GM sets end of road for Swedish brand Saab

[Lets Gekiga In]

AFP: GM sets end of road for Swedish brand Saab (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gC7icCmcDFiYt3oXcF2YDm9XmWkg)

I'm so sad. My car is a Saab and they're being discontinued and my major was discontinued at my alma mater earlier this year.

The best part of 2009 for me was finding the love of my life.

[Ferrer]

I was about to post it.

Well, GM can burn in hell as far as I'm concerned.

[Dino Scuderia]

The Swedish gubbermint should buy it.

[Wouter Melissen]

Well, GM can burn in hell as far as I'm concerned.

Why don't you buy it then?

[culver]

I'm a SAAB owner and sad to hear it. However, I don't agree with the anti-GM attitudes I've seen on several forums. GM is doing what is needed to turn it's finances around. SAAB hasn't made any money for GM. It would be interesting to get the inside scoop on SAAB. I've never read a good account of what has been going on with SAAB during the GM ownership. My impression was that in the early years GM left SAAB largely alone and SAAB didn't do much. Then GM got active and tried force some action and products at SAAB. However, this didn't work out. Rumor has it that the 95 was twice supposed to be replaced with a new joint venture product. One was supposed to be a Fiat-SAAB thing but that fell apart when GM and Fiat parted ways. I'm not sure about the other (perhaps there was just one). Subi and SAAB were going to release an SUV together but that died when GM and Subi split up. I think the Subi-GM split was about GM getting cash to pay off the UAW.

In any case, I think there were plans for decent SAAB cars in the works but they died. The stop gap products (the Trailblazer SUV and the Impreza) were all we ever saw. That certainly made it look like GM didn't care about the products. I suspect it was instead GM reacting to the loss of what ever they were developing for SAAB combined with the dealers demanding SOMTHING to sell.

I hate to see SAAB go but I also hated to see Pontiac and Olds die off. I don't know why none of the deals went through. I've read some claims that GM wanted the deals to fail. I find that hard to believe. GM wants to extract the most value/lease liability from SAAB so that they can finish turning the rest of the company around. I can't see how letting SAAB simply die vs finding a deal was better for GM.

Finally, do note that SAAB wasn't in great shape when GM got them. They had the 9000 which wasn't that new and the absolutely out of date 900. SAAB needed a partner because they couldn't make it on their own.

Don't worry, SAAB will live on in their jets.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Sad, really sad.
And yesterday when I saw the first official image of the 9-5 Estate I thought it was really good looking.
I hope the new car will survive somehow, new Opel Omega, anyone?
As far as the brand is concerned...Saabs suck the last years, no doubts on that. Even if I always liked the current 9-5 it was as old as myself and therefore having it still for sale was a good indicator of how things were going to end.
The new 9-3 was just an average car, surely not a Saab, let alone a good replacement for the 900. Even if it is a good car, it was too average for such a peculiar brand. probably the same reason why the BLS (Cadillac) didn't sale well here since people in Europe expects something almost exotic from a Cadillac. Eventually the car (platform) performed pretty well, even if heavily modified, as the Fiat Croma, a truly average car, designed to be the horse carriage of the family and excellent at that I must say.

So, Saab was dead since a while it seems.

Damn, I was already imagining some sort of an uber Spyker designed Saab (as I did with Koenigsegg), but that would have been a Saab either, wouldn't it?

[Ferrer]

As far as I know, Saab was never a massive money maker, but a small car factory which made well enginereed cars and which could financially survive on its own. At least before the GM takeover.

I'm gonna be simplistic, but globalisation, greed and regulations are killing many interesting car maker that we used to have.

Why don't you buy it then?
Only if you bring the finance.

[henk4]

As far as I know, Saab was never a massive money maker, but a small car factory which made well enginereed cars and which could financially survive on its own. At least before the GM takeover.

if that was true it would not have been taken over, it was an already ailing company. GM was not the correct remedy.

[Ferrer]

if that was true it would not have been taken over, it was an already ailing company. GM was not the correct remedy.
I'm not saying it was Saab's case, but not all companies are taken over because they need help. Sometime the firm that's the who's paying just wants to expand their bussiness.

[G35COUPE]

Failed american management style has led to a failed Saab.

Five lessons that GM can learn from the Saab debacle - Drive On: A conversation about the cars and trucks we drive - USATODAY.com (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2009/12/five-lessons-that-gm-can-learn-from-the-saab-debacle/1)

Can anyone tell me why american managers can no longer manage in a globalized world where competition is fierce?

[Kitdy]

Ferrer though, what if Saab had been sold? They woulda died anyways. I figure a sale woulda gave them a few months or years more but the fact remains that their perception is not good - surely better in Europe than North America but still not great as far as I understand. They were not really competitive cars.

I don't mourn their loss, as they weren't very good (I never liked Saab to be honest) but I do feel bad for all those working for Saab that are gonna be out of a job.

[G35COUPE]

A car should have a flavor, a soul, a certain look, and an attitude. All these factors are generally absent in american built automobiles because they are mass-maarket items.

And the inability of american managers to understand the 4 factors so stated above, is the reason why their marketing efforts fail woefully at bringing and maintaining any prospective brand in the auto market.

Advertisements are not a be all and end all endeavor. It is just a tool to draw customers to the show room so that they can see and test drive the vehicles for themselves.

Unfortunately, GM marketing egg-heads beleive tv ads will solve all their problems.

GM is a sad company and all the management of GM deserve to be sacked, fired, and flogged, immediately. While I am for bailing them out as Obama administration did, I still think the heart and source of GM's problems continues to be the inept management it has.

GM couldn't even unwrap a Snickers candy bar to save its self from hunger and death. Sad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[culver]

Failed american management style has led to a failed Saab.

Five lessons that GM can learn from the Saab debacle - Drive On: A conversation about the cars and trucks we drive - USATODAY.com (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2009/12/five-lessons-that-gm-can-learn-from-the-saab-debacle/1)

Can anyone tell me why american managers can no longer manage in a globalized world where competition is fierce?

Funny, Ford seemed to have done a good job fixing Mazda. BMW is generally really well run but they did a miserable job with Rover and Mercedes all but killed Chrysler. Unlike SAAB, Chrysler was fairly healthy before the Germans invaded. Perhaps you jumped too far with that conclusion.

[Ferrer]

Ferrer though, what if Saab had been sold? They woulda died anyways. I figure a sale woulda gave them a few months or years more but the fact remains that their perception is not good - surely better in Europe than North America but still not great as far as I understand. They were not really competitive cars.

I don't mourn their loss, as they weren't very good (I never liked Saab to be honest) but I do feel bad for all those working for Saab that are gonna be out of a job.
Why? A different approach may have solved all or part of Saab's problems. It also, in anycase, would've given Saab hope, which is the last thing to be lost. Dead doesn't solve anything. Saab, like many other car manufacturers, has suffered in the last years. But doesn't mean we should just give up, at least in my opinion.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Many are already wondering if GM wanted to save it in first place, perhaps it was just a nice way to introduce all of us (Governments and workers mainly) to a very dark period, which would "help" assimilating this end.
Hard to believe that, but surely GM did too few in the last years to make Saab easily profitable or even just interesting to be bought.

[NSXType-R]

Wow, sucks for Saab.

[Kitdy]

Why? A different approach may have solved all or part of Saab's problems. It also, in anycase, would've given Saab hope, which is the last thing to be lost. Dead doesn't solve anything. Saab, like many other car manufacturers, has suffered in the last years. But doesn't mean we should just give up, at least in my opinion.

Well Saab being sold to Spyker or Koenigsegg coulda bankrupted the parent companies.

That wouldn't have been good. I don't think that Saab would have had enough time left on their clock to turn around public perception of them before whoever owned them decided to shut them down or they went bankrupt.

Don't throw good money over bad money.

Saab was a poison pill for anyone that woulda bought them, just like Chrysler may well be for Fiat.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Well Saab being sold to Spyker or Koenigsegg coulda bankrupted the parent companies.

That wouldn't have been good. I don't think that Saab would have had enough time left on their clock to turn around public perception of them before whoever owned them decided to shut them down or they went bankrupt.

Don't throw good money over bad money.

Saab was a poison pill for anyone that woulda bought them, just like Chrysler may well be for Fiat.

Except that Chrysler was and still is for free.

[G35COUPE]

Funny, Ford seemed to have done a good job fixing Mazda. BMW is generally really well run but they did a miserable job with Rover and Mercedes all but killed Chrysler. Unlike SAAB, Chrysler was fairly healthy before the Germans invaded. Perhaps you jumped too far with that conclusion.

But if you remember, Chrysler was always on the edge of collapse as far back as the early 80s. My opinion is that Chrysler gained more from Daimler Benz than Daimler Benz would ever have dreamed of gaining from Chrysler. Chrysler nearly sucked the life out of Daimler Benz. During that period when Daimler Benz owned Chrysler, Benz suffered almost irreparable quality and reputational issues, as well as a degenerating auto design--their autos got uglier. Thats how bad Chrysler nearly ruined Daimler Benz as a company. I call the Chrysler period, the lost years for Daimler Benz. In fact, during that period, BMW which has always been the fiercest competitor of Daimler Benz, produced better and more sophisticated performance cars than Daimler Benz.

BMW was left unchallenged during those lost Chrysler years of Daimler Benz. It was also that period that allowed Infiniti to replace Daimler Benz as the true competitor of BMW. Infiniti made BMW work hard during that period. And BMW was constantly on the edge because they knew Infiniti was going to eath their lunch if they blinked for a moment. Daimler Benz was no where to be found in the race for better cars during this period. I would argue that Daimler Benz's foray into Chrysler allowed cars like the Nissan 350z and Infiniti G-35/M-35 or M45/ FX 35 and FX 45 to flourish exceedingly well. Without Infiniti, the only true choice out there for performance and luxury at the same time, were BMW cars. Of course, this story is limited to the USA.

[culver]

Chrysler was making a nice profit at the time they paired up with Mercedes. Remember that at the time the two companies paired up Chrysler's profits per car were the same as Mercedes yet, excepting the Viper, the most expensive Chrysler was about the same price as the cheapest Mercedes. This was the height of the SUV boom and Chrysler was doing great. Really all Chrysler needed at the time was a bit more money for interiors and to address some quality issues.

I'm not sure you are right that Chrysler gained more than Mercedes in the pairing. Chrysler actually had a lot that they could have offered but Mercedes was too arrogant to see it. However, Mercedes did get a lot of cash that Chrysler had in the banks. Chrysler got one and a half left over platforms. The half, ie the platform under the 300, was well into the design phase before Mercedes entered the picture. Mercedes had the car redesigned to use their left over E-class parts. That might have been a wise move except that it delayed the launch of the car thus robbing Chrysler of a year or two of sales before gas prices spiked and killed the 300's shine.

It's hard to say if the Mercedes quality problems were due to Chrysler or not. You have to remember what was happening at the time. Historically Mercedes were expensive to build because they were over engineered and quality was double and triple checked. Lexus and Infinity came out less than ten years prior and shocked the luxury car world by producing cars that could compete with Mercedes yet cost far less. Mercedes had to figure out how to compete in a more competitive luxury car market while also figuring out how to cut costs. It's not easy to do that and Mercedes quality suffered as they worked their way through that period. Yes, their involvement with Chrysler didn't help but Chrysler wasn't likely to have caused that issue.

Later when the relationship was souring Mercedes basically starved Chrysler of funds. They chased away the award winning design teams that had put Chrysler back on the map. Most of the new products launched under the German watch were junk. They hadn't improved reliability and had arguably decreased perceived quality. The stylist certainly were failing left and right. When the original Neon came out it had a fun styling that helped sell the car. The two generations of Sebrings were really nice looking cars. The current Sebring has fail written all over it. Mercedes had Jeep SUV and Jeep SUV launched into a market saturated with SUVs and high gas prices. They let the mini-vans whither. Mercedes basically ran Chrysler into the ground.

However, that isn't to say there isn't fault on these shores. In this case the big US villain would be the unions. When contract time came Ford and GM were in bad shape. The unions saw this and gave each of them a break. Chrysler wanted the same deal. But, the unions saw German money behind Chrysler and figured they could hold out. That was about the time that Mercedes moved from trying to make it work to, screw this, milk it then kill it.

In the end it isn't too bad that Chrysler nearly killed Mercedes. No, it's almost the other way around except that Mercedes isn't liked to die though it's mismanagement of Chrysler has effectively killed the company. I don't see the Fiat deal really saving it in the end. I suspect Jeep will be all that's left in a few years.

[Spastik_Roach]

I'm gutted for Saab. Huge fan of Saabs myself, think they're very classy cars. Seems the niche got too small, aided by mismanagement. bugger..

[culver]

I'm gutted for Saab. Huge fan of Saabs myself, think they're very classy cars. Seems the niche got too small, aided by mismanagement. bugger..

I think that's a very fair assesment. Their niche was small and the market they wanted to play in was getting VERY crowded. In the US their weren't many practical, sporty, entry level luxury cars in the 1980s and even in the early 90s. However, things really started to change in the mid 90s. BMW was really rising as the 3 series was getting large enough to temp Americans. The Audi A4 was a nice offering. The Japanese were also getting into that market. It became very crowed. Sure SAABs had character but they also had problems and character or not they often weren't great when compared to the competition. They couldn't win based on reliability. They had the hatchback for a while but seemed to have forgotten when new models came out. They were sporty in their own way but that way typically wasn't as good as the German way. They had fun turbo motors but eventually everyone caught up in power. They had good seats... well no one really caught up there. They were safe. Well so was just about everything in the entry level luxury catagory. In the end many of SAABs good features were shared with others. Few things made them stand out. It's just too bad you can't break even on say 60,000 sales per year.

[Ferrer]

Don't know in the US, but in Europe their main problem is that they are not German. Here, all premium manufacturers that are not German (including Alfa Romeo, Lancia, Volvo, Saab, Jaguar,...) have struggled to compete with the Germans (BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Audi) in quality, resources and most of all sales, especially from the 90s. There was the perception, and there still is in many cases, that if the car isn't German and it is expensive it must be bad, or it must break down all the time or it isn't as high quality as the other, or whatever you can think of.

Of course at the same because they had no sales, that meant no volume, and that in the modern world of globalisation and regulations meant they simply couldn't stay with the Germans in terms of development, engineering and technology. The fact of the matter is though, that up until the 90's all those oddball manufacturers made perfectly good cars that were competitive within the market, and each had its own distinct character.

And that's what has ended up killing them, or making them little more than posh rebadged version of mainstream cars.

[Kitdy]

The Germans also enjoy a position of status that their non-German opponents don't really have.

You sound sad for this though Ferrer, what do you propose be different? How would you have saved these smaller manufacturers from the axe?

[Ferrer]

The Germans also enjoy a position of status that their non-German opponents don't really have.

You sound sad for this though Ferrer, what do you propose be different? How would you have saved these smaller manufacturers from the axe?
I'd say that the only solution is the Jag way, which finally seems to be working. Less volume and more price. Of course that could still go wrong, but images can be overturned, as Audi demonstrated. Or if costumers weren't so damn stupid, these manufacturers could rely more on volume.

The thing is not that long ago those car manufacturers were making great cars. And some of them still are damn good. Why do people not buy them?

[IBrake4Rainbows]

it's a sad prospect, for sure. But is it really that surprising?

I mean, who is the market for Saab? Quirky Semi-Professionals in roles like "Creative Consultants" who have a large disposable income and see fit to spend their money on a car with nearly zero badge cache for anyone except those in the know? Those people drive Hybrids these days, or ride a bike to "save the planet".

Saab's customers are people who hold onto their vehicles. Those who were new to the brand are looking at them in the same breath as an Audi or BMW. Both, in my opinion, better choices in their respective markets.

GM's patronage of Saab is marked as an entirely uncreative company being put in charge of a true individual, and having very little idea of what to do with it. Indecision, problems at home, poor product choices and undesirable product have all conspired to send Saab to the grave.

In the end even those who wanted to bid on it were either being charged too much by GM for a company that hasn't made a profit in what, 15 years? or couldn't justify the expense.

Would Saab work as a niche product? well, what sort of niche? The Premium market it currently sits in has too much competition for it to be anything but a brave choice.

[G35COUPE]

My anger at GM management cannot be measured with any modern instrument or tool.

[Roentgen]

“We will work closely with the Saab organization to wind down the business in an orderly and responsible manner,” said Reilly.

Simply translated as: "We will now put an end to Saab. R.I.P."

GM is run by a bunch of *insert swear word, starting with f, ending with ucking, here* idiots. End of.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Not all companies could have saved their asses just heightening the prices and lowering the volumes, the market isn't large enough for everybody and badge recognition would have entered the picture once again in the end.

Maybe some of them could have. Saab, Jaguar and Alfa Romeo (except that AR would enter Maserati territory, no go there...). I don't know if Volvo could for example, I think they should be more of a rock solid everyday car rather than a luxurious yet uber-safe sedan (or whatever it should be).

What pisses me the most is that of the four companies up for sale at GM, the only one (still) alive is HUMMER.
WTF.

[Kitdy]

Word (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/19/report-swedish-government-to-meet-with-gm-officials-could-saa/) from Motor Trend is that the Swedish government will have emergency meetings this weekend in an attempt to save Saab.

It ain't over yet.

[LeonOfTheDead]

With 4.000 directly employed people, plus all the suppliers, it doesn't really suprise me, as Germany was about to declare war to GM for 9.000 workers, but in a country with a population of 82.000.000 VS Sweden's 9.000.000.

[Ferrer]

It'd be a big hit for Sweden indeed. And Volvo doesn't seem all that safe either.

[NSXType-R]

Not all companies could have saved their asses just heightening the prices and lowering the volumes, the market isn't large enough for everybody and badge recognition would have entered the picture once again in the end.

Maybe some of them could have. Saab, Jaguar and Alfa Romeo (except that AR would enter Maserati territory, no go there...). I don't know if Volvo could for example, I think they should be more of a rock solid everyday car rather than a luxurious yet uber-safe sedan (or whatever it should be).

What pisses me the most is that of the four companies up for sale at GM, the only one (still) alive is HUMMER.
WTF.

I still don't like the fact that they killed Pontiac to save Buick. From what I see, Buick has no future. Besides, their spokesman just got a whole less popular. :D


It'd be a big hit for Sweden indeed. And Volvo doesn't seem all that safe either.

Ford might sell Volvo huh?

[LeonOfTheDead]

Ford might sell Volvo huh?

Ford wants to sell Volvo, since a year or more. Another company from China is in the lead, I think Geely.

[NSXType-R]

Ford wants to sell Volvo, since a year or more. Another company from China is in the lead, I think Geely.

Sounds stupid. Ford should get rid of Mercury instead. I don't think they own much of Mazda anymore right?

[Ferrer]

Sounds stupid. Ford should get rid of Mercury instead. I don't think they own much of Mazda anymore right?
The Chinese may only want to buy the technology, not the brand though, which is what they wanted to do with Saab.

As for Mazda, yes Ford sold their shares but they will still collaborate with them very closely. For selling their stake in Mazda was because they needed to raise cash fast.

[G35COUPE]

Yep, Ford is in talks to sell Volvo to Geely of China. Its amazing how cheaply and easily the Chinese are getting technologies that took more than half a decade to develop and perfect from western nations. Western civilization is allowing market principles to rob them of tangible and intangible outcomes/factors of sustained competitive advantage. One day, many of us will be driving Geely Motors, and maybe one day, on UCP, we will be discussing Geely Motors.

[LeonOfTheDead]

The Chinese may only want to buy the technology, not the brand though, which is what they wanted to do with Saab.

As for Mazda, yes Ford sold their shares but they will still collaborate with them very closely. For selling their stake in Mazda was because they needed to raise cash fast.

I thought Geely was a bit more serious in wanting the whole package with Volvo, as it is a more appealing brand, but that could be the case nonetheless.

Oh, G35, it isn't that the Chinese are robbing anything, other companies are selling what they are getting for that price, so if someone is doing or has done something wrong, it was exactly those huge companies that now can't survive with everything they've bought in the past.
Fisker bought a plant in Michigan worth in the 3 digits range and payed only 18 M $, but I didn't heard you complaining about that.

[twinspark]

Spyker has made a new offer, which it states will remove the issues that the earlier negotiations had. I doubt it, but hopefully the story of Saab isn't over just yet.

[Dino Scuderia]

Sounds stupid. Ford should get rid of Mercury instead. I don't think they own much of Mazda anymore right?

You can't sell your upper line brands...those inflated sticker prices on those cars are what pays for development of new products.

[Wouter Melissen]

Spyker press release:


The Netherlands (20 December, 2009) – Following the announcement on Friday that the intended sales terms of Saab Automobile AB between Spyker and General Motors (GM) could not be finalized, the Spyker leadership has submitted a renewed offer in the hopes of securing a future for Saab, its employees and the brand – despite the announcement that the winding down of Saab would begin.

Spyker CEO Victor R. Muller said today that an 11-point proposal had been submitted to GM, addressing each of the issues that arose during the due diligence process and that the renewed offer would remove each of the obstacles that were standing in the way of a swift transaction.

"We have made every effort to resolve the issues that were preventing the conclusion of this matter and we have asked GM and all other involved parties to seriously consider this offer," said Muller.
"We are very confident that our renewed offer will remove the impasse that was standing in the way of an agreement on Friday, and this would still allow us to conclude the deal prior to the expiry of the deadline originally set by GM of December 31st", said Muller.

"Despite our collective eleventh hour set-back, we are returning to the table with a renewed offer, that addresses every known issue brought to light during the initial negotiations and that has the full backing of the Saab Management. The new offer eliminates the need for an EIB loan approval prior to year end, for example, which will allow the deal to be concluded within GM's deadline. Our efforts are based on our passion for saving an iconic brand that we would be honoured to shepherd, and the jobs and livelihoods of thousands of loyal Saab employees, suppliers and dealers around the world. Some 1,500,000 Saabs are on the road today and their proud owners would no doubt welcome the survival of this phenomenal brand", he added.

In Spyker's view, the ownership of Saab by Spyker Cars would add a lot of value to both parties. For Spyker, Saab would bring a strong, global distribution network consisting of no less than 1100 dealers, state-of-the-art production facilities, a truly dedicated work force and solid engineering, sourcing and research & development capabilities. Likewise, Saab would receive the financial backing required to compete as a competitive global brand, along with an entrepreneurial leadership team sensitive to the uniqueness, heritage and individuality of the Saab brand. Throughout these negotiations, both Spyker and Saab leadership have proven that they share a mutual vision for just such a partnership.

"Our company motto is nulla tenaci invia est via - for the tenacious no road is impassable," said Muller, "And we intend to remain true to that throughout these negotiations as we bid to secure Saab's future and revive the company."

The renewed Spyker offer is valid until 5pm (Eastern Standard Time) on Monday December 21, 2009.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I'd dare to say Spyker made the new offer hoping for some heavy backing from the Swedish government.

EDIT: removed the PR, Wouter was quicker...

[LeonOfTheDead]

Following Friday's announcement that GM will begin the orderly wind down of Saab, GM has received inquiries from several parties. We will evaluate each inquiry. We will not comment further until these evaluations have been completed.

several?!

[Chrischrill]

Well, since Koenigsegg gave up, the media have been looking at this whole issue as dead. I regard these "new inquiries" as bullshit. Heck, the whole town of Trollhättan, where many SAABs are built, is basically doomed unless our government steps in to save the jobs

[Ferrer]

Maybe KFL should apply...

[culver]

Maybe SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/static/split.htm) will buy back SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/static/split.htm) :D

[LeonOfTheDead]

Maybe SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/static/split.htm) will buy back SAAB (http://www.saabgroup.com/static/split.htm) :D

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.

[Timothy (in VA)]

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?

Just different enough. Personally, I'd much rather have a Mariner than an Escape, simply because it is nicer inside and, in my opinion, better looking outside - and, like I said before, it's rarer. My perception is that people who buy Mercurys are a bit more in the know; they won't settle for something that everyone else has.


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.


A few years ago, I would have said that Lincoln should stick to larger cars, but that's not really an option any more. I'd like to see either Lincoln or Mercury offer products that are truly different from the other Ford divisions, but with today's financial considerations that may not be feasible. I'm not an auto exec, so I can't say with certainty what they can and cannot do.

Also, I don't know that Lincoln will ever have enough volume to warrant having their own standalone dealerships, so if they shut down Mercury, where would that leave Lincoln-Mercury dealerships? I guess they would have to merge with Ford dealerships, like Chrysler is doing with its brands.

I guess I'm just a sentimentalist. What I'd really like to see is Ford bring over European Fords as Mercurys, since they are typically more high-class than American Fords, but if they do go through with their plans to unify their global product lines I guess there won't be much point.


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

I don't know. :\

[Ferrer]

I guess I'm just a sentimentalist. What I'd really like to see is Ford bring over European Fords as Mercurys, since they are typically more high-class than American Fords, but if they do go through with their plans to unify their global product lines I guess there won't be much point.
That could make a lot of sense.

[nota]

Is Spyker a 'clean money' entity of which the US Govt would wish to be publically associated?

[LeonOfTheDead]

That could make a lot of sense.

See Buick & Opel.

[Ferrer]

See Buick & Opel.
Indeed. It'd also give Mercury different cars that Ford US without having to spend nothing in engineering new cars. However for some reason they brought the Fiesta as a Ford, so I guess this plan is already a no go.

[Badsight]

As far as I know, Saab was never a massive money maker, but a small car factory which made well enginereed cars .
debateable

you ever had to work on them ?

[Ferrer]

debateable

you ever had to work on them ?
I'm not a mechanic.

[culver]

I can only speak for the second gen 900 and a bit on the 9000. Those were mixed bags. They had some really well thought out bits but they were also by necessity parts bin cars. This could be very frustrating at times. Most manufactures stick to a few fastener sizes. Mazda uses 10,12,14, and 17mm almost exclusively. SAABs got just about everything thanks to sourcing parts from all over the place. At the time they weren't fully wed to GM so while the car gets a lot from GM, they also used other suppliers. Under the hood things were packaged almost where ever there was space. That makes a few jobs very difficult simply due to access issues.

Other parts of the car have very clever ideas such as the system used to fold the rear seats. In the end you get the feeling the guys could have come up with a good car had they had the volume to really get all the sub-parts custom setup for their needs. Instead you have a mixed bag of good ideas and what necessity thrust on them.

I would think the cars designed under full GM ownership would likely be better, not worse than the older cars.

[Ferrer]

I was referring to pre-GM Saabs. The original 900 had double wishbones all round and the engine and gearbox were cleverly positioned so that it wasn't very nose heavy. I don't know however if they were service-friendly at all.

[LeonOfTheDead]

There were some interesting prototypes and ideas about engines at beginning of the GM era too, but all we got were the first low pressure turbo engines.

[twinspark]

I was referring to pre-GM Saabs. The original 900 had double wishbones all round and the engine and gearbox were cleverly positioned so that it wasn't very nose heavy. I don't know however if they were service-friendly at all.

IIRC the OG 900's had a beam axle rear suspension. Either way, there's lots and lots of those still on the streets here, partially because they were built here too. But they're not among the first ones to stop moving either.

[Revo]

I was referring to pre-GM Saabs. The original 900 had double wishbones all round and the engine and gearbox were cleverly positioned so that it wasn't very nose heavy. I don't know however if they were service-friendly at all.
Correction: rear suspension isn't independent double wishbone, it's dead axle.

As a 900 Mk1 owner, I can say that one too has its fair share of embarrassing engineering failures.

The battery is located right next to the exhaust pipe from turbo. Yes, it is a perfect place for a battery meltdown. Saab's "solution" - use non standard sized battery (read: all battery producers have stopped making it long ago due to lack of demand) and cover it with heat shield made of asbestos. Which detoriates after every couple of years.

It is not like there isn't room in the engine bay. For gods sake, there is always an option to place battery in the trunk if every other idea fails.

Then there are notoriously weak geaboxes. Purely engineering failure again.

[Ferrer]

My mistake. Still and despite some questionable engineering decisions, as Revo explains, there still wer some interesting left-field touches. Or at least I thought there were.

And I always liked the styling and the practicality... :o

If the A5 Sportback can succeed, why can't Saab? Can someone explain it to me?

[LeonOfTheDead]

My mistake. Still and despite some questionable engineering decisions, as Revo explains, there still wer some interesting left-field touches. Or at least I thought there were.

And I always liked the styling and the practicality... :o

If the A5 Sportback can succeed, why can't Saab? Can someone explain it to me?

OOOO

'nough, unfortunately.

[Revo]

My mistake. Still and despite some questionable engineering decisions, as Revo explains, there still wer some interesting left-field touches. Or at least I thought there were.

And I always liked the styling and the practicality... :o
Again you are making way too extreme conclusions :p

My post was supposed to demonstrate that the world isn't as black and white as many here would like to belive.

In spite of all its faults, Saab 900 Mk1 Turbo is still a worthy icon. I quite simply love it.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

But it's an Icon in today's world, seen as a relic to the hedonistic days of the 80's.

I wonder how well a large, 3 door hatchback with whale tail spoiler and upright windscreen would do in todays market.

[Ferrer]

People still lust after Jags or Bimmers. And they've had about the same receipe for... well almost forever.

Why can't the icon be updated and modernised and still be bought?

By the way, I saw a Saab Turbo X estate yesterday. It looked nice.

[culver]

But it's an Icon in today's world, seen as a relic to the hedonistic days of the 80's.

I wonder how well a large, 3 door hatchback with whale tail spoiler and upright windscreen would do in todays market.

Well the 911 almost fits the bill :D

[G35COUPE]

My friend could not find the radiator cap in his older model Saab. His car was overheating. He was baffled by this.

[G35COUPE]

I will never know why GM stopped making the Cadillac Catera. The Catera seemed like a European model Opel that was brought to the US. The interior was awesome.

[Ferrer]

I will never know why GM stopped making the Cadillac Catera. The Catera seemed like a European model Opel that was brought to the US. The interior was awesome.
The Catera was the Opel Omega. Apparently early models suffered from unusual tyre wear because the suspension was tuned for high speed European driving.

[Revo]

My friend could not find the radiator cap in his older model Saab. His car was overheating. He was baffled by this.
That is right, older Saab models have their cooling system welded shut. With lifetime guarantee.

Now, talking seriously - what model are we talking about? Did he look for the expansion tank?

[G35COUPE]

That is right, older Saab models have their cooling system welded shut. With lifetime guarantee.

Now, talking seriously - what model are we talking about? Did he look for the expansion tank?

I have no idea what model it was. I forgot. We spent a good 20 minutes looking for the radiator cap. We were both baffled and confused. He actually bought it used.

[Wouter Melissen]

I have no idea what model it was. I forgot. We spent a good 20 minutes looking for the radiator cap. We were both baffled and confused. He actually bought it used.

There was no manual?

[culver]

I will never know why GM stopped making the Cadillac Catera. The Catera seemed like a European model Opel that was brought to the US. The interior was awesome.

Ever wonder where the "C" in CTS comes from. The Catera name was dropped. The CTS is in a sense in it's third generation. The Catera chassis did make it back to the US as the GTO.

The new CTS is a better car than the Catera. I did like the Catera's interior and would love to transplant the GTO's 6L motor and manual into one.

[Ferrer]

The new CTS is a better car than the Catera. I did like the Catera's interior and would love to transplant the GTO's 6L motor and manual into one.
Call Opel, they may know a thing or two about it.

Opel Omega - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Omega#Opel_Omega_V8_.28prototypes.29)

2001 Opel Omega V8 Images, Information and History | Conceptcarz.com (http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z2920/Opel-Omega-V8.aspx)

[nota]

The Catera chassis did make it back to the US as the GTO.

Technically no. The Catera (Omega B) unibody differed substantially to Pontiac's 'new' GTO, which was a rebadged Holden Commodore.

[henk4]

some of the latest rumours
the new 9-5 will be produced as a Buick. Scrapping the brand name SAAB just avoids bankruptcy...
GM is also looking for options to reintroduce a larger Opel as a successor to the Senator.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I hope the new car will survive somehow, new Opel Omega, anyone?


In before GM.

[Ferrer]

Opel 9-5 will fail heavily in today's market.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Opel 9-5 will fail heavily in today's market.

Still better than a whole project trashed when finished.

[Ferrer]

Still better than a whole project trashed when finished.
I guess it would still fare better in sedan-loving America than here. In Europe no one will buy a big saloon that isn't premium.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I guess it would still fare better in sedan-loving America than here. In Europe no one will buy a big saloon that isn't premium.

Sure.
I'd sell it both as a Buick and as an Opel if Saab was to be dropped, trying to get as much sales as possible.
I think it's style is closer to Opel's, but Buick should be OK as well.

[Ferrer]

Also, isn't the Insignia about as big?

AFAIK it also has the same engine lineup.

[henk4]

Sorry guys, the 9-5 and the new Opel (if it comes) will be totally different cars, not a re-badging effort.

[LeonOfTheDead]

The Insignia is 4,83 meters long, with a wheel base of 2,74.
The 9-5 is 5,01 meters long and the wheel base is 2,83.

The differences are of 24 cm and 9 cm respectively.
About the engines, it's the same case with many other companies, just avoid the smaller engine in the larger model and add a more powerful one (perhaps with more cylinders) for the more expensive version of the same larger car. Done.

Between an E90 3er and an E60 5er there are differences of 32 and 12 cm, would be curious to know how it will be with both the new generations.

At Audi, the gaps are of 22 cm and just 3 cm for the wheels base (which explain why the new A4 looks so squashed).

At Mercedes we have a difference of 29 cm for as regards the length, and 11 cm for as regards the wheel base.

So far, the 9-5 is enormous, but it's about as larger than the Insignia as with the competion and their smaller sisters. The new E-Klasse is weirdly small, with just 4,87 meters of length. the new F10 5er is 4,89 meters long but has a wheel base of 2,97, the longer of them all.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Sorry guys, the 9-5 and the new Opel (if it comes) will be totally different cars, not a re-badging effort.

Why that?
I can see a new interior and front/rear would be necessary, but other than that I wouldn't spend much money on it, given it won't match the competition of the Germans no matter how good it is. Also, the previous flagship from Opel was a bit of a failure.

[henk4]

Why that?
I can see a new interior and front/rear would be necessary, but other than that I wouldn't spend much money on it, given it won't match the competition of the Germans no matter how good it is. Also, the previous flagship from Opel was a bit of a failure.
I think they are looking for a Senator successor, which was RWD.

[Ferrer]

The Insignia is 4,83 meters long, with a wheel base of 2,74.
The 9-5 is 5,01 meters long and the wheel base is 2,83.
I thought the difference was smaller. In fact the 9-5 is almost as big as the S-Classes and 7ers.

I will still fail though. :(

[henk4]

I thought the difference was smaller. In fact the 9-5 is almost as big as the S-Classes and 7ers.

I will still fail though. :(

probably not as a Buick in China though, where the brand is highly popular.

[LeonOfTheDead]

probably not as a Buick in China though, where the brand is highly popular.

And where people go mad for LWB versions of the A4, A6, 5er and so on, rather than just buying the larger model.

[f6fhellcat13]

Another lease of life (briefly).

Automotive News reports GM will restart some production lines in January including the 2010 Saab 9-5. So Saab's alive. For the moment anyway.

"We are preparing the wind-down process. At the same time we are open to options, to bids that come in. Therefore the deadline has also been dropped," Saab spokesman Eric Geers told Automotive News.

Saab will restart some production lines again in January for its new 9-5 model. "We have the orders and we have to deliver them as usual. We also have the orders for the 9-3 and others. The factory has to continue again," Geers said.

GM was still in talks with potential bidders for its Swedish unit but Geers only named Spyker Cars and declined to talk about other parties.

Merbanco Inc., a Wyoming-based group, has been named in the media as another Saab bidder.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I didn't understand if they are going to build the new 9-5 for actual customers or for pre-production/press events/whatever.
As far as I understood there are a good quantity of orders for the 9-3 Cabriolet as well.

[jaromull]

Volvo cars were always prefered by even Swedish people before SAAB products, during last 25 years at least. But still the SAAB cars were ever sound and smart-looking designs, many of them quite un-orthodox ones...
Well, still I think that SAAB was killed by the GM high-brass policy and management. We can discuss the possibility of SAAB to shut down even sooner if it were not taken over by GM, but who knows..
It is very sad that so few traditional Europian car-producing companies remained Europian in fact...

[Ferrer]

It is very sad that so few traditional Europian car-producing companies remained Europian in fact...
There are still many cases of European car makers staying European, like VAG, Daimler or PSA. Some even have a stake in overseas car makers like Renault and FGA.

[LeonOfTheDead]

What is actually sad is that a few traditional brands manage to survive living up to their tradition.

[Ferrer]

The problem is that these days if it's not German it must be rubbish, and costs have spiralled in such a way that without volume you can't support a car manufacturing bussiness. So that counts out pretty much everything that was interesting.

[Ferrer]

It seems like Saab is definitely terminated.

GM Media - United States - News & Information (http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_gm.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/Jan/0108_Saab)

[cargirl1990]

I may not be a Saab person but I was sad when Pontiac had to go and I think Saab was so underadvertised. It kinda does suck a bit.

[Kitdy]

It seems like Saab is definitely terminated.

GM Media - United States - News & Information (http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_gm.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/Jan/0108_Saab)

I've heard elsewhere while they star the shut down process they are still looking for someone to sell it too - Spyker and Gennii with (oh dear lord) Bernie Ecclestone of all people are in the running too.

I think Saab is dead though.

[Ferrer]

Saab not quite dead yet?

Report: GM/Spyker near agreement, Spyker chairman to step down? — Autoblog (http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/24/report-gm-spyker-near-agreement-spyker-chairman-to-step-down/)

Also it seems that 9-5 Estate mules continue to be tested, maybe an indicator?

[Kitdy]

Saab not quite dead yet?

Report: GM/Spyker near agreement, Spyker chairman to step down? — Autoblog (http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/24/report-gm-spyker-near-agreement-spyker-chairman-to-step-down/)

Also it seems that 9-5 Estate mules continue to be tested, maybe an indicator?

Doesn't this whole game seem like it's just prolonging what's gonna happen anyways? If it does happen, I think even with Spyker and money from the Swedish government I still think Saab is gonna die soon after.

[kingofthering]

... Bernie Ecclestone of all people are in the running too.

I think Saab is dead though.

So part of Saab's annual profit will mysteriously end up in a Ferrari bank account? :D

[Ferrer]

Doesn't this whole game seem like it's just prolonging what's gonna happen anyways? If it does happen, I think even with Spyker and money from the Swedish government I still think Saab is gonna die soon after.
Maybe, be until they go bust there's still hope, and hope is the last thing ro be lost.

I think Koenigsegg's plan wasn't all that bad, Saab become a more expensive nich player. Quality and profits over volume is what could save many of those premium manufacturers.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Even with a hugely wealthy investor a company like Jaguar is still leaking money.

Saab must be swedish for "flogging a dead horse"

[Ferrer]

Even with a hugely wealthy investor a company like Jaguar is still leaking money.

Saab must be swedish for "flogging a dead horse"
I believe they are not anymore. I'll try finding it.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Jaguar have had to write off the investment in new architectures and models, along with massive prior debt.

They're still a loss making enterprise.

[Ferrer]

There it is.

REPORT: Tata Motors back in the black as Jaguar/Land Rover fortunes improve — Autoblog (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/30/report-tata-motors-back-in-the-black-as-jaguar-land-rover-fortu/)

Of course, as you say it's not all done. But don't dismiss them just yet.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Making product people want to buy? what a novel concept!

I maintain that most of that improvement in sales was from Jaguars end, but I'm concerned that once mr Tata passes on (he is getting to be nearly 80) his predecessors will see these companies less as prestige marks and more like blots.

[Ferrer]

That could happen, but still it doesn't mean they can't turn a profit and be run as normal bussiness winning money. They just have to find their place, because as we've seen repeteadly it's no good trying to beat the Germans at its own game, so it's better to find you own different from them game. Be it quality, going downmarket, become a niche player, or whatever works.

[twinspark]

Swedish news sites are reporting that the sale is done and there should be a confirmation from both sides later today.

I don't see Saab's near future very bright either, but I wouldn't think they might as well be written off just yet. Of course a lot depends on the new 9-5 and it's pricing.

Edit: GM CEO Ed Whitacre just told in a press conference, that there is no news in Saab issue. So no sale so far, apparently.

[cargirl1990]

Barely anyone paid attention to these cars.

[Ferrer]

Barely anyone pays attention to something that's not German. And thanks to their idiocy it's our loss too.

[cargirl1990]

Barely anyone pays attention to something that's not German. And thanks to their idiocy it's our loss too.

LOL. I think all car companies have potential. Its just its the design, parts that they use, and advertising. In the case of Saab, it never seemed to work.

[twinspark]

Barely anyone paid attention to these cars.

I know it's inappropriate to feed the troll, but was there thousands of car owners showing their support in convoys and gatherings all around the world when Pontiac or Oldsmobile was killed?

[Ferrer]

LOL. I think all car companies have potential. Its just its the design, parts that they use, and advertising. In the case of Saab, it never seemed to work.
Some of the late GM-designed cars might not have been the best of choices, but overall Saabs presented and interesting, different and sometimes even quirky mix that used to work. So the word never is inappropiate.

[nota]

I know it's inappropriate to feed the troll, but was there thousands of car owners showing their support in convoys and gatherings all around the world when Pontiac or Oldsmobile was killed?
At the risk of being labelled a troll, there weren't any wakes of measure held in this part of 'all the world' for the passing of SAAB either. Few noticed and less cared. I guess its because its a long broken brand which hereabouts in recent times has literally had more models than customers.

Where lies the future saviour of SAAB, and where is their saviour? Is it to be Spyker, a dubious entity which last year iirc sold 23 cars? So at least there is common ground among the two, albeit in stark terms a commonality of irrelevancy.

[wwgkd]

I know it's inappropriate to feed the troll, but was there thousands of car owners showing their support in convoys and gatherings all around the world when Pontiac or Oldsmobile was killed?

I never saw a gathering like that for saab, but I saw several for Pontiac. I think location may be key there.

[Kitdy]

Some of the late GM-designed cars might not have been the best of choices, but overall Saabs presented and interesting, different and sometimes even quirky mix that used to work. So the word never is inappropiate.

Do you that Saab would have been viable without GM? Would customers in this increasingly advanced, homogenized, and globalized world of cars would have bought them?

Saab I feel were screwed with or without GM. GM had the money to keep them afloat.

Were they profitable pre-GM or post GM?

[wwgkd]

Do you that Saab would have been viable without GM? Would customers in this increasingly advanced, homogenized, and globalized world of cars would have bought them?

Saab I feel were screwed with or without GM. GM had the money to keep them afloat.

Were they profitable pre-GM or post GM?

I have to agree with you. As has been discussed before, it's really hard these days to build something truly different and turn a profit. Saab couldn't have been a vanilla builder relying on large volume, yet neither could they have stayed afloat building truly unique cars at a low volume.

[Ferrer]

Do you that Saab would have been viable without GM? Would customers in this increasingly advanced, homogenized, and globalized world of cars would have bought them?

Saab I feel were screwed with or without GM. GM had the money to keep them afloat.

Were they profitable pre-GM or post GM?
AFAIK they were profitable in the pre-GM era. Not big profits, but enough to go along.

What would've happened if GM hand't bought them? Nobody knows. Could they have survived? Possibly. Could they have gone bust? Possibly, as well.

Volume is certainly important these days. But there's a second way in which you specialize and survive. It's certainly not easy. But it's not impossible either.

[twinspark]

At the risk of being labelled a troll, there weren't any wakes of measure held in this part of 'all the world' for the passing of SAAB either.

I never saw a gathering like that for saab, but I saw several for Pontiac. I think location may be key there.

Probably most of those rallies are mentioned at the end of this post (http://www.saabsunited.com/2010/01/saab-sale-update---bees-genitals-edition.html). Sure, many of especially the North American ones only had a few cars, but then again there was also many of those with more than a hundred cars. Maybe it is the location, but I would suppose Pontiac fans' conventions were practically concentrated in just North America?

It was just the 'Barely anyone' one liner that triggered my well refined sense of provocation. :rolleyes:

[Wouter Melissen]

Deal is done:


GENERAL MOTORS AND SPYKER CARS REACH AGREEMENT ON SAAB


GM and Spyker Cars announce a binding agreement over the transfer of ownership of Saab

Terms are agreed and the deal is expected to close in February

Saab's future as an independent company is secured

Saab will exit the orderly wind-down process

Spyker shareholders will restructure at closure of the deal

Swedish Government issues guarantee in favour of EIB



ZEEWOLDE, The Netherlands (26 January, 2010) - General Motors Company and Spyker Cars N.V, today confirmed the details of a binding agreement over the transfer of ownership of Saab Automobile AB of Trollhättan, Sweden. The transaction is expected to close in February and Saab Automobile will exit the orderly wind down process in line with that timetable.



The transaction will be accomplished as follows:



Spyker acquires from Saab Automobile Investering AB, a subsidiary of General Motors ("GM"), all the issued and outstanding ordinary shares in the capital of Saab Automobile A.B. ("Saab") for a consideration of USD 74 million ("Purchase Price").



The Purchase Price will be paid in two instalments. The first instalment of USD 50 million will be paid on the date of completion of the transaction, expected to take place on or before February 15, 2010 ("the Closing"). The second instalment of USD 24 million will be paid on July 15, 2010.



The Share Purchase Agreement is subject to the execution of a EUR 400 million loan agreement between Saab and the European Investment Bank ("EIB"), guaranteed by the Swedish Government. Today, the Swedish government announced approval of this guarantee. The guarantee is subject to approval by the European Commission, which is expected shortly.



Upon completion of the transaction GM will retain redeemable preference shares of USD 326 million. The preference shares represent less than 1% of the voting rights in the capital of Saab. The mandatory redemption date is 31 December 2016 and Saab has the right to request voluntary redemption at any time prior to this date. The preference shares carry a dividend entitlement of 6% starting from January 2012, increasing to 12% as from July 1, 2014. The dividend over 2012 will be added to the principal, but as from January 1, 2013 the dividend is payable in cash. Should Saab have insufficient distributable reserves to pay the cash dividend it will be added to principal increased with a penalty factor.



In order to allow Saab to operate on a stand-alone basis outside GM, Saab and GM will enter into a number of ancillary agreements. As part of the transaction, Spyker intends to negotiate the acquisition of all the outstanding shares in Saab Great Britain Limited, the UK distribution, marketing and sales company for Saab from General Motors UK Limited.



Spyker will issue a corporate guarantee not exceeding USD 10 million for Saab's obligations to and for the benefit of the financing company GMAC.



Spyker will as soon as practically possible convene a general meeting of shareholders to approve the transaction. Spyker obtained irrevocable voting undertakings to vote in favour of the transaction representing the voting majority of its current shareholders.



It is the intention to change the name of Spyker Cars N.V. at that general meeting of shareholders to Saab Spyker Automobiles N.V.



As back-up financing, Spyker entered into a EUR 150 million Equity Credit Line Facility with GEM Global Yield Fund Limited ("GEM") for a term of 3 years. According to this facility, Spyker may issue shares to GEM at 90 per cent of the volume weighted average price of the shares over a period of 15 trading days following a draw down notice sent to GEM by Spyker. In relation to the GEM facility, Spyker has issued to GEM share warrants in respect of 1,570,000 ordinary shares at an exercise price of EUR 4 per ordinary share. The warrants have a 5 year term.



The object of acquisition



In spite of media reports that certain parts have already been sold off, the object is Saab as a complete entity and going concern with all IP rights, trademarks, facilities and other infrastructures. The sale of pre 2003 Saab 9-3 and current Saab 9-5 technology to BAIC in December 2009 did not result in any part of Saab's business being divested or devalued. On the contrary, Saab has already started the production of the new generation Saab 9-5 in Trollhättan.



Both Saab management and Saab GB management prepared an estimated balance sheet as at 31 December 2009 for the purpose of this transaction. These estimated balance sheets are still subject to final account closing and audit procedures.



Spyker Cars does not yet have a balance sheet as at 31 December 2009 ready for reporting purposes. As such, it would be premature to show a pro-forma combined balance sheet for Spyker, Saab and Saab GB as at 31 December 2009.



Therefore Spyker only disclose an indicative combined balance sheet of Saab and Saab GB as at Closing date based on the estimated balance sheets for both entities as at 31 December 2009, adjusted for the impact of the transaction items as at Closing date.



It should be noted that the indicative closing balance sheet is based on the latest estimated balance sheets of both entities by Saab and Saab GB management which are subject to final closing and audit procedures and therefore subject to change, and does not reflect any potential fair value or purchase price allocation adjustments. The indicative closing balance sheet should therefore not be considered as the actual closing balance sheet, but only as an indication for the assets and liabilities to be acquired at closing date.





(The balance sheet is visible in the PDF version of the report)





Saab's and Saab GB's combined revenue amounted to some EUR 1.0 billion in 2009 (2008: EUR 1.6 billion). Earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation amounted to EUR 0.4 billion negative in 2009 (2008: EUR 0.3 billion negative). In 2009 Saab sold 39.903 cars and produced 20.791 cars versus selling 94.751 cars in 2008 and producing 89.086 cars.

[Wouter Melissen]

Continued:


RESTRUCTURING AND MANAGEMENT BUY-OUT



As from Closing of the Saab acquisition, the ownership structure of Spyker will change as follows:



Tenaci Capital B.V. ("Tenaci"), a company wholly owned by Mr. V.R. Muller has made a successful bid on Mr. V. Antonov's current shareholding in Spyker consisting of 4.6 million ordinary shares. As agreed in 2007, when Mr V. Antonov acquired his shares in Spyker, Mr. V. Antonov will cause the transfer of the priority share to Spyker if and when he would dispose of his shareholding. A resolution to cancel the priority share will be proposed at the upcoming EGM.



Messrs. N. Stancikas, M. Bondars and Mr. V. Antonov will retire as members of Spyker's Supervisory Board effective as per the date of Closing.



Tenaci will grant to Spyker two loans. One for an amount of USD 25 million towards payment of part of the Purchase Price for Saab upon completion of the transaction. A second loan for an amount of EUR 57 million for repayment of all of Spyker's current outstanding loans to banks and other financial institutions controlled directly, or indirectly by Mr. V. Antonov. This loan mirrors the existing terms (including the lender's right to convert EUR 9.5 million into ordinary shares at a conversion price of EUR 4.00 per share).



The sale will be subject to customary closing conditions, including receipt of applicable regulatory, governmental and court approvals. Other terms and conditions specific to the sale are not being disclosed at this time.



Victor R. Muller, Spyker's CEO, stated: "We are very much looking forward to being part of the next chapter in Saab's illustrious history. Saab is an iconic brand that we are honoured to shepherd. We are delighted to have secured the jobs and livelihoods of thousands of loyal Saab employees, suppliers and dealers and to have given reassurance to the 1.5 million Saab drivers and enthusiasts around the world. It was breathtaking to see so much support from the global Saab community over the last months which not only shows the strength of the brand but also helped us in our relentless determination to get the deal done."



"Spyker Cars will provide Saab with the backing required to compete as a competitive global brand along with an entrepreneurial leadership team sensitive to the uniqueness, heritage and individuality of the Saab brand. I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to Vladimir Antonov for his formidable support during the past two years. His contribution has allowed Spyker to get to the point that this transaction was made possible. I also want to extend my gratitude to Messrs. Stancikas and Bondars as Members of the Supervisory Board. They have made very valuable contributions to our company during their respective terms."



"Finally I would like to thank the Swedish Government for its constant support for our efforts culminating in granting the Guarantee in favour of the European Investment Bank today for an EUR 400 Million loan to Saab which we hope to secure in the coming weeks."



Jan Åke Jonsson, CEO of Saab Automobile AB said: "It has been a challenging 15 months for Saab but our global organization has shown a fighting spirit that will serve us well going forward. The agreement with Spyker Cars has secured Saab's future and will enable us to maximize the brand's potential through an exciting new product line-up with a distinctly Saab character."



"Today's news is great for Saab's customers, dealers, suppliers and employees around the globe. The level of passion and support shown to Saab over recent months has been remarkable and I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of those people who continued to believe that Saab deserved a future. Now we aim to get back to the execution of our business plan and with the continued support of our employees and business partners I am confident we will succeed."



Nick Reilly, President GM Europe, added: "As a responsible corporate citizen in Europe, and throughout the entire period, GM has always had the hope to find a positive solution for Saab that would avoid a wind-down of the brand. We have worked very hard with many parties, including governments and investors, and I'm very pleased that we could come to such a positive conclusion that preserves jobs in Sweden and elsewhere. GM will continue to support Saab and Spyker Cars on their way forward."

[Dino Scuderia]

If they can sell 23 Spykers and 23 Saab's they'll out sell Chrysler.:eek:

[twinspark]

Spyker press conference just ended, obviously Victor Muller had lots of nice things to say about pretty much all parties involved. What he mentioned about the somewhat near future, developing a whole new model, practically a compact car, is virtually impossible with the current business plan. But Spyker has experience in building cars in low volume, and Mr. Muller says he's a big fan of Aero X...

Anyway, the acute threat is now out of the way. Coping the next few years will be the next big step.

[Ferrer]

Well at least there's hope.

In 2009 Saab sold 39.903 cars and produced 20.791 cars versus selling 94.751 cars in 2008 and producing 89.086 cars.
Wow! :eek:

[NSXType-R]

Well at least there's hope.

Wow! :eek:

Relatively speaking, is that a lot? Or a little? Seems like it's not a lot.

[Ferrer]

Relatively speaking, is that a lot? Or a little? Seems like it's not a lot.
Well from one year to the other they lost almost two thirds of their sales. Even by niche standards this is quite a catastrophe.

Altough it may have to do as well with the fact that Saab was on the very verge of dying.

[NSXType-R]

Well from one year to the other they lost almost two thirds of their sales. Even by niche standards this is quite a catastrophe.

Altough it may have to do as well with the fact that Saab was on the very verge of dying.

Then Spyker has a lot of work on its hands.

[G35COUPE]

I beleive Spyker can spike Saab back to life. Saabs may end up becoming spiked cars on steroids.

[G35COUPE]

If they can sell 23 Spykers and 23 Saab's they'll out sell Chrysler.:eek:

LOL! Well said!

[cargirl1990]

Saab needs a complete redesign.

[nota]

In cursory overview:

[bankrupt and/or dodgy] Spyker is already $54m euro in debt.
[bankrupt] SAAB has been losing money for years.
[bankrupt] GM has negotiated future sureties to bleed money out of its stone.

And yet the future is bright and viable and smelling of roses :rolleyes: (see below) thanks to Swedish taxpayer guarrantees!


"Spyker Cars will provide Saab with the backing required to compete as a competitive global brand along with an entrepreneurial leadership team sensitive to the uniqueness, heritage and individuality of the Saab brand.

[henk4]

Before fully committing himself to Spyker CEO Victor Muller had already turned two companies into pretty profitable organisations. (Wijsmuller and McGregor) Admittedly Spyker is a different story, but the guy is not a fool.

[Ferrer]

Then Spyker has a lot of work on its hands.
Indeed, and if I'm being truly honest it won't be easy and it doesn't look nice. But let's not write the end of the story before it has actually happened.

[drakkie]

I am very very curious about how the situation will develop. I actually had Victor on the phone today, for 2 minutes. He was very tired as you can imagine.. He said he had 15 hours of sleep in 5 days!
Before this weekend we will have a exclusive, long interview with him :)

Personally though I have my doubts on how the situation will develop. Time will teach us. For the moment, Spyker-Saab is something to be proud of as a dutchie.

[henk4]

I am very very curious about how the situation will develop. I actually had Victor on the phone today, for 2 minutes. He was very tired as you can imagine.. He said he had 15 hours of sleep in 5 days!
Before this weekend we will have a exclusive, long interview with him :)

Personally though I have my doubts on how the situation will develop. Time will teach us. For the moment, Spyker-Saab is something to be proud of as a dutchie.

Give him our best regards when you talk to him. (and tell him to avoid understeer in all new Saab models....)