Filed under: China, Plants/Manufacturing, Lotus
UPDATE: No Chinese-built Lotus on the horizon
Contrary to a report that surfaced Monday, Lotus has no intention of partnering with the Malaysian state-owned automaker, Proton, to build cars in China. This announcement debunks what Jinhua Neoplan has asserted throughout a number of articles in the Chinese press – including the state-supported China Daily.The e-mail, which was apparently sent to Lotus staff, makes it clear that no vehicles will be produced in China, nor are there any plans to do so within the next five years. The email goes on to say that such reports "could affect staff morale or performance" and that, "in the future please treat such press comments with the scepticism (sic) they deserve."
Moving on...
[Source: Inside Line]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
cheezwiz 6:47PM (8/16/2007)
Good! I imagine all that lead paint the chinese manufacturers use would just add extra weight...
Reply
Arnie 7:25PM (8/16/2007)
"...Lotus has no intention of partnering with the Malaysian state-owned automaker, Proton, to build cars in China."
Partnering? I thought Proton owned Lotus. Did I miss something?
Reply
The Doctor 7:26PM (8/16/2007)
Why the (sic) after scepticism?
Reply
Greg A. 11:05PM (8/16/2007)
Perhaps you speak the Queen's English and are therefore unaware that in the U.S., the word is spelled s-k-e-p-t-i-c-i-s-m. (Not that this calls for the use of 'sic' here.)
hashiryu 7:34PM (8/16/2007)
The car Gods are being good to us
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 8:00PM (8/16/2007)
I would imagine they are partnering, as Proton does indeed own Lotus.
Why would Proton make vehicles in China? The Malaysian government owns 40% of Proton.
"scepticism" isn't a spelling error, Brits spell it that way.
Reply
Jack 9:28PM (8/16/2007)
Thank Goodness
Reply
El Norte 10:17PM (8/16/2007)
"in the future please treat such press comments with the scepticism (sic) they deserve."
I'm assuming Damon Lavrinc inserted the (sic). At any rate, scepticism is a variant of skepticism and the (sic) isn't necessary. Especially considering that the source of the comment is British.
Reply