Press release: Saab Automobile Update On Voluntary Reorganization

Trollhättan, Sweden: Swedish Automobile N.V. (Swan) announces that Saab Automobile AB and its subsidiaries Saab Automobile Powertrain AB and Saab Automobile Tools AB (collectively Saab Automobile) aim to submit their appeal on the District Court’s decision to reject Saab Automobile’s proposal for voluntary reorganization on Monday September 12, 2011.

In yesterday’s decision, the District Court argued that the application of Saab Automobile lacks evidence that the purpose of a formal reorganization can be fulfilled. The Court is of the opinion that the first reorganization of Saab Automobile cannot be considered to be a successful one. It is further unclear to the Court whether – and if so when – the Chinese authorities will approve the EUR 245 million equity contribution of Pang Da and Youngman and whether the planned funding will be sufficient to structurally solve Saab Automobile’s financial problems. The Court finds that it is unclear how Saab Automobile will be able to end the liquidity crisis and continue its business. The current stops in production are likely to have resulted in considerable loss of the goodwill of the company and an impairment of the Saab trademark.

Saab Automobile disagrees with this interpretation of the voluntary reorganization proposal and aims to submit its appeal on Monday September 12, 2011. After the court has received the appeal it is expected that a decision on the appeal is taken soon after.

In the meantime, Swan and Saab Automobile continue discussions with several parties about obtaining additional funding for the short term.

Swan will update the market on further developments.

kochje
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Is it not time to organize another “get together” in Sweden and other countries to show the District Court that at least their argument of “loss of goodwill” is a false argument?
Come on Victor; do not give up.

Audun
Member
5 years 19 days ago

If it shall work it has to be this weekend.

900 classic cab
Guest
5 years 19 days ago

Agree

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

I choose to look at it this way: By injecting false arguments into their verdict, they helped Saab’s appeal process. This way, Saab will get a (hopefully) positive ruling by a higher court and this will help quiet down the critics.

I doubt the court system is corrupt, much unlike swegov. The latter we probably should have protested more against, but I think we’d need 20000 people for that, not just 2500 (which we’ve already done).

Audun
Member
5 years 19 days ago

I hope you are right on this, Rune.

900 classic cab
Guest
5 years 19 days ago

+1

MK
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Hard to see why the court say no and then try to help saab to get a yes in higher court.
The best thing had be if the court asked for more information.

They said it was a bit vague information, so how they even could say anything if they are unsure is beyond my mind, instead of asking for more information from Saab..

Audun
Member
5 years 19 days ago

I don’t understan why they acted like this. I don’t think they did their job in å good way.

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Well, when you file for reconstruction it is, in this case, Saab’s responsibility to provide sound argumentation as well as facts on which the court make a decision. There is no investigation involved. The judges look at whatever evidence is presented and make their ruling on what information is provided.

RS
Member
5 years 19 days ago

I have to agree here. It’s the company’s job to provide as much information, proof and documents of factual agreements as possible to the decision makers.

If Saab/VM got “expert” advice that they wouldn’t have to do that, it was a) really crappy advice, b) they should have known better as this is SAAB we’re talking about.

Carlo A
Member
5 years 19 days ago

as I have written on InsideSaab, in an Italian scenario, the court would say no, knowing that there would be an appeal and the decision will have to be taken by a higher court …. a way to pass the problem onto someone else without deciding …

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Could you clarify the “false arguments” issue? Which arguments in the verdict were false?

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago
VM addressed several of those already. The court claimed that the previous reorganisation had proved to be a failure, completely ignoring GM’s decision to start the liquidation process of Saab in January 2010. By the time Spyker finally were allowed to buy Saab, a lot of work (and money) went into putting Saab back on track. This event alone was definitively not taken into account in the original business plan and certainly backtracked many of the good efforts put in during the reconstruction back in 2009. Or to put it differently: The reconstruction was a success until swegov objected to… Read more »
Audun
Member
5 years 19 days ago

+1

ante
Member
5 years 19 days ago
No timeplan for the chinese, no timeplan for the bridgeloan, no organisation named that is interested in investing in saab, no production, almost no income from sales, almost zero sales. According to swedish law you cannot allow a reorganisation where there is a possibility that the company will be more indebted after the three month period than it currently is. That mean VM has to prove to the court that production and sales will run soon otherwise there is NO legal ground for a reconstruction. I fail to see what VM stated in the application that change this into a… Read more »
NC
Member
5 years 19 days ago

So is there any Plan X other than to appeal? Did VM note something lately?

Also, the press release mentions only the search for short-term funding. And what about the US investors? EU major bank? I believe these sources were to provide more or less substantial funding…

ANA
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Come on Saab keep working hard for a solution.

Tripod
Member
5 years 19 days ago
It seems to have come as a surprise to some journalists, during the press conference after Saab had filed for reconstruction, but also this morning in an interview with VM on the Swedish Radio (national public radio), that Saab has enough money to pay the salaries but they can’t favour one over another, the employees instead of suppliers. I don’t know if they have enough or not. But one thing is clear, and I thought the journalists understood that, the situation is now different, another case. We know that some suppliers has sent their demands to the Swedish DEA, and… Read more »
Audun
Member
5 years 19 days ago

A very good comment. FKG and Clepa + the court should read it.

Grumpy
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Good one Tripod

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago
But surely on cannot disagree with the statement that the previous reconstruction was unsuccessful. The purpose of a reconstruction is to end up with a company that makes and sells products with a profit – and here we are talking short-term NOT long term. It was early in 2010 that Saab was saved from bankruptcy by Spyker taking over from GM. One year later things started to get really difficult. To keep a company going for 12 months surely cannot be regarded as “success”. I think it is sad that Saab now is in a very distressed situation, but only… Read more »
rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

It was early in 2010 that Saab was saved from bankruptcy by Spyker taking over from GM.

No. Saab was saved from liquidation. Its owner at the time had decided to shut down Saab due in large part to NDO’s preliminary report on Antonov. As VM said, the suppliers had been told to politely go away — there was never going to be any production of cars in THN ever again.

Tripod
Member
5 years 19 days ago

“It was early in 2010 that Saab was saved from bankruptcy by Spyker taking over from GM.”
You don’t know what you are talking about, Sadim; but you just have to argue, don’t you?

I said winding down process. See Rune’s reply, liquidation.

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Well, it’s nice to meet an expert now and again Tripod. My memory tells me this: In 2009 Saab went through six months of reconstruction. It came out of reconstruction and Koeningsegg was supposed to take over. K-segg pulled out and Spyker took over as of Feb 2010.

Any mistakes there, Tripod?

During the six months following end of recontruction very little profit would have been made, and if Spyker had not taken over Saab woulkd probably have been forced into bankruptcy?

Could you please point out where my facts are wrong instead of just saying I want to argue?

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Any mistakes there, Tripod?

You are leaving out many events that took place in that period of time. Why did Koenigsegg pull out? Why was Spyker’s first bid rejected? What happened after that? etc…etc…

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Rune, if you like (and choose to pay me) I could write a complete essay on the topic and include every little detail.

I was, however, trying to keep my post short.

The matter of interest and what we were discussing, is: Was the previous reconstruction a success or not. I have seen no account here descibing whatever parts of the 2009-reconstruction can be considered a success.

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Sadim, you were trying to avoid the crucial detail of Saab being put into liquidation after swegov dropped the ball on both k-egg and spyker.

That alone was a very significant detail as explained in several comments in this thread.

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Rune, could you please provide a non-SU reference (and preferably not a Swedish socialist/trades union one either) that states that “swegov dropped the ball on both k-egg and spyker”?

If we are going to argue about facts we need more that just some old SU-hearsay.

Khrisdk
Member
5 years 19 days ago

@Sadim
You should really write essay, without payment.
If not, how come you expect people to answer you in depth without payment?

State your case in full, and you might get answers in full.
Until then:

I have another perception than yours, and I think that you have missed details and information
Please prove me wrong 😉

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

@Khrisdk

How on earth should I be able to know what your “perceptions” are, and what you might “think”? And without knowing that – how do I prove you wrong?

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Rune, could you please provide a non-SU reference

Officially K-egg kept a low profile after they pulled out. Do you remember that they posted an ultimatum? To who was that ultimatum addressed?

Khrisdk
Member
5 years 19 days ago

@sadim
You can not.
Just as I can not know your perceptions and what you think without your unpaid essay.

We are on all points in equal positions, not stating anything but opinion

SpinM
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I partially agree with you Sadim. I am not an expert in law and or economics, but by any logical criteria the last reconstruction cannot be considered a success. If that was not the case, Saab would have been a profitable or at least sustainable company by now. However, I firmly believe they would have make it if Swedish government in cohorts with EIB didn’t conspire against Saab. Looking at all that happenend since Spyker took over I can flat out say, that those two parties sabotaged any and every effort made by Saab to succed. So, in all honesty… Read more »
Grumpy
Member
5 years 19 days ago

SpinM, Check out Rune’s reply above. At teh time everybody where surprised that Saab was able to come out of the reconstruction so fast and so well set up. GM decided to kill Saab and VM managed to convince them not to.

I do not think today’s Saab should be faulted for what happened under GM management.

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

The post-GM management Spyker team accepted to purchase Saab, accepted the business plan, accepted the terms of EIB-loans etc. The team in question i.e. VM is responsible for the situation today……Nobody else. Not the media, not the EIB, not SweGov…

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Sadim, it wasn’t unreasonable to believe that swegov would let Antonov invest money once NDO’s report was finished. The final report acquits Antonov and in a free market economy there are no reasons to not let him invest his money. NDO agrees with this.

I see no problems blaming EIB for this. And swegov’s lackluster handling of this issue is reproachable to say the least.

Could you please inform us of your connection with swegov? Are you a party member? Did you vote for them? Are you in their employ? What?

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Rune, what sort of questions are those?

I think they are highly inappropriate. Still, I can tell you I have no ties with SweGov, I am not even allowed to vote in Sweden.

And re the initial agreement between Spyker, EIB, SweGov and GM maybe should have been changed or not is a non-issue. Syker signed the agreement and are/were forced to live with it.

It’s ridiculous to say it’s the Govt’s fault. But I know your kind: It’s everybody else’s fault…..do you blame bad weather on SweGov too?

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I think they are highly inappropriate. Think what you will, but I find it very strange to see someone so forcefully defend putting 10000 people out of a job. And re the initial agreement between Spyker, EIB, SweGov and GM maybe should have been changed or not is a non-issue. Syker signed the agreement and are/were forced to live with it. Spyker signed up at a time when they still had Antonov aboard. After swegov sabotaged Antonov’s stake in Spyker, Spyker was effectively left as the only game in town. Nobody else fought GM’s decision to close down Saab. They… Read more »
Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

But Rune, all you are writing about is wishful thinking. The original contract stated clearly that Antonov would not be allowed to participate.

You can think this and that, wish this and that – but fact remains: All those involved KNEW there was little chance that Antonov would be let in.

And finally, I am NOT pleased to see some 5-6000 folks lose their jobs. But if that is what’s going to happen we can look at other similar shut-down and that after some years many new prosperous companies evolve from the ashes.

Grumpy
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Sadim, I think what one can blame the Swedish government for is the standoffish attitude and their habit of saying that they have done so much. What could be added to that is the handling of Antonov vs. EIB and I think you have to be extremely forgiving if you say they did a good job of that. SweGov – should have spoken out positively for the Swedish car industry and not claim that their existence solely laid in the hands of the Americans. SweGov – should have made funds available in line with other European governments with reasonable payback… Read more »
Khrisdk
Member
5 years 19 days ago

But I know your kind: It’s everybody else’s fault…</blockquote

Shall we leave it at that, or do you want to take a discussion about all kinds of people?

"You're telling me I ain't Kind, but I'm just not your kind" (Megadeth)

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

The original contract stated clearly that Antonov would not be allowed to participate.

You have seen the original contract? (contract between who btw?)

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

@Grumpy September 9, 2011 at 11:08

Concerning some of thos points I really can agree with you.

RS
Member
5 years 19 days ago
If it would have been ‘common knowledge’ that VA would not be let in any circumstance then why did NDO not say no to the application right from the start, but actually APPROVED Vladimir?! It is clear that someone is not telling the truth. If Swe Gowt was blocking VA because he was the money behind VM in the first place, then then we have the question did VM know that there was no chance in hell to get VA in as an owner or were they lead to believe otherwise? Then why put up the show when Maud could… Read more »
Tripod
Member
5 years 19 days ago
SpinM, “I am not an expert in law and or economics, but by any logical criteria the last reconstruction cannot be considered a success. If that was not the case, Saab would have been a profitable or at least sustainable company by now.” The reorganization, under the GM era, when GM had to file themselves (and no, chapter 7/11 are not exactly the same as in Sweden), was filed in February 2009; Saab exited reorganization in August 2009, if I remember correct. During that summer there were discussions with Koenigs, when they backed out GM started to winding down Saab.… Read more »
SpinM
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Tripod, thank you for your elaboration. For me it really sheds light on cronology – I only found about SU when this phase was over, so I guess I missed that part. I am in total agreement with you and the court should heed to your argumentation…that is, to consider the last reconstruction as irrelevant to their decission making. But basically – the end result still is a fail and it makes me sad. Well…let’s not call it an end. Even so, I remain a firm believer in Saab brand. After all, inspite of the grave situation I decided to… Read more »
M.A.
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Next Tuesday is VM’s birthday. Just hoping he receives by then a very pleasant birthday present, a big YES from a Court.

guy55
Member
5 years 19 days ago

HALLO SWEDEN? HERE IN BELGIUM WE BELIEVE IN SAAB!!!!!!!
NEVER GIVE UP!!!!!
THE gouvernement in sweden dont like saab,shame on jou!!!!!!
wel, saab jour welcome in belgium in de site of opel in antwerp!!!!!!!!

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

guy55…. Come on man, the Swedish Govt likes or dislikes Saab just as much or as little as other companies operating in Sweden.

rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

…and they treat all investors equally, regardless of nationality?

The proof is in the pudding.

Motoradd's Cat
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Victors last stand perhaps? Reading various comments posted yesterday and other media sources, I don’t think that another go at reconstruction is a good idea for Saab. It is for the current management and I’m sure that they don’t want to let go of the company. Re-reading the previous reconstruction application, it appears that a great deal of GM baggage still exists within the company, which has been an expensive on cost. Heavily concentrating on the USA market at the expense of other markets has been a huge mistake. In the UK there was hardly any high profile advertising and… Read more »
TurboLover
Member
5 years 19 days ago

But what about the brand name? Is there any possibility that the Brand name continues to be on new cars after a possible (god forbid) bankruptcy? I’ve understood the answer is no to that question. Please tell me if I’m wrong.

Sadim
Member
5 years 19 days ago

My belief (whatever that might be worth) is that this could very well be a matter of negotiation. If a viable company were to be formed, based on Swedish automotive know-how i.e. the folks in Trollhättan, I think the owners of the brand would look at it quite favourably.

But if all tools etc were shipped of to China or elsewhere I would say: No way.

Motoradd's Cat
Member
5 years 19 days ago

I would think so.

But it all would depend on who buys the company and how much are they willing to pay for the name.

GreekSaabDriver
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Considering the alternatives, would losing the brand name be such an insurmountable obstacle? Of course, I understand that establishing a new brand name would be difficult and expensive, but isn’t it more important to be Saab than to be calledSaab? I see it this way: – Enthousiasts and long-term customers will still know the car behind the new brand. – Non-enthousiasts are not buying Saab today, because they are concerned about long-term viability, used car price when they want to sell etc. However, if they didn’t have to worry about that part and all magazines stated “New Brand is built… Read more »
Grumpy
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I just wonder how a arisky Bankruptcy would be BETTER than a managed reorganization? Liquidation although unpleasant and with no predictable outcome may be the answer to saving Saab as a going concern and a way to strip out all the excessive on costs. There are no guarantees that the name can be kept. There are no guarantess that they are able to produce any cars unless GM gives them the right. There are no guarantess that they get funding. A small volume manufacturer needs to be lean and mean and new management is the way to go. Isn’t Saab… Read more »
jond
Member
5 years 19 days ago

@Motoradd’s Cat
Your list of possible bidders is way too short. The Company should be offered for sale as a going concern, whioch would clear out all the existing shareholders and with them the present management. As a clean investment it may well attract interest from a wide range of industrial companies.

jond
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Sorry! you’ve made this point yourself, which I hadn’t seen.

Motoradd's Cat
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Yes I am sure there are more out there than the ones I listed. It would have to be sold as a going concern and debt free (the sale should see to that). I would not be suprised if the people who caused the problems in the first place (certain component suppliers) put a consortium together and bid. It would be in their interest and possibly this is the whole point – a subtle takeover bid. What better way to get control of Saab. No parts = No Cars = Cash Flow Crises = Liquidation = Saab Sold (to a… Read more »
Andrew-V
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Unfortunately this was more estimated verdict of Court. Have in mind pls. Government point of view: no money of tax-payers into problematic businesses…

moose
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I think that court’s reasoning are (unfortunately) 100% correct The Court is of the opinion that the first reorganization of Saab Automobile cannot be considered to be a successful one. – If the company is requesting new reorganization in 21 months time from the last one, it is clear that the first reorganization was not successful. It is further unclear to the Court whether – and if so when – the Chinese authorities will approve the EUR 245 million equity contribution of Pang Da and Youngman and whether the planned funding will be sufficient to structurally solve Saab Automobile’s financial… Read more »
rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago

No-one knows whether Saab gets the money, and 95m€ (245m€ -150m€ Saab’s overdue debt) is not enough to keep the company running for more than few months (and definately not enough to develop new models)

Excuse me, but is it the case in Sweden that only companies who are able to state “oh yeah, 40 days from now we will definitively get paid enough to pay our creditors” (and back this statement up with evidence) are allowed reconstruction?

BTW: Do you know how much money is required to finish developing the next 9-3 based on the phoenix-platform?

Cerulean
Member
5 years 19 days ago

” If the company is requesting new reorganization in 21 months time from the last one, it is clear that the first reorganization was not successful.”

Excuse my ignorance on this matter but wasn’t the last reorganisation carried out under GM, who then failing to conclude a sale with Koeniggsegg decided to press the liquidate button. Surely this meant that the company Spyker bought was in a far worse state than the company that had exited a successful reorganisation?

michaelb
Member
5 years 19 days ago

I agree with you on most of your points, but not with respect to the last. If the buyer would be a powerful group, that could lift the standing quite easily. It just implies substantial investments into the dealer network and marketing as well. Any solution, that is small and above all with the current shareholders, is doomed to fail.

moose
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Totally agree.

Only thing that would save Saab would be a large investor willing to pump 1 billion € in to the company, and endure heavy losses for the next 5+ years. It is however clear that no such investor is in sight.

zippy
Member
5 years 19 days ago

+1

Anything else is a band aid. 🙁

OliverH
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I just picked up parts at the Saab dealer for around 2000 EUR. So I injected some money 😉 It’s not easy to build up trust on the notes of reject. It must to be very clear that chinese money is comming and that money is there to bypass the reorganisation period. It Saab must fill bancruptcy (or someone do it) the facilities are worthless without production and use of facilities. To make the hall free for an oter use the costs are to high. What can be made into money to pay outstanding debts? So the only case suppliers… Read more »
Daniel B
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Regarding, if the last reconstruction was or was not successful, I think we ALL can agree on the fact that IF GM had not been in the trouble it was in 2008, stating that Saab would be sold OR shut down, goodwill of the company had not been demolished to the point that was played out before our very eyes in 2009. It´s very easy to sit in front of a computer and blame the management for the state Saab is in right now. But that is very arguable to be honest… Yes, it all comes down to sales. And… Read more »
Grumpy
Member
5 years 19 days ago

Good Summary DanielB and all for free. Sadim waants to charge us for this knowledge. 😉

It is easay to deny facts that ren’t present but it is much more difficult if they are right in front of you.

Most of the comments on DI.se are based on invented facts, also known as lies.

Audun
Member
5 years 19 days ago

+9

Allan B
Member
5 years 19 days ago

+1 Daniel B. Based on the available info, that’s a good timeline demonstrating why VM deserves credit (pardon the pun) for what he has been trying to do in exceedingly difficult circumstances, come what may.

As if we needed more proof that Swedish officialdom doesn’t like colourful, maverick individuals. They’ll be banning Thomas Di Leva concerts, next!

Daniel B
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Thanx all, and sorry for the misspells and whatnot… Try to work and typing on SU at the same time:D But one has to bear in mind that going from +120 000 cars sold / year to 30 000 is not VM´s doing but GM´s/ SWE GOV, EIB and foremost the MEDIA! Even though, the situation is what it is and it is painful to see how much badwill this fantastic brand and carmaker has gotten the past 2 years.. The thing that upsets me the most is that people seems to think that there is an equal sign between… Read more »
rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Sadim: I think your defence of your original statement does not hold water. Discussing whose fault the current situation is, is besides the point. (regardless of how much I enjoy that discussion, because swegov’s incompetence and malice cannot be overstated too much) As soon as GM put Saab into liquidation January 2010, they effectively changed Saab a lot from the Saab that came out of reconstruction 2009. It matters not that Spyker thought they could turn Saab around again. And yeah, it doesn’t really matter what swegov did or did not do. Not when we are discussing the court’s assertion… Read more »
900SEB
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I’m really sick and tired of Viktor Müller and all his lies. He doesn’t have any binding agreement with Chinese customers. He doesn’t have a contract with BMW for engine supply. He doesn’t have a sustainable plan for the company. I watched the first 10 minutes of the press conference held during Wednesday and he didn’t say anything in concrete. Except for “I want to keep working, I want to save the company”. C’mon folks! He doesn’t know where he is at the moment. He doesn’t have a management team to support his decisions. Saab is not Spyker, it is… Read more »
rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago
I’m really sick and tired of Viktor Müller and all his lies. He doesn’t have any binding agreement with Chinese customers. He doesn’t have a contract with BMW for engine supply. He doesn’t have a sustainable plan for the company. Calm down. The Youngman and Pang Da deals are well known at this point. Spokespersons for those two companies have also been quoted in Chinese media making statements to this effect. The BMW deal is still on AFAIK. The press conference with a BMW representative present seemed real enough (http://saabsunited.saabklubben.se/2010/09/notes-from-saabbmw-press-conference.html). What exactly have you heard? I saw it coming when… Read more »
900SEB
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Dear Rune, don’t want to hurt feelings or take this personal. But (there’s always a but), the Chinese deal is not approved neither by the Chinese Government nor for the European Authority. Until that happens, it’s all a matter of good will between two companies, not reality. Regarding the BMW deal, you’re quoting a press conference held on September 29th 2010. Short of 365 days ago. I haven’t heard anything else, I don’t have ears in secret meetings. I’m just saying what’s evident. And yes, my take on JÅJ departure is just gut feeling. But you would expect that, should… Read more »
rune
Member
5 years 19 days ago
Hang on. Yes, the plan must be approved by NDRC (also European Authority? That is news to me), But: There is a legally binding agreement. Once approval has been received, the parties have no choice other than move forward. I’m just saying what’s evident. Your comment about there not being a BMW contract is the first of its kind that I’ve heard during these 365 days. Do you have anything to back up your statement? should his departure had been organized, Saab would’ve presented a new CEO by the time the step down was announced It is my understanding that… Read more »
Marque
Member
5 years 19 days ago

900SEB: Yes we are pretty much awake. But no, it’s you getting it wrong, because blaming Victor is much too late here. He makes it or fails. That are the only options left. No one is likely to pop in and rescue Saab. The times of this fairytale have passed by. So stating that Victor is no good does not help it at all.

900SEB
Member
5 years 19 days ago

It really doesn’t help either presenting him as a savior, an allmighty car-industry genious.

Marque
Member
5 years 19 days ago
And what would you say if Saab gets stabilised and prospering? Then all the support for VM does pay off, doesn’t it? I hope it would then satisfy you aswell. But as I said there is no second chance anymore, thus no better figure to make Saab finally succeed! Also there are a few things others mentioned lately: 1. Saab is still alive – thanks to Victor. 2. Saab produced 50,000 fantastic new cars – without Victor they were never on the roads today. While I respect your opinion that you don’t like him for some reason (maybe among which… Read more »
KaiC
Member
5 years 19 days ago

It is too late to say anything, but when Saab go into bankruptcy maybe someone will win the benefit(get cheaper price to buy Saab).

wpDiscuz