Agreed. What good is an advertising campaign if seeing an ad elicits the same response one might have when seeing an animal on the endangered species list?

Run the ads consistenly like the major players in the market. At this point even BFJ would be better than nothing. I digress but not having seen an ad for Saab on any major / minor television stations in the U.S. NE regional market in over 8 months…not one…tells the story: Nobody Cares.

I live in the #1 TV market in the US – and I haven’t seen a single Saab commercial on TV on any of the national or regional networks.

Around here, Ford has been slamming every channel w/ commercials featuring Derek Jeter. I’m sure they’re not national commercials. Perhaps the tri-state Saab dealers (dealer?) could get together and do some of their own marketing like the other brands have done.

-JF

Her requirements were simple:

1. Hatchback. No saloons, no estates.
2. Space for kids.
3. Reliability.

In the end it was a toss-up between an Audi A3 or a Honda Civic and what sold those cars was the interior styling.

The Honda was more practical so that’s where the cash went.

If Saab brought back the hatch and stopped the interiors looking so cheap (the ’08 9-5 interior looks poor commpared to a ’00 9-5) there’s a whole market out there that would stop ignoring them.

Saab can’t compete with Ford, they CAN against Audi.

* HATCHBACKS
* INTERIOR
* DESIGN

And a good kicking for some of the (UK) dealers wouldn’t go amiss either.

It will be OK if the 9-5 isn’t all the way there, but they really need to hit it out of the ballpark with the next 9-3 the way Audi did with the original A4 or Infiniti did with the G35.

The car needs to take everything that Saab is known and loved for offering, and kick it up to the next level in a package with some serious appeal to non-Saab buyers.

So here are some points I’d like to see:

First off, bring back the hatch. It’s as simple as that. Offer 3 and 5-door hatches along with a 5-door wagon and the convertible and suddenly Saab is competing in a segment that’s all it’s own again.

Second off, downsize the engines. Saab is known for their turbo 4′s, and forced-induction 4-cylinder engines (gas or diesel) should be the only powertrain offerings. GM (or whoever Saab’s new owner is) needs to give Saab full access to the parts bin for these engines, and direct injection and hybrid drivetrains are a must. Offer a range of turbo 4′s from a ~150hp 1.6 liter engine for the European market and the hybrids up to a 2.3 liter, ~300-320 hp engine for the 9-3 Aero XWD. Compared to the 6′s in Audi’s, BMW’s, Merc’s, and Infinitis, this would make a huge statement about the kind of environmentally responsible performance that Saab stands for.

Thirdly, Saab needs to bone up on the handling and interior quality of their cars. The Turbo X and the 9-3 2.0T Aero both handle very well, but they need to have the road feel of cars in their performance class. The same goes with the interiors, the 9-3SS has a great interior design, they just need to work on the materials and details in a big, big, way. But back to handling, there was a day when Saab built the best-handling FWD cars on the market, and Saab should try to reclaim that crown with a lightweight, turbo-4 powered car. The 9-3 Aero 2.0T seems like a giant leap in that direction and I’m ecstatic that Saab has decided to return to their roots with a car like that. Give it the dynamics of the first TSX and they’re golden.

Finally, Saab needs to incorporate all of this in a stylish, individualistic package that brings to mind the 99, C900, and even the NG900 and early 9-5′s. It needs to look stunning in that “there’s no way that’s anything but a Saab” kind of way that the old cars were. You’d be amazed at just how far good looks can get a car.

So there you have my theory on how Saab can get it’s mojo back. Forget the NG9-5, forget the 9-1, Saab needs to build the best 9-3 it’s made since the C900.

Hell, if Saab wants to REALLY drive home the point that they’re making the kind of iconic cars that they used to, they should scrap the 9-3 name altogether and call the new car the 900. Saab was always different, and something as simple as going back to the quirky old number system would really do alot to drive that point home. Instead of 9-1, 9-3, and 9-5, how do you like the sound of 90, 900, and 9000?

Anyway back to Saab, the new 9-5 is probably over 16 inches longer than the 9-3 which is double the current size differential.

I spoke to a Saab dealer the other day. He said unofficially that nobody he knew would even take an each way bet that the 9-1 would ever get built. That’s pretty sad.

I was just giving you a hard time for my mention of it, I wasn’t serious. IIRC, the only reason I brought-up 9-2 in the first place is because there was word there would be no car called the “9-1″. I think since then we learned the concept was named (and I still think this was stupid) the “9-X BioHybrid”.

Sorry I didn’t mean to blame you about anything, it’s just that you mentioned the 9-2 back here. Various people have mentioned the 9-2 since and it seems to have evolved into a straight hatchback derivative of the next 9-3, but as I said it was Robert Collin who probably first mentioned it in that Swedish newspaper. He can take the blame!

I guess he’ll comment now!

Marcac: you mean to tell me that the 9-1 will only be about an inch shorter than the 9-3? What’s the point in that? Oh, and nice blaming me for mentioning the 9-2. I’m only repeating that there was some speculation that Saab wouldn’t call their smaller car “9-1″.