The situation for the employees is getting tough
December 17, 2011 in News
With no payment of wages for november and the date 23′rd of december when the december salaries are due is closing in fast a lot of Saab’s employees find them selves in a very tough position financially. the Union IF Metall have arranged so that its members can receive an emergency loan from the bank SwedBank and this now being reported to be used extensively. Prior to the weekend Saab employees were standing in line to apply for the emergency loan. The union “Unionen” have arranged a similar solution for its members.
Darko Davidovic, IF Metall’s head lawyer states it in a simple way, no payment no reconstruction. Saab needs not only to say, they need to prove that the salaries have been paid and are either on or on their way to the employees accounts by monday morning when the hearing at Vänersborg district court is scheduled. Otherwise the unions have to demand that the court discontinues the reconstruction.
All the unions at Saab are united in this issue, they are all going to demand the same thing.
But there are indications to some media that a way for financing the wages has been found and that money comes from Rachel Pang & Youngman.
I will be on location in Vänersborg on monday morning for the hearing, expect both photos, live reporting and video shortly after the hearing is complete (if it is allowed). Until then, I wish everyone a nice weekend!
DanSaab said on December 17, 2011
The situation just gets worse and worse…
Youngman always makes promises that they will pay but no penny is in sight!
Trollblazer said on December 17, 2011
Indeed…
and they are supposed to ‘save’ our Saab….?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Any other Suggestions or alternatives for Saving Saab?
They are the ones.
nordican said on December 17, 2011
Indeed that seems to be the sad predicament we’re in….
Troels, Denmark said on December 17, 2011
I really hope – for the employees and for Saab – that money for the wages will arrive in time …
meg haviland said on December 17, 2011
+1
Eagle63 said on December 17, 2011
Maybe the best times truly are behind us;
so glad I managed to find me a wonderful 9000 Anni from the ‘good old days….’
I hope for all the good people of Saab that things will still turn out good…, hang in there guys, don’t give up hope yet..!
CJ said on December 17, 2011
Saab has one of the best factories in the world and the employees are the reason. Lets hope this finally gets worked out.
Hang in there, my friends.
sportwagon28t said on December 17, 2011
promises,promises. Im sorry l just dont trust these Chineese investors, I wish Saab could deal with proper companies that do what they say when they say. I wonder if Youngmans Busses are always late? (probably)
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Saab can’t make your wish come true
You don’t have to trust them. But they’re the ones. Actually the only ones in case you haven’t noticed
sportwagon28t said on December 17, 2011
krisdk can you translate to english please?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
There is only one interested party that can assure the suirvival of Saab.
There is neither time nor any other interested investors at the moment.
Either Youngman delivers in time or Saab dies.
Hans H said on December 17, 2011
It is GM i don’t trust. At all.
ThomasJ said on December 17, 2011
No. The say NO again.
3cyl said on December 17, 2011
Is it reasonable to expect investors to put in $900k just to to keep their options open?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
No
But they need to unless they want to see the investment opportunity gone.
That’s the predicament Youngman is in.
orion said on December 17, 2011
Salaries must be payed, otherwise Saab must have a hell of a good story by monday in court
Remdu67 said on December 17, 2011
Thanks Tim for everything. Enjoying the 2 coming days is hard but a duty. I am going to visit my dealership now to go and shop some goodies if not a used Saab I have seen…
Take care everybody there in THN.
nordican said on December 17, 2011
So what if the Chinese pour many millions in Saab only to hear the next day from the Swedish court that the reconstruction has to end.., will the Chinese have lost all that money??
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
I think the scenario drawn up by RedJ could be a solution.
Money in a swedish account, ready for transfer to Saab in case of a continued reconstruction. With documentation for that at the hearing..
The problem with that could be the court and how they see it.
orion said on December 17, 2011
i agree
OH said on December 17, 2011
GM sais NO..again according to Swedish radio..i don´t understand this
MK said on December 17, 2011
Wonder if GM know all details in the new agreement.
TimR said on December 17, 2011
With the new deal, GM is not supposed to be able to say No…
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Oh they can probably say NO loud and clear
It’s just that it shouldn’t really have any effect on anything
Lundin said on December 17, 2011
Yes, and if it has any effect i am sure GM needs to hire more lawyers.
I think Saab has during the period missed some vital agreements in the contracts, like the sheduling for the 9-4X production but not in the same magnitude as if GM really is into the “Saab killing strategy”. Stop delivering in order to shut down the brand (the aim) they better take my advice and hire (even) more lawyers.This can be really messy for them.
Troels, Denmark said on December 17, 2011
If GM says no to the press right now, in this critical moment, it can only have one purpose; To do what they can to shut down Saab (as a competitor and as a superior innovator) by trying to influence the court to stop reconstruction … sad, sad
OH said on December 17, 2011
http://www.gp.se/ekonomi/1.802808-saab-besked-fran-gm
in swedish
DanSaab said on December 17, 2011
R.I.P Saab
No, i am not optimistic anymore, sorry! Only a miracle can save Saab now.
orion said on December 17, 2011
Saab is already a miracle.
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
+1
Hans H said on December 17, 2011
Yes!
RS said on December 17, 2011
If Saab pays its bills to GM and there is no ownership change they better keep quite.
GM can not dictate what SWAN/Saab Automobile will or will not do in ten years from now when GM is no longer a stakeholder.
Saab can get financing from where ever it pleases in the meantime.
Lundin said on December 17, 2011
+1
saabdealer said on December 17, 2011
The timing of GM publically saying NO right now is interesting. Possible reasons:
1. Influence the court’s decision toward ending reconstruction.
2. Influencing Youngman to pull out.
Both seemingly in an effort to avoid a breach of contract from the sale of Saab relative to IP as from what I’ve understood, as long as ownership doesn’t change hands, Saab is not in violation of the sale agreement.
This is a down and dirty tactic by a very large, powerful company that is doing whatever it can to protect their interests in China.
I haven’t felt the need to play this card till now:
GM was bailed out at the expense of the US Taxpayer. Now this is a slap in the face to those of us who have livelihoods on the line. (US alone) ~190 US dealers and employees, suppliers, and customers are going to suffer. They were allowed to push the ‘start over’ button but they don’t want the same for the company they sent on its downward spiral. We’re not asking for a handout or bailout…just a chance.
Saabissimo said on December 17, 2011
This seems to be a fair conclusion.
It will be difficult now for Youngman to commit funds, and difficult for the court to allow extension, now that they know that they have a mighty legal battle ahead of them.
This was a dirty tactic indeed. And it will be very difficult for the court to assess in a simple hearing who is right about this, Swan or GM. So the safe bet would be to halt reconstruction, in accordance with Lofalk’s submission.
I was positive before this move. Now I am not so sure. I am afraid GM’s dirty trick will have a good chance to work in their favour here. Saab is in for a hell of a fight on Monday.
Keith said on December 17, 2011
Does anyone know how much Youngman has already sent Saab this year?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Not sure, but I think about €80 Mill has been mentioned.
Lundin said on December 17, 2011
Khris,i think that number is a bit high but i might be wrong on this one. That kind of sum would made Saab through the reorg. Include the pre-payment from PangDa etc however might get you into that territory.
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Yeah..I wasn’t sure how much was actually included in that figure.
They way the money has been paid has made it a little hard to follow
Keith said on December 17, 2011
I think much of that number was never actually delivered, but I’ve lost track. I am curious what they have actually sent, as one would think it would have a bearing on their desire to protect that investment.
Some have said that Youngman is simply waiting for bankruptcy, but I don’t see how that makes sense based on their actions. Would paying the taxes this week likely be a benefit in a bankruptcy sale? I don’t know Swedish law, but elsewhere the sale would go to the highest bidder – previous involvement would be no advantage.
SaabSouth said on December 17, 2011
I think GM have put the final nail in Saabs coffin. Why would Youngman pay the wages if they know the deal will not go through…. Very sad, GM will kill Saab off 2 years after they last tried.
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
I think you underestimate Youngman.
The reason that this comes out a a mail to the news agencies right now is probably because GM want to scare Youngman off.
I think that would only be necessary if there is a possibility that the deal could go through without influence from GM.
Greg Bakos said on December 17, 2011
Tim thank you so much for going to the hearing on Monday. This type of inside access is unprecedented and much appreciated since the news media will only capture part of the real story. I’m hoping we hear something positive out of Rachel Pang in the way of a funds transfer prior to the hearing. I would not rule out a continuance of the hearing on Monday due to the wealth of information presented and likely new proposals to consider. Good luck to us all, and most heartfelt wishes and gratitude to Victor no matter how it turns out.
saabyurk said on December 17, 2011
+1
sportwagon28t said on December 17, 2011
If Saab does go down there is only one person responsible
Hans H said on December 17, 2011
No it isn’t, but Rick Wagoneer is the one most responsible in my mind.
Saabissimo said on December 17, 2011
Muller responds to GM’s message:
http://ttela.se/ekonomi/saab/1.1469207-muller-det-ar-horsagen-
He claims their statement is based on hearsay and is an attempt to influence the court. He maintains GM’s approval is not needed.
Regardless if this “hearsay” statement is true or not this is bad news. It seems to prove that GM is not happy with the proposed solution and that VM is now on a collision course with our friends on the Western front. This will probably mean all sorts of problems going forward, even if the court allows extension and YM and Saab reach some sort of agreement.
If they feel so inclined, GM can cause expensive legal disputes, delivery problems and much more.
Timeshifter said on December 17, 2011
GM cannot cause anything after successful deal with Youngman, because they have agreement with SAAB they must follow…
Keith said on December 17, 2011
Guessing – it may be messier than that. And on multiple levels:
1. As a result of not paying GM this year, Saab may have already broken the agreement. This may give GM latitude on whether or not to continue.
2. The new deal’s intent is get a new investor / owner, while attempting to mask that. GM may say the end result is the same, and courts may agree.
3. As #2 is an intentional form of deception, it may give GM pause regarding putting their IP with such a situation.
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Hmm..That leaves the moral of GM a little ragged.
They were the people that knew that VA was the money behind Tenaci.
But OK, morality is probably not an issue
Lundin said on December 17, 2011
Keith,
No, i dont think it wont give GM any latitude because as a creditor they have had multiple chances on affecting the process of Saab as a ongoing concern up until now. And even more important revenge (as in causing equal damage for the sake of) goes very bad with the law.
Sorry, you cant justify one error with revenge and make up a story afterwards in a court trial.Well you CAN but that will in this case not yield the desired effect for GM.
Why didnt’ Samsung stop make the Apple IC and ruin the company after losing a court process against Apple. That would be a very nice solution if revenge was a part of a legal activity.
Sorry, if the contract between SWAN and Youngman follows the contract (you call it masking it) there is nothing GM can do about it, other than terminate their contracts after they have expired. And if they want to terminate them before they need to comply with the legal process on how to do that (which they have had time to do).
Keith said on December 17, 2011
As I wrote at the beginning of the post – Guessing. As we all are.
I didn’t mean “revenge” at all, but rather that the contract may already be broken due to non-payment.
We all know the latest proposed deal is indeed a way for Youngman to invest, without appearing to have done so. I’m not claiming any knowledge of how that might be interpreted by a court, but it isn’t hard to imagine their could be case made by both sides. Intent and spirit of an agreement is part of the law.
Lundin said on December 17, 2011
I replied to that guessing, if broken due to non-payment you have to act if that is your intent. You cant make up the story as you go and break another contract as a result.
“but it isn’t hard to imagine their could be case made by both sides”
-Yes, and i think VM would love to take up that challenge if he gets more spare-time due to saab failure.The intent is to develop new vehicles with youngman in that new division without GM ip.It is not a crime to sell engineering services.
Jeff said on December 18, 2011
Keith, you’re more right than you know about GM using non-payment as a cause to break contracts and even the law. There are facts about GM right now that Saab has on GM that GM will NOT want made public (that have happened since April). Saab has some leverage there hopefully if they need to use it, GM takes the matter more seriously. It’s the kind of thing that even Jim Cain can’t spin to save his boss.
Saabissimo said on December 17, 2011
Timeshifter, I wish it was that simple… With respect, I think that position may be a bit naive.
Financial muscle is important in a legal dispute, sometimes just as important as the wording of the agreement itself. Unfortunately.
And I haven’t seen the agreement so it is actually impossible at this stage to know who has made the correct interpretation, Swan or GM. They obviously have differing opinions.
I very much hope that YM commits the required money and that the court agrees to an extension on Monday. But the odds certainly didn’t get better after GM’s dirtly little intervention today.
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
I think that the Chinese will go all the way on this.
Chinese are good at dirty games themselves, and they do not like being pressured.
Somehow I think that ChiGov could show some unofficial reaction to this.
Could be unpleasent for GM
michaelb said on December 17, 2011
It a deal and solid financing for Saab comes along, there will be a new situation for GM:
- Either they stick to the original contracts, deliver and continue to draw IP licenses, while Saab respects all GM’ licencse agreements for years to come
- or they are facing Saab’s produced in China within two years containing GM IP without being able to object
GM will look for the first, and not risk the second
Keith said on December 17, 2011
How would the second option happen?
Niklas G said on December 17, 2011
I Guess GM are aware of the capabilities of Saab’s engineers when it comes to developing new technology (for the Phoenix platform and piece by piece replacing current GM technology by other alternatives). This whole idea to try to pull Saab out of business by sending e-mails to the media, lokks like a rather desperate move, perhaps because they have realized that they have no clear legal rights to stop the deal as long as Muller makes sure that there is no ownership change?
BarryMemphis said on December 17, 2011
*IF* GM is successful in causing the demise of Saab when a legitimate buyer/financier is willing to invest the necessary funds to secure its future, then GM are setting THEMSELVES up for a potentially very large class-action lawsuit here in the USA. There are literally hundreds of “issues” and/or consequences for which they could be held financially responsible to Saab owners, dealers, suppliers, etc.
3cyl said on December 17, 2011
If SAAB fails, does most of the blame belong with GM or with those who concocted the failed business plan. GM went along with an undercapitalized business plan and an inexperienced, even if well intentioned, owner. Did GM do this because they expected the sale/licensing arrangement to have a big impact on their bottom line or because they didn’t want to be associated with the shutdown of SAAB when a longshot chance of SAAB surviving had arisen in the form of an offer to buy the SAAB?
Now that that hasn’t worked out, can GM be expected to compromise their own situation for SAAB’s benefit? Unfortunately what has happened to SAAB since GM sold it has probably not reinforced any remaining confidence GM may have had in the brand two years ago, making it even less likely that GM will compromise.
Perhaps GM simply wants an excuse to rid themselves of what they see as a nuisance and is claiming protection of their technological property as an excuse. However, as long as they can make a case that their interests are at risk, will they really have much exposure to lawsuits if they don’t endorse a new deal?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
The actions, or attitude of GM has been very consistent.
They did not like the Chinese at the original sales process, and let Saab be bought by possibly the weakest buyer.
They do not like the Chinese now. The reasons are a little obscure, but they don’t
I would never expect GM to compromise on anything regarding Saab.
Which is the best reason to make deal that does not change the ownership structure of SWAN or Saab.
3cyl said on December 17, 2011
Yes,that is a way around GM, but we don;t know if they can accomplish it. Harder to understand than GM has been what at least seems to be an adversarial postion adopted by the Swedish government toward SAAB since the beginning.
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
That’s a part I will never understand.
I could understand being indifferent, but everything seems to indicate, at least to me, that SweGov was newer satisfied with the buyer GM choose.
I actually think they would have preferred the Chinese in the first sale, and that they are now hoping for some Swedish solution, but that means getting Saab into bankruptcy first, exchanging the owner and let the price drop.
But that’s just my own assumption
Maybe everybody should just have accepted the Merbanco bid in the first sale.
That would have been much easier on everybody
sportwagon28t said on December 17, 2011
quote ‘They did not like the Chinese at the original sales process, and let Saab be bought by possibly the weakest buyer.’
Not the weakest, VM obviously put a very good case to GM and they went for it. The contact was drawn out and everybody signed on the dotted line.
VM had the vision of Saab being a small independent carmaker – which it should be. That hasnt worked out and now Victors plan has changed and he is going for a cash solution.
We all already know its notoriously difficult to regulate what goes on in China, GM are obviously worried that the tech will fall into the wrong hands and will end up in some homegrown Chinese rubbish and GM will never be able to do a thing about it. They know it will be notoriously difficult to take legal action in China so why take the risk.
apart from all that do you really want the Saab name to become Saabyong or Saabtong how about Saabtingtong motors..?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
I don’t expect any of that to happen, so I am not worried.
I understand that GM are, because they are actually selling Chinabuild cars with old IP there for the masses
Allan B said on December 17, 2011
Nor me. I am more worried about cheap jibes at the Chinese.
Aero1 said on December 17, 2011
Still maintaining a POSITIVE attitude, still know SAAB will pull through. How can so many get so negative after all that SAAB and it’s employees been through, it’s time more than ever to give positive support! The money will be there! As for GM- they will get what they deserve, and actually they already are, just look at the Fine products that are being recalled.
Red J said on December 17, 2011
After reading the second article from ttela.se I really get the impression that GM is firstly only trying to influence the court decision on Monday, as they really can’t opose the possible DEAL and secondly; if they only try to protect their technology, why did GM not stop the production of the 9-4x when Saab started discussions with Hawtai?
I have a strange feeling about GM ‘s position, I don’t think it is about their IP, but this is only a feeling.
Allan B said on December 17, 2011
… what feeling, Red J?
(Throw us a bone!)
Red J said on December 18, 2011
I don’t want to start any wild theory on GM willing to kill Saab, but you know the Car industry is going back to the their pre-2008 protectionism policy, which supports the old theory that only a few really big car companies will survive.
A non-Saab related example could be the diesel for hybrid deal between BMW and Toyota. While BMW will be allowed to use the hybrid power trains on any BMW, Toyota won’t be allowed to use the diesel engines on any Lexus car. Maybe its just me, but I don’t understand why? The Dude says that Lexus is a small brand and therefore they don’t need diesels in Europe, I think it is a quite stupid argumentation, as Lexus would love to sell as many cars in Europe as BMW does.
Saabissimo said on December 17, 2011
The article linked by Red J is very interesting. Jim Cain explains GM’s reasoning. He says that Youngman gets a “de facto” influence over the GM licenses even if they don’t have direct ownership, since they are the financially stronger partner in the deal and Saab are dependent on them. That may be partly true, but sounds like a weak argument in court?
It would be interesting to know which jurisdiction controls the agreement between Saab and GM – US or Europe (NL/SE)? This is political matters as much as financial, so that could be of importance.
Cain also says that they cannot act in court on Monday, but ominously that “the administrator is aware of the situation”.
This article in Aftonbladet has another slant. They have asked the proposed new administrator, and he seems to give his clear support for VM’s positiion. He says he can’t understand why GM make their statement now. “The latest proposal is such that it does not require approval by GM”.
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article14094388.ab
In the blue corner – GM and administrator 1… in the red corner – Saab, Youngman and administrator 2… let the fight begin.
(Unfortunately I don’t think administrator 2 has any formal say yet, since he is not yet appointed.)
scand said on December 17, 2011
Poor old administrator 1 isn’t really ‘in the blue corner ‘ with GM; more like he is stuck in the middle with his nuts in a vice.
He has to deal with GM in both a sort of ownership capacity, and that of a large creditor.
Because of legal constraints he can’t sail nearly as close to the wind as victor muller is willing to (attempt to) .
No wonder he wants to quit!
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Somehow I don’t feel sorry for him..
Instant Karma?
saabdealer said on December 17, 2011
So what I’m reading between the lines:
VM says “we don’t need GM’s approval under the new deal”
GM’s feelings are hurt and so begins the public p**sing match between GM and VM.
Sorry your feelings are hurt GM but don’t put let your temper tantrum put thousands of people out of work and cost millions of loss to parties involved.
If Saab dies at the hand of GM, I hope Youngman gets ahold of Saab’s engineering and R & D and flat out smothers GM in their special market, China.
Unreal.
3cyl said on December 17, 2011
This SAAB story may give some insight into what is happenig in the world. The U.S. bails out GM. There is no Swedish bailout for SAAB. The Chinese want to invest. So the Chinese are capitalists, and the U.S. is more socialistic than Sweden?
Khrisdk said on December 17, 2011
Yup
New World Order.
aerostar said on December 18, 2011
Not to throw fuel on the fire…but, GM has been withholding warranty funds from Saab NA. Last I heard it was to the tune of $20+ million US. They are withholding funds because Saab AB owes GM money. But, I’m pretty sure this is totally unethical and many be illegal. I believe the two Saab entities are separate operations and if so, in court I’m 95% sure GM loses. My hope is GM gets a grip on reality and fairness, accepts that Saab is here to stay and embraces change and acts like a business partner not an adversary.
Keith said on December 18, 2011
I’d heard that dealers some dealers were not performing warranty work on Spyker sold Saabs (due to non payment), but that GM sold Saabs were still OK. Where did you get this information?
aerostar said on December 18, 2011
I’m not privy to say, but it is a very credible source. If there is a bankruptcy this will come out as an asset on Saab NA balance sheet. As far as dealers doing warranty work, I know that most if not all are doing it. Saab NA is still solvent and paying warranty claims, despite GM withholding Saab NA (and their dealers monies.)
Lundin said on December 18, 2011
Thanks for the insight aero. Doesn’t sounds good at all. Do you know what kind of transaction(s) between Saab AB and GM that might be ?
GM GM GM…what will happen with GM in the future anyway? If looking back onto history, global economy is cyclic. That holds true for some certain companies as well. GM will be in a bad position in the future as well..that is not a threat,it is a fact. They will not be able to recover from a Opel-saga one more time (from customers, nor Opel itself). They are burning their bridges from place to place. I really wonder if they will survive what ever may come in the future…
Y2K said on December 18, 2011
“accepts that Saab is here to stay”
Lets face the facts now guys!
Like it or not, but SAAB will be history on monday evening.
There is no way according to Swedish law that SAAB will be permitted to continue.
Why?
- GM says NO! End of story!
- No money – No business
Big scandal that the unions on SAAB are not acting in the interests of their members! In 1 month they have been waiting for the salary, and the unions just say lets wait !!!!
Wait for what? Wait for money that’s promised but not showing up!
Due to this the unions is delaying the legal process, stating that the government should pay the salary for some months if the company is bankruptcy!
Lots of swedes are starting to wonder if there are som hidden agendas here, since the laws have been twisted for half a year now! The “book of SAAB” will be a best seller for sure in Sweden, I bet there will be some interesting facts reviled then …
Khrisdk said on December 18, 2011
I think I would await monday before declaring Saab dead.
And I do find it interesting that the conspiracy theories are now spreading to those that declares Saab dead
I assume that there will be several books on Saab in the future.
Every single one written by someone close to the proces, and none of them giving a complete picture.
Rune said on December 18, 2011
Y2K, I think you are barking up the wrong tree.
Saab have had severe difficulties, yes. But they have been paying their taxes, and have eventually been able to pay salaries too. (and that will likely be the case next week as well)
Had they folded earlier, the state would end up having to pay unemployment benefits. So far the state has *earned* taxes during this time instead. I don’t know about you, but I think it is better for the state to earn money rather than spend it.
For the Swedish society as a whole, the current situation is preferable to a bankruptcy six months ago which you seem to advocate. There is also a huge potential upside ahead: Production might get going again and Saab will be able to pay off their debts.
Feel free to identify the downsides to not declaring Saab bankrupt half a year ago.
Y2K said on December 19, 2011
Youngman has today (Sun) declared that they will NOT pay any salary until GM says yes.
Well, according to Swedish laws, like them or not, SAAB will be declared bankruptcy tomorrow then.
And as an answer to you comment, NO SAAB will never be able to pay off their depts.
Its gone way to far now, in my dreams they have money to pay of all the debts at the same time as developing new models …
Yes they need new models adjusted to consumers need, not the crappy big +5 meter monster 9-5 (nicknamed the frog (or toad) in Sweden), totally wrong in time when the consumers wants lean small environmental friendly cars!
From a consumers aspect the new models SAAB has presented is a joke! SAAB should have closed the technician playhouse long time ago, and started to produce cars for the ordinary people, then they would have been in a much better position today.
Well, its all history tomorrow, sadly because SAAB is a OK car, its just that the management has never understood what the consumers wants from a car, and what price they are willing to pay for it! Most of the consumers are describing SAAB as a “strange expensive car” … do you think that a car manufacturer can survive on that judgement from the consumers?
Angelo V. said on December 19, 2011
Y2K: Please cite sources/surveys you’re referring to where most consumers describe Saab as a “strange, expensive car.” I hadn’t heard about that. Please post the url because I want to read about that and see what the questions were and how people answered. It’s very interesting stuff. Hopefully you didn’t just make it up.
ivo 71 said on December 18, 2011
I seem to remember that, when GM was dragging its feet about the sale of Saab 2 years ago, a big class action by the Saab dealers against General Motors was being prepared. Maybe Kurt Schirm c.s. could blow the dust off that file if GM really try to either block the deal or, should the deal materialize nevertheless, to suffocate Saab by not supplying components and not building the 9-4X.
Ivo
DreamChaser said on December 18, 2011
Suppose Saab would go into bankruptcy, would there still be realistic possibilities for a ‘positive’ outcome, or would that be the definitive end of Saab ???
SAAB340 said on December 18, 2011
Interesting question.
anybody…?
Iiari said on December 18, 2011
I’m certainly no expert, but even the most wildly optimistic of those posting here (and elsewhere) have suggested that bankruptcy would really be the end, if for no other reason than Saab Aerospace at that point would probably never allow the name to be used, among others. It’s been strongly suggested that Saab’s only hope is a positive emergence from reconstruction. Even Swade, to paraphrase, suggested that no Mini-like brand resurgence awaits Saab if they go into bankruptcy.
No, we all have to hope for Monday to go well!
Rune said on December 18, 2011
It would surprise me greatly if they could get the plant going again.
GM had an ‘interesting’ way of selecting bidders two years ago. Only certain interested parties were invited. IMO they were careful with who they were willing to tie bonds with back then, and they have been extremely careful now when Youngman wanted to buy a stake.
I see no reason why GM would change their mind following a bankruptcy.
Thus post-bankruptcy Saab would be left with a heavy task of redesigning current models to not include any GM technology. If that was an easy task, Saab would probably have done so a long time ago.
As for the Saab brand name, I believe they stated two years ago that they were basically willing to license out the name as long as the production took place in Sweden. But I could be mistaken. In any case, I doubt this is the biggest hurdle to jump.
I believe GM holds the answer, and will continue to do so for the next couple of years.
That said, there seems to be some interest in a post-bankruptcy Saab here and there, and you never know, the people involved could have already cleared their ideas with GM making such a venture viable. Given GM’s reluctance two years ago, I do not find this to be a likely scenario. You’d need someone like Victor Muller to pull it off.
Allan B said on December 18, 2011
I get the point about GM’s protectionism, above. Pretty grim stuff. Again, this tale is a snapshot of the bigger economic picture. Fascinating and depressing in equal measure.
Here’s a crazy scenario. IF our favourite car company goes to the wall, but SWAN remains in existance, I wouldn’t bet against something else emerging from the ashes. An all-new manufacturing operation but spiritual successor to Saab, employing ex-Saab people, making electric vehicles and backed by Youngman or some such. Oh well, just a dream to hold on to in case things go wrong. But still living in hope.
Wittendorff said on December 18, 2011
It seems like GM is going to interfere with the new proposal, stumpled over this one:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FZ20PnWHq
MarkoA said on December 18, 2011
If GM is going to interfere as the link says, then I think it´s time for Saab community to act.
saabserb said on December 18, 2011
It seems that GM is trying to influence the court decision, since they will have no legal rights to stop technology sharing with SAAB. What GM can potentially do to damage SAAB is to stop delivering 9-4, engines, threaten sub-contractors with legal process if they continue production etc. But this might get nasty and seriously damage the GM image, start the “David vs. Goliath” stories in the world press, and GM might face the potentially dear penalties. If SAAB only is able to keep up during the legal processes.
I really think that GM central maybe don’t mind that much, but they are pressed by their partners in China, who are affraid of yet another player. But on the other side Youngman seems to be pretty sure that they want SAAB at any price, which indicates that NDRC is behind the plan. So if the reconstruction continues situation for GM might get nasty on all fronts, even in China.
That’s why they are trying to kill SAAB now.