Don't sob at the funeral for Saab.

[Byteme]

Should be no suprise about this.  Strange cars with a small, but loyal, following.  I'd still like to own a Sonnet II though. 


Saab heads for scrapyard as long rescue quest fails

Reuters ? 13 minutes Saab factory in Trollhattan September 7, 2011. REUTERS/Bjorn Larsson Rosvall/Files
By Johan Ahlander

TROLLHATTAN, Sweden (Reuters) - Car maker Saab ran out of room for manoeuvre on Monday when its Dutch owner filed for bankruptcy, calling time on a nine-month battle to rescue the struggling Swedish marque.

Saab's cash problems began in March this year, after 2010 sales fell short of target. It has not made any vehicles since April.

The end of the road for Saab, which has been making cars for more than 60 years, came at the weekend when General Motors (NYSE:GM - NewsGM.N) again vetoed a plan involving Chinese investor Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile.

GM, Saab's former owner, still licences key technology to it and has a small shareholding.

Saab owner Swedish Automobile (Amsterdam:SWAN.AS - NewsSWAN.AS) said that after GM had informed Youngman it would not approve the plan, the Chinese company told Saab "the funding to continue and complete the reorganisation ... could not be concluded".

"The board of Saab Automobile subsequently decided that the company, without further funding, will be insolvent and that filing bankruptcy is in the best interests of its creditors."

Swedish Automobile shares, which had been suspended, plunged when trade resumed on Monday. By 1306 GMT, the shares were down 71 percent at 6 euro cents.

Swedish Automobile said in the statement that it expected the court would approve the filing and appoint receivers soon.

At the company's factory in the western town of Trollhattan, emotions among some of the workers ran high, even though they have been preparing themselves for the worst.

The company employs about 3,500 people, though officials have said many more would be affected by a closure, including suppliers.

"I feel emptiness and frustration," Fredrik Amlqvist, a car builder for almost 17 years, told reporters.

"I looked out at my two Saabs in the yard this morning. I had tears in my eyes, I have to admit."

Long-time Saab employee Stefan Karlsson said he feared for the future of the whole region where the company is based.

"We have had a long time to prepare ourselves for this, but when it happens it still hits you," he said.

"I know there will be much unemployment. Then there's other issues, like exclusion and segregation. It will be a fight for jobs. It will have a massive impact."

GENERAL MOTORS

Saab presented its first prototype in 1947 after moving out of aeronautical engineering and built a small, loyal following.

A separate Saab (SAABb.ST) defence and security company still exists.

General Motors bought 50 percent of the car company in 1990 and the rest in 2000.

It decided to sell the brand in 2009 after the financial crisis and came close to closing it before Swedish Automobile, then called Spyker Cars, bought Saab in January 2010.

When cash problems surfaced in March, production was halted. Saab briefly restarted output, but mounting debts to suppliers forced a stoppage in April, since when the plant has been idle.

Swedish Automobile Chief Executive Victor Muller stitched together a series of deals to rescue Saab, but General Motors said it could not accept an option involving Youngman.

GM, which operates in China in a partnership with state-run SAIC Motor Corp Ltd (Shanghai:600104.SS - News600104.SS), said in November continuing to supply parts and technology to Saab's new owners would run counter to the interest of its own shareholders.

Despite its well-known name, Saab was a niche player and analysts had questioned its future even if Muller had kept the company afloat.

It has the capacity to produce more than 100,000 cars a year running on two shifts.

Swedish rival Volvo, successfully rescued by China's Geely Automobile Holdings Ltd (HKSE:0175.HK - News0175.HK) in 2010, made almost four times that last year and plans to sell 50,000 cars in China alone this year.

Muller's efforts to keep Saab afloat had focused initially on getting Russian businessman Vladimir Antonov to invest, but his role was vetoed by the European Investment Bank, which has lent money to Saab.

Antonov was subsequently indicted by Lithuania for fraud and is fighting extradition from Britain.

Muller later turned to Chinese investment and first lined up Hawtai Motor Group in May, but that fell through. He then agreed the failed deal with Chinese car distributor Pang Da and Youngman.

Muller, 52, is a former mergers and acquisitions lawyer who made his fortune from Dutch fashion brand McGregor before revamping loss-making luxury sports car maker Spyker, which he jointly owned with Antonov.

(Reporting by Patrick Lannin and Veronika Ek; Editing by Erica Billingham and David Hulmes)

[Galaxy]

When Antonov was arrested in London some weeks ago (apparently he bought a bank in Lithuania and sucked all of the money out of it)  it was clear that this was over.

[Colin]

Sorry, but I hold GM 100% culpable for this........ they screwed up SAAB when they owned it and they have now vetoed every effort to rescue it, as they don't like the idea of the Chinese getting involved.   

[280Z Turbo]

Saabs were never any good for the price that they asked.

[Colin]

Saabs were never any good for the price that they asked.

Simply not true (though lately it may just be the case - but that was after GM had wrecked them).

[ifcar]

Sorry, but I hold GM 100% culpable for this........ they screwed up SAAB when they owned it and they have now vetoed every effort to rescue it, as they don't like the idea of the Chinese getting involved.   

It integrated Saab too well. Saabs became GM cars with unique cosmetics, so it would be more like selling a brand than an independent company. China might as well have wanted to buy Pontiac.

[Onslaught]

I'm not sad about it. I never really liked their cars.

[Galaxy]

Sorry, but I hold GM 100% culpable for this........ they screwed up SAAB when they owned it and they have now vetoed every effort to rescue it, as they don't like the idea of the Chinese getting involved.   

Well I can understand GM. Most of the Saab tech is made by GM North America, or Opel. They have a legitimate interest to keep theire toys from China.

[SVT666]

Saab only ever built one car that I actually liked, but there were competitors that built better cars.

[280Z Turbo]

Simply not true (though lately it may just be the case - but that was after GM had wrecked them).

No it is true. They wanted BMW money for a Mazda level of refinement.

[93JC]

GM had wrecked them

THAT is simply untrue. Saab wrecked themselves.

Speaking of the North American market, in the 1980s Saab (along with Volvo, BMW and Audi) was in a little niche between 'mainstream' brands (Big 3, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.) and 'luxury' brands (Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac, Lincoln, Jaguar, etc.). They did okay by offering some unique features, a little more power and more cachet than the mainstream brands. People were willing to spend a little more money for a Saab over a Chevy.

By 2000 this niche had slowly disappeared. BMW and Audi saw it happening and aimed higher, against the likes of Mercedes-Benz. Direct competition from Lexus, Infiniti and Acura took sales away from them. Indirect competition from makers like VW and Subaru whittled away their customer base.

Saab, for whatever reason, kept plodding along as though they could compete with old rivals BMW and Audi. They couldn't, because Audi and BMW had become demonstrably better. That didn't stop Saab from deciding to market and price their cars as BMW and Audi rivals. (read: Saabs became preposterously overpriced)

Even toward the end of the '80s Saab was dying. If not for GM Saab would have died twenty years ago. GM saved Saab.

If one wants to blame GM for Saab's death they should blame GM for being too hands-off. GM let Saab operate independently, let them engineer their own cars, let them market their own cars; people decry the 9-3 as "not a REAL Saab" even though that car and every other recent Saab shared at best a handful of parts with any other GM product (save the 9-2x and 9-7x, which were Saab's ideas...).

GM gave Saab just enough leash to strangle themselves.

[hotrodalex]

It integrated Saab too well. Saabs became GM cars with unique cosmetics, so it would be more like selling a brand than an independent company. China might as well have wanted to buy Pontiac.

No, it didn't integrate them well enough. It was only half integrated - Saab still had a lot of separate development groups and their own structure. Thus they cost too much to develop and build, so there was absolutely no profit. They either needed to be integrated completely into the structure of GM or separate. I'm not sure how well the company would have done on its own; I think it was doomed either way, unless some other corporation decided to step in and somehow do a better job.

[280Z Turbo]

THAT is simply untrue. Saab wrecked themselves.

Speaking of the North American market, in the 1980s Saab (along with Volvo, BMW and Audi) was in a little niche between 'mainstream' brands (Big 3, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.) and 'luxury' brands (Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac, Lincoln, Jaguar, etc.). They did okay by offering some unique features, a little more power and more cachet than the mainstream brands. People were willing to spend a little more money for a Saab over a Chevy.

By 2000 this niche had slowly disappeared. BMW and Audi saw it happening and aimed higher, against the likes of Mercedes-Benz. Direct competition from Lexus, Infiniti and Acura took sales away from them. Indirect competition from makers like VW and Subaru whittled away their customer base.

Saab, for whatever reason, kept plodding along as though they could compete with old rivals BMW and Audi. They couldn't, because Audi and BMW had become demonstrably better. That didn't stop Saab from deciding to market and price their cars as BMW and Audi rivals. (read: Saabs became preposterously overpriced)

Even toward the end of the '80s Saab was dying. If not for GM Saab would have died twenty years ago. GM saved Saab.

If one wants to blame GM for Saab's death they should blame GM for being too hands-off. GM let Saab operate independently, let them engineer their own cars, let them market their own cars; people decry the 9-3 as "not a REAL Saab" even though that car and every other recent Saab shared at best a handful of parts with any other GM product (save the 9-2x and 9-7x, which were Saab's ideas...).

GM gave Saab just enough leash to strangle themselves.

This man speaks the truth.

[Mustangfan2003]

Didn't GM buy Saab because Ford bought Volvo?

[hotrodalex]

Didn't GM buy Saab because Ford bought Volvo?

Yep. GM wanted an upscale European brand and after Ford beat them out and got Volvo/Jaguar/Land Rover, they went with Saab.

[2o6]

THAT is simply untrue. Saab wrecked themselves.

Speaking of the North American market, in the 1980s Saab (along with Volvo, BMW and Audi) was in a little niche between 'mainstream' brands (Big 3, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.) and 'luxury' brands (Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac, Lincoln, Jaguar, etc.). They did okay by offering some unique features, a little more power and more cachet than the mainstream brands. People were willing to spend a little more money for a Saab over a Chevy.

By 2000 this niche had slowly disappeared. BMW and Audi saw it happening and aimed higher, against the likes of Mercedes-Benz. Direct competition from Lexus, Infiniti and Acura took sales away from them. Indirect competition from makers like VW and Subaru whittled away their customer base.

Saab, for whatever reason, kept plodding along as though they could compete with old rivals BMW and Audi. They couldn't, because Audi and BMW had become demonstrably better. That didn't stop Saab from deciding to market and price their cars as BMW and Audi rivals. (read: Saabs became preposterously overpriced)

Even toward the end of the '80s Saab was dying. If not for GM Saab would have died twenty years ago. GM saved Saab.

If one wants to blame GM for Saab's death they should blame GM for being too hands-off. GM let Saab operate independently, let them engineer their own cars, let them market their own cars; people decry the 9-3 as "not a REAL Saab" even though that car and every other recent Saab shared at best a handful of parts with any other GM product (save the 9-2x and 9-7x, which were Saab's ideas...).

GM gave Saab just enough leash to strangle themselves.

I always thought the 900NG and 9-5 were hits. I just thought they failed to update product. I mean, the 9-5 was essentially unchanged until it's death a few years ago. The 900 turned into the 9-3, and IMO that product cycle was very long. The new model was OK, but yet and still, the product cycle seemed to be far too long.

[ifcar]

No, it didn't integrate them well enough. It was only half integrated - Saab still had a lot of separate development groups and their own structure. Thus they cost too much to develop and build, so there was absolutely no profit. They either needed to be integrated completely into the structure of GM or separate. I'm not sure how well the company would have done on its own; I think it was doomed either way, unless some other corporation decided to step in and somehow do a better job.

To clarify, I meant integrated too well to sell off.

[93JC]

Whose fault is long product cycles?

[2o6]

Whose fault is long product cycles?

Saab? Some say GM.

To clarify, I meant integrated too well to sell off.

Yeah, handing over Saab to Youngman would essentially be giving them two new platforms for them to exploit.

[93JC]

Saab? Some say GM.

A lot of people say GM, but they're wrong.

Frankly I think that's emblematic of Saab's core problem: a lack of accountability. Every fuck-up they've ever had has been blamed on some external factor. Bad timing, not enough money, Scania, GM: never Saab itself.

[2o6]

A lot of people say GM, but they're wrong.

Frankly I think that's emblematic of Saab's core problem: a lack of accountability. Every fuck-up they've ever had has been blamed on some external factor. Bad timing, not enough money, Scania, GM: never Saab itself.

I don't understand why people say that the 900NG and 9-5 were bad products (because they used GM platforms and powertrains), I mean, it was better then what they had. Upon entry, those cars were very competitive.

[93JC]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvl8dZjZF9U

[Mustangfan2003]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvl8dZjZF9U

Seems pretty bleak

[Raza]

 

[Rupert]

The last car they made that I liked was the 900, so whatev.

Er, I guess the Viggen was cool, too.

[Mustangfan2003]

This looks cool 

[Madman]

Didn't GM buy Saab because Ford bought Volvo?

No, GM bought 50% of Saab in 1990.  Ford didn't buy Volvo until 1999.

GM tried to buy Alfa Romeo in 1986 but the Italian government didn't want it to fall into foreign hands, so they accepted Fiat's offer even though it was less than what GM was willing to pay.

GM then set it's sights on Jaguar and negotiations reached an advanced stage.  Then, out of the blue, Ford swept in and snapped up Jaguar out from under GM's nose.  GM did manage to acquire Lotus at about the same time but the tiny sports car manufacturer could never provide the volume GM was looking for.

Having been twice burned in the mad rush to gobble up European trophy brands, GM finally cut a deal to buy 50% of Saab Automobile in 1990.  GM purchased the remaining 50% in 2000.

[Colin]

A perspective here: http://www.autocar.co.uk/blogs/autocarconfidential/archive/2011/12/19/who-killed-saab.aspx

[Speed_Racer]

The writing has been on the wall for some time.

I always found them quirky and unique, but at their pricepoints, there were just so many better options. And the only thing setting them apart was the quirky factor. Paying $50k for that in a 9-5 is just ridiculous.

[2o6]

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/12/20/saab-suspends-all-warranty-coverage-cars-to-be-sold-as-is/

Saab suspends all warranty coverage for cars made after the GM purge of February 2010.



On the plus side, the sale prices of 9-3, 9-5 and the few 9-4xes probably will have tanked. And they'll likely appreciate greatly if Saab doesn't come back.