Press release: Nevs has paid its debts to the creditors

Nevs has made the second and last payment of the composition to the 106 creditors today with a total amount of 231 MSEK. This means that Nevs has no longer any debts to creditors.

Nevs exited the reorganization in April 2015 with a composition proposal approved by 98.2% of the creditors. According to the composition, the last payment of the debt should be made no later than October 14, 2015.

“Being debt-free gives us stability to continue our building relationships with industrial, financial and technological partners, who are significant when it comes to develop and implement our business plan. To be able to make these payments earlier than agreed was important for us”, said Mattias Bergman, President Nevs.

In May 2015, Nevs introduced the city of Tianjin (THT) and State Research Information Technology (SRIT) as its new strategic shareholders. The investment from the new investors have been implemented as planned. The Tianjin manufacturing plant, which will be Nevs’ second global production base focused on EVs, is under construction, as a complement to the Trollhättan Factory.

NEVS is now debt free, at least according to 98,2% of its former creditors, although many said that NEVS only wanted to sell the parts and disappear.

Hope the next press-release is once again about cars and not about a financial matter.

45 thoughts on “Press release: Nevs has paid its debts to the creditors”

  1. So as of this very moment they can seriously sign agreements with other interested partners while no debts means a nice “bride” 🙂
    However if that means that we see NEVS starting to build SAAB cars again is still a big question mark.
    But at least it is good news for the people in THT who can look forward to new employment in their neighborhood.

    • “But at least it is good news for the people in THT who can look forward to new employment in their neighborhood.”

      From your mouth into God’s ears, bro. There are still lots of ex-Saab’s workers that are still unemployed.

      • Adde: You and I have discussed this before. Lifted from this article: “The Tianjin manufacturing plant, which will be Nevs’ second global production base focused on EVs, is under construction, as a complement to the Trollhättan Factory.” Why do I get the feeling—-this new factory is not going to be a “complement to” but instead a “replacement for” the Trollhattan plant? We can private message, but in short, why would they start investing millions of dollars to build a new factory in China when they don’t even have a car to produce yet? Wouldn’t it make more sense to begin building cars in Sweden, bring them to market—as a priority? Somewhere along the way, they could anticipate the demand and begin work on an alternate factory if one is needed—-but the fact that this city is the investor and a plant is being built before cars are being built (when there’s a perfectly good plant sitting idle) seems like “writing on the wall” to me. Their plan would appear to be building cars in China, not Sweden. Congratulations Tianjin. Hope the jobs are good ones.

        • In a similar case Volvo started building a factory in China, although they were sitting on the old Ford models, the amount of Volvo cars sold worldwide were diminishing, and the funding for the development of new engines and platform were not 100% sure.

          I think it takes more than one week to get a car factory build and up and running, so you better begin sooner than later.

          I can also only hope that the factory in THN starts producing cars sooner than later, as I can’t say for sure that cars will be build in THN again, but in my opinion, it doesn’t make sense to own that big factory if you don’t want to use it as it generates costs even if it stands still.

          And NO, I have no proof of what I say.

          • I think you have a good point. Why keep a huge building if you’re not going to use it? Even if you wanted to say you designed cars in Europe just rent a small office in a building, don’t own a huge empty factory. The only reason for keeping the factory is if there are plans for it.

              • I see that from time to time you read what we write 😉
                Yes, they have stated many times that they want to sell unused production capacity to somebody else that needs them. They have 2 production lines. Maybe on 2015/16 both could produce non-NEVS cars, later 1 line could produce NEVS cars and the other non-NEVS, and if the Gods are good to them, they might need both in a couple of years.
                But we will know for sure when (and not if) they start once again talking about cars.

                • There is significant overcapacity in the European auto manufacturing sector so the idea that anyone would expect to profitably build cars for another company seems quite illogical unless they could somehow do it cheaply enough to warrant a transfer of production. That won’t be in the case in any Swedish plant. If the Trollhatten plant isn’t used to build their own cars it’s most logical usage would be to manufacture for another industry or for warehousing.

        • Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the Tianjin plant a joint venture with Dong Feng? Dong Feng probably have cars to produce there if it take several years for NEVS to start producing their cars. Until the factory is finished(can it take 2-3 years to build) NEVS only have Stallbacka Plant. It would surprised me greatly if they only should produce cars in China. I don’t know any car makers that have closed down in Europe and moved everything to China. Do You?

          • I don’t. Then again, I don’t know any other car makers that came into existence claiming they were going to be an electric car company with an emphasis on selling in China—-but whose first model was resumption of a 12 year old car (with restyled headrests, for sale to Europe)—–and who only made a couple hundred of them before stiffing creditors and apparently starting over.

        • Of course a Chinese factory would be a replacement for the Trollhattan plant! To even contemplate that a Chinese company would have long-term plans to manufacture cars in Sweden is so naive that it beggars belief (and yes, that includes Geely).

          The only thing that might be of some interest to see here is whether NEVS are competent enough to manufacture anything at all, or if they’ll implode before they get that far.

          • Who is naive here? Why do not all manufacturers move their business to China then!? The answer is that transportation and import taxes to EU for fininshed cars is too expensive. NEVS will produce cars in Trollhättan for European market. Anything else is madness!

            • NEVS would build cars in Trollhattan in bare minimum volume—-to comply with any requirement their might have been for them to maintain use of the Saab name. Now that apparently they might no longer have that permission anyway—-they aren’t likely to want to build anything there. Their interest is not in the European market. There interest, is, was and always has been building electric cars for China. They also had a strong interest in having the Saab name to make the buyers in China feel as though they were getting a car with a European luxury heritage. Take the name away and I don’t see any motivation for them to build cars in Sweden as I think their sales to Europe were only going to be symbolic anyway.

              • Exactly, Angelo. Moreover, what little volume would be produced in Trollhattan (for a limited time period only, merely for compliance reasons) could just as well be assembled from CKD kits shipped from China.

  2. Do you know any other car maker that was sold, but where previous owners denied the new owners the right to make any existing models, and an even earlier owner raised problems about using the name, but the new owners still tried to carry on?

      • Which is probably why no other company in the end was prepared to bid for SAAB, and why no major established OEM seems interested now. The only hope for SAAB is that NEVS makes a go of making electric or hybrid cars in China for China (I doubt that these would be called SAABs) and that this puts them in a position to develop and make cars in Sweden for other markets. They would like to call those cars SAABs. This two pronged strategy (cars for China made in China, and those for the rest of the world made in Sweden) is their stated position. Will it actually happen? I don’t know. But it is either that, or no more SAABs.

        • But I remember reading here that part of the allure of the purchase was that the Chinese loved European/American status brands and that was one of the primary reasons the consortium wanted Saab. So it would make no sense for them to not use the Saab name on products they plan to sell in China—-as that seemed to be one catalyst of the purchase. And there were others willing to bid if they had the same conditions NEVS ultimately enjoyed. The process was ridiculous and scared off viable companies with common sense.

          • Who was willing to bid? Mahindra? Twice they have been supposed to be about to bid for/buy SAAB or NEVS, but it did not. The documents published by TIm suggested that the brand name issue was probably a major stumbling block for them. Your conspiracy theory has been exploded. Several companies did back out of bidding for SAAB, when GM made it clear that they would not give any licenses relating to the then existing SAAB models. That, and the doubts over the right to use the name SAAB, is why no major OEM has been willing to buy SAAB. This is unlikely to change in the future.

  3. IMHO we’re reading far too much into the ownership permutations. China is still a communist country and bank accounts relating to regions or cities are like different pockets in a jacket. The jacket is worn by the Chinese Government. Swedish mass car manufacturing is now owned by the Chinese Government. Get used to it. It may be that the Saab brand will be useful to their future plans as they develop them or it may not. If it is then they might have another go at coming to an agreement with Saab AB. But they don’t seem to be particularly bothered and that suggests to me that the raison d’etre for the acquisition of Volvo and Saab was primarily to gain access to advanced Western technology in order to help them develop their own motor manufacturing industry. And SweGov is letting them get away with it. What a completely stupid dereliction of duty and a loss to Sweden!

          • You are right in a way. The old SAAB died the very day GM decided to kill it because GM was dying at that time and thought killing some brands was the only way to survive.
            After that some people, firs Swedes, then Dutch and now Swed-Chinese try to create a new SAAB. From what I know all of them had to prove the world that bigger is not better, but most of the people prefer to buy a car from Toyota/GM/Volkswagen rather than buying a car with personality.

            Cars are for most people only a mobility appliance, that has the following assets: current in-colour, can speak to the own smart-phone and has to have a cool brand to show that they are also cool.

            The old SAAB is only a voice from the past, only too few would buy such a car, and the only possibility for anybody that is willing to revive the brand has to try a bold new way, and currently the electric way is still a sector where small brands could survive.

            We have to live with that, but that said, I can’t understand why people keep repeating that (former)SAAB is dead, we all should be aware by now about that.

            • Red J: People would be perfectly happy with a smaller hatchback Saab they could actually afford to buy, own and operate—-and yes, perhaps in a few colors other than black, silver, gray and white. Saab got blown out by Audi, Mercedes, BMW…and others (See Joe’s comment below). It was/is long overdue for Saab to move downmarket and try to take sales from players like Mazda and Subaru. It won’t happen—-the horse is out of the barn and Saab is dead at this point.

              • Ask in Detroit why they never saw Saab as their luxury world wide brand instead of trying to bring Cadillac to Europe and building Saabs out of Opel spare parts.

                As an example Saab had to build the 9-5 till 2010 out of an old Opel platform that was only designed to cater with naturally aspirated engines (low torque) with a max power of 120 hp.

                You always had blue, green, red, and sometimes even yellow, but at least here even the police buys the cars in silver so they can sell them afterwards.

                • I think it was the perception that Saab was closer to Buick in terms of luxury, then Cadillac. So it’s likely that GM figured they’d rather fight Mercedes worldwide with the Cadillac brand, instead of a “near luxury” brand. Was that a mistake? I suppose a case can be made either way—-that they should have moved Saab upmarket to compete against the high end European brands—-or that the brand didn’t pack enough punch to do that and they needed to use Cadillac, once considered a standard of the world in terms of luxury—-to accomplish it. We could make good arguments both ways. But one thing is certain: Cadillac was ALWAYS the high priced, exclusive, luxury “standard.” Saab emerged as a quirky company selling sub-$2000.00 cars to compete with the Volkswagen Beetle. Along the way, Cadillac ended up building shoddy, cheap cars and Saab moved up to build tremendous drivers cars—-with luxury and technology. But to come full circle, for a variety of reasons—–not all factors related to General Motors either—-Saab lost their way (and were already on the brink of dying before GM bought them). I maintain that the happy medium for Saab was a middle ground—-not inexpensive basic transportation like Kia’s lower priced models, or Ford/Chevy—–but also, not BMW territory either. I think they’re best chance was a European alternative to brands like Mazda, Subaru, Buick…cars that would be about 15% more than comparable Volkswagens.

                    • Very much so in the beginning of the 90’s, and in another world could have picked up much of Audis customers in the US at that time (after Audis disaster with sudden acceleration).

                      Saab was far from dead when GM got involved, and I did have hope at the time for GM to add the missing pieces (marketing, sales channels, increased model range) but they totally missed the ball.

                    • Mair: Saab products were good—-but financially, they were teetering on the brink when GM came in. And Jacko, the product line was equal to Audi at one time—-but Audi has evolved to go upmarket and Saab is now owned by NEVS. Enough said.

                  • First, Cadillac as a premium car doesnt fly in Europe, and hasn’t for a long time. it’s seen as a lipstick on a pig. The overlap of customers in Sweden that would consider both Cadillac and Saab were extremely low.

                    • VW had an idea how to enlarge Audi from couple of models in the past into decent premium class with plenty of models nowadays, just wondering why GM failed on this task with Saab.

        • Roger: If NEVS has the brand for cars, it’s already dead. Better to wash our hands of NEVS and hope that Saab AB licenses the name to a competent group in the future.

          • That will never happen. Not in our lifetime anyway.

            NEVS is the only chance for Saab cars now and will be for a long time.
            All of us don’t have to love NEVS but if we want som cars with name Saab it would be much better to support them than trash talk them.

            • I don’t think NEVS is going to build a car with the Saab name on it. I think perhaps the only chance of that might be if they finish off the rest of the 9-3 sedans that they have parts, body panels and engines for. I don’t think that will happen because I don’t think there’s any market for that and it would require more preparation expenses than it would be worth. So at this point, I don’t think NEVS will build any more Saabs.

            • I agree with you. Why all this trash talk? Concerning the question, does this have anything to do with Saab: My perspective is that the legacy link with the past is still there; Trollhättan, the car factory and key personnel. Further on, we can now see how former saabers returns to NEVS. And the brand? I see it like it – Saab – is still loaded with values. At least I am still heavily affected from it. Of course, from a strict business perspective, the saab brand is still out of business. But when the guys in Trollhättan comes up with something, I hope it will be another chance to bring back saab as a brand also for cars to be manufactured on the assembly line, even so if they decide to go all electric.

              Obviously contrary to some in this post, I have to say I am actually thrilled by the possibilities which are now, bit by bit, unfolding for us.

            • Angelo, Roger, and Red, never say never. The old Saab may be dead, but who said that it can’t see its former glory days again? If Saab has money and great management, it can grow big and compete with Audi, Bmw , Mercedes , etc…..
              Look at Hyundai. Back in the early 2000, they were one of the worse cars ever built and that no one wanted, but with the new management, investment in RnD, and marketing, they are now one of the most successful companies to date. They sell over a million cars a year. I doubt that nevs can do anything like Hyundai did recently, but as you see, it certainly possible to make Saab a global recognized brand. Just need some big money and aa good management team.

  4. Just picked up a new Infinity Q50 for a daily driver. Amazingly reminiscent of my 2006 9-5 driving characteristics, but I will tell you all…IF SAAB (or a reasonable facsimile of) is to re-enter the market anywhere NEAR that price-point, they have a virtual insurmountable amount of ground to gain relative to quality, technology, and engineering vs. anything they’ve ever produced before. Massive investment needed.

    I reckon that would not happen.

  5. I can’t see this outfit ever producing another Saab. Our best hope is that another manufacturer approaches Saab AB about using the name on a car, maybe a low production sports car manufacturer and build a high end luxury sports car. Something that’ll give the name some kudos again.

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.