Yesterday I asked the question: who makes the decision on bidders for Saab?
I received an answer via email from a reader who's had some experience in this sector.
His reply was as follows:
------
I don't know the local political landscape but standard fare is that the recommendation is made by the investment banker but the decision is for the owner, be it GM in Europe or US.
Seems there are many of moving pieces (more than normal) here with the restructuring court, the government(s), the bailout, ongoing relations with GM, and the owner. All have a say for a "no" from any could make this foggy.
I hope the management team have a strong voice in this for they are the only people who will be there the day after with the new owner. Aside from running the place, management is the keeper of the culture - and it is easy to work harder for people you like. Using GM as an example, a incompatible owner can fatigue the brand and the staff.
I have actually seen two models in action: one where management is charged with finding a buyer, the other being the "institutional" model where the owner must retain control. For Saab with the challenges they have, I favor the management model. Given the news reports, I can't imagine GM will get much for this.
Here is what the various groups might want:
- GM - as much as it can get as soon as it can get it, and as few as possible post closing liabilities or complexities as possible.
- Deutsche Bank - Their fee.
- Restructuring - a plan that really makes sense and a committed buyer.
- Sweden - A buyer who passes the political test. Yesterdays offering (i.e. Renco) will be a problem here. These folks will reject any blemishes that will taint them.
- US - They want this gone as soon as possible.
- Management (including unions)- someone who understands the brand, is supportive and committed, and can help lift the dark cloud.
Saab needs sales and over here the buyer is the college professor type (amongst others). They are, generally speaking, conscientious customers. They will support a "good" owner and will shun a "bad" owner. How deep the pockets are doesn't matter if the "pockets are sewn shut". Make no mistake, with the internet, people are making more informed decisions. This has helped the "zen" brands and hurt GM, Chrysler.
Think about it, Ford is trying to become a Zen brand.
However, I cannot help but feel that the decision for bidders will be a high society affair decided on a luxury super yacht moored in a Monaco marina. A meeting between members of the Wallenberg and Agnelli dynasties cannot be ruled out.
You may not care about the new owner, I and others may. I will never buy a Saab from a bad group, one of the worlds serial polluters, or someone who fails to live by "responsible performance". I know, I know, my high horse and all. My decision and my money too, and possibly another lost sale for Saab. Where I live, the core Saab buyer cares too.
Many car companies were part of the military or supplied the military in the past. In today's the modern world, I care about who owns it today, how they own it, and if they walk the walk.
The AM General connection doesn't bother me at all. They make a legitimate vehicle for a legitimate purpose.
It's much of the other stuff I'm seeing as I dig through this privately held company that bothers me.
SAAB may be in a better place being already outside of the imitate GM structure and the fact they are already going thru a Swedish court lead bankruptcy protection / restructuring .
Unfortunately if you work for one of the other GM brands ........the whole lot may come to a very sudden stop when they make this chapter 11 filing !!
Could be interesting to get opinions from other bloggers, in the know ,on this process .
I cannot recall any stories of them poisoning people in a third world country (or elsewhere).
There was a scandal some twenty years ago involving Bofors (?) and weapons being exported somewhere 'not good', but that is all I can recall off-hand.
Hardly much to put a prospective car buyer off I would think.
thnx
Just about anything can be 'spun'.
http://www.ofog.org/press-releases
I'm not sure how close the relationship these days between 'Saab Aerospace' and our lovable little car company but maybe we should indeed (a la Kroum) be a bit more circumspect about how 'Born from Jets' we are!
And I really want this owner thing to be completed. I would like to hear some more about the cars and the core values SAAB stands fore and a bit less about some old stories about an eventual owner.
Comments today in Swedish that the government are skeptical to a Chinese (Geely?) owner of Saab and/or Volvo, and that they would rather see a European buyer (they are welcoming Fiats proposal).
Google translation...
Two to three buyers
remain on the list Saab
Two or three buyers said to be behind Saab's business plan, which means that virtually all production moved to Trollhättan.
Saab Automobile sales process is entering the final. Two or three buyers have signed a so-called letter of intent stating the administrator's lawyer Guy Lofalk for TT. It is a declaration of intent in which stakeholders have described the investments they're willing to do and what they are willing to pay for the company.
- All is behind Saab's business plan, "says Guy Lofalk.
The business plan means that virtually all production moved back to Trollhättan.
From the beginning, the Saab that it was 27 stakeholders. A dozen of them have been on a visit in Trollhättan and have had a deeper presentation of the company.
In consultation with the owner of General Motors now has two or three pieces selected for further negotiations.
- For various reasons, they have judged the strongest. These include to be strong financially and be long term, "he says.
Those who now remain on the list have all described the commitments they're willing to have against Saab.
Guy Lofalk is silent when it comes to what the remaining stakeholders are.
- There are different nationalities, is the only one he wants to say.
Speculation has been most focused on Chinese car company, including Geely, American capital companies and Swedish sports car manufacturer Koenigsegg, in cooperation with the Norwegian financiers. Italian Fiat have also said they want to have with Saab in a new biljätte.
TT: Is there an American interest among speculators?
- I can not go into, "says Guy Lofalk.
+1 means I agree
As to Ford becoming ZEN? yes, Ford's new ads in May 11 issue of The New Yorker are very ZEN. almost too ZEN until you get to the inside back page ad that is actually for a car: Ford Fusion+hybrid.
But, I still will not buy a Ford because of Henry Ford SENIOR's dedication to re-publishing The International Jew without copyright in the 1920's, and how Hitler used Ford Senior's reputation and those editorials as "endorsement" for The Final Solution. Won't buy a VW or Porsche or any German car for similar historical reasons.
ah well, good thing i have so little money for a future new car purchase. My 9-3 will have to last a very long time.
I sense Saab buyers are very internet savvy and research before make a big ticket purchase, and want to feel good about the decision they make. Thus, the new owner of Saab, and Saab, needs to appeal to a very but loyal base very similar to Apple.
If the owner is one of the worlds biggest polluters that harms children, count me out. No amount of marketing can get around this, I won't feel good.
And on AMS.se they refer to this article from Steven.
Hi Steven, you are geting the #1 source of SAAB news.
What counts is current activity, corporate culture, and the current corporate leadership.
There are plenty of reasons not to take Ford seriously on its new-found "Zen": it makes the bulk of its money selling large trucks and SUVs to people who don't need them. Also, the corporate arrogance/belligerent litigiousness which produced the Pinto disaster as well as the Explorer roll-over problem is likely still there.
None +1
I hope you didn't mind if I borrowed that.
When I bought my second Saab in 1987, I even checked to make sure the US had a positive trade balance with Sweden to make sure I was not contributing to our growing trade deficit! I bought a Bosch stove in 2006 because it was actually assembled in North Carolina (my boycott of German companies is limited to VW and Porsche - not that I ever wanted to own a Porsche - ok, I admit this Bosch stove is very much like owning a Porsche for cooking!)
Everyone has different reasons for buying cars. and for NOT buying cars. Saab and other imported cars may be facing a much stronger "buy American" mood in the future.
Now that we are down to 2-3 finalists, everyone keep their thoughts positive. and hope the UAW is NOT the decider!
Gas Guzzling Zen - now thats new!
One rumour I have heard (but have not confirmed) is that the last shipment of oil to Hitler-Germany was courtesy of an US-based company owned mainly by jews. The story is that they sought extra-ordinary means to get the oil shipped.
IBM's and other american companies' dealings with Hitler-Germany is also an interesting topic.
My own country, Norway, had for several years a constitution that banned jews from entering our country. It was not changed until the latter part of the 19th century IIRC.
Ford, according to Wikipedia, apologized in 1927. Granted, it was after a court case, but at least it was long before anyone knew anything about what was going to happen in Germany. And long before other american companies cut their business relationships with nazi-Germany.