There's a few interesting news reports out this morning. The best of them is Göteborgs Posten's article on what it was that broke the Saab deal.
Koenigsegg Group have been very quiet about why the deal broke down, saying only that delays in the process made the risks involved too prominent for them. As I wrote earlier today, with the money almost in the bag and the plans approved, there must have been more involved here than a little bit of fear.
GP claim that it was tension between GM and Beijing Automotive with regard to intellectual property that was the main issue.
The Googletrans:
GM thought it was good [when] Baic went in as a minority owner. Then the Chinese transparency is limited. When Baic demanded transparency in the level of their capital investment shrank GM, "said a government official.Intellectual property rights are patents, trademarks, ideas and more. GM was concerned that much knowledge could be Chinese, in general, knowledge that was strategically very important in Detroit as GM chose not to sell the Opel to Canadian / Russian Magna.
To paraphrase......
GM didn't mind at first when BAIC got involved because their money supported the deal and would help get it done. As time went on, BAIC began to demand a few more things in exchange for their involvement, which is when GM started to hesitate.
------
This story concurs with the second piece of Djup Strupery I've received today.
Djup Strupe passed on to me that BAIC contacted Koenigsegg Group on the weekend and informed them of some new requirements they needed for their involvement to go ahead.
From what we read here at GP.se, this is possibly not the first time this has happened, and the prospect of more delays whilst these requirements were negotiated between BAIC, Koenigsegg and GM were quite likely the delays that Koenigsegg have cited as the reason for them pulling out.
The GP.se article states that Koenigsegg Group evolved into a sort of intermediary between BAIC and GM, a role that they possibly didn't expect nor had time for given the volume of work to be done.
It's an interesting insight as to what's happened here and GP.se's story definitely rings close to what I'm hearing.
--
My thanks to Peter for the link.
Ford is undergoing the same process with Geely for the possible sale of Volvo. It's progressing very slooooowly, and it too may collapse:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601209&sid=a5RMMK9f7IlA
For all the witch hunters that were wishing death to certain K-segg members- how sad your comments seem in light of more information. Might I suggest a little more restraint in the future? Thanks
Bard Eker himself stood outside the factory yesterday and said that if the factory people wanted to beat him up, they could as they deserved it. Obviously not serious, but even he realised the gravity of the situation.
I think people will be suitably apologetic of their own accord.
The important thing is that the info comes out and we get a real chance to understand the various roles played.
In a case like this, until the final agreements are signed, any party (BAIC, GM etc.) can raise new issues. It is a question of negotiating the best for you.
I think K-Segg Group, as the "junior partner" stood in the middle of two millstones and got "pulverized". That's why they surrendered.
Now, I hope that everyone learned his lesson: BAIC not to overdo things, GM to lower their demands, the Government to give more support....
Saab is not dead! Let's start again!
Whatever happened with BAIC was only able to happen because KG were vulnerable and needed the help. That should have been sorted, as you suggest, in the selection process.
http://www.expressen.se/Nyheter/1.1792997/uppgifter-i-natt-nu-vill-bank-kopa-saab
It's in Swedish, so you can use Google Trans as usually.
Still it's a matter of how much GM wanted to close the deal because they could push it all in a certain direction by their reaction to BAIC's demands. We'll maybe see the intention after the next announcement by GM.
Still I think that todays Saab is better off than it was at the beginning of the year so a buyer could be found easier than before.
I think it was a good move from CvK and Eker so go to the factory yesterday, maybe the best move communicationwise within the whole process...
That all shall not be the end for Saab, despite of their sales numbers. They've come so far this year and with those new products in the pipeline future should be bright with the right parent.
Well stubborn as I am I'll anyway see my dealer now. I hope I can make a letter of intent to get a new car. Or even a binding purchase agreement...
What will be telling is whether GM or the SV government really scuttle the deal as that would say a lot about their consideration for anything other than what might be considered their 'narrower' interests.
www.autocar.co.uk/blogs/autocarconfidential/archive/2009/11/25/gm-s-global-dream-is-back-on-track.aspx
GME plans (they stated yesterday) will be set within 3 weeks suggesting no time for a new buyer to emerge. Personally I sense Saab is out of time as a stand alone operation though the Brand may live on within GME, perhaps with the 9-5 being pulled and a fast forwarded Astra based 9-3 made at Ellesmere Port?
*Göteborgs posten say it was the demands from BAIC that stopped the deal.
*SvD says that Koenigsegg Group got cold feet and realized that they were in over their head. *Expressen say it is because of quality issues with the new 9-5.
BUT both von Koenigsegg and Eker say it was because they ran out of time. But we know that the EIB loan was only a few days away. Do really a few days more matter?
So which explaination should we believe in? For now I believe in Koenigsegg Group official explaination.
And also now that the deal is off, both von Koenigsegg and Eker say that they believe there is no hope for Saab. What kind of farewell present is that? Comments like that only make people lose even more hope and make Saab bleed even more!
Merbanco should buy Saab from GM as it is the only company with no intelectual property right problems
that quickly can take over before 1st of january.
Merbanco should as Saabs owner start to collaborate with Koenigsegg on development of engines and new materials and technologies. Basicly offer CvK a unique product development position in the company.
Merbanco should also launch a K-edition Saab 9-5, and finally make use of the EIB loan application for lean-grean-technologies.
The situation is a win-win situation for Saab, GM, koenigsegg and Merbanco. Everyone can be friends again.
Where do I send the bill to Deutche Bank??
Maybe Merbanco is back on track?
From TTELA & EXPRESSEN
According to Expressen, the U.S. merchant bank Merbanco again shown interest in Saab.
The head of the bank, Mr Johnston has a plan ready for Saab.
- Saab have to start building cars that buyers want, and take care of their customers, "said Johnston told Expressen.
German Deutsche Bank last summer, picked up three main candidates for the purchase of Saab, the Swedish Koenigsegg Group, U.S. Renco Group, with clear links to General Motors, and American Commercial Bank Merbanco.
Of these three, General Motors chose to begin the final negotiations with the Koenigsegg Group.
Now Koenigsegg Group dropped out of the deal have Merbanco, with Saab-enthusiast Christopher Johnston expressed interest again.
According to information provided to Expressen was Johnston last night in contact with representatives of Saab Automobile and he is - according to the source - "on the track again.
Merbanco cash, stability & leadership with a K-Segg halo would be a nice outcome at this point. Somehow I suspect that the allure of that soft entry into China is hard for any of the players to resist though.
Bishop, the man who started it all was the money man. Why would they have been picked if the money was not there? The man with the money ran away but before that happened everything was fine. So what if the plan called for getting the EIB loan. Forget all the armchair financial experts making judgments here. Everyone who actually saw the plans(GM, EIB, Swedish government) said it was a good and viable one and some were quite impressed if we are to believe what we have read here from the DSs.
If the money was not there they would not have made it past the first round. Things happen. Money can flee from a company by more than one way. In K-segg's case it was one man who ran away out of apparent agoraphobia. Take some other large company that may have shown interest and been picked as THE bidder. The economy or any number of business "issues" could have wiped it out in the interim. There are no absolutes in this world. Just because you are sitting pretty one minute does not mean you will be the next.
In the end I still say that if the latest reports are true the money is not the main issue. I remember K-Segg mentioning there being several avenues of funding to explore to replace the missing money man Bishop. They just picked the wrong one. And now, although they could just tell BAIC to take a hike and find some of their other friends with money, it is a time issue just as they said. I think they lost faith and were just so beat down by the whole process and did not have the patience left to deal with two demanding cry babies on either side of them. Money is an issue here but not the issue. Other money can be found but time and apparently patience cannot.
Swade! There´s a report in expressen today that Johnston from Merbanco contacted Saab and GM and is in the deal again! I don´t know if they got it from saabsunited, certainly some info is from here, but if it´s true, then it´s magic!
http://www.expressen.se/Nyheter/1.1792997/uppgifter-i-natt-nu-vill-bank-kopa-saab
Of course it was the bank's money, just for clarification.
"I wouldn't read too much into the BAIC angle. GP.se haven't been known for accurate theories in the past and I'd urge caution on giving that one too much credence.
I spoke with Saab just two or three days ago and everything was signed up and ready with BAIC and agreement had been reached from the BAIC and the GM side on their participation.
Nice scapegoat, but I'm not ready to use that one yet."
As far as I know, GP.se are still the only ones reporting this as the reason. So why is it suddenly so much more credible?
That was my mistake. I got my news services confused (I confused GP with Expressen, who I definitely don't trust).
My unreserved apology is all yours.
Mind you, I'm not all that impressed by Göteborgs-Posten either. It's my local paper, so I read it a lot, and their journalism has really gone downhill in recent years. But they're well connected in these parts, so they may well be onto something here.
However, I say this with mixed feelings, because I'm not totally thrilled with K-Segg's plan to make Saab an elite (translated: high-priced) vehicle that I'll never be able to afford again.
Through my rambling, I find I would prefer Merbanco to take over as majority owner and business plan, keeping K-Segg as figureheads.
“Vill de anställda slå oss så får de det” upon visiting the Saab factory yesterday morning.
http://www.svd.se/naringsliv/nyheter/artikel_3849739.svd
Google translates this as: "Do they want employees to beat us, they'll get it”
This is akin to saying that “if the employees wanted to take it out on them then they would be entitled to do so” –and hence he would understand this.
This is a self-effacing statement and perhaps does not suggest that they [K-Segg] “deserved” it.
CvK is also quoted/translated as saying:
“It feels good to be here, but obviously I am incredibly sad that there was [n’t?] something [more positive to say?]. Besides time and heart, we have spent over 100 million [SEK?] during the six months we have been involved in the process”.
In the same article Paul Åkerlund, the IF Metall chairman at Saab is quoted/translated as saying:
“We know about some things we cannot say to the media right now. And we must check if it really is as it says, or if there are other hidden things”.
Venting is fine and it goes without saying that it should be done without prejudice and in a reasoned and civilised way. Anything more should be reserved for the gym! It could be said that CvK showed courage and leadership (the same could be said of CJ/Merbanco) by being the public face whilst others preferred the anonymity of their respective brands and PR outlets.
The due diligence and subsequent selection of K-Segg (which at that time including ‘Bishop’) for this process and, as noted by others, was decided by GM and Deutsche Bank AG.
However, even with Bishop pulling out early, CvK says that it was not an issue of finance but one of timely signatures for the deal (ref. Mailr).
The Koenigsegg group it would appear conducted themselves with integrity and professionalism and in the best interests of Saab. I hope there is still a chance for them to be a part of Saab’s future and, that what is unfolding here is high brinkmanship and sabre-rattling as a result of others.
I cannot blame GM for not wanting BAIC to have too much of a look-see into up coming technology... and I cant blame CvK for this either.
From a pure business sense, it makes the best move to cancel the deal. "know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em"
I always thought this deal was too big for CvK, but i never wanted it to fail, and I sure never wished death on him like others. He's human too and it was simply too much of a steak to chew on.