As I understand it, when GM starved Saab of cash for spending to much on the 9-3′s development GM went to Saab and said “Seeing as you have made the 9-3 unique to Trollhattan and it cant be built anywhere else build us a FWD Caddy for Europe based on the 9-3″

Saab’s enginieers have been very clever. Yes the 2008 9-3 would not be as good as it is, if it were not for the BLS, but I believe Saab knew the BLS would flop, took the money and made the BLS and took the best bits for the 9-3.

I think if GM had not give Saab the money to design and build the BLS, GM would have continued to starve Saab of cash.

Just maybe the Jag/LR brand will flourish despite the inevitable teething problems.

As for Saab – same deal, to me the worst thing is an American company owning a brand they can’t relate to nor understand. As said I’ll wait and see on Tata but the RR and Bentley brands are doing fine in European hands.

Renault is not a nice thought, especially with heavy government intervention, the thought of the Chinese buying out Saab is a nightmare – watch those quality ratings drop below minus… I don’t know the fit, like Swade I wish Audi had somehow got Saab but that won’t happen.

I just can’t see a long-term fit for Saab in GM’s range and the further push for Caddy acceptance in Europe – or even here in Australia shows amazing ignorance on behalf of Detroit.

Here in Australia our home grown Commodores are better built, offer more power and better cred than the aptly named BLS. Let alone Europe…

How many readers of this site would turn to a Caddy if Saab disappeared altogether? Or would you go for the Audi/3-5 Series/Honda etc route? I would.

Somehow Ford hasn’t made a meal of Volvo but I feel GM’s sale is a matter of when not if – and yes agree expanding the line-up could boost company value.

But sell to who? Will GM give up the premium sector in Europe? They’d have to as I can’t see Caddy’s ever cutting it there if they can’t in rough n’ tough Australia.

I really hope Saab is in good hands in a decade but who knows? These are sad days for a Melbourne Footy Club supporter and Saab driver:-(

I don’t like GM’s attitude that Saab should consider it lucky to get Cadillac’s leftovers, but I understand it. Can any of you really imagine GM putting Cadillac before Saab in any part of the world…ever? I doubt it. Hell, if I were the head of GM, I’d want to try and make Cadillac successful first, too, because it’s Cadillac. Sure, they should dump their money into Saab in Europe instead, I know that, but I’m also not going to delude myself into ever thinking it’s going to happen. GM will try this new 3dorado, and if it works out, and Cadillac makes some money, then maybe Saab will get some attention.

But I doubt it.

But even so, it’ll be much more likely to happen if the new Caddy succeeds. If it fails, they’ll probably try again. GM is stubborn like that.

Alex – I’m not going to explain how wrong you are about the history of Cadillac in the US…but you are. I don’t think that GM thinks Cadillac’s name means any more than Saab’s in the global market, but I definitely think that they want it to. Also, I don’t like the idea of Renault buying Saab. I’m worried that the same exact thing will happen: They’ll try to rebadge Renaults as Saabs and sell them for a premium in a desperate attempt to move upmarket. When it doesn’t work (again), they’ll just cannibalize sales from each other.

What we’d likely see is the new buyer continuing to build Saabs on their current platforms for the rest of their projected model lives. A year or two into new ownership you’d probably see the electrical bits, some switchgear and the engine/transmission/ECU equipment switch over to a new in-house engine setup. Look at what happened to the Range Rover when Ford bought LR from BMW, it still had the BMW engine and electronics for a few years while Ford engineered an all-Ford version of the car.

If anything, building up all of this energy and good PR for the brand would be a great way to gear up for unloading it. You have to spend money to make money, and giving Saab a more modern and viable lineup would make it far more appealing to prospective buyers. Right now I doubt Saab is worth $600 million, if that, but with the new 9-5, the 9-4x, and the next-gen 9-3 and the 9-1 on the horizon, I think the company would be worth more like $2-3 billion. So don’t count out a Saab sale, it’s still a distinct possibility as far as I can see.

Saab is now almost completely borg. By 2011 all Saabs will be fully integrated GM products under the skin. Saab is now do or die, it cannot be disconnected from GM except as sale of brand-name only. If that happens then the name buyers would have to go down the same path as GM and reskin some other cars at enormous cost and over many years losing what momentum the Saab name has left.

Factor in Renault’s repeated failed attempts to move upmarket as well as their dedication to edgy, distinctive, “love em or hate em” designs and top-notch FWD cars, and I think they would be a perfect new parent for Saab.

The sheer fact that they created a pseudo-luxury brand based on NIssans and sold it to status-seeking North Americans who care more about number of cup holders and cylinders than fuel economy and ergonomics (not to mention brand history), means nothing to me. (And sorry for over-generalizing, but as a North American I am allowed to).

On topic, I don’t see GM succeeding with Cadillac in Europe, however, a few years ago I would have said the same thing about Chevy, and look at its success now.

I also don’t necessarily see Caddy as being bad for Saab, as long as the latter is not underfunded because of the former. But I do understand and support Swade’s criticism.