Victor step down?
October 21, 2011 in Editorial
There is a lot of talk in the comments today from people who think that Victor Muller should step down from Saab, that he has done his part and that enough is enough…
Well my question to all of you is, who do you know in the world with the same commitment to Saab and who in the world have shown even the slightest of real interest in Saab and openly stated what they want to do with it?
Well one thing is clear, the chinese have not done that and my fear is that Youngman would just want to move Saab to china and if that happens I know that I’m no longer interested in running this place nor buying a Saab again. To me Saab is Swedish and it belongs in Trollhättan. My whole family and all my friends work there and they are SAAB!
Victor has time and time again stated he will do everything in his power to clear up this mess and I’m very sure that he is sincere about it. Who can forget the words he stated to SU a few months ago: “I will never ever give up!”
So before I read one more comment about him stepping down, please come up with a suitable alternative and also why that person would do a better job than Victor has done so far? And just bankrupting the whole thing is clearly not an option, we’ve seen that in todays comments from FKG.
OurMoldySaab said on October 21, 2011
It’s a bit unclear whether the buyout offer truly happened, how it happened, and what the terms were. A buyout would have basically ensured survival, but survival at what cost? I guess an independent Saab is better than a Chinese Saab, but a Chinese Saab is better than a dead Saab. If a full buyout with retention of employees was on the table, he should have taken the cyanide pills. Otherwise, I applaud him for refusing the offer and fighting the good fight. There is NO ONE else that would be as vigilant as VM in saving SAAB and SAAB jobs.
TimR said on October 21, 2011
Well in an interview with Reuters Victor states that the buyout would have been the end of Saab…
scand said on October 22, 2011
A bankruptcy is also likely the end of Saab too, leaving the only available third option being “north steet capital ” I guess.
Or am I missing something?
rallyho said on October 22, 2011
Personally, at this point I would not buy a Chinese Saab. That is for any number of reasons but the primary one is the flow of cash to and from a region or “market”. Things are bad enough here in the US but with our Walmart propensity, we have bought and sold ourselves into a hole. One level is the product being manufactured and the second is the return of profits to the region. Ancestral and cultural affinity with an area like Scandinavia (keeping the money with “cousins” so to speak with an anticipation of reciprocity of course. As thin as that is, China would toss the US under the proverbial financial bus in a heartbeat. Would Norway or Sweden do it as quickly?
Nikita Khrushchev said in his UN speech when I was young, “We will bury you FINANCALLY”, though the one word was left off in most of our propaganda (substitute a pic of a nuclear blast), a real war is a more silent one; perhaps even more deadly. The war of the dollar or euro or sen or whatever currency. Today, I may, despite my sour purchases before, buy a Ford or Chevy. My kids depend on it.
Trued said on October 22, 2011
Rallyho,
You nail an important issue here. Stubborn nationalism in an all interwoven international business and commerce world does not fly. Should we embrace the capitalistic trade liberal functions and promote trade over borders and manufacture where it is most cost efficient, or should we put our heads in deep sacks and hope it will all will blow over.
Vagabond said on October 22, 2011
err what..? You don’t make sense. Could you be more specific, Rallyho?
rallyho said on October 22, 2011
Easy, the US has few jobs and most of our cities are in a state of total collapse.
When the money goes to savings by way of reduced prices that is good to a point.
The down side is when the profits start to leave too. American towns are a train wreck of poverty. How many cities in Europe would you tell me to avoid for fear of your life? Once thriving industrial towns are for the most part welfare wastelands. Detroit, St. Louis Camden; the list is endless. We no longer have a respectable blue collar LMC, (lower middle class/upper working class), and now with profits not available for the “Trickle Down” economics to have effect .. a car sold here and the profit goes to China or India … you are a foot deeper in the grave you started to dig.
Sorry, but cash flow patterns are just basic economics. The US is in deep shizz and IMHO it is way too late for a reversal.
The old Soviet Nikita thing is something I grew up with thinking Russia was talking about bombing us. That was in about 1959. It was much later that I found out what he really said and that was “we will bury you ECONOMICALLY.. You Euros are much better at history so I thought you would have picked up on that.
Mr. Negative said on October 22, 2011
Speaking of former Soviet leaders, VM’s current predicament reminds me of Mikhail Gorbachev. At one time a leader of a reform movement – only to discover in a few short years that he was an obstacle to the movement he initiated. Sorry, just a thought.
scand said on October 22, 2011
Well said. I have bought European cars, occasionally an American one ( ford) and I am conscious about supporting the livelihoods of those cultures I know and care about (I live in the states, but am from England) . I would not buy a Chinese car even if it was dirt cheap, and I have no interest in buying a Korean or Japanese car, despite the fact that they are very good.
Marque said on October 22, 2011
I see it like it was a dirty game of the Chinese who eventually smelled flush blood (maybe by the turmoil Lofalk generated) and they became piggy and wanted a bargain takeover of Saab. Very reasonable on their part, but it is not admissible anymore for Saab (nor is it a fair conduct.. but what were you expecting?…). But anyway it rules out the real and viable Saab deal that was previously agreed. Sad story and I personally blame it on Lofalk’s humbug game and/or hidden agenda.
I wish I ever see all the involved parties’ and the so-called “Saab friends’ STOP kicking in Saab… Now it seems it takes a miracle to happen… With all the concentrated, Sweden-wide ill will towards Saab, it is already a miracle its heart still beats.
Nicola said on October 21, 2011
+1 imho
Leimat said on October 21, 2011
I think its unusual to se a CEO so commitment to rescue a company like we see in Victor Muller. So why should he step down? Who could take his plase?
welshwizard645 said on October 21, 2011
I share your sentiment Tim….without VM the end would have come and gone on Dec 18th 2009.
I would also think GM would have had something to say if it was a complete buyout as the last thing they need is their tech being pilfered, on the cheap….same with the new technology going into the next 9-3…..
So VM Up!
ANA said on October 21, 2011
Well Tim since you are asking….
As an alternative, I would like to propose just about any group or individual who has enough cash to make a go of Saab. When you look at VM’s record since buying Saab, on balance, it has been a comlete disaster and he has either alienated or let down a good proportion of employees, suppliers, dealers, media, the government and more… But most of all he has, and continues to, damage this wonderful brand. Like many others I feel he needs to go but the big questions are when and how.
ivo 71 said on October 22, 2011
So you think that anyone with money is automatically the right party, or at least better suited party than VM to run the company? Come on, get real. Do you really think that if the Chinese buy Saab outright, they will just keep Saab going on as is? I would agree with you if the buying party would be an experienced automotive group but those don’t seem to be interested.
As to alienatiing everyone, I disagree. The trade unions, the suppliers and the dealers have publicly stated their support of Saab in its current shape. That includes VM, I have not seen any calls for his departure except by a few negativists on SU. The media actually seem to have let up on criticising Saab and VM lately, too. The government seems to be thinking about paying off the EIB loan. If anything, Saab’s standing in terms of PR is less bad than any time in the course of the current year. For what it’s worth, of course…
Ivo
ANA said on October 22, 2011
Ivo
Let’s put it this way, someone without money, a bad track record and almost no credibility is not the person to own Saab in the long-run. And as to my comments about his alienation of the many parties you will notice that I said he had alienated a ‘good proportion’ rather than all of them – as an example I don’t think that every supplier is happy with Muller’s handling of the situation and I think that the Enforcement Agency would agree with me as many have registered with them. Also you are obviously reading different reports from me if you think Saab is coming across in a more positive light in the media. Perhaps you missed Reuter’s and BBC’s headlines today…
scand said on October 21, 2011
No one doubts his interest or commitment, or enthusiasm i don’t think.
The trouble is, he hasn’t the bucks to sort it out, (no individual has) he doesn’t have access to the bucks to sort it out, as no outside entity (in the western world) with the wherewithall to do it can make a sane business case to do so.
Thundering Churchillian phrases like “we will never give up…” etc is all very well, but its hardly achieving anything at this point and is just eroding whatever value remains in the company.
I feel sorry for your family, but Saab’s days of producing cars in Trollhattan are probably over, and the chance of Saab’s days of producing cars anywhere are very slim.
rallyho said on October 21, 2011
As always, more questions.
Who would have him and in what industry?
How much is he in debt to Vladimir and the associated corporations like Gemini or Conovers? I mention this because he gave that interview where he said the initial $24 million to buy Saab from GM was “given” to him from Vladimir Antonov. What does his balance sheet look like all things considered.
Aside from his business finances can he just retire on his personal assets?
Chris Hansel said on October 22, 2011
Well Tim:
Once Saab went into reorganization VM’s ability to control events dropped to almost nothing. As I understand it the Swedist govt. is holding the bag on the loans, at least a large amount of them. What to do? without VM and keeping the company in Sweden? Easy, but the govt. would not hear of it, nationalize. Seize the factory as in theory the loans are defaulted, and run it themselves for a short period of time,( recall JVA for 6 months, restart production so that you can sell a working company, and look( pick) for a buyer that would guarantee; 1. The plant stay in Sweden, with so many jobs. 2. That production of Asia Saabs could start at some point in the future as long as all the stakeholders agreed on a plan to do so. Give the winning Chinese company a small tax break to maintain the above, and justify the whole operation on National Security. It is a little hard to build miltiary vehicles if you have almost auto manufacturing industry. Sound a little heavy handed? Do you think the Chinese would have a problem with this if rolls were reversed?
TimR said on October 22, 2011
Well Chris if this was a forced reorganization you would be right, its not… this is a voluntary reorganization so what ever the administrator does it needs to be with the support from the current management! Big difference there!
Well you miss one point, that the chinese are not at all interested in running a plant in sweden… they just want the technology to build cars in their own plant…
scand said on October 22, 2011
Forced into voluntary reorganization maybe? Nobody “volunteers” to enter bankruptcy protection, they go there because of no other choice.
VM seems to think he can do that, and still call the shots like nothing changed. You cannot.
Meller said on October 22, 2011
@Tim
How can you be so sure about their intentions????
Marque said on October 22, 2011
Isn’t just their belated “revised bid” just a hint about their real intentions?
Ronnie_Rad said on October 22, 2011
Tim, that is absolutely absurd to say, and simply false. I find it quite ironic that we cannot speak “lies” in comments, except if we are the blog writers, apparently.
Name ONE statement from Youngman or Pang Da that says that they are not interested in running a plant in sweden, and that they only want the technology to build cars in their own plant.
This must stop at SU if you want to keep the integrity of this website so many have come to love. The propaganda, and one-sidedness of issues is obscene and obvious. No matter what you think of VM, he is still a financial shareholder and must be treated as such. He has personal interest (and I am not saying that he doesn’t have Saab’s best interests at heart) but he has his own intentions.
Now with that being said, there were many avenues he could have taken, including one that I proposed earlier, to do a “put” option with the chinese, as was done with Saab Aero and GM, or he could have done a 50% stake in Saab, by Swedish Auto, 50% Chinese, and 50% stake in Swedish Auto by Antonov/Muller and the other 50% by NSC.
Is that a good enough “alternative” for you?
TimR said on October 22, 2011
No Ronnie its not, you’re just speculating without presenting any facts… What I’m after is a name, who would take over after Victor, who would you trust to do an equally good job that he has done?
Please give me a name not just a speculative suggestion! And No I can’t name one statement from the chinese either, but its the lack of statement from that has me worried. Victor at least lets us know his intentions, they are very clear!
And if you don’t like the way we run SU, then you are welcome to start your own blog. I’m paying for this place so I write what I want, and the other writers here on SU write whatever they want, I have no control at all over them! They are free to express their emotions and thoughts as they wish!
Even if I don’t always agree with them I respect their opinions, just as I respect yours. But if anyone is calling someone a liar straight out, one better be damn sure to be able to back it up with proof! So far, nobody has!
Just a not, we had more than 61000 + visitors today, that sort of tells me that we are doing the right thing here…
74StingSaab said on October 22, 2011
@ Su crew.
You all are doing just fine! While I don’t agree 100% of the time with some of the postings and their content, I choose to ignore what I don’t like and question what I may not understand.
name calling and rumor mill sh!t is not needed here. SU is still my homepage and always will be.
Ronnie_Rad said on October 22, 2011
Speculating? define speculating. What I gave you was NOT a speculation, that, sir, was a suggestion. Since when does the comment section become the “fact” section? more than 90% (or more) of those 61000 visitors today came here for facts today, so giving facts in the comment section shouldn’t be suggested, or expected imo.
And I never said I didn’t like the way SU was run, so don’t take what I say personally. It seems as if constructive criticism (which is exactly how I meant it, and the way it was presented) has ruffled your feathers. Sorry if it has.
I have not called him a liar as well, or anyone, but to say what you said about the chinese is NOT. THE. TRUTH. no matter what you want to believe, so giving them a bad rap at this blog may actually be doing damage to the situation, because what if, in reality, the Chinese’s intentions are really good? You don’t know! Victor may say one thing, but his word, is just that. Words. We don’t know, nobody knows what’s going to happen, or who is the “right” team. The chinese are quiet because that’s the difference between THEIR culture, and WESTERN culture.
As far as starting my own blog, I don’t have the time. Plus in general, I like SU. Some parts more than others
. But good job, take criticism constructively, and Saab Up !
jond said on October 22, 2011
@TIMR
IMHO there is zero chance that any serious commercial investors will choose to retain VM’s services, given his record over the past eighteen months. He has driven the company rapidly to bankruptcy and like all failed leaders has now lost the power to control events. He has been unable to put together a deal that would retain him in post to compete against a straight bid for 100 percent control from a powerful, well-financed industrial grouping. So, his demise as CEO looks inevitable and is likely to follow rapidly – probably in the next couple of weeks and perhaps as the result of the end of reconstruction and the sale of the business as a going concern following bankruptcy.
Perhaps we should get over it, respect him for what he has done for the brand in attempting a solution, wish him well as CEO of Spyker and look forward to a competent management team being installed by the new owners.
Again IMHO, VM might do well at this late juncture to reflect on the inevitability of all this, to stop flailing about trying to put together dubious deals and to get the Administrator sacked, and to ease the passage of the new owners by gracefully stepping down and not frightening the horses with scare stories about the end of the brand as we know it.
TimR said on October 22, 2011
Well my question to you, how do you know that the chinese group are well financed? Do you know what the bid included or how big it was?…
jond said on October 22, 2011
Well, those questions are probably best put to the Administrator, who will have to make a judgement. At this stage we also don’t know, of course, what other interest may emerge from the woodwork as a result of a bankruptcy.
Meller said on October 22, 2011
@Tim
And do you know this?
Does anybody know anything here? I guess not.
TimR said on October 22, 2011
Well, we know that things have not been going on the way they were, we hear a big bunch of rumors all the time and this is not the first time Youngman is causing problems for Saab…
Which leaves me wondering, what are their real intentions?
Swade said on October 22, 2011
VM deserves, and has taken, his share of the blame. But don’t forget that he’s only been CEO since Jan-Ake left.
Saab’s performance to March this year as a whole organisation was less than it needed to be in order to maintain adequate cashflow. That’s not merely down to Victor. That’s down to some product decisions that made vehicles more difficult to sell, amongst many other things.
People, remember something before you tar and feather the man – he managed to put a transaction together that saved a company that was already sent into liquidation thanks to its former owner. That’s a big part of his track record.
The other big part, which you don’t see, is the herculean hours he’s putting in to get this sorted. Unfortunately, we’re in a vulnerable position now where others have the power to shift the goal posts, making his and everyone else’s work twice as hard.
Baver said on October 22, 2011
Well said, Swade!
TurboLover said on October 22, 2011
+1
fido said on October 22, 2011
Yes, VM is a hero for SAAB. We’ll not forget that.
ANA said on October 22, 2011
No one is doubting his effort levels, but his results are under scrutiny – and they are undeniably atrocious. He may have saved the company but since then poor Saab has been run into the ground.
I was saddened to hear criticism levelled at JAJ, it is my personal opinion that he was one of the real heros at Saab. I hope he writes a book blowing the lid of why he, the CFOs, Adrain Hallmark and a whole raft of others really left – I have a hunch that they were sick and tired of all the broken promised from Spyker and VM.
I strongly suspect it is a forgone conclusion that Muller will not be with Saab in the long-term as he has lost credibility, he has tainted the brand, he is a loose cannon and other investors will want him out as soon as possible. I just hope he leaves in an orderly fashion rather than taking Saab down with him.
Rune said on October 22, 2011
ANA… What exactly is it that you know? Do you have insider knowledge?
Swade tells you that JÅJ was in charge until quite recently before the stoppage and you retort with that you are saddened to hear crticism levelled at JÅJ.
I am a big JÅJ supporter and still subscribes to his facebook fan page, but I find it very interesting how quick you are to judge VM openly, yet you won’t hear of any criticism “levelled at JÅJ”.
JÅJ gave some interviews earlier this week. I suggest you read and listen to what the man himself is saying.
Yes, VM could be a raging sociopath, but do observe that he has admitted making mistakes publically and he is working extremely hard to keep the venture going. For a major portion of this year, Saab and their employees have paid taxes rather than taking unemployment benefits (which probably would have been the smart thing to do, given what we now know).
And in the end, this is not about Victor. I suggest you come up with some ideas on how to solve Saab’s predicament rather than continue your anti-VM crusade. And do keep in mind the issues involving GM IP property and GM’s unwillingness to consider selling Saab to Chinese companies in a not-to-distant past.
kochje said on October 22, 2011
+1
ANA said on October 23, 2011
Rune
You say this is ‘not about Victor’ however I completely disagree – his actions will dictate whether Saab lives or dies. Also if you look at the title of this post ‘Victor step down?’ then you will see I was merely staying on topic so please don’t attack me for voicing an opinion that differs yours. I can assure you that whatever I think of the current predicament I will be extremely happy if Saab survives.
Khrisdk said on October 23, 2011
Not completely true.
It will be the actions of Saab and pang da/youngman.
Actually it is the chinese that has changed the positions.
Not VM.
Rune said on October 23, 2011
ANA, I “attack” you because you have embarked upon a crusade against VM based on a hunch that he is a ‘bad guy’. I do not see that you make suggestions of what you would have done differently in Victor’s shoes. Nor do I see you talk about possibilities for future business. It is just a continuous stream of hate towards Victor (just dialed down enough so the stupid moderators like me engage you in attempts of constructive dialog rather than heavy moderation).
As I said, this isn’t about Victor. It is about Saab’s survival. Victor seems to be doing everything he can to keep Saab afloat. Again: What would you have done differently? Do you have reasons to believe that GM would accept a change of ownership? What makes you believe that?
ANA said on October 23, 2011
Rune
Try to accept that people can have a negative opinion of VM while also caring deeply about Saab -the 2 positions are not mutually exclusive. I respect your opinion so please respect mine. It was Voltaire who said ‘ Think for yourself and let others have the privilege to do so, too’.
As to your questions, I suspect you are trying to shoot down the answers so I am choosing to ignore them.
Rune said on October 23, 2011
ANA, it is very tiresome to read your tirades against Victor all the time. You never add any new information, nor do you actually debate any of the few claims you’ve made.
Again: What would you have done differently in Victor’s shoes?
We are all very aware of your misgivings towards Victor. Please move on from that topic unless you have something new to add.
ANA said on October 23, 2011
Rune
The title of this post was ‘Victor step down?’ so clearly I was on topic.
I am not going to list (again) the blindingly obvious mistakes I think VM has made as you obviously don’t agree with me, but to use a sporting analogy if a football team has had a string of disastrous results then I think the management would have to be questioned.
For your information I am not here, specifically, to debate with you : )
Rune said on October 23, 2011
ANA, you never add anything new. Nor do you answer questions concerning your comments.
From the comments policy:
As I tried pointing out to your initial response to Swade’s comment, your criticism of VM seems irrational, since JÅJ was the one in charge right up to the point where the production halted (give or take two weeks).
Your dislike towards VM has been known for a long time and is duly noted. You do not have to repeat your comment every time SU posts something concerning VM.
Just tone it down a little, OK?
ANA said on October 23, 2011
Rune
You insult me, you try to draw me into an argument and then you quote the rules at me….. I have decided to ignore you for a while.
Rune said on October 23, 2011
Yes, it is necessary to quote you the rules, and this is not the first time I do that. Didn’t I send you an e-mail about a week ago?
You can assume that I will delete future postings from you if you continue your anti-Victor campaign. Not because I’m pro-Victor (I’m not), but because it is annoying to see you not back up your statement with any sort of reasoning or proof. Post that stuff somewhere else.
Aeropilot said on October 22, 2011
Swade !
” That’s down to some product decisions that made vehicles more difficult to sell, amongst many other things.”
That’s interesting.
What exactly do you mean by that ?
What “product decisions” made it “more difficult to sell” ?
E.g does that mean that the missing hatch (which is real Saaby) on both car models is a real problem, or is it that the NG 9-5 seen as “the savior af Saab” (which is in fact a big and expensive sedan derivation of the GM Buick La Crosse) does not sell because it’s not that type of car that people want, leadinng to lots of unsold cars still on dealers site despite the production halt ?
Isn’t it the major sales problem that Saab doesn’t have the “right Saaby” products at the moment, and present models are overpriced in accordance to what they really are ?( GM OEM products assembled in Sweden) Leading to missing confidence in the brand’s inner soul and therefore they can’t stand the competition !
Can you please be a little more specific on this issue ?
maanders said on October 22, 2011
VM has said for some time he does not want to be the CEO of Saab….he stepped in when the need was there because how can you hire the type of CEO you really want until the liquidity issue is sorted out?
It is all past history now, VM has been seeking additional funding it seems like for the last year. The early efforts were with those who were ready and passionate about Saab, but that was blocked for reasons we still do not yet fully understand. Then he went looking for partners in China to open the potential of that market and now time is running short.
It is always easy to criticize with hindsight, but I still do not know what some of these who are criticizing now think should have been done as an alternative in terms of seeking additional funding and partners beyond what VM did? Nobody else it seems in Sweden was helping.
SaabMan said on October 22, 2011
Tim, you have a very different kind of relationship with Victor Muller and Saab than many of us here at SU. You have worked for Saab, as do many of your family members. You know Victor Muller personally, as evidenced by your thoughtful birthday surprise. And Saab’s future will impact you and the people you love more than it will most of us. I care about Saab, too, but in a different way–as a driver of a brand new 2011 9-3 in the US, with a bit of a Saab obsession. I honestly don’t know if anyone could do a better job than he. Certainly, I doubt that there would be as many who would be as tenacious as Muller has been. But like many, my loyalty is not to Muller, even as I am very grateful that he was able to rescue Saab from the clutches of death. I want to see Saab thrive as a great auto maker with a unique style and wonderful Swedish history and cache. And I would certainly want Saab to maintain its base of operations in Trollhatten. (My Swedish ancestors emigrated from just a few miles away from there, so under other circumstances I might be working there, too.)
Like you, I am convinced, and have written often today, that Youngman’s intentions have not been honorable. They have not fulfilled their side of any agreement they have signed. Thus, I don’t think that there is in reality any possibility for a future with them, aside from the complete takeover you fear. But some sort of investment is necessary if Saab is to live. So much of the business has been mortgaged now, there are so many loans, and the debts are so very high that something has to change quite dramatically. The boy putting his finger in the dike, to employ a Dutch image, is not going to be enough.
Thus, I am not one who finds Mr. Lofalk’s actions contemptible. He was seeking whatever foundation he could for a stronger Saab, especially when it became clear that Youngman was unwilling to honor its original agreements. Victor Muller’s and others’ complaints against Lofalk just don’t seem fair. And I imagine that he truly believes that Saab is not solid enough, given the many questions now facing it, to emerge from reconstruction successfully. I hope he’s wrong. And I hope the courts continue to give Saab a chance.
Perhaps over the weekend Victor Muller can come to some deeper agreement with North Street Capital to see it through this present trial. But it really has to be more than a stop-gap measure (Dutch boy with his finger in a dike) if everyone (employees, customers, dealers, suppliers) are to feel secure again. So I guess, Victor Muller will have to prove that he is the right person for the tasks ahead by his ability to overcome the current challenges. But in reality we have to remember everyone is not right for every job or every circumstance. Sadly, at this point it seems that if he proves that he’s not the right man, Saab will either be the Chinese company that you have no interest in (and honestly neither do I), or it won’t exist at all. That is, unless something changes dramatically very soon.
TimR said on October 22, 2011
I agree with you fully on this one!
beren said on October 22, 2011
Who would step in at this point? Kind of like tip toeing thru the cow pasture at night…
MarqeDeSaab said on October 22, 2011
He Stays…
Victor Muller deserves every chance to realize his dreams with SAAB.
It was his vision, it was his money, it was his plan…people, it is called OWNERSHIP.
Such as it is…it is still his.
And in spite of some of you more emotional nancy’s, who think it is somehow ‘yours’….it is not.
It is his company at the moment.
It’s clear to me that Mr. Muller has gone out of his way time and time again, to demonstrate his passion for the people of SAAB.
And to blithly say that he “…continues to damage this wonderful brand…”, sir, and other naysayers like you, you are not very knowledgeable about the cold reality of the marketplace. Companies come and go, regardless of how much we love them. If the cash is not there to save it…it dies, and someone else picks up the pieces…maybe. (I still grieve for Studebaker).
Life is not certain and most definitely not always fair…remember Mr. Koenigsegg?
He had a shot at it and it did not work for him.
Mr. Muller not only OWNS this shot, he also deserves every other possible opportunity to make this company a going concern.
He stays as long as he wants to stay……………………
rallyho said on October 22, 2011
Victor has said in a press interview that the money to; was it $24 million, came from Vladimir.
Who owes what to whom in this issue is so complex that you would use up an entire wall just trying to work up a flow chart. I doubt there is a person on this forum who could trace the ownership of the Saab/Spyker union from memory.
As an “NV” additionally it is not information that need be open to the public (regarding ownership) and I doubt that unless this goes into a court action that it will ever be known. I don’ know what you call it there but here it would be called “piercing the corporate veil”.
scand said on October 22, 2011
He had his chance to realize his dreams, he ran out of cash. As you said yourself, “if the cash is not there, it dies…and someone else picks up the pieces.
Peo said on October 22, 2011
I agree with your analysis TimR. 100% Chinese ownership means nothing else but buying brand and technology for production in China. If the previous deal is no more it´s only another evidence for business tactics. I also think that Victor is the one person in this play that has the most true ambition to keep production and Saab Swedish. Sad that swedes are so “blue-eyed” in business.
Hope to meet with you some day TimR when all of this is on track again… Peo from Åmål.
Troll96 said on October 22, 2011
Many here have expressed concern that Chinese ownership would result in a transfer of technology to non-Saab brands, a shift of Saab production to non-Swedish factories, and a decline in Saab DNA at the hands of a foreign corporate parent whose primary focus is a very large and very different domestic car market. Others claim that the choice is one of survival, and if Chinese investors are offering a life preserver Saab should grab hold.
Well, just replace “Chinese” with “American” and notice how we’re back in the 1990′s again.
With the benefit of hindsight, can anyone who chastised GM expect better from a Pang Da/Youngman ownership? If Saab achieves greater market share in China, can we honestly expect this NOT to have a substantial effect on the styling and driving characteristics of future offerings in ways markedly different from what a Scandinavian-based company would otherwise produce? Saab may survive this crisis. It may do so under new ownership. It may even succeed in selling more cars worldwide. But if that means operating under the same constraints of the past 20 years, will it be worth it?
CJ said on October 22, 2011
All
I don’t believe the Chinese companies are as financially capable as we sometimes believe. Most of these companies (Geely) are very small and rely upon financing from the authorities. I recall seeing Volvo reported a large loss. In prerspective, how can Geely fund this? Sound familiar?
The recipe to save Saab is very simple. The EIB/SweGov, suppliers, and GM must convert debt to equity in a new company. Not debt…EQUITY! The management, unions and dealers must come together as production and distribution remain the key – it always was. The stakeholders have to step up – all of them – to save jobs, industry, technology. The healing will be long and difficult and a seasoned and tough turnaround guy must step in to operate – someone the team will work with. No fluff, no frills, no fancy campaigns. Just hard work – the Saab way.
Saab has good products. Value and distribution were, are, and will be the key. Chasing rainbows is over. Don’t chase Audi and BMW…just be Saab.
The stakeholders, Including Mr. Muller may have far less but, then again, less is better than the current path.
Sweden keeps thousands of good jobs (at Saab and suppliers) and an vitally important industry.
Managament keeps their jobs.
GM retains a good tech partner and sell parts.
Suppliers sell more and recover lost receivables.
Unions keep good jobs where good jobs matter.
Dealers get a solid supply of product and have a a say in the “how”.
Mr. Muller gets the nightmare behind him and may actually earn some money along the way.
Who know, I bet they could all make money at it and get out whole in the end. If Saab can go back to simply being Saab, I bet so. Equity is the answer.
If it closes, it closes forever. If the Chinese buy it, TimR is right, no need to keep it in Trollhattan and GM likely won’t cooperate. Thus, they all must come together. There is an opportinity here for all of them if they just wake up. The answer in right in front of you. Stop wasting time. There is work to do.
Cowboy Up!
lala said on October 22, 2011
This should be brought up as a new entry….
My only question is: how are you going to hold out until the time they reach break-even?
JasonPowell said on October 22, 2011
That interests me. CJ, do you see all parties coming together like that? I’m sure you’ve talked to all parties in the past when you were looking at Saab, do you personally think that all parties can come together like that and has something like this been done before? Sounds intriguing to say the least.
CJ said on October 22, 2011
Jason
I don’t see any other viable soution. They must as it is in their mutual interests. The stakeholders must come together, and now. Its very simple and, really, what do they have to lose?
lala – with a completely deleveraged Saab, working capital can be recast with a prudent pledge of assets taken out by an IPO and follow on PO’s.
Saab doesn’t need to die.
Audun said on October 23, 2011
A very good suggestion you come with. I’ve thought about somthing like that myself this weekend. Everybody should have mor to win if this happends than with the alternatives we know about.
maanders said on October 22, 2011
This is the most level-headed reply I have read here in the last several days of news!
Welcome back, CJ! (Although I bet you never really left….)
Cowboy Up, indeed!
CJ said on October 22, 2011
Thanks, maanders. I’ve been around here and there. Never far from Saab.
Jeff said on October 22, 2011
Your comment is the whole reason comments exist on this site. Thanks CJ.
74StingSaab said on October 22, 2011
Good to see you around !
michaelb said on October 22, 2011
Your proposal probably does not take into consideration political / organizational restrictions: Forget about the EIB or the Swedish government converting debt to equity. The EIB is protected by the Swedish state guarantee, the Swedish government by collateral. They do not want to be shareholders at all, as probably most suppliers do not want. And both the EIB and the Swedish government do not want to continue with Mr. Muller. In reality the alternatives have narrowed down to bankruptcy, with some pieces to be picked up by the Chinese, oder a full blown takeover by the two Chinese firms. In the first case, GM IP and the brand name will be gone, in the second case GM IP will have to be dealt out. The two Chinese firms are not in such a strong position to take over, and that is a difference to the Rover case, as GM IP will be concerned. Forget about just moving things to China. That is not a viable solution neither, and the two Chinese companies would be badly adviced if that would be their project.
CJ said on October 22, 2011
MIchaelb and Rune-
If you think aboutit, SweGov has the most incentive and clout to bring the parties together. The question is: are they forward thinking ehnough to see this?
If Saab dies –
1. a buyer (if there are any) will pay little if anything. Pennies on the dollar is my guess. SweGov get hit on loan guarantees.
2. unemployment jumps in the western side of Sweden from Saab and suppliers. Volvo’s own suppier base is impacted as well.
3. Elected oficial want solutions and closing isn’t a solution, its a negative outcome.
With equity, there is a decent chance of being made whole and a good chance of Saab turning around. Then the company can be sold (or an IPO) to return the money, in larger sums that they will get now.
I didn’t say they would do it but, by analysis, they should do it. With the loan guaranty and GM owning so much in IP, this could be tied up for months if not years. The easy and quick remedy is to shuffle the deck and keep her going. That, or take the losses now – that will keep transfer significant costs and suffering to SweGov anyway. Saab closing will ripple through the Sweden economy, far more than anyone realizes. It need not be so.
If SweGov and suppliers don’t want to be shareholders, they will lose money now and ongoing. Saab is worth more to all as an successful entity. If they want to get their money back, probably with a profit, they all must think differently, and fast.
I, too, respect and support Victor’s involvement in Saab but his taking a lesser role may well be the price of a solution. If that is indeed the price, I bet he would gladly do so to see his child saved and to make money in the long term.
The key here is to get up and running again, to put people to work, to make, distribute, and sell cars. Nobody loses here – everyone wins.
I have no firsthand knowledge here but that is the best solution I can see.
There is no doubt a successful Saab is best for Sweden.
paulsaero said on October 22, 2011
Got to agree with that summation CJ.
michaelb made a common slip from stakeholder to shareholder. For clarity the shareholders own the company, stakeholders area broader group and are all of those people and entities with an interest in the company being successful. In this later group SweGov is definitely the biggest stakeholder as the failure of Saab will inevitably have knock on effects to suppliers across Sweden and beyond and it’s the government that will have to pick up the social cost tab.
Are they forward thinking, I doubt it, in most governments the politicians look only at opinion polls while the civil servants do only what they’re told and suffer from massive inertia.
I have no axe to grind with anyone involved insde Saab, they’re in a maelstorm and are no doubt dealing with the issues as they arise and trying to get one step ahead. We on the other hand, look in with only a small percentage of the information – and it’s alsways historical data – and from the comfort of our homes which is a very different viewpoint. Human nature favours negetivity it seems and we all suffer from 20/20 hindsight. To all of those involved, keep doing your best, there is no doubt that Saab is getting your best shot and while the battle is grim the fact that it’s still going on means that there is sme hope of survival.
Glad to see you’re still around CJ.
davidgmills said on October 22, 2011
Good to see you back CJ. Would love for you to get involved trying to purchase Saab again because as an American, I think we really need a significant Saab presence in the North American market. I’ve got many friends who are scratching their heads trying to think of ways to return Saab to some kind of American or part American ownership but none are really in the position to do it. I think it is quite unfortunate that the European community could not come up with enough money to really give Saab a shot after the GM sale. But these are very tough financial times so I understand.
I really like my new 9-5. I think it is the best Saab I have ever owned and it is my 15th. Damn it was put together well, kind like the Swede’s financial lives depended on it. And I wanted a new 9-5 wagon to go with it.
But I don’t know if the Swedish Government will push as hard as it needs to in order to get the job done. Time will tell.
Rune said on October 22, 2011
CJ, your roadmap is a good one, except for this part IMO. I have to agree with michaelb’s comment, swegov is not willing to deal.
Ironically, it is my understanding that Pang Da / Youngman will get government support. From the Chinese government that is. The irony here is that they are willing to support the industry that Sweden is so eager to dispose of. Those Swedes who talk about a free market place… I hope they wake up and smell the coffee one of these days.
OTOH, you have had dealings with both swegov and GM. If anyone has some knowledge about these parties willingness to sit down at the table, it is probably you. Although I do not share Tim’s skepticism towards Chinese ownership, I do think it is better that swegov gets involved than chigov.
Sadim said on October 23, 2011
Rune, I am not questioning your statement but would you share with me the source saying that ChiGov would support Y&P financially?
I am quite sure our opinons differ greatly on the merits of market economy. But your statement that “Sweden” is eager to dispose of SAAB can only come from a hardened socialist (or worse). It is just not true. “Sweden”, I believe, wants corporations to live as long as they are well managed and profitable. If they are not they should be put to rest.
Rune said on October 23, 2011
My apologies Sadim, I think I must have misinterpreted one of fido’s earlier where he explained the difference between state owned and privately owned businesses in China.
As for what I am… I’d like to remind you again that the governments of US, Germany and France have all supported their automobile industry. Swegov is pretty much alone in their belief that the financial crisis is a myth.
fido said on October 23, 2011
what chinese government support is just approve the deal. Chinese government just support the gov owned company financially throw gov owned banks, and Youngman is private owned, so no money from gov, they must find financial resources by themselves. take it easy. 235M or 700M euro is not too much money for Youngman or Pand Da. i think no problem for them.
Pang Da’s sales in 2010, 6.24 billion euro. Youngman’s sales is not public, because it’s private owned. but one of their production base investment is 430M euro.
They don’t like VM, they have their successful company continue earn profits. but VM’s Spyker continue losing money.
OddJob said on October 22, 2011
I’m with you 100% Tim, a Saab without VM is unthinkable. I was quite sceptic when he entered the scene after Koenigsegg deal broke (which I thought was a dream scenario), but I must say he has won my deapest respect through this long and painful process. His engagement and what he has done for Saab is unbelievable. However he needs some people surrounding him to keep him “down to reatlities”. But as a motor for development and progress there’s no one like him in the automotive industry – and that’s what Saab needs.
Tomas TL1000R said on October 22, 2011
Tim!
I don´t know anything about the thing that happends inside Saab or whatever. What I know is that if you don´t have money you can´t own a car company. So someone with money should help Saab to survive. Who? Who has that kind of money…….sorry to say……….the Chinese. That is not what I want but proberbly the only way. What has happend the last year? VM tried to build up confidence in the market and that failed proberbly because of lack of money and perserverance. Now the money is gone and the reality is shown. Why do you think JÅJ accidently leave the company 1-2 month before the band stopped. I´m not sure it was the official explanation. And I don´t think the Chinese is stupid enough to move the company, Volvo hasn´t. So of all bad thing I could take that someone as far as asia save Saab. But no one would be happier than me if Scania or The Swedish gouvernment or Wallenberg or even Siemens bought it. Just save the company that´s all I ask and I don´t think our Dutch friend is the man, sorry!
TimR said on October 22, 2011
Well I ask you as I asked a previous writer, do you really know that the chinese have money?
I’m for one is not too sure of that…
Tomas TL1000R said on October 22, 2011
The question must be: Who will invest that kind of money it takes to get Saab on it´s feet.
1.000.000.000$ is proberbly what it takes to give Saab a fair chans, hopefully less.
I´m not sure of that either but there´s other company in China. My point is that it´s easier to grow in a expansive market rather than stick to the US and European market If you need a good start. The worlds biggest car market and it s growing every year rapidly. Saab need China as an area and I think that investers from there is moore willing to spend that kind of money.
I´m not saying that that´s what I want but western companies have obviously turn that offer down, anyway thoes with the biggest purse.
Tomas TL1000R said on October 22, 2011
One more thing. If Saab stop building cars in Trollhättan everything is over and that must NOT happen.
I don´t think a buyer of the company is stupid enough to moove all production. No they will expand in China with new factories and leave the develop and headoffice in Trollhättan (Saab is Trollhättan and they know that). They still earn money on there own market.
fido said on October 22, 2011
the chinese will follow the Germans, Volvo/SAAB to be Audi, their sub brand to be VW mass car.
whether you like it or not, Germans success is proven by the market, if SAAB is partner with spyker, then the 100,000 cars a year and a niche car maker is the goal, because spyker don’t have money to do BIG things.
if SAAB/Volvo are partner with chinese, than Germans way is the right way to go. Because this model can play the advantages of both. that’s a Win-Win model.
fido said on October 22, 2011
as a chinese, i wish Swedish government can inject money to Koenigsegg, Let Koenigsegg take over SAAB.
that will be perfect for me. pure swedish, pure nordic.
Look at CCXR & Aero X , how similar they are!
and then look at AeroX and spyker, totally different!
CoolCombi said on October 22, 2011
No Swedish Saab,… no longer a Saab owner. And that’s all I have to say about that!
Ronnie_Rad said on October 22, 2011
Saab isn’t Swedish owned now? Are you still a Saab owner?
What you meant to say was, if Saab isn’t owned by a European or American, or anyone who doesn’t look like you, then you’ll no longer be a Saab owner.
TimR said on October 22, 2011
Ronnie, Saabs are / were produced in Trollhättan, a Swedish Car… SWAN, the name even states a swedish car company, even though its dutch, the place is still run from Trollhättan. Victor Mullers office is in Trollhättan, I’ve been there… so it is in essence a Swedish company!
If this changes, the main office and production moves to china, its no longer a Swedish company and I for one would no longer see any point in buying the car at all, since the values and thoughts behind the car of the people designing and building the car would have fundamentally changed.
ANA said on October 22, 2011
This is just scaremongering, where does it say that the Chinese would close down operations in Sweden. I would guess the plan is that design and European production would continue in Trollhattan but that they also start a factory in China.
CoolCombi said on October 22, 2011
Ronnie – I’ve been driving Saab’s since 1984. Part of a Saab’s mystique, its soul, is that it is built in Sweden. Though the sum of its parts are certainly not all Swedish made, it’s final assembly is by the careful, loving hands of a Troll (aka skilled worker) whos factory resides in Trollhattan. This forum has no place for racist remarks such as yours. If you can’t say something nice (or at least constructive), don’t say anything at all!
Ronnie_Rad said on October 22, 2011
How was my comment racist? Against whom? I was implying that YOUR comment was racist, because it had strong racial undertones.
and for the record, I look like none of those “races”.
@Tim. I don’t think this would happen if you look at Volvo though, where that hasn’t happened and it seems that Geely is quite serious about keeping it that way. Who knows, time will tell… I hope Saab stays in Sweden as well, and it all works out that way.
TimR said on October 22, 2011
Ronnie, please take a look at what is happening with Volvo in China right now, 3 new factories are right now being built, and another engine manufacturing plant is being built as well. These factories are big enough to supply the whole world with cars. When these are up and running at full speed you’ll see that suddenly it will be too expensive to build cars in Sweden… what then?
fido said on October 22, 2011
@TimrR
Volvo should move fast to catch Germans in china, i hope if Youngman take over SAAB, it can do same. Those cars will just for China market, The Germans already produce cars in china about 30 years. do you ever seen a VM/Audi/BMW in euro or usa is built in china? i bet NO.
Geely will not sell china made volvos outside china, because even a fool known Western people will not buy them.
but after years and years, if the Western people are willing to buy a chinese made perineum car and the cost made in china then import the overseas still the lowest, that day, maybe it will move factories to China, but i think that days will not happen, because the cost raise in china day to day.
after years, i think the factories will move to Africa. or others lowest cost place. business is business.
It’s not necessary to protect plant. i think the answer is in customer’s side.
if SAAB customer say, they just want buy cars made in Trollhattan, then Trollattan will be the only place that factories exist.
if customer just want but SAAB, they don’t care where cars been built, then lowest country is best place to go for SAAB factories.
It’s hard to implements Let’s SAAB be SAAB, not like Audio/BMW plan.
i think if an SAAB 9-5 and Audi A6 or BMW 5 are same level, the cost of development must be similar, maybe Audi and BMW cost less than SAAB because they have more resource. SAAB does not even own it’s own BIG test track. it use Volvo’s.
the cost is similar, but the sales are big less than Audi & BMW, then how can SAAB earn more profit to develop more model?
if such plan will work, i think SAAB must raise their price to 150% or 200%.
SAAB should sell 100,000 cars in china and more sub-brand lower price cars in china.
then SAAB should raise to a higher grade in outside china market.
the real thing will save saab is not law, not the contract, not the money, it’s continuous innovation and create valuable and competitive products,
If one day, everyone is buy a fly-car, does SAAB still hang on it’s car factory.
Open your imagination and Move Your Mind!
CoolCombi said on October 22, 2011
Ronnie, you’re really reading too much into this. A simple statement of me wanting my Saab’s built in Sweden is construed as having “strong racial undertones” is beyond belief. You really need to get a life.
saabworker said on October 22, 2011
I just want SAAB to stay in Sweden. Not only for i work there, but who’s gonna develop new SAAB’s? The Chinese? No if SAAB is moving from Sweden the engineers will not follow, and then SAAB is dead.
quickbird said on October 22, 2011
The possible way is design in Sweden and also make cars for global except Chinese market. In China, they can make the local saab there and only can be sell there. Notbody would buy a saab made in China.
They cannot move everything to china. Without R&D engineers in Sweden, Saab is dead.
But right now the point is, do VM allow Chinese to buy it or not?
Lundin said on October 22, 2011
There are other markets that could benefit from chinese Saab production,like Australia/Russia and mid east.
As per info confirmed by SU-user fido,every premium brand is doing loads of money in China by selling european made/produced car in china.
Make no misstake. Even the chinese would now what a youngman-Saab and a Saab produced car is.How unlikey that might seems to us, well known automotive companies are generating huge profits with this concept right now.Playing the cards correct you could very well end up with a segmented Saab product line that would generate money huge money in china that would gain Trollhättan.
It’s vital that we can reach an agreement with Youngman and Pang Da.
quickbird said on October 22, 2011
I agree with you. But there are too many people here think Chinese own-saab is a disaster. I think Chinese is the only savior for SAAB.
Look back these six months, do anybody except Chinese shows interest in SAAB? NO!
NSC? Saab cannot depend on it…
Lundin said on October 22, 2011
Yes it’s vital, i agree. Not only for money injection but for opening up the market without the struggle of finding a good importer in China.
Having said that,does that imply that SWAN needs to dissapers totally. I dont know. The answers given by muller seems to imply that doing a hostile takover would not yield the desired effect,meaning overtaking Saab-as we know it. Does that mean something is exclusive binded to SWAN/Muller rather than Saab itself ? I dont know. I only know that there where some thousends contracts signed in the deal back in 2009.
However,i can also understand if Y/Pa feels uncomfortable with paying a overprice for shares with the current trend in mind of the stockmarket and SWAN.
We will have to watch how this all pans out nex week.
JasonPowell said on October 22, 2011
quickbird, does anybody else show interest in the last 6 months… Yes, but you wouldn’t know about it because Saab has had a contract with two Chinese companies and they have been standing by that contract. The reason that most look at the Chinese as sole ownership as a disaster is simple, look at their own words, Youngman has stated many times that they were only interested in the Chinese market. I guess that could change if they took on full ownership but their words have only talked about that one market and as CJ has pointed out in his comment, it wouldn’t be that easy for sole Chinese ownership to get approval from other parties like GM.
Baver said on October 22, 2011
What about public ownership, ala Green Bay Packers of the US’s NFL? Main production, design and engineering must remain in Trollhättan,
Vagabond said on October 22, 2011
I, for one cannot envision anyone else or know of anyone other than Victor Muller. I would vote for him as CEO and I’m a shareholder in SWAN. The only other names I can think of is Antonov or the british racing guy who wanted to buy Saab. You know…I think Saabs are popular in the UK. They could team with Mini and build a 9-2 over there.
ryanonsrc said on October 22, 2011
My answer to the question: “Should Victor Muller Step down” is a resounding Absolutely NOT
Here at SU, we know first hand the level of commitment that Victor Muller has placed into Saab is well beyond what I think many of us here could possibly comprehend. A solid concrete deal, that was agreed upon between VM, Youngman, and Pang Da has been firmly defined and fast-tracked through the Chinese government approval process. Then Guy Lufolk comes in and gets the Chinese investors all excited about an opportunity to buy Saab outright — with VM’s expressed disapproval.
The very notion that we are supposed to trust some stooge sent in from the Swedish Government (Guy Lufolk) over someone that has poured has heart, soul and reputation into Saab is a complete joke. VM’s departure from Saab would be very sad indeed. But, let me tell you: that’s not going to happen!
SaabMan said on October 22, 2011
Ryan, remember that Guy Lofalk was not just some stooge sent in by the Swedish government. He was specifically requested by Saab to serve as administrator when it asked for voluntary reconstruction and again when it won its appeal. Saab could have asked for someone else and likely would have had that request approved. They chose Lofalk because he successfully led Saab through its reconstruction in 2009. Furthermore, I’m not sure that any of us know how things transpired in China. My guess is that Youngman proved to be an unreliable partner (surely no know could deny that, since the promised 70 million Euros have not yet arrived), Lofalk saw that situation unfold, and he sought out other options. In terms of full Chinese ownership, Lofalk claims that he didn’t know or anticipate anything like that. But when Saab turned the offer down, he had no choice but to ask to end the reconstruction, since the funding simply wasn’t there. I’m not suggesting that he’s right, or that the courts should agree, but let’s keep some perspective.
Ken said on October 22, 2011
Well I for one are knotted up inside trying to work out which way this will go.
I currently have two Saabs (9-5 and a c900i), one bought from a main dealer a year ago to try and add funds to the system (dealer has since gone out of business) and which is booked for service at my local dealer on this coming monday to once again add funds where I can. I also have shares in Saab (SWAN) which are currently worth 5 times less than I bought them for.
Where I can I have put my money where my mouth is.
Biting people for biting peoples sake does bugger all good. The politics and business is out of our hands which obviously where the frustration comes in.
Please stop bickering like children and do what you actually can to help things!
amigabuzz said on October 22, 2011
Hello…the new 9-5 which I happily bought back in February, for its Style, performance and safety. Wow though it was stickered at $40,000; more than a volvo S80, Lexus IS loaded, BMW 3 , Audi4 etc…the point is even if Victor, buys a few more months of keeping the lights on at SAAB Sweden…the cars need to be sellingwith just 670 units sold, in the US after 10 months, this is not good. BMW moves that much in a month in Florida alone. SAAB for the sake SAAB is not a company…they need to move thousands of cars…which requires lots of cash to get the “new” cars and SUV out in front of the public.Remember the new 9-5 by 2012 will no longer be new model design. Sorry this is the way the Auto business works. Victor, or the new Senior Management team – needs push hard ASAP to find a market niche aka the “Born from Jets -or something needs to come back if it can (some legal trademark issues I’m told)..
Even running new SAAB performance commercials for the 9-3, 9-5 and 9-4x all together would convey a strong image of a full car lines with performance as the main emphasis.
davidgmills said on October 22, 2011
Tim: With all due respect, at this point it is not a matter of whether we want Mueller to go or not go or who we want to replace him. Once a company files for reorganization/bankruptcy, unless existing management can come up with a great plan of reorganization, which is enthusiastically supported by both administrator and creditors, usually existing management gets shoved out the door. The creditors may have their own reorganization plan which a judge approves and if so the creditors get to decide who the new management will be. Or if Saab is purchased to pay off the creditors, the new purchaser gets to decide who the new management will be. Saab’s fate is in the hands of the court not Mueller’s.
The reorganization administrator is apparently going to recommend to the court (according to the thread earlier today) that there be no reorganization because he was not convinced that Mueller’s plan of reorganization would work and the creditors have not come up with a plan of reorganization either. If the judge determines there will be no more reorganization then only two things can happen. Saab is shut down for good and what ever remains of its assets will be sold off to the creditors, or someone comes and buys Saab and buys off the creditors or cuts a deal with the creditors so they don’t lose as much.
So unless Mueller can convince the court at the very last minute that his latest hedge fund group from the US can come in and save the day, reorganization is gone as an option and there are only two left: (1) dissolution and (2) purchase by a new owner.
My personal feeling is that Saab will go into dissolution again, like it did with GM, and maybe the Chinese or some other buyer will buy it. That is likely Saab’s best fate. The other option is that Saab Automobile has run its course.
Tripod said on October 22, 2011
You still stick to your view how it works in your part of the world? Remember bankruptcy and reconstruction is not the same; Swedish laws are not the same, as for example, in the US Bankruptcy Code for reorganization or bankruptcy (chap. 7&11).
Also, remember there hasn’t been a meeting yet, with the creditors; and at this early point they would not be involved, OK?
No matter what information that comes, you try to twist it to fit what you have mentioned earlier, it seems.
What he does say is that he thinks that a reconstruction must be funded, for the reconstruction to work, obviously, and for him to accept the role as administrator. Then he goes on and discusses that in the whole petition.
The administrator doesn’t mention what you call “Mueller’s plan of reorganization” (it’s amazing when there is negative press in the media, often here in Sweden, and here at SU, it’s always “him”, “Muller” etc., as if he is the only one around doing work…) in his (Mr Lofalk’s) three pages petition to the court.
He does however mention the initial plan briefly, section 3, (that isn’t the one supposed to be presented to the court and the creditors, usually, that should be the result of the joint work before that meeting), and only when it comes to the funding, and that boils down to something outside the initial reconstruction plan and Project Cheetah etc., namely the bridge loan.
Remember the reconstruction plan the Saab companies presented to the court consists of several things, projects to reconstruct the companies. But Lofalk is discussing the bridge loan and that only smaller amounts have arrived.
So, he hasn’t said anything whether he is convinced or not that the plan to reorganise the companies would work, he talks about the funding. And then we are back to Chinese guys, and the discussions between SWAN and them about the bridge loan, Lofalk says it’s up to them.
davidgmills said on October 22, 2011
Unless you are a lawyer in Sweden, I wouldn’t be putting out these ideas about how Sweden bankruptcy is different from the US. Bankruptcy around the world is very similar. Sure there are going to be local differences no matter where you are. But the overall concept is going to be pretty similar. It has to be because companies are global now.
When I mentioned “Mueller’s plan”, I just meant the plan he would like to have or I think he would like to have. He’s the one that went into reorganization with Chinese investors, hoping he could get the administrator and court to go with his plan. It appears the administrator looked at it and was not convinced the plan would work.
On the other thread about the administrator, if I understood his letter to the court, he was abandoning the idea. I read the letter. Even with a bad translation the message came through loud and clear that he was recommending abandoning reorganization.
Khrisdk said on October 22, 2011
Just for info as I am most certainly NOT a lawyer:
The interview in the latest post, and other statements by Lofalk indicates that the only reason behind his wish to end reconstruction is because the financial agreements made has not been held and money are running out
The important part regarding this is:
He does not overrule current management.
It is a problem between current management and the chinese. If they can not solve this he recommends bankruptcy. If they can solve this he wishes to continue reconstruction
It would appear that current management will only be shoved out the door in case of bankruptcy,
Not while under reconstruction.
So there seems to be a difference between Swedish Reconstruction and the US version
davidgmills said on October 23, 2011
No. It is the same. An administrator’s/trustee’s job is to determine whether a reorganization is feasible. Without new money it is usually not feasible. Lofalk doesn’t think new money is coming in time if it is coming at all. So how can he recommend a reorganization if new money is desperately needed and he is convinced it is not coming in time to help. If Lofalk believed the new money was coming in time, and if the new money was conditional upon VM staying and if Lofalk believed the new money was sufficient for a reorganization, I am sure he would be recommending that reorganization take place and that VM continue to run Saab.
davidgmills said on October 23, 2011
Well, to be more precise it is not the same and as I have said before it is very similar and I stand by that.
Tripod said on October 23, 2011
davidgmills,
It has been mentioned by others as well, Swade I think, etc., that people should remember that this is done according to the Swedish law. I’m not a lawyer, I have mentioned that earlier to you, but I have studied the Swedish law a bit. There may very well be many similarities, but there can definitely be differences, and one must be aware of that. (And yes “bankruptcy around the world is very similar”; but this is a reconstruction.=
It was you who, in several threads, were “putting out ides”, to use your words; such as “usually existing management gets shoved out the door”, “hostile” etc. etc. You wanted to explain to the SU community how it usually works, from your point of view. Fine, but if I was in the US I would be careful doing that.
I just wanted to point out that this is a (voluntary) reconstruction in three companies according to the Swedish laws. And that one can not build on experiences in completely different cases from other counties. (For example in some interview the administrator said, about the discussions related to the “100% of Saab, instead of shares in SWAN-question”, something a long the lines that it’s up to the shareholders, he doesn’t have the shares. Yet, many have got the impression that he can sell the Saab companies etc. etc. And you fuelled the discussion several times by mentioning things like “usually existing management gets shoved out the door” etc.)
—
As for the other thread, “Guy Lofalk fights back”, why not comment my translation there, instead of here?
Pro primo:
It’s pretty amazing that you were perfectly happy with an auto-web-translation of the first parts of the petition, the letter, but then wrote “Sure would like to know what the last paragraph says.”. Why didn’t you auto-translate it yourself? I had, as I mentioned in my reply to you, already commented about the petition, perhaps you had not seen that comment and blog post, but I did a new full translation of the summary. Thank you Tripod for the translation of the last part, in the other thread.
I did one mistake at the end of my reply to you above, but didn’t bother to add a new comment, just after posting. I, at some places, used the words “reconstruction plan” for the application from the Saab companies to the court, guess I got carried away by your use of “plan”, and “Mueller’s plan” etc.
A reconstruction plan, according to the law, is something created by the administrator, after consulting the companies, based on his research (and the application) (I have mentioned this earlier), and that plan is to be presented at the meeting with the creditors. However it can perhaps be understood from my other comments in the post above that I wanted to separate the reconstruction plan from the initial plan (application).
Pro secundo:
You once again repeat “It appears the administrator looked at it and was not convinced the plan would work.” As I have already mentioned in my initial translation to ANA (in the post “Further reconstruction to be decided by the courts before October 31st”); as mentioned in my translation to you in the post “Guy Lofalk fights back”, mentioned above, and as mentioned in my reply to you above and also commented by Khris:
It_is_about_the_funding_of_the_reconstruction!
The whole letter to the court is about that; a lack of funding.
Pro tertio:
No kidding, Wow!
Again, no kidding… of course he’s “recommending abandoning reorganization”. Gee, that’s what we have been discussing for a few days. But I have also read it and other comments from him and my Swedish is perfect, thank you; it is about the funding, not necessarily how the reconstruction is going to be carried out, and that it would not work.
amigabuzz said on October 22, 2011
Speaking of sales figures and Chinese autos…GEELY is boasting 300,000 units sold last year . This doesn’t include Volvo -which they own. Note that Volvo is having sales declines with its Wagons and small car…this doesn’t bode well for launching a 9-5 Wagon in the US. Geely paid 1.2 billion for the company . Volvo if you read the article below is targeting the higher end market ….so a new 9-3 next year…maybe welcome news but again…ADVERTISE THE DARN THING…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boPRPsigzb8
Sales for the smaller Volvo has been in a decline.By: Michelle Koueiter on 6/15/2011
Related Articles
Volvo You concept is the shape of things to come
2012 Volvo S60 T6 AWD R-Design, an Autoweek Flash Drive Car Review
AUTOWEEK TV: Buick cranks up the power with Regal GS
Volvo will discontinue the S40 sedan and the V50 wagon for the 2012 model year in the United States.
The second-generation S40 came out in 2004, and the V50 debuted in 2005. According to Volvo spokesman Dan Johnston, S40 sales were down 29 percent by the end of last year and V50 sales were down more than 50 percent.
“It seemed American buyers weren’t looking for that kind of product,” Johnston said, “and for us as a car company, it’s not profitable to sell something that has a declining market share.”
Volvo will focus on cars that are selling at greater volumes, namely the S60, the XC60, the XC90, the S80 and the XC70. The XC70 is the automaker’s only wagon left in the U.S. market, as Volvo discontinued the V70 this year.
Read more: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20110615/CARNEWS/110619906#ixzz1bTIwb28Y
davidgmills said on October 22, 2011
I don’t know why, but wagons just don’t sell well in the US. This prejudice against them has been around a very long time. Yet you can take nearly the same vehicle, jack it up off the ground 6-10 inches, put on bigger wheels and tires, and turn it into a crossover or SUV, and it will sell like hotcakes. All perception.
Iiari said on October 22, 2011
As CJ’s learned response here validates, this is a complex issue with many possible scenarios of resolution. We’ve all got to keep a level head here and watch what’s going on in a sophisticated fashion.
That’s why, again, the simplistic, jingoistic entry here is so dissonant. I know you own the blog, Tim, but it makes me sad to see posts like this one fritter away the integrity, responsibility, and insightfulness for which SU has always been known. We pull for SAAB and SU. You’ve got a real important position here. Please slow down, think about the impact of what you’re typing before it goes out, and please tread carefully…
gunteman said on October 22, 2011
+1
SU is in a unique position. It’s the main meeting place for Saab enthusiasts and it’s also one of the “front figures” of the entire Saab community.
“posts like this one fritter away the integrity, responsibility, and insightfulness for which SU has always been known”
So true.
Slow down, Tim.
mp2dtw said on October 22, 2011
As a Detroiter, I’d like to see GM acknowledge its responsibility for Saab’s situation and cough up a few hundred million. Otherwise GM will have nearly done for Trollhattan what it did for Flint. A picture of Buick city which once employed 28,000 and now employs none: http://www.plan59.com/photos/BC/buickcity2002.jpg
zippy said on October 22, 2011
Am I the only one who is beginning to think that SU is starting to turn into a bit of a b**tchfest? It seems that people arent allowed to disagree with the so called official line. We were tod, rather joyously a few weeks back, that Saab has $70million headed its way by SU and then when we get all down when the money was a noshow things get all narky. We are constantly being told investers are on their way (whatever happened to the long forgotten Hawaiian venture capitalists with @ $350million?) but nothing happens. What are we supposed to think? I could have told you what was gonna happen three months ago. The Chinese would bail as what they had signed on for in the beginning was not worth the paper it was written on. I really hate to say this but I dont believe a single word that comes out of VM mouth anymore and I dont trust him.
Saab Up!!!
74StingSaab said on October 22, 2011
Whoa…. be easy and steady my friend. I doubt very much VM is out to lie or deceive and neither is SU. I honestly feel he’s working non stop to make this work and unless VM is caught in outright blatant lies, I think we could all cut him a little slack. (saab employees have every right to be disgruntled, it’s more than a car company to them)
A man like he does not wish to be the final captain on a ship that goes down. I too am very frustrated with Saab’s current situation and that’s why I took some time away from SU. I know you’re not going to give up on Saab, it’s too much in your blood, just like me. It does not mean we’re blind followers, it’s just that we stay true till the end.
Have a drink my friend… or better yet, go hit some windy road with some night panel action… all will be well again.
Cheers!
zippy said on October 22, 2011
I sold my car 2-1/2 weeks ago, 74 as we are moving overseas soon. Everytime I see a Saab now I smile. Miss my baby LOADS.
74StingSaab said on October 22, 2011
OH? I hope you’re moving somewhere fun and exciting!
zippy said on October 23, 2011
Definitely and as soon as I get sorted job wise Saab will be a part of my life again.
mnztr said on October 22, 2011
Even with the current deal the Chinese will have a majority ownership, so they can still do whatever they want and VM would have NO POWER to stop them. So 54% or 100%… the control would be complete either way. Victor is not a child, he knows this is true. I suspect his counter offer is not really to do the deal as we did it.. .but pay me off and you can have the damn thing. So I suspect, sometime next week, you will see the Chinese buy 100% of SAAB.
michaelb said on October 22, 2011
You don’t now what is in the original shareholder agreement. If it is written that the business leadership is with VM, they could not do what they want.
Daniel said on October 22, 2011
On a lighter note… this weekend I may be buying my first Saab. That is, if I can secure the funding that’s supposed to be coming in tomorrow. It’s not funding from China though, so it shouldn’t be a problem. I might have to wait until next week though (man this all sounds familiar!). But seriously I’m going to look at a 2007 9-3 2.0t in a light blue, about 4 hours away. It’s got 108k miles on it and only one owner. The only mark against it, is there are a lot of miles on it already, but that puts it in my price range. Anyone have suggestions on specific things to look for when I go check it out?
I have wanted a Saab for a long time, particularly since the sale from GM when I thought I may never have the chance to. I had never driven or even sat in a Saab until earlier this week when I test drove a 2006 9-3 Aero. It genuinely made me feel happy. I need a new car before winter hits, and there aren’t a lot of Saab’s to choose from around here. But I want the Saab. It doesn’t matter how it compares to any other brand or car. It’s what I want, and if I can’t have it, then I’d probably just get a Sonata or Fusion. Probably either would be a fine car for me, but I want the Saab. I’m not after power or sporty, luxury or gadgets. I’m after a Saab. A perfect blend of focus on safety and performance, packaged together tastefully in a unique and beautiful way. I can’t wait to be a proud owner and park this in my driveway for the first time, and finally order my SU license plate holder!
paulsaero said on October 22, 2011
Checks:-
Wheels 4
Saab service history – Yes
Dings/scratches/rust – No
Stick a finger into the front strut spring seats – no loose bits of spring
Interior – good
Drive it if you can.
If all well:
Pay money
Enjoy
Dreadnought said on October 22, 2011
China is the only hope for Saab.
I can’t believe there are people who do not see this.
Forget “venture capitalists”. That is just silliness.
What “venture capitalists” have been successful in the car business lately, apart from boutique makers?
You have Cerebus with Chrysler, a much better capitalized firm than any of the motley crew who showed an interest in Saab, and who took over a firm much larger than Saab . Still the end result was bankruptcy.
Penske with his abortive Saturn play? Never got off the ground.
Koenigsegg with Saab? Same deal.
And of course there is now the example of Muller’s experience with Saab.
It’s China or nothing. They saved Volvo. They can save Saab. If they want to.
If the Chinese buy Saab, they won’t be able to close down their European facilities. They have to keep them open in order to maintain the credibility of the brand, as they’ve done with Volvo. It’s in their own best interest.
Chris Hansel said on October 22, 2011
Here is how that is going to work. The Chinese buy Saab and make statesments about keeping Saab in Sweden. Then after 5 or 7 years, they will annouce that Saab engineering and design will open a new building somewhere in Sweden, and all will appear to be well. Sometime after that they will annouce production will be moving to a plant in China where they are already building Saabs. But that Saab world headquaters will remain in Sweden. That situation could continue for many years, but at some point they will shut down Swedish engineering and move everything to China. In short they will follow the American model of slow death for in- country high paid jobs by outsourcing. There will be some smooth talk about costing saving by having the two together etc, etc.
Unrelated, or maybe not. Have you recently tried to buy contact paper? Might sound strange, but then check out who makes contact paper today. I think I googled 302 companies the world. 290 of them are in China, one in the U.S., but I think they make some of their contact paper in China. What did Dylan say years ago, ” don’t need to by a weatherman to see which way the winds blows.”
Tim, liked your repsonse to my post, only one problem with it, you are wrong. Saab auto is no longer running anything, they have no power to broker anything. That may not be technically correct under Swedish law, but it is the reality at this moment. However, I do agree with you, I don’t know anything about Swedish law !!!
take care
Marcus said on October 22, 2011
nobody needs a chinese owned saab, never. no chinese comany will stay in an european country for a long time and we will see this also by volvo, i´m absolutely shure about that.
saab is not only an brand or a factory in trollhättan – it´s the feeling like a vm is working hard for.
saab is pure emotion – and the emotion of the european will be below zwero, when the cars will come from china.
therfore you can see a production running with chinese miney, no problem, for some years here in europe, but the brand is dead.
who really needs saab? only the people, that are working for.
you have to make something, what saab has: you have to create emotion, feeling, status etc.
and this will never go with a 100% chinese company.
and: the ongoings with these chinese companie are not fair and i will never stay to a company, which is founded on this way and i also think, that i´m not alone with my opinion.
veljkopopovic said on October 22, 2011
It was a smart decision … In ten years Volvo will, basically, face same problem he had few years ago: workers will be out on the street and all production will be moved to China and Volvo will be far away from Sweeden… And what will happen then? Will Volvo be a top Sweeden car? Or some Chery or whatever they call their piece of garbage … And frankly speaking if I wanted to drive Chineese car I would not buy a pre-ford era Volvo … So, if you ask me, this is a harder way, but better one in long terms … Victor has to make a smart deal and bring saab to a position that saab can live from what they do best: making cars
So head up, do not step down, not at this moment and move on … Best regards 
OliverH said on October 22, 2011
It’s not a question who could be the better CEO, it’s more the question if a solution could be made with SWAN/ VM.
hilmar said on October 22, 2011
Reading SU and other sources during the last months VM seems to work hard to keep Saab alive. I don´t know if anyone could have done it better. But he still kept Saab alive coping with difficulties he seems not to be liable for, with hardly any help from anyone. Why should he step down ? I admire that he didn´t already step down yet. It´s not his problem that Sweden isn´t interested to keep Saab. Why not leave this nation behind and send thousands of people into joblessness or into re-education for windmill production ?
And if China will completely control Saab this is my last Saab I bought.
Khrisdk said on October 22, 2011
From my POV this is an academic discussion.
VM owns the company. It is his decision if he wants to step down.
Which he apparently will not.
So if there are interested parties wanting a living Saab, not the bankruptcy leftovers, they will have to find a solution in cooperation with VM.
Everything else in this discussion is just moral judgement
mina said on October 22, 2011
Rightie, a woman’s point of view.
I have been reading SU for a looooong while. I have been to saab fan meetings, I had one saab and now I am a very proud owner of a 9-5 NG, fantastic car. The ups (so few) and downs (so many) of this company make me glad or sad, accordingly. But what makes me so frustrated and so close to stop reading this site is the incredible amount of sheer negativity around here! You negative lot seem to wish the demise of saab only to be proven right, that hard you argue your point (which in my opinion is stretched to the point of breaking, and just like an elastic rope, it might hit you in the eye. But that is not relevant.)
The question was whom would you see in VM place, and you say anyone with money. Is it cosy and nice in your world, where money stand for passion and commitment? Victor Muller may not be a saint, he may have made mistakes, but he does not back down, not yet anyway, he is still committed, he still fights and struggles and God I wouldn’t want to be in his place for all the money in the world, what with all the accusations and back stabbing and the rest of the “biz dealings”. I know that money IS needed, I am no fool. But everything that happened since 2009 proves that at the core of the matter there is more than just money.
So I am surprised to see so many negative comments here. And disappointed. If I had wanted that, I would have gone and read the tabloids.
My heart won’t let me quit SU, because it’s something that matters to me. But I will not read comments anymore. It’s not that I avoid listening to what I disagree with, it is that I avoid reading pointless bashing. I know that real life means both good and bad, but honestly, the closed ears of negativity who only press on with their point of view and do not really engage into a discussion, that is something I can live without. If I ever miss it, I will go talk to a wall.
Saveyour breath, or better said, your fingers, and do not start preaching me. Just as you are hell bent on believing the worst, am I in not wanting to read you anymore. It’s not like it matters what I think, anyway, so let’s leave it at that.
SU crew, keep calm and carry on! You are doing a GREAT job. Let’s hope for the best.
Thylmuc said on October 22, 2011
Just to give you some positivity: I still believe that Saab’s skills and assets will carry it even through a bancruptcy. Even the most “homo economicus” style of thinking must lead to the conclusion that
-there is value in Saab
-this value is manifested in the structures located in Trollhättan.
So, someone will continue with Saab. For now, all this mess appears to be some kind of oversized poker.
RS said on October 22, 2011
I don’t like the tone of this thread. This is business not a popularity contest. I hope SU is not going to alienate Pand Da and Youngman with too emotional posts based on rumors.
It’s so complicated that everyone makes mistakes at this point.
There are so many languages and cultures involved that things get lost in translation or are not generally understood.
IMO there is only one thing that ever truly works in a difficult situation. Keep it simple and stupid.
No room for interpretations or trying to get an edge in a difficult situation. If the parties involved just don’t trust each other anymore, well then we will have a ugly bankruptcy soon, but if the Chinese just ”tested the waters” for a better deal VM should get over it. He would have done the same thing in their shoes I’m sure.
Why would a Chinese majority ownership automatically end Saab in Sweden as we know it?
Someone said Pang Da and Youngman are smart. SAAB is all about Swedish R&D and production for the Western market. Heck people are saying they wouldn’t by a Chinese built Saab in China…
If Saabs are just purely assembled there for Asia it is still a win-win situation. Who knows how popular a 9-1 built in China could be if it’s a Saab. The Austrian convertibles or Finnish 99/900/9000/Viggens were still Saabs, right. It’s just a line. Quality control is everything.
Do people care in the end where their precious Audi is but together? Don’t think so.
When Youngman said they are only interested in the Chinese market, wasn’t that what everyone wanted to hear at the time? Meaning, they won’t compete with THN in Europe.
There are also heavy trade tariffs headed the western way soon, so it would make absolutely no sense to close a factory here.
What needs to happen is for the Chinese to keep VM as the chairman of Saab (good speaker, visionary, very enthusiastic about the brand and an excellent deal maker), get a new STRONG CEO (Swedish at this point to deal with suppliers) and an equally strong CFO who knows profitability. Just stick to the plan of lifting the company on its feet and continue working on the cars themselves.
Nobody knows what will happen in the future, lets not worry about that. At the time everyone though the GM ownership would last a lifetime.
Cokeisit said on October 22, 2011
I don’t think the Chinese are so stupid that they don’t realize the potential of Saab cars being built in Sweden. They would certainly not close down RnD in Trollhättan since that would hurt their investment rather hard when it’s time to develop the next generation of platform and so on. They know that the competence exist in Sweden.
Even if Saab was only going to be built in China in 15 years from now with the development still in Sweden would that make it a lesser Saab?
Is an iPhone an American product or a Chinese product? It is developed in California but manufactured in China. I don’t think of the iPhone as a Chinese product.
Believe me, I really want Saab to continue to develop and manufacture cars in Sweden and I think that will be the case even if a Chinese company buys all of Saab or even if a company from Mars is buying all of Saab.
Victor has done both a good job and a bad job with Saab so far but don’t forget that the real hero is JAJ. Without JAJ GM would have closed down Saab. It was JAJ who convinced GM to sell Saab in the first place.
JAJ is a real hero and I would really want to know what he can do with Saab as a CEO once again without being restrained buy GM or by Victor.
I think Victor could stay in Saab in a creative role and as a minor owner but he need to step down from the role as CEO and chairman since the automotive press can’t stand him and that is a real problem for Saab. Without good relations to the press there will not be any good reviews.
Please, all involved, sit down and come to a solution to this mess and start building Saabs again!
I’m still holding on to my order for a brand new 9-5 SportCombi even if I really need a bigger car than my 9-3 SportSedan since we have a 2 month old son that requires a lot of stuff to be filled into the small trunk.
peeceepeh said on October 22, 2011
For me, the big question is: Would it help anything if VM stepped down?
I don’t see a solution if he steps down. Yes, there have been announcements about a possible takeover, but the players involved are the very same that announced a cooperation with SAAB and then didn’t pay the promised money. Just didn’t pay it. For whatever reason, difficult to judge. Fact is, they didn’t pay the money. So I doubt that this time they would put the money on the table if VM stepped down and GL tried to sell SAAB to them (and they would need Chinese government approval, which would be months away).
So, saying that VM stepping down is something that is an option for SAAB, is just a claim based on nothing. Well, maybe based on envy.
Hogge said on October 22, 2011
I see no indication that Saab would be moved to China in case of a takeover.
Moving the entire factory, resume production, switch suppliers and then using boats to ship the cars tu Europe, not to mention that you loose the scandinavian-ness are all indications that Saab will continue making cars here. Perhaps some day in the future when a certain model sells better in China than in all of Europe combined, and it’ll be more profitable to build cars there than increase production capacity.
Muller has the commitment, but he hasn’t got the money. He’s going to need to run around doing more and more outrageous things to gather money, causing a risk for further production stoppages.
Saab need to restart production ASAP, have cars to sell in ALL markets and not stop producing cars ever again. No gambling with suppliers, no secrets, no questionmarks, no people leaving the board without a replacement, just deliver and develop cars.
100%Saab said on October 22, 2011
Answer to the question: I don’t think so. At the end of the day I’m still 100%Saab.
Anders_Sweden said on October 22, 2011
I think the biggest probelm for Saab, and the Swedish car industry as a whole, is that Saab and Volvo were not fusioned a couple of decades ago. I don’t mean a fusion of the brands, but fusion of the companies, like the French PSA Group (Peugeot and Citroën).
davidgmills said on October 22, 2011
Agree. Sweden is just too small a country to have two viable automotive manufacturers. The failure to fuse may be the downfall of both. If Saab goes, Volvo may not be far behind. But maybe it was a clash of brand cultures like Ford and GM. But Exxon and Mobil merged successfully.
SUreader said on October 22, 2011
I think that in this difficult situation we should not forget the existing Saab owners (me personally having MY11 9-5 Aero) who actually have invested money to Saab products but not getting the service they were promised (for six months already I’m waiting for spare parts for my damaged vehicle). I hope Saab will be fixed soon with or without the current owner.
KaiC said on October 22, 2011
There is no appearance indicates that Saab would be moved all of the company to China.As a enthusiasts i wish Saab staying in Trollhattan too.But let us try to think about What is the most important thing for Saab?Alive is better than dead.If the company is dead whatever we discus is worthless. Here i don`t want to say anything about the deal from the newspaper or someone`s mouth.I am here to say some highlights about Geely and Youngman .Li shufu(Geely) whom is a enthusiasts of Volvo. He appreciated the quality of Volvo very much .and has concerned about Volvo several years ago .He had tried to do a lot of work convincing the Chinese Gov to give the approval of the deal between Volvo and Geely for two years.Finally did the deal.Recently i saw the news about his daughter`s wedding.The motorcade involved only Geely cars and Volvo cars.There was an Aston Martin in the motorcade.That because it was the gift for her daughter.I think that was a part indicated Li shufu`s resolution of making the Volvo better in the future.
http://news.sohu.com/20111020/n322776043.shtml
Second is Pang qingnian ,the president of Youngman.He himself not only is a business man but also is a total enthusiasts of Saab.He was interested in Saab 7 years ago.He loves the Saab car very much.And he decided to risk pushing money in the deal between Saab and Youngman as Pang da did.
The NDRC has an record system that any company who wants to invest a company outside China more than 50 million RMB first should tell the NDRC on file then get the Approval of the Gov.VM did not understand the rules of this even didn`t trust that was true ,He wasted a lot of time at the beginning of the negotiation.But Pang qingnian pushed the money first before telling to NDRC, why? Just for a business?Is he silly enough to do that?
If you have enough patient try to use google translate see this
http://auto.ifeng.com/news/domesticindustry/20111021/697766.shtml
maybe you will find more which you never known before .
I do not believe a company like Youngman is stupid enough to move all the Saab to China .Because that means there were no Saab cars again .No Saab car means no market .everybody knows the principle.
I don not believe a company who wants to invest Saab wish to see it dying.
I do wish Saab would be better than ever.
davidgmills said on October 22, 2011
An even bigger market than China would be India. If Saab has to be Asian owned, I wish the Indians would buy it. It seems like Tata’s (?) purchase of Jaguar has worked very well. There are a number of Indian companies that could buy Saab and really make it work.
mnztr said on October 22, 2011
People say SAAB must be made in Sweden before they buy one. But if someone offered you a Swedish designed and engineered 9-5, built with high quality in China, at 30% off… would you buy one? What about a nice 9-3 AWD at 30% off the current discounted prices… that would be 21K…. any takers? Full warranty?
mnztr said on October 22, 2011
That said I think the best way to do this is increase Chinese content in parts…like alloy wheels, wire harnesses, non- customer touch items. This will take a lot of cost out without diminishing the product.. then they can gradually add other items until the Chinese supply chain is proven….
Khrisdk said on October 22, 2011
I would expect that to happen anyway
I have been working with chinese partners and suppliers since 96
They can easily compete with all others on quality.
And a lot of products not “Made in China” actually are 98% manufactured there
I can easily get products “Made in Japan” that comes from JV with China
So can everybody else.
fido said on October 22, 2011
at lease the rear light already made in chinese, i seen it in a china auto parts exhibition, made by a company in shanghai.
fido said on October 22, 2011
rear light of new 9-5
Saabim said on October 22, 2011
Without VM we weren’t here today. He knows what’s to do. Never give Up. Saab is Swedish and it must be Swedish.