 11 times earnings. Two points can be made about this. It is a low price for a company with obvious potential whatever its latest figures may show. And, secondly, it is the sort of bargain-basement price which may tempt others to make a higher offer: Leyland for instance?
"Certainly it is international considerations which have occasioned the merger proposal. The plain fact is that the British motor industry is more widely fragmented than any other of the major producing countries." Eddaido (talk) 00:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sterling wilts again after bright start. by our City Editor, ''The Times'', Tuesday, Jul 12, 1966; pg. 15; Issue 56681.

message: "BMC's offer has now been declared unconditional, acceptances having been received in respect of over 86 per cent of the ordinary and over 81 per cent of the "A" ordinary shares. BMC will continue to take acceptances until further notice." Note that the interest rate on the unsecured loan stock had been increased from 7¾ to 8 per cent. Eddaido (talk) 00:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: BMC offer unconditional, by our City Editor, ''The Times'', Wednesday, Aug 31, 1966; pg. 12; Issue 56724. or its all over Rover

message: ;1967 Benn - join Leyland it has Donald Stokes
On 17 January 1968 BMH merged with the smaller prosperous Leyland Motor Corporation to form the British Leyland Motor Corporation (BLMC) on a one-for-one share exchange, valuing BMH at £201 million. BMH had reported a £3.4 million loss for 1966/7.
When last I heard, the point of an encyclopedia was to inform and the point of a section title was to summarize the content of the section.  A reader looking for information is going to read the title of the section quoted above, read the text of the section, and find absolutely no connection between the title and the text. The text does not mention Benn or Stokes, nor, for that matter, does it mention 1967. In fact, the only mention of Donald Stokes in the entire article is in that section title, so readers of the article, who can be assumed to be uninformed and looking for information, will have not the first clue as to who Donald Stokes is or what his presence at Leyland has to do with anything. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 11:01, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.   I presume the title was from someone who intended to write more but didn't or else from someone who did write more that then got unwritten.   Either way, the UK political scene is a player in the story of BMH - a big player but only a player - and it doesn't make much sense to write headlines as though the defining subject of the entry was British politics, especially where the content of the ensuing para is of only marginal relevance to the headline.   I've replaced the title.   Feel fee to replace it with something else if you find my knee-jerk replacement sub-optimal.   Regards   Charles01 (talk) 12:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your support. Your "knee-jerk replacement" was an improvement, but I have replaced it with something that summarizes the text a bit better. At least, I think it does; please let me know if I am wrong. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 12:44, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest that is just another carefully aimed low quality cry for attention—like referring Daimler for assessment—and it will get fixed by another editor. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 23:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The low quality of that section title really did cry for attention, and, thankfully, it got it. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 01:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a copy editor deliberately limits his horizons? I don't know. A reader of an encyclopedia might remember reading about Benn a few lines above, might look in Leyland a line below and find Stokes and might realise that the 17 January is but a few days after 31 December seeing they must be of inquiring mind to have got as far as this.A Wikipedia editor might be grateful for the pointers in the right direction to improve the article rather than responding like a particularly totally negative copy editor. Do you know what Cat's Paw means? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 01:26, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Innuendo and cryptic remarks do not help readers of an encyclopedia. Clear and understandable content do. The reader would want to know who Donald Stokes was and why Benn would want him in the same organization as BMH's component companies. The reader hasn't come to be challenged, or to be part of a game of "pass the fool a little farther", he or she has come to be informed. If you have the info to add, please add it. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 02:00, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: See how badly she wants the attention? There is a whole long dreary history of this behaviour, readily accessible. Regards,  Eddaido (talk) 02:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please limit your comments to the improvement of the article, as per Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 02:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

text: But indeed I do, indeed I do. Eddaido (talk) 02:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very confusing section in the article