GP: BAIC/GM conflict sunk Koenigsegg Group

There’s a few interesting news reports out this morning. The best of them is Göteborgs Posten’s article on what it was that broke the Saab deal.
Koenigsegg Group have been very quiet about why the deal broke down, saying only that delays in the process made the risks involved too prominent for them. As I wrote earlier today, with the money almost in the bag and the plans approved, there must have been more involved here than a little bit of fear.
GP claim that it was tension between GM and Beijing Automotive with regard to intellectual property that was the main issue.
The Googletrans:

GM thought it was good [when] Baic went in as a minority owner. Then the Chinese transparency is limited. When Baic demanded transparency in the level of their capital investment shrank GM, “said a government official.
Intellectual property rights are patents, trademarks, ideas and more. GM was concerned that much knowledge could be Chinese, in general, knowledge that was strategically very important in Detroit as GM chose not to sell the Opel to Canadian / Russian Magna.

To paraphrase……
GM didn’t mind at first when BAIC got involved because their money supported the deal and would help get it done. As time went on, BAIC began to demand a few more things in exchange for their involvement, which is when GM started to hesitate.
This story concurs with the second piece of Djup Strupery I’ve received today.
Djup Strupe passed on to me that BAIC contacted Koenigsegg Group on the weekend and informed them of some new requirements they needed for their involvement to go ahead.
From what we read here at, this is possibly not the first time this has happened, and the prospect of more delays whilst these requirements were negotiated between BAIC, Koenigsegg and GM were quite likely the delays that Koenigsegg have cited as the reason for them pulling out.
The article states that Koenigsegg Group evolved into a sort of intermediary between BAIC and GM, a role that they possibly didn’t expect nor had time for given the volume of work to be done.
It’s an interesting insight as to what’s happened here and’s story definitely rings close to what I’m hearing.

My thanks to Peter for the link.

Comments are closed.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.