Does Saab AB have any issue with NEVS website still having SAAB all over it—-talking about electric vehicles introduction in China during 2014, the Saab 9-3 Aero back in production, etc.? Or maybe they realize that it’s just me and half a dozen other people visiting that site. LOL.
You make a good point that NEVS would stand to gain if the perception was that they actually have something that somebody else wants. I would love to know if Jiang/NEVS has the autonomy to cut a deal—or if some bizarre stipulations in his original agreement has strings attached to Qingdo or some other mistakes holding them back, making this…[Read more]
Red J: I don’t know either—none of us really know as we’ve really known nothing about NEVS for 3 years now. But one thing that comes to mind is that in a weird way, these rumors about Mahindra being interested in buying NEVS helps both companies even if there’s no longer any truth to it. For Mahindra, perhaps it gives the perception that…[Read more]
The basic premise that one company is interested in buying into or taking over another one shouldn’t have to “leak.” That should be announced, not leaked. This is totally ridiculous, how this saga drags on and on. “Leaks” should be things that we probably shouldn’t be privy to. NEVS has never understood the nuances. Incompetent.
Doug: I think Pininfarina might have been the studio that designed my Chevy Monza. Car enthusiasts do know the name—but the general car buying public has no idea who they are. The general car buying public has heard of Saab. So if Mahindra thinks the name is a substitute for the right to sell cars under the Saab name, they are sadly…[Read more]
Red: The other platforms you mentioned—aren’t they completed, with cars being produced on them? Built into the “ancient” comment is the fact that Phoenix isn’t done yet. To my knowledge, not a single vehicle has been produced on it and/or sold. So by the time it’s done, will it have set a record from beginning to end—-how long it took?
Yes, though I would think “resumes” is more accurate than “carries on with.” Right now, they’re dead in the water. They need to revive and it’s not going to be easy. There are forces, external and internal, that might make this almost impossible to overcome.
That’s understood Avelik—-but since a car has never been built on this platform and we don’t know of the commercial viability of it—-and it was started so long ago—-I’m just wondering what value there is in it. Things do change—-it’s sort of like a musical group trying to finish a song they started writing in 1988. It’s possible to…[Read more]
Automakers use old platforms to save money. Yes, we know that. Instead of developing a new platform, they solider on with an old one and try to refine it. I guess my point is that if you’re going to develop a new one, why would you start with one that is ALREADY “old?” If a computer company had been working on software and a new computer system…[Read more]
Thanks for bringing the discussion back to Earth Hugh. I swear, some of us are so starved for something positive, we find it in ANYTHING reported. I stand by what I’ve been saying for years now: There’s no way forward with NEVS as the owner. Until the company moves into different hands, there’s no point in getting excited about anything. …[Read more]
When was the Phoenix platform conceived? How long does it usually take an automaker from inception to completion, to develop a new model on a new platform? Has Phoenix been passed by like an old Edsel being lapped at the Daytona 500 by modern cars? Sorry, but this is getting more and more ridiculous.
- Load More