Spykers Case Against GM Dismissed

Spyker’s US$3bln lawsuit accusing General Motors of trying to bankrupt SAAB has been dismissed by a US federal court judge who said GM had the right to block the sale of a company using its technology.

This quote was everywhere yesterday and was not too surprising. Some of us thought there was a case when looking at the big picture but the US District Court Judge Gershwin Drain looking at everything before him ruled otherwise and granted the motion to dismiss the matter.

General Motors had a contractual right to approve or disapprove the proposed transaction.

He also stated that the deal Spyker had reached to purchase Saab had given GM the right to stop changes in ownership and that GM’s statements voicing its opposition to the Youngman deal were not made with malice or to intentionally harm Saab.

GM’s lawyer, Kathryn Kirmayer, called Spyker’s deal with Youngman where they would eventually take a 70% ownership in Saab, “sketchy in many respects”.

Spyker’s lawyer Ben Chew, had said that Spyker and Youngman had reached the framework of a deal that would have allowed the assembly of Saab vehicles without the use of GM technology and platforms. They had also agreed to loan Saab 200m Euro which would have kept the company moving.

Spyker has not said if it will appeal the decision and at this point with everything that has happened, it’s hard to say what the right move would be. Reuters had spoke to Victor Muller who said “we will be awaiting the written order and then we will assess”.

It is very hard to look at things from where most of us sit and think that GM’s actions and words were not made to intentionally harm Saab. It is beyond most of us to not think that it was very deliberate and direct. That all being said, if GM did in fact act within the agreement and within the laws that govern them, as crappy as their actions were….. maybe it is best to move on from this whole mess and focus on the future.

The future for Victor and Spyker looks to be promising with a beautiful new car set to be produced and a partnership that was formed through the Saab trials. For Saab/NEVS, we have not even scratched the surface of what they can be or where they are headed. We know now that turbo engines are not just the DNA of the past but will be a part of the future.

It may be time to forget about GM and look forward, I say forget as most will never forgive.

swedej
Member
3 years 3 months ago

I presume that this was decided on a Motion for Summary Judgment. Does anyone have access to the decision? Please post if you do. Thanks

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

In the article I read, I think the Judge promised a more detailed description of the decision at a later date.

MAT7RVA
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Judge Drain’s opinion/order has not been published by the Court (although the Minute Entry for the June 10, 2013 hearing confirms that GM’s Motion to Dismiss was granted).

I will post the opinion/order when it is published – Saab Automobile v. General Motors Co., 4:12-cv-13432, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit).

dcpattie
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Detroit Judge…very predictable outcome.

100%Saab
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Agreed.

bilen
Member
3 years 3 months ago
I hope that Spyker has a promising future but I am not sure as of yet. The deal with Youngman were reported to be finalized in May, but no PM to shareholders and market yet. Some people at Saab said that Youngman were a organizational mess and that they did not have the funding the let people belive. Personally I really hope it will be solved. But the Spyker share have been masacred even after the reversed split in the beginning fo 2013. maybe Youngman have already paid up but as I belive I think they would have to notice… Read more »
kochje
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Agree with you and indeed hope the Spyker shares will once start rising again.
However it is good this case has been ruled; nothing else expected but it was definitively a good try.

Chris Hansel
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Focus on the future, as you say Jason. It is in the best interest of NEVS, Saab ,and possible future American sales to drop the issue. As Obama said of Russia, let’s reboot the relationship.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Why is it in the best interest of future American sales to drop the issue? I don’t know if it’s well advised for Muller to keep spending money on lawyers for a case he’ll probably not win—-but I also don’t think keeping it going would hurt Saab/NEVS future sales. General Motors harmed Saab. I’ve owned quite a few GM cars over the years—-and still have two of them, including my Saab. Would I ever buy another GM? They are not on my short list, that’s for sure. My 8 year old likes Camaros—-I hope that’s just a passing phase as… Read more »
Chris Hansel
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Ok Angelo, I guess you don’t know millions of Americans, perhaps well over 50% happen to like GM and their products? That is a fact, deal with it. I’m sure most of them are not aware, or care, about GM problems with Spyker, or tax cases in Sweden, but if we keep dragging this old news out in front of them, they will be. That is the last thing I want to happen. Let NEVS be as free as possible from past problems. I want GM to be totality disassociated from the “new” Saab. Do you really think you, personally,… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Chris: Where are you getting the statistic that well over 50% happen to like GM and their products? Go to Google or Bing and find a graph showing GM’s market share from 1970-2012 (or the latest year you can find). That does tell a story about whether people are liking GM products more—-or less. Also, NEVS isn’t suing GM. No worries there. It’s Saab’s FORMER owner involved in the litigation.

guy davidson
Member
3 years 3 months ago

I consider GM to mean Generally Mediocre… I wouldnt think of buying one – just all nasty plastic built for the middle of the road buyer

Chris Hansel
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Angelo, People should allowed to post comments here without fear of your constant trolling. To sit there with a straight face and declare that you hope and believe that millions of American will develop a very negative attitude towards GM, and somehow that will improve sales of NEVS cars is totally nuts. NEVS must move forward and reject the past, the corporate past. No one needs to be reminded of Saab’s trials and failures. Please try to be less confrontation. thank you.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Chris: Do you consider it trolling if someone else (or others, plural) express condemnation of GM—-and then you write a comment telling us to put it all in the past? I think the words were “Drop the issue.” Is that confrontational? I didn’t think so—-and was just continuing the converastion. As Sylvester “Sly” Stone once said “Different Strokes For Different Folks.”

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

…and so on and so on and scooby dooby doo-by.

Stefan Zomborcsevics
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

No. It light not be trolling, bit it’s geting pretty boring Sven someone always pics on everything that doesn’t fit.
I have stopped commenting, but felt Chris was right on tvist one.
I feed up by your constant bashing on the ones you don’t agree with and your obvious lack of understanding for the ones not speeking english as à native language.

That’s it. Keep on bashing Angelo, you are good at it.
I’m out.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Show me some evidence of lack of understanding of people who don’t speak English as a native language. In fact, I think just the opposite is true—-I only speak English and I admire people who speak more than one language and I think I’ve posted that sentiment here before, more than once. As well, if there is any “bashing” going on, by me, it’s a reaction to others who might be obnoxious or arrogant in disagreeing with me. I am civil and do not “pick on” people unless I’m mistreated in the first place.

Peter Gilbert
Member
3 years 3 months ago

As a point of interest many SAAB owners did not know that she used to owned by GM when she was and many never even knew that a new 9-5 even came out in 2010. Many have any inkling that there is now a NEVS. “Low information care buyers!”

BMW Rider
Member
3 years 3 months ago
“Spyker’s lawyer Ben Chew, had said that Spyker and Youngman had reached the framework of a deal that would have allowed the assembly of Saab vehicles without the use of GM technology and platforms….” This isn’t really the way I understood the deal they (Muller and the Chinese) had worked out at the end, at least not for the mid term to restart production in late 2011, early 2012. The “deal” was more of a shell game with ownership of the company with the Chinese as a kind of silent partner in the background so Saab could still go on… Read more »
Ivar M
Member
3 years 3 months ago
I think that the most of GM IP, must be originally SAAB patents that GM bought in full year 2000. That means that GM can claim all IP rights for 2010-11 9-4 and 9-5 even if GM could not have done the work without free engineering from SAAB Automobile. All SAAB engineering still remain in THN through Innovatum, Comitech etc so the future SAAB´s that Nevs plan to build is designed by old SAAB engineers and i hope new SAAB´s is built during 2013. That is something GM can´t stop and they will not make any money as a supplier… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

“GM’s attorney, Kathryn Kirmayer, said on Monday that Spyker bought Saab knowing GM had the right to veto any change of ownership. “GM would have said absolutely no way” to a rival like Ford Motor Co buying Saab, she said.”

Hey Kat, we all know why too: Any rival buying Saab and making them profitable would expose GM for the complete buffoons they are.

dcpattie
Member
3 years 3 months ago

I always viewed the Chinese solution as a total Hail Mary attempt. VM knew that GM had veto power, I just wished he looked elsewhere for funding. Or maybe he did and all roads lead back to China?

maanders
Member
3 years 3 months ago

It seems that way. He had looked a lot of places and it seemed only the Chinese had money they wanted to invest.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

It was a case of poor timing or maybe he was a victim of poor timing. There would be more money today, in 2013, then there was 2 years ago.

Baver
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Yes, the timing couldn’t have been much worse. Too bad.

sandborg
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

Having won legally doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the winner being ethical or moral. Often the opposite is the case.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Very true. I guess the “Detroit Judge” was in the 20% of people living there who like GM—-while the rest despise them.

Seb
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Friends, What did you expect to happen? SAAB for the last 20+ years was GM. GM’s mismanagement and dilution of our beloved brand is what killed SAAB. But facts are facts and GM own’s SAAB’s technology, etc minus the 9-3 which in my humble opinion is worthless in today’s competitive market (it’s 2013 kids). The 9-3 was not competitive in 2003 and is 10 year old moldy bread in 2013. Getting back to my point, do you think that GM was going to allow SAAB to compete in China and other markets with technology that they rightfully purchased when they… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
I’m not so down on the 9-3. I own a 9-5 but have been in the most recent 9-3 and have been in and ridden in/driven a wide variety of new cars, through rentals and at car shows. I think the 9-3 holds up quite well against a lot of products in the $25,000-33,000 price range. If NEVS can freshen it up even a little—-and bring it in at this price range, with a reasonably good promotional effort—-they can be somewhat competitive while a new model is readied (pricing based on ICE—-EVs would cost more of course and if ICE… Read more »
dcpattie
Member
3 years 3 months ago

I agree that Saab would need to sell the 9-3 between 25-30K. They would also need to improve the car to at least the Ford Focus ST and 2014 VW GTI level in terms of quality and content. That’s no gimmie.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Pattie: There needs to be an update—-but I don’t think the benchmark should be the Focus—perhaps not even the GTI. Saab needs to aim this at a different market, at least in the U.S. Saab has the advantage of being perceived as a luxury/performance higher end European car maker. If they can bring this model in at the price we’re discussing—-they have a leg up because before even sitting in the car—-people already have an impression that a Saab is “worth more” than a VW or Ford. The car doesn’t need to go item for item to try to compete… Read more »
E. Boon
Member
3 years 3 months ago

For fleetowners the 9-3 should have been priced slightly (just a tiny bit) under the Audi A4. The 9-5 slightly under the BMW 5. This would have created some volume in the SAAB customer mix and machines running in order to cover costs. Private customers would have created the profit margin.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Yes, definitely on target with that comment EB.

Baver
Member
3 years 3 months ago

And they should push for a long warranty – not that anyone will be there to honor it.

scand
Member
3 years 3 months ago
There is no business case selling 9-3s for $25-$33000. Arguably saabs closest competitor, The Audi A4, starts at $32k, and goes to $42k , just in the 2.0 liter version. Last year they made 329 759 of them. Think of the economies of scale of that. Saab’s per unit cost for a 9-3 cannot possibly come close to how low an A4 must be, because they cannot hope to make more than a small fraction of that products numbers. For saab to thrive, then people have to be prepared to believe that a 9-3’s value is equal, or higher than… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Well, reading Pattie’s comment and then Scand’s, seems as though we’re at an impasse. Seems as though no matter what NEVS does, they’re doomed. Might “seem” that way, but I think they CAN succeed with the 9-3, IF they can sell it for between 25-33 K. So if Scand is right—-and it’s not possible to sell at that price—-that they need to charge more and make people believe a fantasy that the 9-3 is somehow worth more than mid-30s—-if all of that is true—-there is no reason to pursue this. If they can sell the car at the price I… Read more »
dcpattie
Member
3 years 3 months ago

We’ve already tried to move Saab up market and that failed in spectacular fashion. No one was willing to pay 50k+ for the NG 9-5, Saab can’t afford to make the same mistake.

rune
Member
3 years 3 months ago

The NG9-5’s level of marketing was close to nill. Reducing the price of the product would not do much to fix that. Many of those who saw the car and could afford it, bought one. I’d be surprised if many bought a more expensive (and inferior) Beamer instead.

RS
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Rune, unfortunately the “questionable” marketing they did came with a very hefty price tag… Inexperienced leadership usually underestimate the importance of saving money. The 9-5 sedan was never going to sell like hotcakes. Saab had been under GM for so long everyone knew independence was going to be difficult in the beginning but I have to say I was disappointed to see them fail so quickly on their own. As far as I know they had a chunk of cash in the beginning from selling the older 9-3 and 9-5 rights to SAIC. In VM’s and JÅJ’s defense it would… Read more »
3cyl
Member
3 years 3 months ago

NEVS needs to convince enough buyers that there is value associated with owning a good driving car produced in smaller quantities, i.e. people who feel that owning a less common car that they like is something in the plus column when evaluating a car’s value. A big plus that more than offsets any deficiency of something like the quality of the dashboard plastics.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Yes, but the real question becomes “How much is too much?” I believe that charging $30,000 plus for a 9-3, is in fact charging a premium over something like a Volkswagen. I could see charging up to a $5000.00 premium for the things you are advocating—exclusivity offsetting less content and perhaps cheaper plastics—-but when it climbs to having to pay $10,000 for exclusivity—-a less common car—–prospective customers bow out. That’s why Saab went out of business—-or at least it’s one plausible explanation, one reason.

scand
Member
3 years 3 months ago

have you looked at what sedan $30k gets you new these days ? i just ran a quick new car scan withing 50 miles of me on Cars.com, with the parameters of between $30 and 31K, sedan.

You get; Honda Accords, Toyota Camrys, , Kia Optima’s, Hyundai Sonatas, Nissan Altimas, VW Passats, Ford Fusions, Chevy malibus, for the most part. None are exactly premium vehicles. All thoroughly mainstream vehicles.

The premium sedan segment essentially starts at $30k in the US.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Scand: Every car you listed—-are they all considerably larger/more interior volume than a 9-3? The Acura ILX starts at $26,900. Couldn’t Saab sell in the same ballpark with Acura? If NEVS can’t deliver that, it’s over before it begins.

3cyl
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Maybe if they have somewhere near the same volume as Honda/Acura and they don’t build the cars in Sweden. More likely the cars will be priced higher.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

C-H-I-N-A. Eventually, to compete, they are going to need to build some of these cars in China. Others here have made the comment—-it makes almost no sense at all to build cars in Sweden and sell them in China. They must be planning for a Chinese factory. They might have to sell at a very, very modest profit for a few years in order to make this work. If they come out of the gate with an overpriced car, they’re sunk.

scand
Member
3 years 3 months ago
The Acura ILX is based on a Honda civic. It’s a small car. The Acura TSX is a closer comparison with a 9-3, and that model starts at over $30k. Auto pricing is an known and exact science. The manufacturer knows what he can expect to get for a given model, based on the strength of the brand, and then works backwards from there in terms of content and expected profit margin. You are right when you point out that they sell between $22k and $30k, because the recent results have been in that price range, or lower. Trouble is,… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
The seats could be textile—-no problem with that. Some people actually prefer cloth and are frustrated that leather is standard. A leather steering wheel cover adds very little to the production cost—-but honestly, there are high grades of synthetic that are actually better and cheaper. NEVS could find them. Air conditioning is standard on cars costing $15,000. I’m sure they could manage to provide AC (and a heater). Steel wheels are fine if that’s what it takes to sell a car at a price people are willing to pay. Brand equity won’t matter if they go out of business—-which is… Read more »
3cyl
Member
3 years 3 months ago

If NEVS can build a 9-3 that people want and can make money selling it for $30k they will have revolutionized automobile manufacturing/distribution.

Also, if NEVS’ primary product is to be a 9-3 premium EV, it will be difficult to market the EV version as a premium car if the same car with an ICE is placed in the mainstream family sedan price range.

Mark
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Seb, sorry but my experience first hand tells me you are wrong. I have a 9-3 TX and through twisty country roads particularly in the wet it is faster and more sure footed than my friends BMW (E90) 335i. While the 9-3 is far from perfect it is not a POS, unless you think top end BMWs are too.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Mark: The other thing about the 9-3 is how supportive the seats are—-at least the ones I’ve been in. Comfortable for long trips and a quality feel to them. Yes, during the GM era, Saab seats were better than Cadillac seats. I’ve been in both. One looks more elaborate but isn’t as comfortable as the other. The Saab’s look more basic—-but prove themselves over and over on my distance driving in a 9-5. The 9-3, with front wheel drive, can also move through the snow. It has a very high safety rating (first in its class to achieve a perfect… Read more »
Baver
Member
3 years 3 months ago

The front wheel drive argument is becoming a non-issue with most premium manufacturers offering AWD. Heck, my 2011 NG 9-5 has AWD and is one of the reasons I purchased it.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Baver: That is true—-but in many cases, don’t you have to pay extra to get AWD from the others? For example, BMW—–aren’t they RWD (at this point in time, about to change though)—–and to get AWD, it’s an expensive option? WIth Saab, their least expensive car has FWD that is more than capable in most climates. I guess I was really angling this at comparing them to BMW. I own one of each and love them both, though I’d rather walk in the snow than drive my BMW!

Baver
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Yes, usually it is an option, but one that more and more people are going for. In my neck of the woods, most new BMWs I see are X-Drive. Same with Volvo. The new BMW X1 is standard front wheel drive, as is its 1-series sedans.

RS
Member
3 years 3 months ago

To my surprise the press in Scandinavia slammed the handling of the X1 when the conditions weren’t perfect.

If NEVS ever produces a turbo Saab they should make the entry car a rock solid, ultra safe FWD that eats snow for breakfast and won’t break down after 3 years because they had to save money on parts in order to be price competitive against VW.
I believe Saabers would appreciate this more than anything. It would also be the best way to rebuild brand reputation and resale value in the future.

Seb
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Angelo, The only thing “tight”.as you say about the 9-3 are (hopefully) the lug nuts on the wheels. I hada 2007 9-3 and between the horrific torque steer and parkinsonian like tremors being transmitted from the suspension to the coarse vibrations felt through the steering wheel (blgot it brand new) to the rickety build quality, etc. Shall I go on? I have owned lots of cars and six Saabs (currently have a 9-5) and I think I would of rather of had a Mazda 6 or even a preowned A3 then this POS. Did I forget to mention the hvac… Read more »
fred diesel
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Yes Kathryn, 70% ownership by a company that actually gave a $hit about the brand/product could be considered “sketchy”, seeing as when GM had 100% for nearly 20 years, you would call that……gross mismanagement?? Bankruptcy/bailout of the parent company would be WHAT exactly?
And Cadillacs, Audis or ANY German cars FTM STILL DONT DO what Saabs did.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Ahhh…these are the times I wish there was a giant “LIKE” button to press!

saab93f
Member
3 years 3 months ago
“It may be time to forget about GM and look forward, I say forget as most will never forgive.” That is very right. NEVS is the way to go forward – hopefully we´ll be seeing new Saabs on the roads soon. I will never forgive GM – I will never buy any of their products and if asked, will never recommend anyone to buy anything GM. While I am sure 🙂 that my actions will only have limited effect on the arrogant conglomerate, I´ll continue anyway. All my life I have picked the former in every Chevy vs. Ford battle… Read more »
Turbo9000
Member
3 years 3 months ago

+1
I won’t even buy a late-model Saab anymore; too much cheap GM stuff; even the newest 9-5 has written GM all over it…. 🙁
So happy to be driving a 9000 2.3T…!

3cyl
Member
3 years 3 months ago

I have noted this before, but my 2007 9-5 built in the GM era has been totally trouble free. Sure, the leather is cheap compared to what was in my 9000s, but I have owned at least one of every SAAB model (except the Sonnet) starting with a 60’s 2 stroke and this 9-5 has set the bar in terms of dependability.

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

3cyl: Same with my GM era 2004 9-5. It’s low mileage but it’s also almost 9 years old—-and has had remarkable reliability. If you look at Consumer Reports data—-some of the GM years were the most reliable Saabs.

Eric G
Member
3 years 3 months ago

forget GM and look forward
That’s right Jason 😉
I hope the future will be good

Turbo9000
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Forget all about GM; buy a 9000; 0% GM 🙂

(unless you buy a nonturbo V6 that is…)

Thylmuc
Member
3 years 3 months ago

What is VM up to? They apparently did a very thorough analysis before filing the trial. Would they have done that if there was a clause in the contract stating something like “GM has to approve any sale of Saab or a stake in it to a third party” or something like that? And now, everything is so clear? Weird.

tombalas
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Called it. The outcome was inevitable. I am surprised that Spyker’s lawyers didn’t at least try to squeeze a nuisance value settlement out of GM, as GM would have gladly thrown millions of dollars in order to buy out early.

Say what you will about GM’s cars, but GM has always had the best lawyers in the business. The best.

E. Boon
Member
3 years 3 months ago

GM has the best lawyers. VM the best fantasy to sell. Both didn’t understand …. what SAAB was about. Today SAAB r.i.p.

scand
Member
3 years 3 months ago

you cant even squeeze a nuisance value settlement out of them if the case was a non starter in the first place! It will be interesting to see if he appeals, because its now even more of an uphill climb and long shot than he already had up to this point.

E. Boon
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Looking forward to what? NEVS takes ages to come out with all that matters: cars to sell.

GM, VM, NEVS…. I had rather seen BMW

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
EB: They’ll have cars to sell, probably next year. My concern at this stage is that they won’t have enough interested customers left to sell the cars to. NEVS is living in a vacuum at this point—-failing to communicate whatever excitement they might feel to all of us. One can only conclude that perhaps there isn’t any excitement there—-no passion. If that’s the case, the cars won’t be worthy of our passion either. If this company is being re-launched by car guys and car gals—-they’d be bursting at the seams to tell us about what they plan to do—-within reason.… Read more »
E. Boon
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Indeed. NEVS appears to look like a government led by old grey haired men at the end of their career.

Thylmuc
Member
3 years 3 months ago

But that was beyond any logical reasoning. BMW has quite a number of front wheel drive projects going on for years in Munich (as I was told), and they have all the competences to do this in house. Why should they buy Saab? They have been burned by Rover, and the Quandt family has apparently decided that they will not buy any more companies.

The only imaginable interest might have been in the factory to build Minis. This capacity problem has now been solved by using the plant in Genk, BE, iirc.

3cyl
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Also, BMW profit margins are reported to be relatively high. Unless they can price SAABs at a comparable profit margin, it is counter productive financially to dilute their financial ratios.

E. Boon
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Mini = frontwheel drive, compact, style icon, customers that are prepared to pay extra for something out of the ordinary.
Saab = frontwheel drive, style icon, customers that are prepared to pay extra for something out of the ordinary.

With SAAB BMW would have got not only dy hard SAAB customers but also part of the AUDI and Volvo market share. Scandinavian design + German technique. Count me in!

Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago

And if an entry level Saab, a 4 door hatch just slightly larger than a Mini—-could be brought in at or near Mini money—we’d have a hit on our hands. I hope NEVS is thinking this way. My fear is that their eyes or on the same thing Muller’s were—-the big enchilada to “compete” against BMW—-and if that’s the case, they’ll have heir behind handed to them. Fight for VW customers, mini customers, Mazda, etc.—-at the lower end—build a base that way and graduate these buyers to the more expensive, more exclusive, more profitable cars later.

E. Boon
Member
3 years 3 months ago
Saab was and will always be niche. That’s why people want a SAAB. A niche brand can’t compete with a market leader in the “luxury” Audi/BMW market segment. It will never have the same amount of fans. On the other hand a niche also doesn’t have the volume of mainstrain like Opel, Renault, Ford, Volkswagen etc. so will never be able to price compete with mainstream. SAAB’s place was nurturing their loyal client base and at the same time nibbling something of the Audi and Volvo market. This SAAB could never have done on their own. They had to be… Read more »
Angelo V.
Member
3 years 3 months ago
EB: BMW would have been the dream scenario—-but I think the more realistic owner would have been Mahindra. I think with their experience in building vehicles—-trucks and tractors—-they would have had a much more manageable learning curve than NEVS does. I think they already had the relationships to get cars into production sooner. Very clearly, they already understand advertising/promotions and I think if they had been named the owner of Saab, by this time, we’d be reading about plans for new Saabs—-we’d be following developments on a professional website, not a joke—-and the Saab name would be in the hands… Read more »
wpDiscuz