Saab Press release: Update On Proposed Sale Of Saab Automobile And Saab GB

Trollhättan, Sweden: Swedish Automobile N.V. (Swan) and Saab Automobile AB (Saab Automobile announce they have taken notice of a press statement issued by General Motors Company (General Motors) today regarding the proposed sale of all shares in Saab Automobile and Saab Great Britain Ltd.

(Saab GB) to Pang Da Automobile Trade Company Ltd (Pang Da) and Youngman Automotive Group Company Ltd (Youngman).

Swan and Saab Automobile acknowledge the position taken by General Motors and will now discuss with Pang Da and Youngman to see whether a structure can be agreed which is acceptable to all parties concerned.

45 thoughts on “Saab Press release: Update On Proposed Sale Of Saab Automobile And Saab GB”

  1. I guess we are back to a 51% Swan/49% YPD share situation with an exclusive put option for YPD on the Swan shares the day after the GM IP exclusivity expires. I wonder if that in itself will still be enough for the Chinese to fully fund Saab’s turn-around and further development.

    Ivo

        • I think, as far as I know the details, that I can agree with your statement.
          It is these who become wealthy on the misery of others that should be blamed, early or later.
          If he indeed filled his pocket with an unjustifiable amount he should be blamed and even asked to return the money.
          For these lawyers in fact the rule : ” no cure no pay” should be applied.

        • Why is it his fault ? He didnt run SAAB out of money. He realised pretty quickly:

          a) Saab didn’t have the money to do a reconstruction beyond the 2 months states salary payments
          b) The Chinese were gonna run the clock out anyway on the prior deal
          c) Swan didn’t have the money to effectively turn it around
          d) Selling it in its entirety WAS the only possible option, other than liquidation.

          Time is not the luxury he had, therefore it was a ‘hail mary’ pass.

          • @scand we should pay you mr lofalks salary 🙂

            i am no well paid lawyer but i never never had an idea to sell saab to a total new player (geely) without talking to GM and to the other players – and that was the problem of the whole reconstruction . mr lofalk told the chinese they could have whole saab without having the whole saab

        • @ davidgmills:

          “Did it ever occur to you that he might just be following the rules?”

          what are the rules, could you please recall it?

          I guess it was apparently *not* inline with the rule to trouble Saab more than it had been already at the beginning of reconstruction, ruining its prospective deals and steering it into a dead-end deal!

          I can easily feel the disappointment about Lofalk others are sharing here.

    • Its about far more than the 9-4x. Pretty much every Saab model for sale.

      the 9-4x is completely controlled and built by GM so thats why they specifically stated that model.

      • that´s the paradox at this case – if GM says for example they only produce 10000 9-4 for the chinese market why should there be a problem – GM could lock this generation for the 9-4 in mexico

        • Don’t think that just because the 9-4x is GM controlled that IP relates to that, if GM wants to Pull IP it will result in all drive trains, all chasis and all current engines plus many other in car technology elements being unusable, including more than a smattering of kit on the new 9-3 yet to be released.

          There must be a solution that GM finds acceptable other than the death of Saab.

          They may want to cash in even more in Saabs possible future success for example which will impoverish any future deal. But my suspicion is still that they want to kill Saab. Their messages from the centre do not sound concilliatory they sound menacing. read the first press release today and their “solution” to the current issue.

          They know Saab can’t pay for the 9-4x and they know there are other IP issues for the 9-5 and 9-3 with YMPD-when you look at the first solution they alluded to you know what is on their minds.

          If GM can’t do proper complex global multi partner business successfully, Saab is dead unless they have some spare line somewhere else ready to go with a new stealth car and another 6bn in a secret bank account.

          for me…I cannot see a way out. it requires magic-good luck to all involved.

          some more of my hair fell out. Time for a beer.

    • SAAB 9-4 X is not a SAAB.
      SAAB has been lucky to have a copy of Cadillac SRX

      This applies for SAAB 9-5 NG, as it is a copy of
      OPEL Insignia and Buick LaCrosse

      SAAB 9-3 used to be a copy of OPEL Vectra.

      What I mean to say, SAAB has lost its identity long time ago,
      once it got fully owned by GM.

      The problem is that SAAB couldn’t survive, and cannot live
      in the short term future without having the GM technology in it.
      As SAAB is an American GM but assembled at Sweden-Trolhatten.

      That’s why SAAB was trying all the time to leave GM. and seek its independence.
      Just to return back to its all golden eras, the one SAAB was an independent
      SAAB and even when SAAB was merged with SCANIA.

  2. Its more about Saab’s ability to resell IP rights to other Chinese car makers, which was mentioned in their revised business plan last week.

    I’m sure once that has been clarified, they might feel happier. Remember Ford did exactly the same thing with Greely, protected its IP rights.

  3. ..
    ”Bad press sells”

    You know, when the ‘good news’ hit the Press a week or so ago, the BBC said nothing atall. Now, this is spread all over their News site in the UK within an hour…..

  4. This is IP (Intellectual Property) dispute with focus on SAAB’s current tech assets (core value), which are being used by GM releasing new models to the market. 100% takeover by Chinese means GM is disallowed to use SAAB know-how for their own product development unless extra permission is given. No wonder why GM gave “NO” stance.

    Keeping its core value exclusive is the key to any organization that strives for independence towards business success, and this is the road map for SAAB as well.

  5. People I feel sorry for are the employees and dealers, this is like a poor soap opera, just as you think it can’t get any worse it does! They need to sort it out one way or the other quickly…..

  6. I find it interesting that Saab / SWAN are issuing a press release in response to GM’s comments to the press, suggesting that they haven’t actually heard this from GM directly. Strange if true…!

    • Indeed, it feels bizarre. Could all of this action to save Saab happened without a single phone call to GM and visa versa? Really?

  7. they have to comment this, as also shares were traded as usual. and tomorrow shares will go down… and if there´s a new deal with swan in it ….

  8. Well, at least GM didn’t spend 18 months from making the decission to announcing it (hi there, EIB).

    Anyway, now whoever-made-the-decission-to-try-getting-100-% has had their try and got a definitive no, so GM should have a stronger position to return to the previous agreement.

  9. GM’s announcement came AFTER court’s decision. My guess is that they KNEW everything about the deal beforehand. But they let first Saab gets the OK from the court (in order to survive) and then enter into the game starting negotiations. GM plays hard in order to secure SAAB/GM technology. I think SWAN and GM are in line on this and not in opposite fields.

    • I agree, if GM would like to kill Saab, they could have announced this before the OK from the court. I think it’s important for the Swedish government to realise it has a role to play here, to make the different parties agree on a solution. GM is a state-owed company today, which also has to be taken into consideration by the Swedish government.

      If GM really kills Saab then we have great deal of lobbying ahead of us in order to get GM (i.e. Opel and Chevrolet) out from the Swedish car market, i.e. to boycott those brands. This is also a signal the Swedish should give to GM.

      • If Saab dies it is because no company in Scandinavia is willing to buy it and apparently no company in Europe is willing to either. Nobody in Saab’s own back yard is showing any interest in Saab. There has not been a Swedish company show interest in Saab since Koenigsegg. So why would you blame a company that has tried to sell a Swedish product it bought and can’t find a buyer remotely in the neighborhood?

        I don’t think GM would be at all opposed to selling to a European company that had enough cash. But selling to China poses lots of problems for GM on many levels.

        • Again, folks, this has nothing to do with buying Saab. There are tons of companies (and even individuals) around the world who could likely afford to do this given the recent transaction price.

          The problem is not what it takes to buy it, but what it takes to absorb the years of operating losses, the development of a full lineup, and the marketing to reestablish the brand. That will takes many billions.

          Seen in that light, there are very few companies and no individuals who can do that. Established makers with their own production and distribution would have absolutely no interest. That’s why it’s developing nations and upstart companies who might have an interest, since buying Saab would be much cheaper than starting their own brand and international distribution network.

          The problem is that we’ve just learned that so much of the NG 9-3 (50%!!!) is GM tech. Most of us had assumed for months (based on past VM and others comments) that the NG 9-3 would be an IP clean break. That’s the killer right now…

  10. Okay, now that everything has come as far as this, there will be a way to take the last steps, too.

    In an earlier post today, I wrote things looked like back in December 2009.
    Somehow, things turned out well back then.
    And so, I’m sure, they will now.

  11. Remeber Gm is an american company they will giva shit in everything they whant it all expand with no competition, In china with americans worst yesterday worst enemy kommunism today their best friend

    • Our government may be the friend of the Chinese, but American people are quite opposed to Chinese products. We are tired of them and for the most part are going out of our way whenever we can to try to avoid buying them.

      • We are tired of them and for the most part are going out of our way whenever we can to try to avoid buying them.

        But there must be plenty of them there; since there has been so many discussions of “dangerous pet food this”, “unhealthy colours that”, we have seen some of that in Europe (and here in Sweden), but no way near what seems to be the case in the US.

        So, somehow it seems you are buying plenty, a huge amount of Chinese products, compared to US. Perhaps because they are cheap; some US guys seems to like cheap things…

      • Amazing, now that 10% of all Americans own a Chinese made iPhone. In 2010, the trade balance of the US with China alone was USD -273 billion, i.a. ca. 900 per US citizen. Which clearly shows the degree of dependence. Converting the US into a service economy might have been a failure.

        There is no way out, though, since if the Americans would try sourcing all goods from the US, they could not afford them. Same over here in Germany.

  12. GM- Government Motors, Shame on them.. How soon they forgot Our Bankrupt govt saved them! I wonder if some bankruptcy law would help with this situation, or better yet they should get Government involved here.

  13. In reality you cant blame GM. The Chinese are well known for stealing other people’s IP but I have a question fror Mr Lofalk. How woulld selling Saab to Geely have appeased GM? Sounds like the guy is shafting Saab. I do, however, think GM wants a soution to this sale rather than see Saab disappear.

    • I actually agree that GM’s actions here make complete sense. In fact, if I were a GM shareholder and have watched GM’s China operations basically keeping the company afloat for the last decade, I’d be screaming for them not to give an ounce to their upstate Chinese competition either.

      The vexing thing for me is the sudden news that the NG 9-3 has 50% GM tech. I mean, who thought this deal would work knowing that!?!? I (as I posted elsewhere) actually think Saab could survive without the GM 9-4X and 9-5 for a few years and just on the strength of a kick-a** NG 9-3, but that’s when I thought the 9-3 was Saab IP…

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.

Close