The headline, apparently, says it all....
Spyker sole remaining bidder for Saab: Whitacre
....and once again it's our friends at Reuters who are making the news and everybody else is following them.
I don't want to be a stone in anyone's shoe here, but I haven't seen a single quote attributed to Whitacre in any of the dozen or so stories I've looked at this morning that says it's Spyker or die.
As a matter of fact, that story with the big Saab headline is mostly about the deal for GM to sell control of it's China joint venture with Shanghai Automotive. The only quote related to Saab is this:
"I think it is possible," Whitacre told reporters in a roundtable discussion at the automaker's board room in its Detroit headquarters when asked if he thought the deal could be completed on Saab by GM's month-end deadline.
And after that, there's this:
Whitacre repeated that barring a deal, GM would close Saab. GM had set an end-of-December deadline to find a buyer for the unit after a deal to sell the brand to sports car maker Koenigsegg collapsed in November.
The Associated Press seems to have a more balanced piece, with more actual quotes from Whitacre:
GM identifies Spyker as possible Saab savior......Chairman and interim CEO Ed Whitacre Jr. told reporters he has "a sense it's possible" that the Saab sale to Spyker could still go through.
"Saab is just about done," Whitacre said in a meeting with reporters. "If we don't find a buyer by the end of the month, we're going to close it."
I have no doubt that Whiacre left the impression with reporters that it's Spyker or die, but why haven't any of them reproduced a quote from Whitacre saying exactly that?
What I think Whitacre is doing here is playing chess with the Swedish government. He's saying that Spyker is the group they've identified and chosen to deal with and they had better deal with them quickly or else it's "game over".
So Joran Hagglund's backed into a corner and the stakes are high. If the Swedish government and the National Debt Office are comfortable enough with Spyker to offer them loan guarantees, then all well and good.
If they're not comfortable with those loan guarantees, then Joran Hagglund has a few awkward moments in his near future.
------
Why am I being pretty pedantic about this?
Because there is another party seeking to get involved in this process, who I believe are probably being stonewalled. I wrote several days ago about a Swedish consortium looking to get involved. They appear to be credible people, they're serious about Saab and they do exist.
What remains to be seen is whether or not they've left their run too late, whether Deutsche Bank will allow them a foot in the door, or whether or not there's a nudge waiting to give them a hand to prise the door open.
These people will not come out publicly until they have their foot in the door, so we wait (but not for long). The rolloercoaster continues, whether you know you're on it or not.
------
For his part, Joran Hagglund is calling himself "a realistic optimist". From Swedish Radio:
At the Swedish Ministry of Enterprise and Energy, the top civil servant Jöran Hägglund told the news agency TT that they are currently looking carefully at the financial situation of Spyker Cars to see if the state is able to give the necessary guarantees for a loan from the state."The work has started, but you could say it is far from finished. We are aware of the time table, so we are working as actively as we can," Hägglund said.
Asked how he sees the chances of this deal to actually happen, Hägglund said he is a "realistic optimist". "The time table is very tight, but we will be doing the tests we need to make because we have no reason to risk the taxpayers money. But the mere fact that there is an interested party and that there are negotiations going on is a reason to be a realistic optimist," Hägglund says.
No sleep for you, Mr Hagglund. You can sleep next year.
------
Saab spokesman Mats Fägerhag seems pleased with the possibility that Spyker are 'the one'.
The comments from Saab were scarce on Tuesday evening, but TT spoke to Mats Fägerhag, head of technical development at Saab, who was not aware that Spyker Cars is the only bidder left in the negotiations. But if that is the case, he said he thought it was good news. "Spyker cars has shown a good understanding for Saabs Business plan and the value of Saab's brand name," Fägerhag told TT.Spyker Cars is - just like the former Saab-bidder Koenigsegg, a very small luxury car maker. It makes 50 exclusive sports cars per year and has 135 employees. The main owner of Spyker is the Russian millionnaire Vladimir Antonov.
But Mats Fägerhag at Saab says he is not worried that Spyker will just be a repeat of the Koenigsegg story, which fell through last month. "Spyker cars has a lot of knowledge from the trade and I feel that they have both more experience and more stability than Koenigsegg Group," Fägerhag told TT.
------
In case you're wondering, I'm not against Spyker being the group that buys Saab. They appear quite dynamic and hopefully they've got the resources behind them to actually get this done.
What I'm concerned about, though, is the gamesmanship from GM and DB, and the timetable for getting things done.
~P
9000 Aero, 5spd, 117K
http://www.gp.se/ekonomi/1.272101-hagglund-vill-ha-fler-svar
The government has gotten confirmation from GM that Spyker have been elected as the final candidate for buying Saab Automobile, states Jöran Hägglund, undersecretary for Industry Minister Maud Olofsson.
---
Fairly open and shut, I'd say.
"General Motors Co Chairman and acting Chief Executive Ed Whitacre said on Tuesday luxury car maker Spyker is the only remaining party with which GM is negotiating for the sale of its Saab brand."
That's good enough for me!
If we don't find a "suitable" buyer by the end of the month, we're going to close it."
There appear to be plenty of buyers, but GM seems to be turning them away for it's own reasons. Sometimes the whole thing just looks like a great big charade.
---
Whitacre said Saab will be shuttered unless a buyer can be found by Dec. 31. Spyker Cars N.V. is the possible buyer, he said.
"We've got our fingers crossed," Whitacre said.
---
Not much room for maneuver there. This mysterious Swedish bidder will just have to wait until Spyker concludes the purchase, and then buy its way in. I bet Spyker, or anyone else for that matter, would be a lot easier to negotiate with than GM!
Spyker isn't too strong a bidder, either, but if they're all we have, then let's push on to 'the bitter end' and hope GM plays things honest.
Dan - again, where's the quote from Whitacre? They say he said that, so why can't they quote him saying it?
Poker's so common now, isn't it? Maybe the Americans are playing poker and the Swedes are playing chess, which is why we can't get anywhere here.
What is known about Convers Group and its owners, father and son Antonov? How much money do they really have in their coffers? Does anyone have any real knowledge?
This is what I could dig up thru google, archive.org plus Spyker's website and annual report:
Both the websites of Convers Group and Convers Bank are currently just simple placeholders.
The main public banking operation of the group seems to be Lithuania's third largest bank - Snoras ( http://www.snoras.com ), where both father and son Antonov are listed in the supervisory board. Vladimir Antonov controls 64% of the equity capital and 67% of the votes in Snoras.
The website of what used to be the hub of their business - Konversbank (Convers Bank) - was previously active but is now closed down, replaced by a placeholder. Bits and pieces are still available in google cache and archive.org, such as this old (2006?) list of banks that were then part of the group.
* Conversbank (Russia);
* Snoras Bank (Lithuania);
* Latvijas Krājbanka (Latvia);
* Bank "Enisey" (Russia);
* InterProgressBank (Russia);
* Bank Gran (Russia);
* Investbank (Russia);
* Conversbank (UK) Limited*.
As of January 2006, the assets under management of the Group's banks exceeded $2.3 billion. It is likely to be significantly more now, based on financials on Snoras' site that contain more current details from that part of the group.
From Spyker's annual report we can conclude that the Convers Group holding company (i.e. the party bidding for Saab) is based in Cyprus. The group's share holdings in Spyker were initially held by Snoras bank but were later transferred to Convers Group (previously named Desolery Holdings Limited, then renamed RMC Convers Group Holding Limited).
http://www.spykercars.nl/download/investor/Annual_Report_Spyker_Cars_N.V._2008.pdf
Here's an article about the assassination attempt on Alexander Antonov where a few more interesting details are provided, such as their business interest in the Kaliningrad Seaport which is said to be a potential reason for the shooting. Does anyone know if they have any other non-banking business interests, except Kaliningrad Seaport and Spyker?
http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/baltic_states_cis/?doc=11011
The good thing about owning banks is that you can provide not only equity or personal loans, but also bank loans to your portfolio companies, even if they otherwise would have trouble accessing bank loans on the open market... They have done exactly that with Spyker - provided a mix of equity (from Convers Group) and bank loans (from Bank Snoras and Latvijas Krājbanka). Um... in other words Vladimir Antonov may have access not only to his own funds, but also to a certain extent those of his bank depositors...
So - is there anyone out there with any more knowledge about the Antonovs or their business activities, and how much money they control via their Cyprus company?
There is not, so I take much more direction from these quotes than speculating there is a white knight waiting on the sidelines with two weeks to go.
I think we all need to prepare ourselves that Saab is as close to being extinct as it ever and if Stryker is the only option, my confidence gets even lower.
when Saab is owned by Spyker,it will be one hell of a marketing campaign to win back the confidence of the market.
Thats why we are here:)
Or are you saying that Spyker is GM's preferred bidder, but not the Swedish government's? That doesn't add up either. It's GM's call, they can pick whomever they like. If the Swedish gov refuses the loan without a good financial reason, then they have their electorate to answer to. That's not GM's headache, they don't care what happens to Saab as long as they get rid of it and don't get too bad PR from it. So there's no reason why Whitacre wouldn't come right out and say Spyker if that's how he feels.
And I'd say, based on all the reports, that he did exactly that. The absence of a literal quote is probably because the statement was a bit incoherent, not forming a complete sentence, not understandable enough without the accompanying gestures, or something like that. Maybe Ed sneezed in the middle of it! I've done a bit of interviewing myself from time to time, and I know that it's often difficult to get usable direct quotes, you have to rephrase much of it in your own words instead.
as a total newcomer to saabunited,but a long time saab owner and devotee. I am totaly bewildered by GM's ability to manipulate all endevours to sell SAAB to a competent concern. They DO NOT WANT to sell! it seems to me.
We have seen an extaordinary saga over the last months,of a list of prospective purchasers/investors,all with some backing either commercial or quasi goverment and we blame anyone BUT GM for the sale. WHY?
TonyC
And here's an interesting one. Whitacre says they're the only one. Hagglund now seems to be saying there's more on the sidelines:
"We, both the European Investment Bank and the Swedish government, have been given one main lead that we are beginning to analyze, though we are also looking more broadly at a few other interested parties," Joeran Haegglund, state secretary in the Swedish enterprise ministry, told Swedish radio.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hvpLAgCpkGW18qJTb-fUJ8uFgT7g
Hagglund doesn't want to have to answer to voters. I'd suggest that a strong buyer will be what he wants to see. I hope Spyker are a strong buyer. I really do.
Following the theme of my missing comment - here's another interesting bit of news, directly from one of Convers Group's banks.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investbank.ru%2Frus%2Fnews%2Fpress%2F3604.html
If I understand the googledygook trans correctly this means that Vladimir Antonov decreased his share holding in Investbank from 52% to 40%, a little more than a week ago.
Releasing funds? For some new exciting venture?
something tells me Swade knows more than he can tell.
I don't want him to tell us till he is allowed to, so till then I will have faith in what he says is truth and in what he says it's not 100% truth (as I also don't think that anybody is lying).
As for why GM choose the way they do, that has been a mystery all along. Why were Koenigsegg Group picked when many seemingly stronger suitors were available? Why were CJ and Merbanco summarily dismissed after the KG dropout, apparently without even getting an explanation themselves? And what happened to Renco? We just don't know. All we can safely assume is that the choosing has been done entirely with GM's best interests at heart, not with Saab's.
The Hägglund quote is, unless I'm mistaken, from this morning, at which time it had been made public that one bidder was more in favour, but not which one, nor that the others had been completely ruled out.
Lets not all lose focus on what needs to be done here and try and refrain from conspiracy theories. We now now that alot of others are reading what we write here. Swade knows more than he is allowed to say.
Saab Up!!
It would be a little odd that the SG is now pushing the same deal for Spyker - as Spyker isn't much stronger than KG and not even Swedish.
That could speak for a possible dark horse which has SG's support and which could be the Swedish consortium Swade has referred to.
(And, to be even more conspiratory, that could explain why Robert Collin made an U-turn regarding Spyker. As a known besserwisser he always wants to be right...)
" let's hope for a better destiny for Saab. Is it not time for government to come up with it's own initiative? Perhaps, after all, it can become a car plant owner a period, until the times get a little better and Saab can have a more permanent owner?"
Isn't that what has been suggested here at SU all along?
no more, Mr. Nice Guy.
"Saab Automobile and Beijing Automotive reach milestone in technology cooperation
2009-12-14
Saab closed on a sale of certain Saab 9-3, current 9-5 and Powertrain technology to BAIC
Current 9-5 tooling will move to China where it will be used to make BAIC vehicles
Saab will assist BAIC in integrating this technology into BAIC vehicles
Trollhättan - Saab Automobile AB announced today that it had closed on the sale to Beijing Automotive Industry Holdings Co. Ltd (BAIC) of certain Saab 9-3, current 9-5 and powertrain technology and tooling. SAAB will assist BAIC to integrate this technology into FUTURE BAIC vehicles."
But, no GM site posts of Ed Whitacre statements today!
From GM nothing has changed. GM is acting like a sale is pending.
Whitacre may just be trying to push the process along. Holding someones feet to the fire. Maybe Whitacre is trying to water-board the Swedish Government to use an updated term. After all, the deadline is GM's.
Just a thought.
For a long time the backup group could remain unknown because Koenigsegg initially stepped up as the exciting local group. But when Koenigsegg pulled out, the backup plan had to be implemented because no one knew if another buyer could be found so quickly. Unlike the first go around, there wasn't enough time to wait to see if someone else was going to be able to buy Saab.
The backup plan group was never going to get into a bidding war with Spyker. They were only going to bid enough to keep GM from shutting Saab down.
That's why GM excluded Merbanco, Renco, et al., from the second round after Koenigsegg. They wanted Spyker (for whatever reason) but they also knew there was a Swedish backup group. They had two bidders in the hand, and did not want to complicate the deal by adding more bidders in the incredibly short 30 days to complete it.
I can only guess who the Swedish backup group is, but Investor (apparently) has a reputation for this kind of secrecy.
Perhaps at the last minute the backup group decided they did not want to let Spyker have Saab - witness the contact and other info leaked to Swade.
If so they are too late. Announcing the single bidder under these circumstances means the deal is all but done.
Just some wild speculation.
Just get the deal done.
I still think we will be surprised by who buys Saab. Pleasantly I trust!
Get the deal done!
I think the possibility to make it for that unknown Group is still there, given that GM knows they are there and they can make GM an offer they can't refuse.If they are the backup plan Swedish government may already have taken their look at it so it could go really quick. Maybe even without EIB in the first stage.
The most important thing is to get the deal done to stop wild speculations in the press and then build a massive campaign saying "we were never gone but here we are again".
This is all going to work in the end and I bet we hear something by the end of the week.
Still, makes one ask, who could be Collin's preferred bidder - Renco ?
For some time ago, it was in Swedish magazine Affärsvärlden (Business World) an article that SAAB should be purchased by some company with good profits - where Vattenfall was mentioned (Vattenfall is the largest energy provider in Sweden and owned by the government and with huge profits) - to balance the profits with the losses of SAAB. The set-up is in principle to put in 1 billion €, run the company for some years, like 3 -5 years until it was running more stable and sell it for this amount. This would then give tax benefits of at least 0.5 billion €.
Now Vattenfall is liased with Volvo nowadays and is also owned by the government, but other companies could be mentioned that could step in and having the competence and economic stability to run such a business. Can be such a company (or fund) behind the Swedish group.
Possibly this group is well known to the Swedish Government and SG trust them. That makes them the SG preffered bidder but GM for some reasons chooses KG.
That can explain SG acting so slowly in their support for KG. When KG is out, Swedish government sees the chance to promote their favourite buyer and start working much faster.
I think the guys from the mysterious consortium are well established Swedish businessmen. with lots of personal contacts to SG and it can explain the strange change in SG behaviour for the last 2 weeks,
Posible?
Many comments evolve around the reason why a small non-profitable company could earn by going into the equally non-profitably business of SAAB. To my understanding there are a number of reasons. I can not say which is true, but time will tell;
1. GM is behind this in order to minimize losses of SAAB. Spyker has been a losing business for its owners and on the agenda could have been close down of business, not even Russian oligarks have all patience and money in the world. The set-up is that Spyker purchases SAAB, takes over the business for one, two years and then concludes that resources are out (including EIB loan) and closes down SAAB (and Spyker). GM does not have to take costs for cleaning up the bankrupcy and gives a certain amount to the Russian owners, who will make a net profit out of it.
2. The owners of Spyker has a real interest in SAAB and is setting up a business case that integrates Spyker into SAAB, avoiding the yearly losses of Spyker. By knowing that SAAB personnel is very focused on showing a new owner that they will make miracles when GM is not around, they will help turning the entire business around and make SAAB / Spyker profitable again. The owners puts in 1 billion € and after some years, SAAB could very well be worth 2 billion €. Though a risky business, there is a number of if's it can really work out.
3. As an alternative, there is a third party in the background, that is interested in SAAB, but at this moment does not have interest in taking over SAAB due to its connections to GM. If Spyker runs it, and SAAB personnel is really committed, SAAB will have a nice set-up in a number of years, say 4 - 5 years, where the dependence of GM has gone down drastically and Spyker folks can sell of the business to the third party. As you understand, the third party is another car manufacturer. My two favorites are (i) Hyundai - who would be able to make SAAB its superior brand which they lack even though they try. GM is not so found of Hyundai, that is why they are silent at the moment. (ii) BMW - remember the earlier discussions of the Mini platform for the SAAB 9-1. SAAB would be perfect for BMW for a front wheel driven alternative to their standard set-up. Mini is limited to smaller cars - the name can not change that, you would not buy a limousine called Mini Grand or something. You can argue that they already tried this with Rover, yes, but this was a very sick patient and waiting a number of years and discretly putting Spyker to the correct strategy they will have a health company to purchase for Spyker in a number of years with a good profit for the owners.
4. GM is discussing with Spyker just to show the world that they really tried, but at the end of the year, they will say, sorry - no success, we close the brand down. Can not find any good reason for this, but there might be any.
I would really prefer number 3 - many argue that number 2 is the most independent, but being very small means that you are very vulnerable. BMW or Hyundai are medium sized partner that would not vaste resources as GM has done.
I think we all might be affected by the repeated 1000 times expression " a loss making unit"
There were 3 bidders for Opel, quite a few for Volvo and 27 (!!!) for Saab.
I think it is not a case GM is looking for someone who gives them some small compensation and let them forget about the 20 years history of losses, but there's a real fight among the bidders to get the brand of possible bright future.
They were 27 - this mean the huge interest from buyers.
Or there may be any number of other, more enigmatic or sinister possibilities. Or my aunt is going to grow wheels and become an autobus with a landing pad on the roof for pigs who actually do know how to fly...
A few examples of said conspiratorial scenarios:
Big business is all about spreading risks. So there may well exist a behind-the-scenes scenario involving Convers/Spyker becoming sole owner at first and then spreading their risk by involving some other investor(s) with whom a future deal may -or may not- already be in place.
The first that comes to mind is Mubadala who a. already own (portions of) various automotive and technology-related businesses, b. already own a stake in Spyker which, by the way, is hardly less sizeable than the stake of Convers (something like 25% vs. 29%; I find it interesting that nobody ever even whispered the Mubadala name throughout the whole negotiation period) and c. certainly have more than enough money to buy not only Saab but the whole of GM but d. are from the Middle East, therefore may carry a certain odium where the USA and/or US business are concerned, therefore may cause damage to the negotiations. So it may be much better PR to keep mum about their involvement before the sale is completed.
Or it could be, as suggested, some other carmaker whom GM wouldn't want to acquire the technology through a direct sale. The Spyker route may be a circuitous way for this carmaker to get their hands on the tech anyway, only a bit later.
Or it may be some Sweden-based entity who, for political or other reasons (not enough capital on their own perhaps, or environment-related so don't want to be sole owner of a car company since cars pollute or work with public money so cannot be seen as potential squanderers of taxpayer-provided funds or...), are unwilling or unable to become sole owner of Saab but cán be perceived as co-saviour of 20.000 jobs and a key industry after the sale (good local PR). The leak to Swade may be a preparatory PR action for the latter scenario.
I could dream up a lot of scenarios like that. But there is no way to tell one way or the other, so I guess we should let the negs run their course an just wait and see.
It ís interesting, though....
Ivo
PS: Loved the bit about your aunt!
That is an incredible news !!
I've reported what you have said here on our blog in french version
http://saab.skynetblogs.be/post/7520356/un-plan-b-
To be continued ....