OK, it's time to try that Saab ownership poll once again.
The options are the same, except I'm just looking for first preferences here. Who do you want as #1.
GRRRRRRRRRRR - It seems any poll I try ends up in an IE abort. Freaking software giving me the irrits!!!!!
Hopefully this one will work OK.
------
I am away with work again, and pretty remote this time, so I'm not going to be able to access news as easily as usual.
I'm not expecting anything big until mid-week, when The US government might push GM a little early into bankruptcy proceedings.
If there's anything big happening, please keep each other informed in comments.
------
I had my first episode of carsickness in years today. And I was driving!!
Mount Arrowsmith is the longest rally stage in Targa Tasmania and as I was driving that road today, I thought I'd give it a burst. A beautiful road, by the way. You should come and drive it.
My problem was that I'd eaten something that wasn't agreeing with me, so all the twists and turns, whilst fun, left me a little green around the gills.
------
There's some talk coming from Djup Strupe to the effect that GM Europe might be stalling the Saab sale process a little. The word is that Deutsche Bank are actually having a hard time getting GME on the phone to make a decision of any consequence.
Maybe the Opel deal has them all tied up. I hope we still get a decision soon, even if it's not announced, just to know that it's been made will start the closure process.
------
I've been thinking about the Koenigsegg bid some more and you know....I'm reeally getting seduced by it.
I can barely see a downside.
Yes, scale is an issue, but Saab management will still be in place and are used to running the Saab site. One must assume that the pockets Koenigsegg are fronting for are deep enough.
The marketing side is a HUGE upside. It's not that Saabs and K-Seggs would be in the same showrooms together, because they won't.
It's just the association.
You know how motoring journos immediately write about the association, which in GM terms means bad things like badge engineering, etc. Here, the association is nothing but cool, totally Swedish and desireable to anyone with a pulse.
The only possible downside I can see is a systems issue to do with ordering, parts, communications, dealers, etc. Saab have been integrated into the GM system for some time, so setting up a new one could be a drag.
But I like the idea more and more.
Thats one of the things the reconstruction team has been doing since febuary.. Haven´t they?
saw 3 9-3 cabs and one viggen on the roads!:)
now i have to catch up with the SU-news:)
Warranty (in the UK anyway) is still basically the old system and has not yet changed over to a GM system (it was planned for this year)
In death, GM is as it was in life: hopeless.
Contrary to GME, I'm on the phone. Why oh why didn't I take the pda with me?
Koenigsegg, Koenigsegg, Koenigsegg!!!
Tom
http://www.teknikensvarld.se/nyheter/090521-saab-nodlan/
Saab looks set to receive the emergency loan, according to SVT Rapport. Condition seems to be that Saab finds a new owner.
GM preoccupied makes sense and I would be shocked if they weren't. Closing dealers, crappy sales, weakening supplier base, selling GME, Saab and RenCen, negotiating with bondholders, closing factories, dealing with USGov, probable bankruptcy this week. Lots have happened since Saab went for sale I'm surprised the phones work! Of these Saab is well down on the priority list.
Morale must be dismal.
K-Segg hand makes makes cool cars in limited numbers in a (hangar) garage. They are fun to root for as an underdog but the task at Saab is big and getting bigger each day.
Has there ever been a successful merger between a super duper car and mainstream company that benefitted the mainstream company? Fiat doesn't benefit from Ferarri or Lambo. I can't think of one instance where this had worked. I can't think of one.
With GM Powertrain possibly going with Saab, Saab would continue be a world leader in efficiency and performance.
I shudder to think what popular superficial connections would be if Renco won the bid. Even if they cleaned up their act and were a wonderful parent to Saab, you know the first line of every car review would talk about hazardous waste making Saab's green campaign a laughing stock...
Don't underestimate the power of association--especially, it seems, with the most superficial associations.
Saabluster | May 21, 2009 5:19 PM | Reply
"...As we all have known for a long time Saabs lack of "success" in the market place has not been all about the cars. The cars are great. It was the association with GM and all the plasticy baggage that came with it. The opinions of the car rags do have a real effect on the masses. They knew that Saabs had GM parts in them and wrote about it constantly. It is obvious to anyone who has read the magazines over the years that the writers opinions were affected by that knowledge. Saab is about to release all this new product and what, you say, can K-Segg do for Saab? Give Saab back the respect it once had. They need respect NOW not later. In K-Segg's hands they will be seen as returning home to Sweden where they belong and will be seen as independent once again. This is big folks! ...Or would you rather have an owner that does not speak to the hearts of the writing and driving public but has deep pockets and can subsidize the continued existence of Saab? Is that really the better way? The end result will be the same as what we have here today. Kicked to the curb."
Same reports indicate that Porsche has a debt of around 9 billion euro...
Fiat does benefit from Ferrari. Many buy small fiats in "rosso corse" knowing it is a wannabe Ferrari. I remember the Lancia Thema 8.38, many bought the car because it had a Ferrari engine inside.
Words like "Efficient Power" or "responsible Power" or "BioPower" have one thing in common, POWER. Most people are still fascinated by the shear POWER of a Lambo(Audi), Ferrari(Fiat) or K-seg(SAAB???).
I know your doubts, and they have to be taken seriously, but maybe is K-seg not the one making the bid but the middleman.
@ Ken H: I was reading the Google trans of that Teknikens Värld article, and found that it states that Fiat still wants Saab:
What sports cars do you suppose they refer to, maybe Fiats/Alfas? And what do they mean by "conversion kits"?To answer your question, I would like an owner that wants Saab to be Saab. K-Segg will need partners to get this done. Would rather see a different list of buyers.
If affiliation with supercars made a huge difference, we would all be driving Fiats.
All concern aside, I would rather K-Segg get Saab than Rennert. Peru will catch up with them and hurt Saab when it does.
I do, however, agree that Koenigsegg as a brand has little to no clout outside of die-hard enthusiast circles. A large part of the potential Saab audience will have no idea what a CCX is. The Veyron, for example, built a lot more hype because it is a much more conspicious car. Can't compare Brad Pitt to Al Pacino. :) Heck, there are a ton of peopel out there who have no idea VW owns Audi, not to mention plenty of 15 year olds who lust after a Murcielago and have no idea it is owned by VW. But teh connection did allow Audi to build the R8.
I also disagree that the buyer needs to necessarily provide Saab with manufacturing economies of scale - 20 years of GM ownership has resulted in cheapening of Saabs and allegations of them being "rebadged Opels". It could be argued that Saab can diversify its manufacturing product - like WooDz said, even if we start seeing wind turbines with the Saab logotype on them.
Lastly, I find the accusations of K-segg not understanding the car business a tad too harsh. Just because they don't manufacture four-wheeled appliances doesn't mean they don't understand the business, or the same could be argued for F1 teams, too. If K-segg can bring further efficiencies in terms of engineering capacity and more importantly - resource utilization - then I don't see why we should all get all defensive about it.
And above all, do not forget - Koenigsegg is just the front of whoever is behind this bid. If successful, we are more likely to see K-segg merged into Saab than anything else.
Convertibles, then. Not conversion of vans.. :)
Clarkson on TopGear, for example, loves K-segg and hates GM. His reviews of Saabs are almost entirely devoted to dripping sarcasm about their GM roots. The K-segg tie-in would change his attitude 180 degrees by itself.
The other virtue of K-segg is that they are run by people who love exciting cars. No one at Saab will have to explain to its owners the need to capture a good driving experience is.
I do have some concerns whether they truly understand the difference between manufacturing 20 cars a year and 200,000 cars a year -- this is where the "too many engineers" quote concerns me. Optimal cost per unit and long-term reliability are not important criteria when you're selling a handful of cars which (1) are driven a few thousand miles a year at most; (2) cost nearly a million dollars a copy; and (3) bought by rich customers as a toy or hobby.
It is harder to engineer a $50,000 reliable daily driver than an $800,000 exotic toy, which is why you need more engineers to build the "lesser" car.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/porsche-facing-35b-cash-shortfall-narrowly-avoid-bankruptcy.html
I'm struck by the statement in the article stating "it sounds as if Porsche’s management may have bitten off a little more than it could chew with the VW deal". I share the exact same concern with a far less sophisticated K-Segg trying to buy Saab.
Porsche took a tumble in trading today.
Yes, I would consider buying a Saab from K-Segg but, having read the article on Porsche, fear they won't be making cars long term. I feel strongly K-Segg is walking into a "box canyon" and is making a terrible mistake.
SAAB is one brand, one site (although sourcing from Mexico too which is mainly GM's problem)and 'hoping' to sell about .025% of Volkswagen's output. Kegg&co will be leaning on SAAB's own management to make the operational decisions.
SAAB is a niche brand and will likely become more so. This does not mean it will sell ever less cars. It means it will become stronger in it's specific niches and regain traditionalists and win-over new buyers by being less middle of the road and actually standing for some-thing (or things). What it takes is focussed leadership, financing and an understanding of what SAAB can be.
This will never happen under another monster multi-branded auto company that will simply seek to shoe-horn SAAB into which ever mould it doesn't already have filled.
New ideas, new technologies, new methods. ABout time for SAAB to be new/old school.
I concur Saab needs to regain standing for something (hopefully being Saab) and they have to be very careful not to be painted with K-Seggs excess as they try to pimp the coolness. People (and the auto press) aren't dumb.
I wasn't comparing Saab and VW, I was comparing a FAR more sophisticated Porsche making a mistake (after decades of close relations) with VW. K-Segg is simply far under sophisticated for the transaction at hand. I'm not a fan of Saab going to a multi brand automaker, or a seerial polluter any more than I favor them going to a too small unsophisticated buyer. All fail the test for me.
As CAR magazine noted in a coverage of the Ford MoCo breakup - given the world trending toward generic, develping-world-mfd cars at low price points (the Nano), the value in the future is at the high end, not in volume. China & India will win the volume game within our lifetimes. Ford should have sold Ford, not Aston or Jag. I'm summarising wildly here but hope you can see my point. GM should, in fact, be selling GM and investing in SAAB if they had any sort of macro view or scope available to them.
WRT K-segg - in the world of high-output supercars, they are about as green as you get. They've even got an E85 spec engine. If you look at the whole carbon footprint issue - K-Segg are pretty neat. They are not about excess to me. They are about low volume, low fat, high performance and pure technology. If you want an F1 driving experience K-Segg is the only place in town.
I sense that they are a long shot in this game but they are my favourite candidate in every sense, not just out of sentiment.
It's a remote possibility, but academically maybe worth to dissect.
Profile is experience in the trenches (muddy trenches) and understanding of engineering, heavy assembly & manufacturing, sourcing & logistics, labor relations, risk management, corporate finance, consumer and dealer financing, large scale distribution, dealer relations, global marketing and advertising, etc. Maybe 50 companies in the world are good at this and it may be why Saab reportedly had 25-30 groups interested. I am in this business and know it well. It isn't for the inexperienced, naive, or faint of heart.
A few names come to mind across industries and some specialize: Alix Partners. Sun Capital, John Malone, Bob Hughes, Bob Ratliff. These are people and groups that specialize in or have built complex business and/or turnarounds. Narrow the list down for groups who specialize and are true brand builders. Now, maybe 5.
@ PT K-Segg is as green as super cars can get - I concur. Selling $1 million cars is very excessive in these times.
@ck1x Agree on boost to image, with a small group of hard core motorheads. I don't believe the average Saab buyer knows nor cares what a Koenigsegg is. Greg is right, far more important than image is execution from what, 30,000 units to the 150,000 needed to simply breakeven. Sometimes, we all act like Saab is healthy, it isn't. It is a bloody mess, sales are terrible, and profit is from where new products will come.
@ Zippy +1 on the hatchback. That is a Saab trademark and a must. Saab needs to get back to and be the best Saab.
Whoever buys Saab needs to have a 'hands off' approach or it will make the same mistakes as GM. It needs to trust Saab too, and I don't think GM ever did. It has to have the confidence to let Saab to be Saab and let it do it's own Saaby thing (within reasonable limits), and the new owner won't go wrong. Playing big brother all the time (like GM did) will fail.
My main gripe with Koenigsegg is that I don't feel that it has the knowledge and breadth of experience to manage a car company like Saab. Like I said recently, it would probably be like 'young upstart' AOL buying Time Warner and we know where that has led. I have nothing greatly against Koenigsegg, except that it lacks maturity. But by the same token, I don't want Koenigsegg gaining that 'maturity' at Saab's expense. If Koenigsegg is only the 'frontman' for a group as some have summized, thi might b okay. The trouble is, we just don't know do we?
Saab needs to be Saab. If it is Saab, Saab will be just fine.
I agree on the new owner needing hands off approach as it relates to design. The new owner should be truly and passionately engaged in the rest of the business.
Audi's performance division (quattro Gmbh) pre dates the lambo purchase by several years. Only recently have Lambo engines been used.
K-Segg doesn't make enough units to effectively tap into Saab's dealer network. Today, K-Segg had exactly 4 US dealers, two of which are in Las Vegas where excessive is encouraged. K-Seggs appeal is its exclusivity both price and performance.
Your last sentence also makes my point, I'd rather not have to pick between three flawed groups. If I had to, K-Segg would win. I would rather eat broken glass than buy a car from Rennert.
The original Saab - the plane-maker cum military conglomerate - is of course the mother of Saab Automobile. Romanticism aside, the car unit was not really profitable and Saab AB lacked the resources needed to grow the marquee. A few times there were suggestions it merge with Volvo. Pros from this era included freedom to design and execute, world-leading safety expertise, access to advanced engineering resources within the hotbed of Swedish industrial innovation and hi tech research, the association with a jet-maker (exploited early on in Saab's U.S. marketing), the numerous wins in motor sports. Cons: limited economies of scale, lack of investment in new technologies, rising labour costs in Sweden which troubled Saab's then value brand image.
Saab ended up married to truck- and coach-maker Scania and as we all know Saab-Scania was a very tense relationship due to the fact that Scania's profits were consistently being cannibalized by it's little brother Saab. Under Investor AB, the two, however, had more in common than the automotive division had with the aerospace mother company. Rising labour costs coupled with increased R&D forced Saab to consider moving up-market in order to remain somewhat competitive. Part of this effort was designing a large V8 engine to compete with the other luxury marquees in North America. This project ended up being replaced by means of borrowing Scania's expertise in turbocharging and adapting it to an automobile with all the associated engineering and endurance requirements. Turbocharging instantly became a Saab trademark trait.
Saab, however, continued to struggle to make profit and unable (or unwilling) to further invest in the unit, so it could grow, Investor AB ended up selling it to General Motors, at that time still a mega-corporation ontop of the world. A controversial part of Saab's history to be sure, but at long last Saab was part of an automaker and could thus gain access to platforms, parts and enormous economies of scale. We all know it didn't work, and there is probably no single answer to the question "why?". GM did not really understand Saab and for the most part was not very willing to invest. Their idea was to utilize Opel platforms and parts bins for all theur European operations, which of course ran counter to Saab's core philosophy of being, if not better, at least different. The Swedes also proved a rather unruly bunch, pissing off GM at many an occasion to the point where after the development of the new 9-3 was completed GM was seriously considering shuttering Saab. The punishment came with split personality - part Subaru, part Chevy Trailblazer. And just as the two seemed to finally get to understand each other, GM entered he final stage of its long, agonizing trip down the death spiral.
What I'm getting at is that at the end of the day Saab's destiny is that of a trouble child. L'enfant terrible, yes. So it doesn't matter if the owner is a jet maker and a military conglomerate (Saab AB), a heavy equipment maker (Scania), an investment group (Investor AB) or a large diverse automaker (GM). It doesn't matter is Saab has freedom to do as it wishes or if it is tightly restricted and works under a budget... No matter what the circumstances and who the owner, Saab will be Saab and this is part of its charm. Under the moving designs, practical hatchbacks, turbocharged engines and class leading safety there is this difficult character. It is a critical part of Saab's infamous quirkiness - the quirk in quirkiness itself.
So in summary: there is no "right owner" for Saab.
+ 1 and all that.
I have to say you are right on the money. What you knowingly or unknowingly keep overlooking however is that the car rag writers ARE a "small group of hard core motorheads". And as such have way more effect on the opinions of the populace than the average Joe. As crazy as it may sound people do read those car mags and the vast majority of people form their opinions based on what they read. Most people do not take the time to go drive all the cars so that they can form their own opinions. Then there is the second tier effects from these people who read the mags, think they know all about cars, and inform their much less knowledgeable family and friends what is "good" and "bad".
The biggest benefit Saab could take from K-segg ist that the bring on the money throgh investors. And after all this is the most important point right now. Hopefully there will be enough money, but to assure that is/was the job of the reconstruction team and Deutsche Bank and we should believe that they did it right.
As far as the final three have agreed on the management plan K-segg's lack of experience in volume manufacturing might not be the problem if they rely on the management already in place at Saab. And it's not only K-segg, it's also the investors who may have further experience - would be interesting who they are and without knowing that the judgement can only be half done.
The "too much engineers" quote worried me a bit but who knows how much weight Eker would have in a K-segg consortium. It's quite easy to talk boldly from a distance.
I'm not sure if there might be such a strong image boost for Saab but at least their image won't suffer (like with a Renco deal). But for sure K-segg would benefit for they get better known.
There are many opportunities in the future in a Saab/K-segg partnership but Saab has to recover before projects like an AeroX or other image-building things can be aimed. New 9-5, 9-4 and 9-3 have to sell properly and after that is done they can go to the fun projects...
I'm with none, there were better options out there, true brand builders with deep pockets who'd care for Saab and I'd like one of those better, too. But hope dies last as far as we don't know the final three for sure and we don't know the ones behind the K-segg bid.
Just my few cents...
The only downside is scale. There is not one negative in terms of marketing or image. Not one. Any attempt to state otherwise is folly and duplicitous.
What would you guys think about Fiat without Opel (and Vauxall et al.)?
It's a remote possibility, but academically maybe worth to dissect.
That is at the moment my only concern in a Fiat deal. I do not want Saab to end up in the some organization as Opel once again. But if Fiat do not get Opel - well, then I see big possibilities in a Fiat deal of some sort.
The "nothing is ever good enough" attitude some of you have is just grumpy a sound like all faith is lost even though nobody except GM, Saab and the swedish government realy knows whats going on.
Koenigsegg not being mature enough?
"there were better options out there, true brand builders with deep pockets who'd care for Saab and I'd like one of those better, too"
So, where are They? The ones not there can not be good owners can they?
I believe that Koenigsegg can realy contribute to a Saab success. They have the right mindset and that they would be imature is nonsence. Christian Von Koenigsegg shaped the company from a dream at age 22. He now have sales reps in the middle east, the US etc etc and he sells a handmade car with numerous Koenigsegg only ingenious solutions (The doors as an example) and they are dooing well. The thing that Koenigsegg is after is the quirkyness and the soul of Saab. Making an environmentaly sound hybrid M5 killer would probably find it´s way and that is fine by me. But he probably would go into more modest power but with the Saab "twist".
Fiat without Opel could also be a good candidate, but at the same time the owner would still be huge TO huge in some aspects. But might work. The only downside might be Chrysler and once again getting the money-losing status.
I´m getting realy tired of reading so much negativism. Jezz, when the Swedish press and government goes positive then some of you goes negative. Some of you Americans and others seem to be more Swedish than I am.. Swedes are said to thrive on negative thoughts.. But that can´t be true, I´m positive as heck for Saabs future.
Please people.. Get into Positive mode!
So, where are They? The ones not there can not be good owners can they?"
As far as we know they are not here... Just wanted to state that sure the dream solution would be someone who puts in two tons of cash and say "go ahead with your plan, call me if you need more". Cut that.
I'm quite positive about the things going on at Trollhattan and I'm realistic. And most of all I'm confident that JAJ and his team will make the right decision. I might be more or less happy with one or another new owner but I'll sure continue buying cars from Saab as long as they are Saabs. And that does not depend on the investor.
And btw: "Swedes are said to thrive on negative thoughts."
I never experienced that - I got to know the Swedes as friendly and open people. I get along with them much better than with my fellow Germans.
http://www.koenigsegg.com/pressreleases.php?view=16
This is a site about Saabs, Saab lovers and their experiences and opinions. This thread shows that we can all share opinions, can advocate and in the end not agree. Nobody here should make or take it personal for the fun is sharing.
At the end of the day, someone will buy Saab. Each of us can like it, like the new buyer, or not. For those who will continue to buy a Saab from anyone, so be it. In my posts, I choose to take a realistic view coming from experience. I have no favorites of the finalists (there is one who is my least favorite) and only point out obvious questions or obvious weaknesse, which I believe are significant.
Think K-Segg buying Saab will fix Saab? OK by me, just allow me to disagree if I do. When someone disagrees with me, I don't take it personally. Healthy debate is good.
Kroum +1 Great post. All - Great debate. Thanks
It also seems as if they're pretty intent on getting back into the US market, where Saab has a great deal more potential to be a successful premium brand (especially now with Obama's future CAFE goals which really won't be friendly towards the all-RWD lineup that Alfa seems to be working towards).
I wouldn't say "no" to a Renco Saab, because that group certainly has the $$$ to give Saab the BMW-slaying next-gen 9-3 that it will need, but right now I'm praying for the Koneigsegg-fronted Norwegian money because it would be a marketing goldmine. The idea of Koneigsegg, Th!nk and Saab under one roof to make a truly scandinavian car company offering products at all levels just sounds too good to fail, at least as long as there's the money behind it to keep producing competitive products.