Saab and safety - an indictment on GM that it’s not recognised
There’s so much news around at the moment that I’m having trouble fitting it all in within one day. The post count could be way higher than what it is right now.
One thing I couldn’t fit in yesterday was sent to me by Tim S and mentioned by Ted in comments - the Consumer Reports brand perception survey. In the results of this survey, Saab rated exactly nowhere for brand recognition when it comes to safety. Volvo was the first response of 77% of respondents.
The survey was done by telephone to around 2,000 people, so this isn’t a check-box affair.
In addition to the Volvo response, it should be noted that vehicle safety was the single most important factor mentioned by respondents when they consider a new vehicle. 63% of respondents considered safety #1.
And as an aside, 35% of people considered environmental friendliness a high priority. This should be a Saab sales point as well, but they didn’t rate there either. For some reason, GMC came in fifth on that score. Saab (and whole bunch of others) were outgreened by GMC.
So safety’s the #1 factor and Volvo owns 77% of that market in the consumer’s mind. And Saab doesn’t even get a mention.
Something’s very wrong with this picture….
——
Saab USA love to cling on to the fact that BFJ won an award in it’s initial year and was mentioned as the 6th most recognised brand slogan in that year.
In the words of S.E. Hinton - That was then, this is now.
Sales have continued to fall despite a great new, updated model in the range, and BFJ is telling the customer exactly zero about what the car represents. It incorporates none of the brand pillars, but instead, it occupies that informational space with bells, whistles and catchy music.
Dealer closures, falling sales and a marketing campaign that has little-to-no substance.
How many more flags have to be raised before GM realise that Saab need some real and tangible support?
More from this category
More from this author
- Automotive Rites of Passage
- Friday Snippets (well, it’ll be Saturday when you read them)
- Edmunds provide puzzling Saab Turbo X road test
- Thursday Snippets - rumours of my demise have been greatly exaggerated, for now…
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- Beren Erchamion on Edmunds provide puzzling Saab Turbo X road test
- Ryan M on Automotive Rites of Passage
- aeronaut on Automotive Rites of Passage
- zippy on EnG Weekend Snippets
- Andy Rupert on Automotive Rites of Passage
- eggsngrits on In defence of the Pontiac Aztek, and other Snippety things
- eggsngrits on Automotive Rites of Passage
- SaabLance on Edmunds provide puzzling Saab Turbo X road test
- Jeff on Friday Snippets (well, it’ll be Saturday when you read them)
- No.9 on Friday Snippets (well, it’ll be Saturday when you read them)
Amen! The number one reason my family and I drive Saabs is because of their safety record throughout the decades. Fuel efficiency is a close second, followed by practical transport of our goods in a no-nonsense Scandinavian package.
Preach on brother!
BFJ needs to die.
And they need the BioPower engines here and the turbo diesel. Start up a tree planting program and wrap themselves in green.
The ads needs to trumpet that all THREE versions of the 9-3 have received top pick over and over and over in safety.
But no, we get a jet blowing fire on an old 9-3 forming the new one and it driving around in a canyon. Which I have YET to see on the TV.
Back on to the Biopower. At the Houston auto show, I talked to one of the Saab people there and was just talking about how Saab really needs to bring over Biopower/ethanol engines and diesel. She told me they were working on the diesel engine, and that ethanol is seen to be trendy and Saab is never a brand to follow trends. I was just like wait what? Saab has a fleet of biopower engines over in Europe which is spurring the sales over there and you tell me it is trendy?
Though today in class, once I was established as the Saab guy. The guy kept being like they are born from jets, over and over and over. I cringed every time.
/Rant and random ramblings (mostly ramblings lol)
Beautifully stated. GM, why not make Trollhattansaab.net an official informational outlet for all things Saab and put SWade on your payroll? Talk about goodwill and a benefit to the brand at a bargain cost. Go on, GM, ask SWade how much… As an aside, I have emailed SWade several times over the past year, and within a matter of hours he has written back with thoughtful answers. He’s like an accessible celebrity to the Saab clan. Kewl.
Wow, an S.E. Hinton quote. I love this website, what other blogger would do that?
“Outgreened by GMC”. Ouch. GMC is certainly putting some effort into cleaning up its trucks, but…ouch.
No one ever believes me when I tell them that Saabs are the safest cars on the road. Volvos are not nearly as safe as they used to be.
S.E Hinton puts us at Defcon 4. If I start with JD Salinger you’ll know the end is near - SW
In all honestly, I dont think GM is taking Saab seriously at all. Twinning it with Saturn dealers here in Canada, and the only Saab dealer here in Vancouver has no Saabs on its front lot at all - they are all in the back locked behind chainlink fences?
Plenty of second hand BMWs, Mercs and Chevy’s so how does GM Canada expect consumers to take Saab seriously when they have clearly given up? I sent an email to GM Canada three days ago asking about pricing for the Turbo X and guess what……? 
Of course I’m going to play devil’s advocate again. I had a theater teacher in high school tell me I should be a lawyer because I have a talent for taking the most ridiculous argument, making a case for it, and making it actually compelling.
So here goes:
I’ve read that often what people SAY they want is not actually what they buy.
For example, people have been taught since they were a child that safety is the most important thing. “Better safe than sorry”. So when these people are asked what the most important attribute of a car should be they will SAY “safety”, but really it’s just further down their list of requirements.
I mean, if safety were really people’s #1 interest in a new vehicle wouldn’t Volvo be the best selling car brand in America?
I’ve actually read that marketing studies have shown safety doesn’t sell. Safety bores people.
BMW doesn’t have the best safety record (not that it’s bad, it’s just a tier below the best), yet without having the sales numbers in front of me I’d hazard a guess that BMW outsells Volvo in the U.S. by a large margin.
So it seems to me that to most buyers in the entry-luxury segment brand prestige is #1, horsepower is #2, and safety probably falls somewhere down around fifth.
“Dealer closures, falling sales and a marketing campaign that has little-to-no substance. How many more flags have to be raised before GM realise that Saab need some real and tangible support?”
Something’s in the water over at SaabUSA, and I’m beginning to think it’s Ambien.
Gripen - Most people in BMWs are safe, because they’re too paranoid about scratching their cars to do anything unsafe. :p
Swade - Don’t start quoting Salinger, you might go off and shoot Bjorn Envall while you’re wearing a stupid hat after getting his autograph.
Always the devil’s advocate, Gripen.
To your credit, however, I think you have a point.
Regardless, the Saab Brand Center and/or Marketing Departments should have this protocol in place:
You must visit Trollhattansaab.net before making any particular brand perception or marketing decision.
This way, they will be able to decrease the number of stupid actions taken, as well as reduce the number of smart actions not taken. Both are types of stupid decisions.
Like I said- no more stupid decisions!
Which is why I get all angry when Subaru here in Australia attempts to own safety while Saab does zero.
Meanwhile stability control is still optional on several Volvos here.
When I got my first Saab, I knew nothing about the brand, I liked the look of the car, 9-3 vert, black, It drove well and that was that. I learned about all Saab was stood for by educating myself. Two Saab’s later and I still love the cars and what they offer and stand for. 1985 Gripen is correct, what people say and what they do are two different things. Saab was selling safety prior to mostly anyone even giving it a mention. Now, it’s in vogue to talk about safety. SAAB HAD BETTER WAKE UP FAST. One thing you have to ask yourself, could Saab be that clueless? Do they or does GM want them to go under? Why the cross drive ? Why the extra money for add’s that I have yet to see?
Let’s hope that Saab has some type of positive plan. I did like the look of the Saab, Hummer, Cadi, dealer that was pictured here a few weeks ago. If GM/ SAAB is that in the dark they are burning up some good money, sad because they make great cars.
Here’s some personal irony on the safety perception: My wife has a 2003 GMC Envoy and I have a 2005 9-3. When weather is bad or she’s taking long trips, she drives the 9-3!! It’s more reliable and safer than the GMC!!
Saab should start REMINDING people with a marketing campaign that they were the first to put seat belts in a car, not to mention active headrests.
seat belts and turbo charging, seat belts and turbo charging, SEAT BELTS AND TURBO CHARGING!
Saab should use the BFJ ad if it’s known to people but add some about safety and technology.
How about a Saab driving with jet over head, then cut to the crash test and the figures about car accidents and show the safety rating( best rating after?)
The problem with Saab is that it’s not an aggressive company. It’s been feminised and gayed down. Notice some previous article that ran on “brand promotion” or some bs.
They need to heckin roll-up their sleeves and promote and market the car and stop pussyfooting around. We need power and sport and we need it now.
“Gayed down”?
Anyway, I don’t think Saab is “pussyfooting around” on purpose. It’s hard to market aggressively when you have no marketing budget.
[Crash testing footage]
Saftey isn’t the number of airbags.
Saftey isn’t a perception.
Saftey is surviving.
Saftey, is SAAB.
[Insert Crash Test Ratings Here]
What got me into my Saab was safety. In 2005 I was hit from behind while stopped at a light. The other driver was going at a fairly good clip. My BMW I was driving was totalled. I was fine except for a sore spot on the back of the head for a week or so, due to the headrest; no whiplash.
The first thought I had when it came to a replacment was Olov. However, I had an uncle who owned a 1998 9-3 ‘vert and a 1990 C900 and the Saab dealer was closer than the Olov dealer, so I headed other there to test drive a 2003 9-5. I never even sat in an Olov and I drove off in my first Saab.
So what sold me? To be honest it was the safety rating and SAHR. Next was the blast I had driving the car. I am a bit dumbfounded as to why Saab USA doesn’t toute the safety of these cars AT ALL in the ads that I am exposed to. Sorry I don’t read the fine print in the ads if that’s where the info is.