ZEEWOLDE, The Netherlands (1 February, 2010) – In advance of the General Meeting of Spyker shareholders, to be held on 12 February 2010, and which was convened on 28 January 2010, Spyker Cars N.V. (“Spyker”) provides further strategic and financial details regarding its acquisition of Saab Automobile AB (“Saab”).
ACQUISITION RATIONALE AND SAAB BUSINESS PLAN
Spyker believes that through the purchase of Saab it has a rare opportunity to acquire and rebuild a global car brand which will be repositioned towards an independent performance-oriented niche car company with an industry-leading environmental strategy. Saab‟s brand DNA is unique and rooted in its aeronautical heritage, innovative and independent thinking and its Swedish origins. Spyker fully supports Saab‟s Business Plan which will be implemented by Saab management. The Business Plan, drawn up by Saab management over the past ten months, was analysed by Spyker in assistance with Booz & Co and KPMG Transaction Services, advisors to Spyker. The Business Plan has also been analysed and supported by several advisors to the Swedish Government and the EIB.
At the General Meeting, Spyker Cars N.V. intends to adopt a resolution to change its name to Saab Spyker Automobiles NV (“Saab Spyker”). This entity will operate Spyker and Saab as two separate operating companies, each focused on its distinct target markets with their respective vehicle lines. As previously stated, Saab Spyker is committed to execute the Saab Business Plan. It is the intention to enhance it in several areas. The highlights of Saab’s strategy will be:
- Saab will be a stand-alone niche manufacturer with three to four model lines: 9-3 (sedan, hatchback, sports estate, X and convertible) and 9-5 (sedan, sports estate and X) and the 9-4X for both the US and European markets. In addition, Saab will investigate the potential of adding a fourth smaller car line (“9-1″) in due course provided that the positive development of the smaller car segment continues. However, this model is currently not envisaged in the Business Plan so if the outcome of the investigation is positive, additional financing to develop this model could be required.
- Saab’s product portfolio will be renewed completely, beginning with the launch of the new 9-5 early this summer, the new 9-4X in early 2011 and the new “all Saab” 9-3 in 2012.
- Saab will continue to be repositioned against other brands such as Audi (A4/A6) and BMW (3/5 series) as a premium brand, leveraging its strong and unique brand heritage.
- Saab’s Technical Development Center in Trollhättan has full capability in developing complete vehicles and will continue to do so. In areas such as safety, environment, driving characteristics, practicality, turbo technologies and several other innovations, the Saab brand is among the best in the industry.
- With Trollhättan as one of the most efficient mid-size car plants in Europe, production and sales volumes are aimed to be rebuilt to recent pre-crisis levels of about 100,000 to 125,000 vehicles including the 9-4X built in Mexico.
- The current dealer network will be re-energized with a new sales and distribution approach in certain markets, which will be implemented during 2010.
- The economies of scale of the on-going collaboration with GM after Closing the acquisition (February 2010) will continue to be leveraged in sourcing via ancillary agreements, with independent sourcing gradually increasing to reduce GM dependency and obtain improved access to other suppliers and the co-development of unique innovations.
Saab Spyker believes that its two brands, both deeply rooted in aeronautical and automotive history, will benefit from sharing certain assets and technology services. Examples include but are not limited to
- Saab’s extensive global network of 1,100 dealers.
- The extensive engineering know how and innovative technologies available at Saab.
- Sharing of activities in marketing & sales: i.e. merchandising, promotion & sponsorship activities, etc.
In the future, the two brands will be able to share certain parts and components and expect to obtain access to supplier and partner resources not available to Spyker or Saab individually today.
FUNDING OF SAAB
The Saab Business Plan requires approximately $1 billion in peak funding for Saab in advance of the return to profitability, forecast to occur by 2012. The funding is provided in part by GM, through $326 million Redeemable Preference Shares (“RPSs”), and in part through other contributions, which concern various substantial contributions to the funding of Saab‟s Business Plan on favorable terms for supplies by GM to Saab and deferred payments from Saab to GM. The remaining amount, apart from cash at bank, is to be provided by a EUR 400 million loan from the European Investment Bank for certain R&D projects at Saab. Securing this EIB loan is a condition precedent to closing of the Saab acquisition (“Closing”).
With this financing in place, the business plan does not envisage any future funding being required, neither from Spyker or elsewhere, for Saab to return to profitability. The business plan targets car production and sales at or below historical levels of 100,000 to 125,000.
Explanation on the two sources of funding:
Redeemable Preference shares
At Closing, GM will convert USD 326 million of pre-closing receivables on Saab into RPSs in Saab. The issue of the RPSs will therefore NOT cause any dilution for the shareholders in Spyker. The voting rights attaching to these RPSs constitute 0.0005% of the total voting rights in Saab. The other 99.99% of the voting rights (100% of the ordinary shares) will be held by Spyker. Since the RPSs are capital and not a loan, no interest is due at any time by Saab. The RPSs carry no dividend from Closing until December 31, 2011. A dividend entitlement of 6% starts from January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2014 and increases over time to 12% as from July 1, 2014 until the scheduled redemption date of December 31, 2016. The dividend over 2012 will be added to principal, but as from fiscal year 2013 the dividend is payable in cash. Should Saab have insufficient distributable reserves to pay the cash dividend it will be added to principal increased with a penalty factor of up to 4%, but such that the total dividend entitlement will never exceed 12%.
In the period 2010-2016, the average dividend payable is about 4%, which is considerably below the average interest on a comparable subordinated loan.
The RPSs qualify as equity and therefore, if Saab cannot pay dividends or redeem the RPSs, Saab will not be in default but the RPSs will simply continue to accrue. Also, the RPSs cannot be redeemed as long as the EIB loan is not yet fully repaid. The Saab Business Plan envisages redemption of the RPSs starting in 2016 out of retained profit, without additional funding (from Spyker or anyone else) being required.
EIB loan
The Share Purchase Agreement is subject to the execution of a EUR 400 million loan agreement between Saab and the European Investment Bank (“EIB”), for which a guarantee was obtained from the Swedish Government on January 26, 2010. This loan will be issued to Saab. All amounts payable by the EIB are specifically earmarked to the Euro for designated Saab projects and capital expenditures and represent 50% of these projects or capital expenditures. The projects mainly relate to increasing fuel efficiency and clean car technology. The remaining 50% is funded by Saab itself pursuant to its Business Plan. Spyker will not have any access to the EIB funds which are completely ring-fenced nor will it pay any part of the Purchase Price with proceeds from the EIB loan. The guarantee is subject to approval by the European Commission. Saab and the Swedish Government have provided all required information to the EC prior to the issue of the guarantee so the decision by the EC is expected very soon.
FUNDING OF SPYKER
Spyker’s existing bank loans in the aggregate amount of EUR 57 million are refinanced by Tenaci Capital B.V. (“Tenaci”). The terms and conditions of this loan will mirror those of the existing loans it repays, including the right to convert EUR 9.5 million into ordinary shares at EUR 4.00 per share. The term of the loan is 12 months and the interest 10 percent above Euribor. After payment of the last instalment of the Purchase Price, Tenaci has the right to collateralize the loan on terms and conditions identical to those on which the existing loans were collateralized.
The Purchase Price of Saab amounts to USD 74 million (EUR 53.23 million at the current exchange rate of 1:1.39). The first instalment of USD 50 million, to be paid on Closing, will be paid as follows: USD 25 million is borrowed from Tenaci at the same interest rate as the other funding extended by Tenaci, without the right to convert into shares. This amount is currently already in escrow with General Motors.
The other USD 25 million is financed through a share issue, largely through a commitment from GEM Global Yield Fund Ltd under an equity facility concluded between Spyker and GEM. Spyker currently does not intend to draw in excess of USD 25 million under this facility.
The second instalment, USD 24 million, will be payable on July 15, 2010. Spyker has been approached by various investors to fund this instalment. Spyker intends to finance this amount primarily through senior debt (senior to the debt owed to Tenaci), but does not rule out other alternatives. Spyker has committed to pledge its assets to GM as security for this final tranche.
FUNDING OF TENACI
Tenaci’s equity is wholly owned by Investeringsmaatschappij Helvetia B.V., the personal holding company of Mr. Victor Muller. Tenaci obtains its debt funding from sources that wish to remain anonymous and with which Tenaci has entered into non-disclosure agreements. The terms and conditions of Tenaci’s own financing do not impact Spyker or Saab in any way.
Tenaci has successfully bought Mr. V. Antonov’s current shareholding in Spyker consisting of 4.6 million ordinary shares, subject to closing of the Saab acquisition. Currently Tenaci has no plans to make a public offer on all of the issued shares in Spyker.
Related posts:
That Opel blurb...
{ 118 comments }
9-3 HATCHBACK!!!! IDHFS;LDUFJHDF4I793P84HP98JFR!!!!
Wow!
Couple of quick observations:
9-3 Hatchback?!
ETA of 9-5 and 9-4x are later than I’d expected. That’s disappointing. I was hoping for Spring delivery of the 9-5.
“current dealer network will be re-energized with a new sales and distribution approach…”
As a dealer, this is very interesting.
So much is riding on that EIB, which is still not 100% approved. :-/ Very concerning, Feb 12 is a HUGE date for all of us. If this falls through, there is no way I’m going to perform two days later
Can only hope it is a “big hatch”, like on Saab’s of yore, versus the dinky things multiple manufacturers “call” a hatch today. Loved the way I could take my ’94 900 to the local hardware or furniture store and load up items other people had to borrow a friend’s truck to move.
Yeah, couldn’t you just imagine a completely modern Saab that harkens to the shape of a 92, 93, or 96 with a cavernous hatch opening in the back? Hm… Or am I dreaming ahead to a 9-1?
Brett,
As usual, Kermit is able to sum it up in so few words!
In general, I like what I read. I hope Saab doesn’t go TOO upmarket.
Cheers,
~P
I am glad the issue of private investors was so clearly written, hopefully the press will leave it alone now.
As for Saab’s business plan, I’m confident they have the expertize and knowledge to get through it.
That leaves us, what can we do to help, hopefully Saab marketing will let us know what we can do as owners and enthusiasts.
Yes, but a key concern of some was spyker utilizing the EIB loan, which as presented here is limited to use for the saab brand. Should alleviate some concerns.
With you on the late arrival
Hatch time… yeah…. love the kermit gif!
Any one else think they should bring back the “Griffen” name badge as well as the Aero?
Glad to see ‘hatchback’ listed for the NG9-3. I hope that means a full coupe/3dr (not Astra/Golf style) and perhaps a twin door arrangement for the sedan/5dr? The Skoda Superb ‘twin door’ is a good effort, but I’m sure Saab could easily top it with a bit of Saaby ingenuity.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/51800/skoda-superb-review-road-test-2/
Great to see the new 9-3 will sell as both a sedan and a hatchback. This is the right approach!
Other than that: this transactions seems to create a very heavy debt burden for the new company.
Did anyone notice the plans for a 9-5x? I really wonder what that might look like? Audi allroad? Or like this
: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3605/3439173858_fc05025a04.jpg&imgrefurl=http://flickr.com/photos/saabrobz/3439173858/&usg=__nihkMwd0gh2bD5wJ6UbyDJHPXQ4=&h=332&w=500&sz=129&hl=sv&start=18&sig2=pvWoMU8nIag1fP5BVlMaTw&um=1&tbnid=zVQvDNf47OfYVM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsaab%2B9-5x%26hl%3Dsv%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1&ei=pmpnS8XuIs3w4gbz9qj1Bg
Quijote: No need to worry, all signs from EIB are positive. Since the business plan has been approved by so many instances, it’s hard to imagine them saying no.
“I hope Saab doesn’t go TOO upmarket.”
Being the conservation-minded thrifty overgrown Boy Scout that I am, only two things do I ever routinely brag about, regarding my car: 1.) gas mileage, and 2.) relatively reasonable cost. So, I share your concern about Saab ending up going the route of BMW/Mercedes on the financial side of things.
Of course, don’t get me wrong, I do less often discuss turbo power, road handling, xenon headlights, good storage, that killer sub-woofer, and other things that make my Saab so cool. (My wife is mostly enamored with the heated leather seats.)
Anyway, better able to afford paying the premium required to support my favorite brand than I used to be able to do… But that doesn’t mean that I am not without limits on what I see as reasonable to spend on transportation. And perhaps therein lies the rub, Saab caters to a particularly finicky, educated lot, and as a group are likely to have boundaries on how much we are willing to spend on purchasing a car.
Hatchbacks rule…. Anyone remember the GM “H” bodies of the late 1970′s… Monza, Starfire, Sunbird.. even Vega… I am not saying they were super great cars, but dang I loved the hatch!
My first car, 1980 Monza Spyder… HATCHBACK.. oh yeah…
HATCH UP!
Hatchbacks rule…. Anyone remember the GM “H” bodies of the late 1970′s… Monza, Starfire, Sunbird.. even Vega… I am not saying they were super great cars, but dang I loved the hatch!
My first car, 1980 Monza Spyder… HATCHBACK.. oh yeah…
HATCH UP!
Hatchbacks rule…. Anyone remember the GM “H” bodies of the late 1970′s… Monza, Starfire, Sunbird.. even Vega… I am not saying they were super great cars, but dang I loved the hatch!
My first car, 1980 Monza Spyder… HATCHBACK.. oh yeah…
HATCH UP!
Does anyone know why the 9-4 has to wait for 2011 delivery? With stories of initial production underway in Mexico, I had hoped (even assumed) it was going to be delivered this year.
did the EIB loan been pre approved??..just formality i think…will b like a walk in the park unless we dont know something?…im confident
Saab can’t immediately jump into the full premium arena. Years of lacklustre GM components cheapening the brand’s image have seen to that.
Each new model release can move a little upmarket over it’s predecessor, but trust and credibility in the market place will have to be earned. That will take time.
“I hope Saab doesn’t go TOO upmarket.”
As far as I’m concerned, Saabs are cars that I don’t mind saving-up for.
The “no money down $5,000 cash back” thing wasn’t working out, to put things mildly.
Will the 9-4x be availible in OZ and NZ?
Hello from the Canary Islands ( Spain ), how difficult would be to set up a new dealer, knowing the fact that the one that exist in my city now is not serving with the quality and exclusivity expected for this kind of brand ?
Actually this existing dealer is selling the Saab brand in the first floor without much attention and in the ground floor are the Opel’s, the Volvo’s and the Land Rovers…We expect I think something more envolving with this brand that makes us maybe more specials than going to a car supermaket…
Greetings from Gran Canaria island.
Salvador
9-5*X* anyone catch that?
To continue with comparisons;
Audi needed about 20 Years to be were it is now.
I wouldn’t hold your breath on that one. I have gone on record (on this site) saying I will test drive a Volvo the day the 9-4x is released in Oz. It depends on the new distributor too. If it is Ateco (hopefully not), it might decide to only sell the new 9-5 here and no other model. You only have to look at how it distributes Fiat. I’m guessing NZ will be the same?
Hmmm …….
“Saab will be a stand-alone niche manufacturer with three to four model lines: 9-3 (sedan, hatchback, sports estate, X and convertible) and 9-5 (sedan, sports estate and X)”
SaabKen: a new 9-3 hatchback ? This was mentioned by Michael Mauer (ex-Saab design chief) as one of the original body styles in the Project 440 that never made it past the final rounds:
http://archive.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2003/frankfurt/preview/saab-93sporthatch/index.html
A 9-5″X” huh ? Sort of like a bigger 9-3X ?
“Saab’s product portfolio will be renewed completely, beginning with the launch of the new 9-5 early this summer, the new 9-4X in early 2011 and the new “all Saab” 9-3 in 2012.”
SaabKen: New “all-Saab” 9-3 ? Wow !
“Saab will continue to be repositioned against other brands such as Audi (A4/A6) and BMW (3/5 series) as a premium brand, leveraging its strong and unique brand heritage.”
SaabKen: More power to ya !
I guess Saab is in a similar position to Audi in 1990.
Why provide all this product detail? As much as I like to know, wouldn’t it be better to keep us guessing and bring out surprises later, rather than exposing everything and risking disappointment if sales are slower than expected and they have to pull a version or two… No other car companies expose this much, listed or not.
I think too many people here talk too much. First Joran Hagglund, now Spyker.
Anyway, looking forward to the hatch. That’s cool.
Yep yep, caught that.
The more interesting parts of this are the elastic clauses about future sharing, like “In the future, the two brands will be able to share certain parts and components and expect to obtain access to supplier and partner resources not available to Spyker or Saab individually today.”
I’m very curious to see what projects could develop, and see Saab catapult itself to the head of the luxury pack just by association with a higher priced brother that produces insane sports cars, suvs and sedans. Pretty cool.
I’m not really sure if I should interpret the 9-5x reference is to a separate model like the 9-3x or just to the fact it’s a 9-5 with XWD. If they’re thinking about “off-roading” the 9-5 though, I think that’s a brilliant idea. Giving an already-developed model a bit of an extra rugged look with some plastic body panels added and a higher suspension, and maybe some thick-stiched leather like the older Volvo XC-70′s. Sounds kick-a$$ to me.
“Saab will continue to be repositioned against other brands such as Audi (A4/A6) and BMW (3/5 series) as a premium brand, leveraging its strong and unique brand heritage.”
There’s no time frame on this, but it’s going to take at least 5 years IMHO. By then newer models will be mostly GM free, and I’m guessing the NG9-5 will be nearing retirement. The last legacy GM car.
1. Why the concern over going ‘upmarket’? Saab’s target is explicitly listed:
I’m guessing to fight the naysayers that claim SAABs line-up is/will be too small. Also to build some confidence in the brand going forward.
The 9-5x has been hinted at many times so I guess it will happen.
Someone recently suggested (in comments) that the NG9-3 wagon and the NG9-3x would basically be the same car. This could help Saab add hatchback models without adding too many extra body styles, especially if a ‘twin door’ sedan/hatch is in the works?
@Viking Up!-
There’s always room for surprises in the mix…. don’t forget about VMs enthusiasm towards small volume creation of an Aero-X.
@Jeff-
In the future, Spyker will be powered by a highly tuned Saab V8 4.0 HOT (let me call it the B435RS) which will also power the low volume Aero-X ….. it is destiny
Otherwise, let me sum up by stating:
Happy.
9-3 Hatch.
Now.
Thanks.
Mike.
Win.
BBTH!!!!!
End.
Wow adding a hatch to the 9-3 range and keeping all the other body styles, thats a large line up for one model. But I’m sure it’ll work. It’ll give the SAAB (hatch) enthusiasts what they’ve been wanting for years, and it’ll continue to appeal to other parts of the market (wagons for families, Sedan for business executives etc.) The 9-5X was mentioned ages ago when the SAAB product plan to 2017 came out before the K-segg deal fell apart. All in all I am looking forward to the new SAAB
Former 1979 Chevy Monza wagon driver here. (Sorry no hatch.) Not the best car but it was a war horse. The L4 engine was decent on gas and took a lickin’ and kept on tickin’. My granddad and I were able to load all the materials to re-roof a small shed into that Monza. Flattened the rear springs but it still was able to run with the beastly V8 family cars of the time in the lower speed, higher maneuver situations such as rapid navigation of subdivision streets.
My ’09 9-5 Combi is roughly the same color blue as my old Monza. Makes me smile every time I associate the two.
Anyhow, I’ll agree … bring back the hatch!
Griffin Up!
x12345 Brett! Hurray 9-3 hatch!!! I hope it gets some decent differentiation from the sedan and combi versions. Unlike mazda 3 and 6 sedan, hatch, and wagon versions.
Looks like no chance of modern day 9000 Aero though. We can get a 9-5 sedan or combi, or uber-combi (x). I still think a large hatchback makes sense (again, newer gen 9000 is an example), but I guess they have to draw the line somewhere with how many variants they will produce.
I hope the 9-5 uber-combi will be relevant ~2-3 years from now. Audi is done with allroads, and I don’t think anyone else really makes a ‘luxury’ rugged wagon.
I’m looking forward to new bold and tasteful SAAB/Spyker advertising and promotions.
With you, ‘Smoke’! (and once, again, I’m nodding at Jeff’s remarks)
For the love of Allah, let’s lose the self-consciousness about competing with BMW or Audi (or M-B).
Granted, there is an undeniable single year lacunae for a 9-3 buyer (dropping the 6 cyl Aero was a monumental mistake…almost rather that they skip model year 2010…the saavy buyer is better off to hunt the market for a low-mileage ’08).
2010 is the ‘Year of the 9-5′ — all rides and falls on. I’m encouraged that the Tuners (MapTun explicitly…I’m sure BSR, Hirsch and VTuner (my personal favourite) are in the wings for Panamera performance numbers (but a damn site better looking!).
Don’t think it’s all about the ‘hatch’ (Kroum: Are we not a two-headed hydra on this point?) . If brought back though I’d like to see it ‘Big and Chunky’ (a la 900 SPG!).
I like the idea of some of the models, but can’t help but think it is spreading the line-up out to thin. Unless the X versions are very different from their sedan and combi counter parts. They are virtually the same cars! I really want Saab to flesh these cars out and make the necessary viable models to sell.
I love the variant line up! It is a low-cost way to attract to a broad base of customers. If one thinks that it is spreading the line up too thin then just look at all of the “non-SAAB” customers the Sedan and the SC have brought to the brand.
Now the 9-3 Hatch: That is for the enthusiasts! This will sell! However, I do not think that my wife would ever buy one. She would (and has) bought a 9-3 SC, however. She described it as the “coolest wagon, ever”. It has regularly been described as such in automative publications. It is a great car in a small segment, but something that you have to hang onto.
Oh, I am so happy that in 2012 we will have a 9-3 Hatch! Make mine a coupe, please!
Nice grouping of vehicles. 2 Sedans, 1 Vert, 2 SCs, 3 SUVs (9-3X.9-5X, 9-4X), and a Hatch, not including the 9-1. Should be enough variety for anyone.
Jimmy Ellis Auto reporting that they received a package from Saab Cars USA (soon to be owned by Spyker) to sign up as a dealer for the new Saab Spyker Automobiles AB.
Would be great to know the contents of the package in detail.
Currently Saab NZ is a division of Saab Aus…. so whoever gets Oz is most likely to get NZ as well (all 2 dealers of it!)
they are trying to prove that they have a valid and sound business plan – to remove some customers and analysts apprehension that Saab will not survive
If the sedan becomes a ‘twin door’, the coupe/3dr hatch is the only addition to the range. If the wagon was to become basically just a 2WD vesion of the 9-3X, that’s no extra body styles.
NTP, I am not a hatch man. I prefer my sedans or wagons, ahem, SportCombis. Love coupes, too.
Completely agree that dropping the V6 from the 9-3 range was a monumental mistake. To compete in the market Saab wants (and has) to compete in a V6 is an absolute must.
And while at it, pump that V6 in the NG9-5 up, will ya!? This thing needs to put out 350 hp. Yeah, sorry, but now that Saab’s saved: time to get to work! The problems that were there 10 months ago have not been solved.
NZ once had more than two dealers. Hopefully it will again?
Unfortunately importers have ‘business plans’ too. If an importer was to decide that selling a 3dr. hatchback model in Australia might rob from sales of sedans/wagons and be less profitable, it could decide to exclude that model from it’s range. Unfortunately I’ve seen it all to often here. It even happens with manufacturers who have their own distribution here sometimes. For example, VW wont sell the Scirocco here, because it thinks it will rob sales from the Golf and the total sales of the two models combined would not be much greater.
Saab does not NEED the V6. Audi is dropping the V6 from the A4 line. That speaks volumes of the 4 cylinder.
Yeah, except they ain’t dropping it from the S4. Big difference. And I bet the new RS4 will come with a V8.
If you want to be a “performance-oriented niche car company”, you need to also be performance, not just niche.
Well unless “Aero” is now going after the S4, C63, M3. Than I think its fine that they dropped the V6. If they have an all out performance version, be it Aero or Viggen or Griffen or whatever, than sure throw down a V6.
I don’t think we need a V8 at all…
I was hoping to go the V6 route like the new BMW VED (http://www.bmwblog.com/2010/01/30/rumor-bmw-vision-efficientdynamics-gets-greenlight-as-production-car/). If they can green light a super high performance Eco-Halo car, I think Saab should get in that space right along with them. Saab needs to be THE go to eco-sports car, which is going to be an extremely competitive but ultimately profitable field. From the ground up, they need to use core technology that allows maximum performance for lowest cost and environmental impact. That’s what turbos were all about 30 years ago, and today that’s what electric propulsion and alternative fuel/engine technology provide. With a comprehensive strategy that implements Saab’s new propulsion strategy from the get-go with the new 9-3, there will be a credible way forward for Saab to establish itself as a player in that arena.
I know a lot of you shake your heads that there is not enough time or money to compete in that space, but it’s a mandate- by the Swedish govt, EIB, and by the marketplace. Like it or hate it, there will be some crazy propulsion tech in the new Saabs, and it needs to be scalable and ultimately unique for it to take hold. I certainly hope that’s what was “out back” that Saab worker was telling us a few weeks ago.
@Brett…I’m pretty confident that’s what Victor meant by 9-5x, an uprgraded 9-5SC with more rugged suspension and off road styling. I’m getting so tired of the grey colored bumper and fender flares though, I hope they can instead go with some rally-inspired bits to set it apart. That whole Volvo/Subaru/Allroad look is getting really old. It’s time that Saab separate itself more from the pack, go the opposite direction. Implement cool lighting, some skid plates, improved clearance bumpers which allow better approach angles, etc. Rally friendly stuff, maybe even colors inspired by Saab Rally teams. That’d be an “X” model, and while your at it, why limit it to the Combi models only? Make it an option for everything, it’s mainly mechanical and lower body anyway.
In response to Charles, Saab does need the V6, but they need it to maximize efficiency. They need to compete against BMW and Audi, who will continue to use V6s in their S4 and S6 models. What their downsizing does is finally give Saab a chance to catch up and beat them at our own game.
anyone have specs on the 2010 9-3 engines? or a link?
It’s possible the NG9-3 won’t accommodate the V6 anyway. In which case I’d to see a bigger four for the Viggen model or whatever.
I bet the RS4 won’t! It seems Audi is more bent on playing up their turbo/supercharged engines as well. The A5 is something all together though. It think it would be smart for divide the powertrains among the models like such. The 9-3 should consist of only turbo/twin turbo 4cyl’s. It gives the more premier models at Saab a reason to ask a higher price. Even the projected specs of the Aero-Xhad it with a twin-turbo 6, which is doable and realistic for Saab.
Twin turbo 4 or 6. Sign me up.
A modern twin-turbocharged V6 (with DI) should be the halo engine. Saab should also work hard on reducing overall weight. When the two come into play, you have a nimble, quick performance car that still gets great mileage.
A twin-turbo four-cylinder would be a great engine for the model just below the line topper. And if they manage to squeeze 320 horses and 300 lb. ft. torque out of a reliable four, then make it the Aero engine for the 9-3, provided it weights significantly less than the current one without being the size of a Golf (because that’s an altogether different market segment).
“Someone recently suggested (in comments) that the NG9-3 wagon and the NG9-3x would basically be the same car.”
That’d be an interesting strategy. Drop the regular 9-3 SportCombi and simply offer the 9-3X. This makes room for a 9-3 Hatch without crowding the 9-3 line.
Subaru did the exact same thing in N. America (dunno about internationally) with their Legacy wagon and OutBack. The Legacy wagon is gone for 2008MY, and the only wagon choice now is the OutBack. With the revamped Forester growing in every dimension, I think the Legacy wagon was losing sales.
When that Spiker statement says ‘hatch’, does that mean just one hatch or 3dr. and 5dr. hatchbacks? Personally I want another coupe/hatch like my C900 and my NG900 and my OG9-3 Monte, but there are possibly even more buyers who’d prefer a 5dr. hatch? I know for a fact that many people who have bought the 9-3SS or 9-3 wagon would have preferred another hatch, but still remained loyal to the brand. I admire their loyalty and I hope it gets repaid. But this is why I mention the twin door idea so much. If Saab thinks 5 door buyers will be much less than the sedan in some markets, it can cover both buyers with the one car.
I also think the convertible and 3dr. coupe should be closely related and a little different from the sedan/wagon.
In the past, you could never really tell if you were driving behind a 3dr. or a 5 dr. hatch, until you got alongside of it.
That should change. The more sporty convertible and coupe models should share some different panels and light treatments, but the coupe should still be a practical hatch. Do that Saab and I’ll bend over backwards to buy one.
Swade, how about a Pollhattansaab to determine what percentage of buyers would choose which body style in the NG 9-3?
Ie: It could go something like this:
If you were to buy an NG9-3 would you choose:
1, Convertible
2, 3 door hatchback coupe
3, 5 door hatchback
4, 4 door sedan
5, Twin door 4dr/5dr combined model instead
6, Wagon/9-3X
Obviously the wagon and 9-3X could still be discreet models, but Saab has limited capacity to build too many variants.
^^ Great lineup, Markac !
Personally I find it hard to see any single model lineup not creating a bit of self-cannibalization between a 5-dr hatchback *and* a traditional 5-dr station wagon/estate. But that’s me.
I would add a “2-door” coupe/notchback (a la A5/S5, 3-series coupe) to your list above (without the hatchback) so it’d look like this:
http://www.bmwusa.com/standard/content/vehicles/2010/3/default.aspx
See SaabKen, I have to agree there with you! That would be a great idea to me. It has be enough of a variant that it doesn’t start to look redundant. Plus I think all who purchased the current model 9-3SS would have, even still if it was just offered in a coupe style. People that generally want 4 doors have kids and would probably opt for the hatch or combi moreso instead. I would like to see the Ng 9-3 vert & 2 dr coupe have a more sportier agressive look than the hatch/wagon variants. Make the wagon almost like the 9-3x was done, but with better execution and take it a bit further with the hatch. To offer something like the Toyota venza, which u wouldn’t guess at first it is derived from the Camry’s platform. But the hatch should resemble something like the BMW X6. Which to me is a nice modern developement of the hatch style
I believe that 9-3 Hatch still means combi. Like the Saab 9-3 SportHatch concept? 9-5X… Sounds really promising. “all SAAB” 9-3 in 2012 – wow!!
Guys I’m a bit confused as to what the “X” in 9-3 and 9-5 mean.
From the Spyker release:
“…9-3 (sedan, hatchback, sports estate, X and convertible) and 9-5 (sedan, sports estate and X) and the 9-4X for both the US and European markets…”
Does the “X” stand for Turbo X, like a high performance version of the model? If so, wouldn’t the “X” also be included in all trims like the XWD Aero as currently available in the 9-3s and 9-5s? Jesus, I’m confused and I’m a Saab afficionado. Imagine the casual customer! With so much Aero and X and Griffin talk, this is getting quite confusing.
+1
Mmmmmm, a 9-3 Aero XWD 2-dr coupe ….
Here’s something I’ve always been curious about. The 9-3 Vert …. does it start out with a hard roof, which is then chopped off (at Graz, by Magna) to become the Vert ?
You see where I’m going with that, folks ? [wink]
No, the “X” simply denotes the implicit presence of AWD, but in a package that is oriented more towards a CUV/SUV. Witness the defunct 9-7X and 9-2X, and now the new 9-3X and 9-4X.
But that is different than the NG9-5 Aeros and current 9-3 Aeros that offer XWD as a standard/optional feature. These models don’t have the “X” suffix, as they are merely trims with sportier performance, appearances, and the addition of XWD (denoted by a small “XWD” badge on the trunk lid).
Clear ?
Do you thing there is a chance, that the 9-5X will be an bigger SUV or SAV like the 9-4X or does this mean only a car like an Audi Allroad ????
Verbatim from Autocar (UK) magazine, 2006 February 26 issue, Vol 247/#9:
WHAT SAAB DIDN’T BUILD: Swede Dreams Aren’t Made of These (p.15):
“9-5 Allroad – Plans for a high-riding, chunkily styled 9-5 estate with a clever front-end differential were well advanced in the late 1990s. And then canned.”
“9-3 Coupe – A simple, relatively cheap project, based on the 9-3 cabrio. Market research from the US that suggested the couple market was dying killed it.”
So you mean the 9-5X would be a big SUV or sav like an Q7 or X5????? I love big Cars like SUVS oder SAVS…………
Lukas, the 9-5x would be to the 9-5 wagon like the 9-3x is to the 9-3 wagon.
SaabKen, I’d like a two door coupe too, but I’d hate to see it come at the expense of a 3 door coupe. As I said, rather than just a 3 door hatchback like Saabs of old, make it a sports coupe with a hatch. This would mean some compromise, but clever design could limit this. ie, it could still be a practical hatch as well.
I still think the 4 door/5 door in one is a good idea. If you really want to haul larger loads all the time, go for the wagon. Many people (including me) just don’t like wagons however, and the twin door would be a good compromise.
okay, thank you guys….. thats not a car for me…… so i have to wait now so long for the 9-4x…hopefully it can be ordered in the last quarter of 2010
Since the Swedish “Hate all that is Saab and Spyker” campaign continues Svenska Dagbladet apparently interviewd M
Grumpy !!! Do you seriously think that gm would entertain anyone who isnt beyond reproach ??
Some press areas obviously dont want any further SAAB contact, press cars and junkets etc.. do we really need the negative ones along for the ride ?
I think they would have there hands full road testing gm cars only
Some minutes ago, I posted this comment in another thread, but here it fits better. Even my *beloved* DI.se report today that Spyker do not have clear to 100 % the financing of the deal. Cannot really understand why Muller talked to media with such an open mouth, he must have been aware of what happened to the proposed deal with Koenigsegg when Swedish media uncovered, questioned and criticised all details of the group, their financing and their business plan. In my view, it had a large impact on the Koenigsegg deal that there were too much rumours around it. After a while, even mainstream media around the world bought the version “still questions regarding the Saab deal”. And this is precisely what is going to happen now. A medial witch-hunt on Spyker, and lots of negative headlines on Saab.
However, if it is true that Muller does not yet have the financing clear, in my view this is a critical point and a possible obstacle to the deal and to the future of Saab. So even if I would prefer more balanced reporting in the Swedish media on Saab, given these news, it is fully legitimate to raise critical questions. Either Muller finds the remaining millions of dollars, or he cannot do the deal. Remember btw that even Koenigsegg and GM had signed a “binding agreement”. Alternatively, Muller could take the money out of Saabs pocket. Not only in regard to the costs of running and developing Saab this would be a catastrophy. In terms of media echo, this would be the total meltdown. In any case, both factors – continuing negative reporting and lack of funding – are working against Saab in their struggle to attract old and new customers.
In my view, there is only one solution that works, and that is to quickly provide a solid and unequestionable additional funding.
I assume that we will keep the existing “designlines” linear, vector and aero.
Personally, I think its a mistake to keep the Aero as just a designline, as it is at the moment, and has been forth and back the last decade or so.
The Aero versions must have more uniqe features than at present. The only thing separating the 93 Areo from a vector is more or less the double exhausts and the front.
The engine performance must be Aero uniqe as the aerokit, breakes, suspentions, interior, rims and mabye colourops.
The Aero must stand out more as the true performance chioce for customers and must not be degraded anymore.
Then, of course, a limited special version of the Aero for the true diehards, could be made on occations. Personally, I like the name “Super Aero” or “SA”.
If Saab was to return to its motorsport roots, then these limited versions might have a name that ties them to that. “Saab 93 Aero DTM” for instance.
9-3 hatch = good! Lets’ see how SAAB styles it, I am EXTREMELY curious about that! And a 9-5X is also a very good idea, targeting the A6 Allroad.
‘New all-SAAB 9-3′, though is very different wording from an ‘all new SAAB 9-3′… Again, let’s see what SAAB comes up with.
Sounds oh-so good. I was pleasantly surprized about the arrival of all-new 9-3. Apparently a lot of work is already completed.
Now I
It may still carry the 9-5 badge but, given the car’s dimensions (over 5 meters bumper-to-bumper!) and presence, it is imho more in the category the 9000 used to be in (which I would characterize as halfway between premium and luxury) than in the -hitherto- 9-5 (= premium) segment.
If it remains priced to compete with the 5-series BMW and the assorted Audis and E-Benzes but actually conveys the 7-series/S-class feeling then it is guaranteed to be loved by people who would like to drive an S-class but only can afford an E-class. And there are no 5-door hatches or station wagons in the luxury segment except the BMW 5-series GT which is in fact a 7-series hatchback. So the 9-5 SC would be in a class of its own, even more so in a potent and luxurious Turbo X version.
Ivo
You could buy a 9-3X much quicker.
Support Trollhattan and buy the Swedish one.
I’m looking at these prices for the new 9-5(I believe this is for the belgian market), and I wonder… why the hell are there no XWD models other then Aero? Same with the V6? Is this specific for some markets, or maybe they’ll add those models later?
Oh no…
There are some disturbing news on Di and E24, regarding the financing, 175 MSEK missing. Can anyone give some clarification and assurance that the deal is not going to fall apart?
There is also information (Di paper version) about that one of the bidders CJ went in ‘personal bankruptcy’ (correct wording?) and that his company Merbanco does not exist anymore.
To get an objective read about those 24 Mill US$, please read the posting from Swade. You can concentrate on the 3rd paragraph of the chapter “FUNDING OF SPYKER”
About CJ and Merbanco, you can ask him, he normally apears here, but maybe he doesn’t want to talk about his finance situation.
“Jesus, I’m confused and I’m a Saab afficionado”.
Different car-styles for different markets? I seem to remember, that the chinese market is all about sedans, whereas MY market (Denmark) thinks that the last Saab was built in 2002! (because the hatch WAS Saab).
I find it interesting, not to say alarming, that J
I find it interesting, not to say alarming, that J
I find it interesting, not to say alarming, that J
“independent sourcing gradually increasing to reduce GM dependency”
Would this mean that Saab could get their engines from other suppliers? Then we have a new playing field
What engine would you like to be the basis of a Saab Turbo/Twin Turbo? Something from the BMW/PSA cooperation, a Renault or the new FIAT?
IMHO the new Opels look a great step forward, except for the engines! So an “Astra”- platform (lengthened) and with Saab-power wouldn’t make a bad basis for the 3. generation 9-3…
Thanks,
I begin to get concerned about the witch-hunt media seems to have started again and their unwillingness to give up on this theme.
I know CJ sometimes appears here. Di quotes a source that it was when Swedish government confronted CJ about being under personal bankruptcy and that Merbanco as a company did not exist anymore when he admitted this. This was in the middle of the bidding phase also. This is the bidder J
Yes, there’s a short but upsetting snippet about CJ and Merbanco in today’s Dagens Industri print edition. The story is mainly about how Swedish insurance giant Folksam was at one point interested in being a part financier of the Nygren bid, but the last paragraph is the interesting one:
—
Merbanco disappeared
Among the other alternatives, American Merbanco, with Chris Johnston, was viewed as strong. The Merbanco group courted the Swedish government several times about a loan guarantee, but in November, it was discovered that Chris Johnston had been put into personal bankruptcy and that Merbanco didn’t exist anymore.
At that time, the company was in discussions with GM.
“He admitted the circumstances when the Swedish government confronted him, but hadn’t previously wanted to inform them,” DI’s source says.
In spite of a number of Saab enthusiasts, like Lars Carlstr
Yes, there’s a short but upsetting snippet about CJ and Merbanco in today’s Dagens Industri print edition. The story is mainly about how Swedish insurance giant Folksam was at one point interested in being a part financier of the Nygren bid, but the last paragraph is the interesting one:
—
Merbanco disappeared
Among the other alternatives, American Merbanco, with Chris Johnston, was viewed as strong. The Merbanco group courted the Swedish government several times about a loan guarantee, but in November, it was discovered that Chris Johnston had been put into personal bankruptcy and that Merbanco didn’t exist anymore.
At that time, the company was in discussions with GM.
“He admitted the circumstances when the Swedish government confronted him, but hadn’t previously wanted to inform them,” DI’s source says.
In spite of a number of Saab enthusiasts, like Lars Carlstr
Yes, there’s a short but upsetting snippet about CJ and Merbanco in today’s Dagens Industri print edition. The story is mainly about how Swedish insurance giant Folksam was at one point interested in being a part financier of the Nygren bid, but the last paragraph is the interesting one:
—
Merbanco disappeared
Among the other alternatives, American Merbanco, with Chris Johnston, was viewed as strong. The Merbanco group courted the Swedish government several times about a loan guarantee, but in November, it was discovered that Chris Johnston had been put into personal bankruptcy and that Merbanco didn’t exist anymore.
At that time, the company was in discussions with GM.
“He admitted the circumstances when the Swedish government confronted him, but hadn’t previously wanted to inform them,” DI’s source says.
In spite of a number of Saab enthusiasts, like Lars Carlstr
Guess it is about picking the best platforms and engines (cost vs performance), and throwing in some SAAB-DNA modifications. SAAB will not be able to fund an in-house platform for quite some time, as that is very expensive. Better to be small, agile and clever!
It was obvious from the day the deal was done that Spyker did not have the extra 24 million dollars, though I understood that that payment would be delayed until next year. However in the grand scheme of things that 24 million does not seem to represent much of an issue, if through the course of this year Spyker manages to lift Saabs profile and at least make it seem that things are going the right way I am sure that being the silver tongued salesman that he is Victor will find someone to volunteer the 24 million, if not as you said he can always find it from their cash flow, which considering the size of the enterprise, will represent no big feat of creative accounting.
Just as everybody else I’m excited over the information regarding a hatchback. I think that that’s a very good way for Saab to re-establish their good reputation.
There is a early comment that mentioned the Skoda Superb and its twin door hatchback. To my knowledge the BMW 5-series GranTurismo is the only car other than the Skoda that’s fitted with with double boot lids.
I’ve read somewhere, can’t find where but the twin-door is supposedly originally a Saab-engineer patent. During the 80s or 90s an engineer at Saab got the brilliant idea to fit two sets of hinges on the boot lid. The management obviously didn’t put the idea in production, they didn’t see the point and it would also increase the price of the car.
The inventor went his own way by creating a patent for the invention which he then tried to sell to other car manufacturers.
He didn’t succeed and 25 years later when his patent had expired the first cars with double lids appeared on car shows.
Can anyone provide a source for this story.
Maybe slightly OT…
I’ve written to CJ earlier in the evening with regard to this. I want to give him first opportunity to address the story.
I will say what I can later.
For the moment, I’ll just say that there’s a lot of context missing from what they’ve said there and it’s important to have the whole story.
CJ’s been a friend to this website and remains so.
Thanks, Swade. I really hope there’s a better light to view this in, because right now, it’s not looking very good for CJ.
There’s one more article in today’s Dagens Industri that is of interest. In it, we get a clarification from the highest authority regarding the collateral the Swedish government has to their loan guarantee. This should (but won’t, of course) put a stop to all the yapping about how the Saab deal puts tax payers’ money in jeopardy.
—
Reinfeldt puts his foot down about Muller’s money
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt now concurs with the demands that Spyker’s owner Victor Muller should openly account for the financiers behind the purchase of Saab Automobile.
In yesterday’s DI, state secretary J
Thanks, Swade. I really hope there’s a better light to view this in, because right now, it’s not looking very good for CJ.
There’s one more article in today’s Dagens Industri that is of interest. In it, we get a clarification from the highest authority regarding the collateral the Swedish government has to their loan guarantee. This should (but won’t, of course) put a stop to all the yapping about how the Saab deal puts tax payers’ money in jeopardy.
—
Reinfeldt puts his foot down about Muller’s money
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt now concurs with the demands that Spyker’s owner Victor Muller should openly account for the financiers behind the purchase of Saab Automobile.
In yesterday’s DI, state secretary J
Thanks, Swade. I really hope there’s a better light to view this in, because right now, it’s not looking very good for CJ.
There’s one more article in today’s Dagens Industri that is of interest. In it, we get a clarification from the highest authority regarding the collateral the Swedish government has to their loan guarantee. This should (but won’t, of course) put a stop to all the yapping about how the Saab deal puts tax payers’ money in jeopardy.
—
Reinfeldt puts his foot down about Muller’s money
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt now concurs with the demands that Spyker’s owner Victor Muller should openly account for the financiers behind the purchase of Saab Automobile.
In yesterday’s DI, state secretary J
Some positive news about Spyker in todays http://www.expressen.se
Super Test: Spyker Ailerons
This is Saab’s new systerbil – Spyker Ailerons. As the first Swedish newspaper, we present a test run on the super car you saw on television pictures from Stockholm and Trollh
DI.se have just published some info on GEM Global Yield Fund, that are part financing the deal. An anonymous source says that GEM deal in “blood financing”, which sounds unpleasant but doesn’t mean anything to me. There is also info about how GEM’s input will dilute Muller’s own shares, so that his ownership will drop from 38 percent to 28.
DI.se have just published some info on GEM Global Yield Fund, that are part financing the deal. An anonymous source says that GEM deal in “blood financing”, which sounds unpleasant but doesn’t mean anything to me. There is also info about how GEM’s input will dilute Muller’s own shares, so that his ownership will drop from 38 percent to 28.
DI.se have just published some info on GEM Global Yield Fund, that are part financing the deal. An anonymous source says that GEM deal in “blood financing”, which sounds unpleasant but doesn’t mean anything to me. There is also info about how GEM’s input will dilute Muller’s own shares, so that his ownership will drop from 38 percent to 28.
Thanks for your response Ken, however….
Where will the “XWD” application of “X” be applied, on all variants or just a single one? If the latter, which one is it? “X” doesn’t address this lol. I’d certainly hope XWD would be an option on all vehicles.
dear oh dear, what’s a mess.”
http://hugin.info/136917/R/1379607/339581.pdf
From Euronext.
Spyker has clarified once again, that the USD 1billion that SAAB needs is secured, if the EIB loan is granted.
If the EIB loan is not granted the aquisition of SAAB by Spyker will not take place.
Take it as you want, but I think the EIB will say yes or no before Feb. 15, till that day we will have to wait once again.
this thread started out on such a positive note and yet towards the end it lacked that “warm ,fuzzy feeling.”
I received the following from CJ via email today in response to Mr Hagglund’s comments and the story that appeared about him and Merbanco. He’s asked that it be published here, where the concerns have arisen.
——
I can confirm the facts presented but certainly not not the way they are now being portrayed. Due to unprecedented challenges in the economy, and specifically a bad investment in 2006 with personal guarantees, I was forced to take the painful step of entering personal bankruptcy this fall. In these times, high risk leveraged buyouts are failing at an alarming rate and I know few who have not been affected in some way.
The important point here is this was disclosed to the Seller. Despite my situation, our group, when considered as a whole, was deemed both experienced and deemed more than financially credible, and we were invited to continue bidding. I was never the financial muscle in our group, but was the lead in communicating with the Seller, and the transaction was to be made by an entity formed by several investors for the transaction. As shared last spring, Merbanco/Mercano was merely a small deal platform and was never the buyer.
Mr. Hagglund’s quoted statements are simply not true. We did not say “we forgot” to tell him anything. We were open and transparent throughout the process, and requested several times a full review of all the parties in our group. Despite our repeated requests, they made no attempt to do so even though the Seller and their representatives were comfortable with the entire picture. The Government did request that one of my partners assume the a lead position and that was agreed to. To now paint us as misleading anyone is simply and completely without merit.
Sadly, Mr Hagglund is quoted recently as saying they wanted a buyer with automotive experience. Our group had extensive automotive experience, and experience with GM itself. Further, as one of 4 Founders of AGCO, my father also had experience in heavy manufacturing, distribution and finance in a parallel industry. Those who knew our entire group knew our capabilities and experience. By mentioning me after another party was selected, Mr Hagglund continues to do Saab no favors. That is a shame.
If we, or anyone else involved, believed my personal situation was an impediment, I would have gladly stepped aside and indeed offered to do so on several occasions. Rather, following the disclosure, we were encouraged to continue our pursuit by the Seller, their representatives, and the Government. We did so at great expense and are quite proud of our efforts to help save Saab.
——
Swade here again….
I can confirm that I’ve known the identity of the money/experience men in CJ’s group for some time now and the experience he quotes here are 100% true.
They had the money and strong turnaround experience.
I found out about this issue in early January and had to confirm for myself that CJ was still able to act in the capacity that he was acting, under US law. Once I did that, I decided not to write anything here. Obviously I believed that Merbanco’s chances were severly damaged by this, however, which I believe is reflected in my assessment of their chances.
Despite the collective strength of their group, which was considerable, it would have been a political risk of major proportions for the the government.
Hagglund needs to take a long hard look at himself here. In the last few days he’s misrepresented the picture around Merbanco and called parties in the Koenigsegg Group liars, which I’ve had other communications about in the last three days.
They’re all subject to NDA’s. What good does he do anyone, including Saab, by saying what he’s saying?
Thank you, Steve.
Thank you, CJ.
There is something rotten in Denm#….Sweden!
First we get H
It seems sadly so that some people in our neighboring country just cannot handle good news. Just as well it seems that credibility is being sought byt badmouthing.
Incomprehensible. H
Thanks for the clarification
Thanks, CJ and Swade, for giving some information and clarifications on this issue. It really hurts me to see you in this painful situation, CJ. Hope you can get out of this quite soon.
The behaviour of the Swedish government and the Swedish media really strikes me. I cannot understand why they feel that they have to make negative noise around the deal now that it is to being finally done. One can only speculate about the reasons behind. In the case of the government, do they lack information this way only because they had liked to see a larger company to take over, or do they anticipate a real risk to the deal and want to show that they did all they could? In the case of the Swedish media, it seems that they actually have the overarching goal to prevent the deal from being finally closed. Even here, is it high ambitions in regard to Swedish industry and dissatisfaction with the actual solution that makes them reporting so critically? Or is it simply the run for news, and best selling bad news?
In any case, it is a pity that Saab-Spyker are so dependent on the EIB loan and the state guarantees. In the world of private business, this would obviously be a juridical case for compensation.
Thanks for that clarification, CJ! Good to get to hear your side of the story as well.
OK, so now we have two versions of this that are clearly incompatible. They can’t both be true. I guess we all just have to decide for ourselves which one to believe in.
Thanks for that clarification, CJ! Good to get to hear your side of the story as well.
OK, so now we have two versions of this that are clearly incompatible. They can’t both be true. I guess we all just have to decide for ourselves which one to believe in.
Thanks for that clarification, CJ! Good to get to hear your side of the story as well.
OK, so now we have two versions of this that are clearly incompatible. They can’t both be true. I guess we all just have to decide for ourselves which one to believe in.
Someone at the finnish Saab club forum did a photoshop of a “9-3 Sports Hatch”: http://www.byterapers.com/~tobbana/saabia/kikka6/9-3sh_v02.jpg
Comments on this entry are closed.