GM sets end of road for Swedish brand Saab

[culver]

Maybe SAAB will buy back SAAB

[LeonOfTheDead]

Maybe SAAB will buy back SAAB

Sabb-Scania should be owned by VAG at the moment, no go.

[culver]

What? VAG is buying SAAB-Scania?

[LeonOfTheDead]

What? VAG is buying SAAB-Scania?

No, VAG isn't buying Scania, they already own 71% of it.

[Timothy (in VA)]

Sounds stupid. Ford should get rid of Mercury instead.

Why? There will always be people who want something a little more special than a Ford. Fords are everywhere, and boring; people who buy Mercurys are looking for something a bit unique. A Mercury will always be rarer than the equivalent Ford model, and that's part of the appeal.

Plus, Ford can charge a bit more for them without spending too much. As long as they are just slightly up-market Fords, they don't need to sell a lot of them to turn a profit (theoretically).

[LeonOfTheDead]

I agree with NSX, despite the fact I don't have first hand experience of Mercury.
They are just too similar, actually identical, to justify the higher price. Even a pink Fusion is rarer than a silver Fusion, and even a fully loaded Fusion is better equipped than a Fusion, no need for a different brand if it doesn't bring something really unique and peculiar.
Pontiac knows that. Maybe Pontiac could have been saved, while from my limited point of view no one whould have been so pissed if it was Mercury to go. Actually, until last year, many magazines and websites were sure it would have been dismissed.

If they changed at least some parts of the bodyworks...

[Ferrer]

Even Pontiac brought the Commodore and that didn't save them either.

Aren't Lincoln and Mercury paired at the same dealers. I'm sure Mercurys bring volume to their dealers and that could be one of the reason why Ford didn't kill it.

[NSXType-R]

Why? There will always be people who want something a little more special than a Ford. Fords are everywhere, and boring; people who buy Mercurys are looking for something a bit unique. A Mercury will always be rarer than the equivalent Ford model, and that's part of the appeal.

Plus, Ford can charge a bit more for them without spending too much. As long as they are just slightly up-market Fords, they don't need to sell a lot of them to turn a profit (theoretically).

I don't have any remorse for Mercury. I mean, the Ford Escape and the Mercury Mariner are exactly the same except for a couple trim pieces and maybe nicer interior materials. How much different do you really think they are?

You need to realize Ford has Lincoln as well. So you're going to have the plain, the slightly less plain, and the luxurious? There isn't enough room for an in between like Mercury. In my opinion, Ford would do just fine without Mercury. Look at the new Taurus. It's luxurious enough as it is. As much as I hate for the marque to go away, as with Saab and Pontiac, the way I see it, Ford could entirely go under. Mind you, they're in better shape than GM, but it's not like they're way better.

I agree with NSX, despite the fact I don't have first hand experience of Mercury.
They are just too similar, actually identical, to justify the higher price. Even a pink Fusion is rarer than a silver Fusion, and even a fully loaded Fusion is better equipped than a Fusion, no need for a different brand if it doesn't bring something really unique and peculiar.
Pontiac knows that. Maybe Pontiac could have been saved, while from my limited point of view no one whould have been so pissed if it was Mercury to go. Actually, until last year, many magazines and websites were sure it would have been dismissed.

If they changed at least some parts of the bodyworks...

Yeah, I never understood Mercury. Too similar. Lincoln at least has different bodywork, to some extent.

[culver]

For historical reasons the reason why the US makes had all these brands is because in the past, when the big three were about it, it made sense to have the extra brands so you could have a larger range of cars. Also, at least for GM the brands really did have individual engineering and the like so they operated more like sister companies than simple relabeling. However, I think the reason why they still have them now has a lot to do with dealers and the cost of pulling a franchise. Old's cost millions to shutter. I don't think GM would have been able to shut down as many brands as it just did had it not been for the bankruptcy.

GM seems to have tried to make it's brands less alike. Mercury, yes, it is easy to forget they exist. More so now that their lineup is something like two cars and two SUVs.

[Kitdy]

At the time, I thought Buick shoulda been killed, and still think there's an argument to be made that they have no place selling cars anymore - in North America at least. Now I have mixed feelings.

However, the LaCrosse and Regal are supposed to be pretty good, along with the Enclave, leaving the Lucerne as the old person car.

[Kitdy]

Why? There will always be people who want something a little more special than a Ford. Fords are everywhere, and boring; people who buy Mercurys are looking for something a bit unique. A Mercury will always be rarer than the equivalent Ford model, and that's part of the appeal.

Plus, Ford can charge a bit more for them without spending too much. As long as they are just slightly up-market Fords, they don't need to sell a lot of them to turn a profit (theoretically).

Do they actually make money though? I looked at their lineup and I don't see much point of it really.

[henk4]

leaving the Lucerne as the old person car.

which, given the increasing average age, in combination with the financial possibilities of elderly people, is the market to be represented in

[Ferrer]

At the time, I thought Buick shoulda been killed, and still think there's an argument to be made that they have no place selling cars anymore - in North America at least. Now I have mixed feelings.

However, the LaCrosse and Regal are supposed to be pretty good, along with the Enclave, leaving the Lucerne as the old person car.

The Regal is good but not class leading. It's not as good to drive as a Mondeo or a Mazda 6 and not as comfortable as a C5 or a Laguna either. However is a nice modern car that's a massive improvement over the car it replaces.

[LeonOfTheDead]

For historical reasons the reason why the US makes had all these brands is because in the past, when the big three were about it, it made sense to have the extra brands so you could have a larger range of cars. Also, at least for GM the brands really did have individual engineering and the like so they operated more like sister companies than simple relabeling. However, I think the reason why they still have them now has a lot to do with dealers and the cost of pulling a franchise. Old's cost millions to shutter. I don't think GM would have been able to shut down as many brands as it just did had it not been for the bankruptcy.

GM seems to have tried to make it's brands less alike. Mercury, yes, it is easy to forget they exist. More so now that their lineup is something like two cars and two SUVs.

This guy seems particularly smart

At the time, I thought Buick shoulda been killed, and still think there's an argument to be made that they have no place selling cars anymore - in North America at least. Now I have mixed feelings.

However, the LaCrosse and Regal are supposed to be pretty good, along with the Enclave, leaving the Lucerne as the old person car.

Buick is required in China, and if they keep on transforming Opel cars into Buicks it should be fine. Had Opel been sold, Buick would have ended like Mercury, possibly, so I'd have thought about shuttering it.

which, given the increasing average age, in combination with the financial possibilities of elderly people, is the market to be represented in

Weird, I thought that was the Corvette role.

[Wouter Melissen]

Spyker has extended the deadline for the deal.