Great Wall may not be Jaguar-Land Rover’s Chinese partner just yet
Wang Fengying, president of Great Wall, recently denied the media report that Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) would partner with Great Wall by saying that Great Wall had no intent on opening a joint venture.
Media reported previously that the related personnel from JLR had visited Great Wall’s Baoding headquarters and Tianjin-based production site this February. But the partnership mode between the two parties and the future production base have not been determined. Meanwhile, Carl-Peter Forster, CEO of Tata, parent of JLR, revealed at the Geneva Motor show on March 2 that the company had contacted several Chinese automakers to make JLR’s local production plan come true, including Great Wall.
It is very important for them to find a local partner, as they should be informed of the local market situation well, and the Chinese government also requires the participation of local automakers in foreign investment. JLR released its China investment plan last year. It planned to invest £100 million to build a new plant with an annual capacity of 50,000 vehicles in China. Tata planned to adopt the CKD assembly mode in China. The plan will be carried out once it finds a suitable partner in China. JLR started to look for a local partner after the release of the plan. Jiangling, Geely, Changfeng, and Chery were all rumored as its potential partners once. According to industry sources, it is normal for JLR to contact Chinese automakers. Great Wall may be only one of their candidates.

Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Save to delicious
Stumble it
RSS Feed


How is Datong considered vulgar? Does it refer to anatomy? I know that Da = big, but what is tong? I thought this was the same Tong as in GM’s Tong Yong name?
I wish they would link up with SAIC, Two of the worlds largest organisations joining forces would be a sight.
And the brand for their first joint venture is obvious; Rover
Rover is long dead, it died because the car buying public were no longer interested in it. Why bother bringing it back?