36 responses so far ↓

• 1 Snotfjold // Oct 29, 2008 at 11:27 pm

  Very good summary Swade. It will be quite interesting to see how the Saab dealer body deals with a blow such as you descibe it. Will they weather it or will many of them get out or go out of business? Maybe a year from now Saab has cars to sell be no outlets. These dealers have been promised new cars for ages and on the eve of a new era for Saab they get the proverbial rug pulled out from under them.

  Let’s hope for the best though, reasonable delays can be managed without to much loss (of life)

• 2 van god los // Oct 29, 2008 at 11:43 pm

  Personally, I never understood why Saab invested in a 9-3x. Investing in a new model that will be build on a platform that will be abandonned within a few years and based on a model that will/should be replaced within a few years, never made any sense to me.

  Maybe GM thought about it as easy money : “let’s just jump on the cross over train without to much expenses”. I think that even those resources were better used for the 9-5 or 9-4x (or NG 9-3, or 9-1, or …).

  In my opinion, there are way too much similarities between the 9-3x and the Rover 25 streetwise. You know, the small hatchback rover with some plastic thrown on to make it look “dangerous” and “adventurous”.

  The 25 streetwise was the last new model rover introduced … before they went bankrupt.

  Introducing an existing model with a bit of plastic on as a “new” model, seems to be typical for motor companys on the edge of bankruptcy : “Well, We don’t have any more money to make real new model so let’s just throw some plastic on an existing one.”

  In my opinion, cancelling the 9-3x would be a good decision. The money spent on the 9-3x should be spent in the 9-5 (or 9-4x, 9-3, 9-1, …).

• 3 bleuler // Oct 30, 2008 at 12:26 am

  GM , If you see this, PLEASE sell Saab!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• 4 Alex // Oct 30, 2008 at 12:41 am

  I think the Saab dealers’s situation can be summed up by the fact that I saw one of those yellow special edition 9-3 convertibles decked out as a courtesy loaner yesterday.

• 5 1985 Gripen // Oct 30, 2008 at 1:05 am

  Let me get this straight. A failing automaker who’s rumored to be headed for bankruptcy is asking me, “Joe Taxpayer” to borrow $10,000,000,000.00 (though I’m already $10,531,290,954,975.37 in debt myself) so that they can turn around and purchase another failing automaker? Yeah, that sounds reasonable…

  Then Cerberus plans to use the stake they acquire in GMAC (presumably using my $10,000,000,000.00 which GM borrowed from me to trade to Cerberus for their failed auto maker to purchase it) to make a claim that they’re a bank and stake a claim of a share of the $700,000,000,000.00 I already loaned (and as a result further pushed me into the red) to various banking institutions to keep them from financial ruin at their own hands (by making business decisions even the layman could see were STUPID).

  THEN the federal government (read: “Joe Taxpayer” again…) will go around and buy up questionable car loans from people who purchased beyond their means. I’m bailing-out both the lender and the borrower. Whoopee! Do I at least get a free new Saab for this?

  This is the kind of thinking on the part of GM’s management that got them to where they are. How have these guys kept their jobs and their multi-million dollar compensation packages? “Good ole boys’ club…” Must be nice work if you can get it…

• 6 1985 Gripen // Oct 30, 2008 at 1:47 am

  It’s unfortunate as I’m sure the Saab Festival is a tourist boon for the Trollhattan area and its businesses. As much as it costs to put on I’m sure the local economy benefits greatly from it. Hotels are filled, restaurants are filled, gas stations are pumping gas like mad. It’s almost as if rather than cancel the Saab Festival (if that’s even in the plans) it’d be better if Trollhattan’s business council put it on themselves, perhaps in a scaled-down form.

  As for the news of all of this stuff being delayed, it makes me roll my eyes wondering what three months to a year will buy GM, really just delaying the inevitable, but the losses they’re going to take are going to be greater than what they save, IMHO.

  Say the 9-5 and 9-4X are both delayed by three months to a year. What does Saab sell for those three months to a year? Do they sell the 2009 9-5 until stocks run out? Do dealers only sell the aging 9-3 in 2010?

  I’m not bothered by the prospect of a cancellation of another 9-3 refresh. How successful was the last one? I mean, an argument can be made that the economy is tanking, yadda…yadda…yadda… But the fact is the 9-3 sales began declining at the end of the 2007 model-year and with the introduction of the “new” 2008 9-3 continued tanking. This was before the credit crunch and resulting economic meltdown. I believe the 9-3 refresh just didn’t strike a chord with consumers. It didn’t make the vehicle any more attractive to conquest sales. Yet another refresh won’t help either.

  The 9-3X cancellation is just stupid. This vehicle should have been at dealerships right now. It’s really not much more than a 9-3 SportCombi w/XWD with a jacked-up suspension and some plastic cladding bits. It’s almost a freebie “new model”. If they’re going to delay the 9-5 and/or 9-4X it’d make total sense to release the 9-3X if not just to give the dealers something to sell in the short-term.

  What is the incentive of Saab dealers to continue selling Saabs?

  I don’t want to read too much into it, but my local Saab/Cadillac/Subaru dealer just dumped HUMMER, just took-on a Subaru franchise, and laid-off all but one Saab salesperson. The Saab building has a paper note on the door stating that the Saab showroom has temporarily been located to the Cadillac building. Over in the Cadillac building they have a few Saabs on the showroom floor alongside Cadillacs. This is the first time I’ve seen this since the dealer built Saab its own building and showroom on the property. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that maybe CASA Automotive Group plans to send Saab the way of HUMMER and move Subaru from the existing off-site dealership into the Saab building. After all, in the month of September this dealer sold only FOUR Saabs.

  This would be a telling sign as the Chairman of the Saab National Dealers’ Council works out of this dealership.

• 7 1985 Gripen // Oct 30, 2008 at 1:52 am

  Sorry, I’m doing it again, but to add to my last comment:

  To add further credence to my conspiracy theory last month when shopping for the CPO 2005 9-5 Arc SportWagon we ultimately bought from them my Saab dealer tried to sell me a “low mileage” 2008 9-3 sedan which was previously used as a dealer “courtesy car”. I see from a print ad they subsequently mailed me that they’re selling all three of their 9-3 courtesy cars for under $20K each. They are now exclusively using their Cadillac SRXs as courtesy cars. Sounds to me like they’re slowly dumping all Saab evidence. I’m sure it’d go more quickly if they could sell more Saabs. At under $20K for a 2008 9-3 sedan, I’m surprised they they have to actively advertise.

• 8 Alex // Oct 30, 2008 at 3:59 am

  Well that’s where GM has taken Saab, to a point where their premier product is so thoroughly unappealing to the average premium sports sedan buyer that even at less than $20k, they still need to advertise to get the damned things off the lots.

  Oh well, it was nice hoping to buy a new Saab in a few years, I guess I’ll be looking for a CPO 2010 S4 instead. It actually has an interior worthy of it’s $45k+ pricetag, and it’s supposed to have have a turbo V6 that will make ~330+ hp instead of 280, with direct injection to boot! I could even stick a griffin badge on the steering wheel and pretend it’s the car that the Turbo X should have been. With that wraparound driver-focused dash, if I squint really hard I might even believe it!

• 9 Adam // Oct 30, 2008 at 5:29 am

  To me, the bottom line is Saab was already too small within the GM empire to get any attention, and looking at the numbers above they’ll be further marginalized when it comes to management attention. They’ve just never been big enough to be worth investing in or divesting.

  I’d still like to see GM unload Saab to join/compliment BMW-mini or even Toyota-Subaru.

• 10 Markac // Oct 30, 2008 at 8:45 am

  The GM/Chrysler merger will allow/necessitate GM to retire some brands. It’s almost certain most of Chrysler’s will go, but also some of GM’s too I think. Unfortunately this might even include Saab. I’m sure most of us would rather Saab be sold off than “retired” like Oldsmobile was, but it all depends onthe ultimate direction than a new reformed GM is to take. If selling Saab brings in more money than retiring it, I’m sure that’s what they’ll do.

  I still see the scenario I mentioned some time ago with the new 9-5 being used as an instrument to sell Saab like the Ford/Jaguar XM deal, as a possibility. The factory in Trollhattan would be sold, but as to GM selling off Saab R&D in Germany, that’s a complicated one. I think GM will probably try to retain that although it wouldn’t be Saab anymore.

  Delaying Saab’s model releases will only do even more damage to the brand.

  Surely the current 9-5 can’t soldier on much longer?

  The 9-3 crossover should already be out. Delay it any longer and it might as well be cancelled.

  The SUV market is shrinking so a delayed 9-4x will have an even smaller market share.

  A new 9-3 can’t come soon enough. I don’t think the 9-3 SS could ever survive as long as the 9-5 has managed to.

  As to the 9-1? I think this depends largely on the arrival of the next Opel/Vauxhall Corsa. If that car is delayed significantly, so will any chance of a Saab 9-1 being manufactured.

  As I keep saying, Saab need a new landlord. It’s time to move house. Better that than the brand and the marque becomming just a memory.

• 11 PT // Oct 30, 2008 at 10:33 am

  Lets face it, nothing is going to happen for a long time. Nothing. Sales will reduce to a trickle..Perhaps Saab could at least use this as an opportunity to consolidate their dealer base (seeing as many dealers will be looking to more profitable and active marques to keep their business afloat). ……….

  ………………and head more towards a chain of concept-store-like sales hubs. These should be owned by GM ( or Renault…..) and run like Apple/BMW/Billabong/Ikea concept stores. No other brands, ALL stock & accessories available – and possible share some costs/floor space with Salomon who have a huge range to choose from. Kind of an active lifestyle centre that also sells cars. Just a thought.

• 12 zippy // Oct 30, 2008 at 2:08 pm

  I’m sad!

• 13 SaabKen // Oct 30, 2008 at 5:06 pm

  Zippy – maybe as an interim cure to your sadness, go down to the new Dueck GM dealership on Featherstone Way (SE corner of Steveston Hwy & #5 Road). Ask for “da man” Bill Convery. Tell him I sent you. Tell Mr. Convery you want to try out the new Turbo X. Before you know it, you’ll be in the driver’s seat with him next to you telling you all kinds of amusing stories (Saab or otherwise). But you may not be able to pay much attention to him as you begin to grow a smile 10″ wide from ear to ear while piloting what feels (correction: what IS) the absolute best Saab that SAAB has ever made to date.

  http://www.dueckgm.com/lansdowne/new-vehicle-showroom.php

• 14 Nigel // Oct 30, 2008 at 6:02 pm

  Any further delay in the launch of the 9-5 could kill the brand !! When does the requiem begin…?

• 15 van god los // Oct 30, 2008 at 8:03 pm

  I just read that the american production of the chevrolet cruze – the korean production of the daewoo cruze has just started if I’m not mistaken – is delayed untill 2010 (!) as GM doesn’t have the funds to buy the production machines.

  So if the cruze (the most important new model for gm) is already delayed untill 2010, I don’t even want to know when they’re are planning to take the 9-5 in production (let alone the NG 9-3 or the 9-4x)

• 16 van god los // Oct 30, 2008 at 8:05 pm

  edith, i just checked the article again : the cruze can be ordered in korea now, the american production is likely to be delayed untill 2011 !!!

• 17 detroitsaab93 // Oct 30, 2008 at 11:30 pm

  “To add further credence to my conspiracy theory last month when shopping for the CPO 2005 9-5 Arc SportWagon we ultimately bought from them my Saab dealer tried to sell me a “low mileage” 2008 9-3 sedan which was previously used as a dealer “courtesy car”. I see from a print ad they subsequently mailed me that they’re selling all three of their 9-3 courtesy cars for under $20K each. They are now exclusively using their Cadillac SRXs as courtesy cars.”

  My local Saab dealer (Saab of Troy/Lakeside) recently sold off their 9-3 courtesy cars as well. They are now using 9-7x’s. I asked for a 9-3, but they told me that Saab made them sell them.

• 18 Paul Guinnessy // Oct 31, 2008 at 12:22 am

  I still think that GM doesn’t want Chrysler. Instead Chrysler’s owners are playing hardball with GM to gain the rest of the GMAC stake, which is a business they understand. Look at the track record. They go to GM and offer to offload Chrysler for the 49 percent stake. GM says no thanks and suddenly GMAC is making it difficult for most of GM’s customers to get loans (the spat gets so bad that GM starts offering money to its dealers NOT to use GMAC for loans).

  Couple of weeks later GM is saying sure we’ll love to have Chrysler. I think they are making it appear that they want Chrysler simply for pride. They can’t admit that the world’s largest car company is in the grasp of another outfit by the short and curlies over car loans. Plus I think they are gambling that the total debt GMAC has on its books will not equal the amount of money they would have to spend on shutting most of Chrysler down over the next few months. Particularly if the Feds given them a stack of bills to do so. That’s the real story behind these moves.

  Three months from now you’ll see GM re-activating all these programs back to their original schedule. Claiming that everything is suspended is just another way of applying pressure to the feds to get the money.

• 19 Billy // Oct 31, 2008 at 1:51 am

  I think the problem lies in the fact that GM is using too much SAAB technology in the saturn sky and cobalt cars, I think they are using veriants of the 2.0 turbo SAAB engines? Maybe I am wrong…….Also SAAB will never truly go away, SAAB Aerospace has the market in europe and several more contracts to go into effect soon. I think SAAB should sell back to Sweden and if customers want to buy a true well built SAAB that we have all come to know and love, then keep it that way…… no more mass produced garbage. I remember in the 80’s it was difficult to buy a SAAB because SAAB wanted it that way, and they owned the market and produced an independent product that people loved. SAAB needs to get back to its roots! I think what happened though is SAAB sold its soul to GM and because GM is using SAAB technology they are in a binding contract with GM……Think about it, GM is using SAAB technology. I would not mind if BMW took over but I still see they same thing happening in SAABs future, SAAB needs to become completely independent or go away and let us remember what and how this great brand and history has just slipped away. GM, please sell SAAB!

• 20 Nate 9-3 // Oct 31, 2008 at 2:00 am

  Life without SAAB is a sad prospect, indeed.

• 21 Saaboy // Oct 31, 2008 at 7:34 am

  MY local SAAB dealership. Carter SAAB, got rid of SAAB and are moving in their off site Subaru stuff in…

• 22 ambushdee 9-3 // Oct 31, 2008 at 7:52 am

  I have been driving various Saabs for the past 25 years and find it very sad that GM has taken a great car and turned it into a bucket of c$aP. If my 2003 9-3 is any indication of what GM is going to do to the line in the future I am through with it. OBTW my 1997 900S 2.3L is running strong at 99k miles, If they’d bring back that quality again I’d be in heaven.

• 23 Troll96 // Oct 31, 2008 at 8:33 am

  If Saab is really in danger, perhaps GM could sell it to the Russians. The St. Petersburg area has already attracted several auto manufacturing plants while Kaliningrad offers lots of tax advantages. Either would offer easy access to traditional European markets while also making possible deliveries to Asian markets by rail. The Russian car market has been booming and Saab would have an opportunity to establish life-long relationships with millions of first-time Russian buyers. On their end, Russia would have an instant “prestige” auto to market worldwide, with better margins because of cheaper labor costs. Northwestern Russia can rightly lay claim to a slice of Scandinavian history and culture to boot. I can see it now… MIGs, vodka and Saab, a potent combination!!!

• 24 PT // Oct 31, 2008 at 10:49 am

  Troll96 – I think you managed to identify the one thing that is worse than the current situation.

• 25 Markac // Oct 31, 2008 at 11:04 am

  I think it all comes down to economics. If GM thinks that by selling Saab it can make a few dollars more than retiring the brand, that is what it’ll do. There surely won’t be any emotion, it’ll be purely a business decision. Let’s just hope that if things go that way financially, that selling Saab is the better option?

• 26 b-rg // Oct 31, 2008 at 8:27 pm

  One comment about Saab9-3 X . It should come with BioPower engine : thus is crucial for Saab’s integrity . It wll be the first really flex-fuel crossover at least in Europe . Do not kill it !

• 27 riku1100s // Nov 1, 2008 at 12:18 am

  My 2c’s worth of advice: Buy a new Saab, while you can !

• 28 JBG // Nov 1, 2008 at 3:23 am

  ambushdee 9-3:
  I also owned a 2003 9-3, and it was a bucket of junk – electrics never worked, crap suspension, squeaks and rattles, in the shop every 3 months (really). I now own an 08 9-3, with 14k miles, and it is heads and tails a better car with no problems. the 03-04 years for the 9-3 was a notoriously bad line. your 03 9-3 is not indicative of what GM has done to Saab – at least in terms of quality/reliability. That said, I feel your pain…

• 29 JBG // Nov 1, 2008 at 3:24 am

  All:
  Saab has a global distribution and brand recognition – that has to be worth something to someone. And, what does GM have to gain by retiring the brand? It stops the hemorrhaging, but so does selling – and selling (even if it is less than GM thinks it is worth) helps their balance sheet. And cash is what GM needs.

  Is there another company out there that would be WORSE for Saab than (an insolvent) GM? I think most of us agree that SAAB has an exciting lineup coming out, but it seems that GMs financial situation is such that they cannot put out the new models in a timely fashion. Anyone who has the cash to buy SAAB, would also (likely) have the cash to implement the 9-4x, 9-5, ASAP. I say that the best thing for SAAB is for GM to suddenly have some cash on hand to get out those new models (unlikely), or for GM to sell SAAB to someone (really, anyone) who will put that cash into the brand.

• 30 Theresa // Nov 1, 2008 at 6:17 am

  I work at a Saab/Lotus exclusive dealer here in North Olmsted OH and we are having a great month – thanks to the trunk load of rebates.. up to 9500 in some cases… as for GM having its claws in Saab, I agree with most Saabies and we really need to put something fresh and new out there! Anything Please! I will, however, praise the ending of a long and painful SUV line but when will the 9-4x make its production appearance? Not to mention it takes Saab like 100 years before they put out anything “advanced” – i understand wanting to get the new right, but seriously in today’s European competative market, there has to be more advance for Saab or they will continue to be plagued with “gincy” interiors and “nothing new about” appearance with people who cannot push themselves to pay the price-tag. Dont get me wrong, I truly love the brand and do feel fortunate that I can sell a product that I don’t have to convince myself is a great value and I would take a Turbo X over a C300 anyday, but something has to happen and i only hope for the best – or my career is in jeopardy…

• 31 Chris // Nov 2, 2008 at 2:16 am

  Here in Seattle, a long time Saab dealer just decided to give up the brand in September in order to become a Subaru dealer. Now the only Saab dealer within 100 miles of Seattle is in Fife, WA which is 30 miles south of Seattle.

  I had just ordered a new 9-3 Aero XWD to replace my 2004 9-3 Aero prior to hearing about this and, frankly, I tried to see if I could cancel the order after I learned about the dealer closing in Seattle; I’m not crazy about driving 60 miles round trip for warranty work and the free scheduled maintenance for the first 3 years.

  The interesting thing is that the Seattle dealer had worked out an agreement with GM to honor new warranties for 2 years or until GM established a new dealer in Seattle, but GM decided to back out of this agreement prior to the deal closing. I think this is a bad decision, but then again, the dealer in Fife will want Saab owners to get in the habit of coming to them and probably feels that people will get used to it.

  I doubt that I’ll be one of those that will get used to it and if I don’t, I won’t order another one when this lease runs out (it is a company car).

  I don’t know where Saab sells most of its cars in the US, but I have to believe that the Seattle area had to be one of the better areas for them. If true, it says a lot that they can’t support two dealers in the Seattle/Tacoma area.

• 32 Troll719 // Nov 2, 2008 at 3:11 am

  I am the lucky recipient of a defective Saab on the west coast of Canada , our Saab dealer was taken over by a big group and they don’t even know the pressures to put in the tires, let alone sales departments that just don’t get it

  After all the issues I have had with the car , I would suggest Saab is not going to last and GM should cut and run.

  This economy will have no tolerance of high priced cars with shoddy workmanship , do your self a favor buy a Mercedes or Audi if you want a high end car

  I hope we as owners are left with some support after this all shakes out

• 33 Michael // Nov 2, 2008 at 6:46 am

  @Troll96: (North)westrussia is almost Scandinavian, even “elks” are living in these forests. But it was Eastern Germany just a couple of decades ago… Thus, we can put it as we want and move Opel and Schnaps to Königsberg (now Калининград). I heared, even the Swedes hold a claim on St.Peterburg not long ago. Absolut! So, right, let´s built Saab there. Anyway.

  I do not know that is going on in GM´s HQ but I think the current “crisis” is a chance for Saab. Saab never became “premium” as Bmw or Audi did. These German “premium” brand just stumbled upon the “crisis”. They are in big trouble now and the whole “premium” approach is jeopardised.

  Saab should focus on well made “honest” and reasonably priced cars built and sold in quantities:

  9-1 micro against Toyota iQ, DB Smart,

  9-2 compact against, well, compact cars like Honda Civic, Audi A3,

  9-3 well, we all now,

  9-5 you name it!

  Anything else?

  Oh yes, the “insecurity” mom´s (and dad´s) cars: 9-4 and (9-7)

• 34 carl // Nov 6, 2008 at 9:25 am

  http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081105/BIZ/811050463/1361

• 35 ubermich // Nov 7, 2008 at 8:32 am

  http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081106/jobs_automakers.html

• 36 ubermich // Nov 7, 2008 at 8:52 am

  I guess I have time to elaborate.

  This is important. GM was probably already looking at some job cuts, mostly white-collar as mentioned in the article above. Now, however, they know they are going to be faced with increasing corporate taxes as well as mandatory benefits for employees. So while they’re trying to cut 401k matching now, they’ll be forced to later. There will probably be mandatory guidelines of healthcare for employees as well.
  What does that mean for ALL workers at GM blue, white or other? GM can’t afford them. Watch for GM to go with alternative labor sources IE: temporary workers. Look for more work through temp agencies and less through the unions and permanent employees.
  Also watch for nearly every other American business to use the same model if these retirement plans and healthcare models do make it to fruition.

  The good news, the silver lining, is that this may actually be a good thing for GM. This may be where GM realizes where their bean counters have been missing zeros. The massive cutbacks in employees may show GM that they can operate with significantly less overhead with the same number of workers (see: not employees).

  I know it sounds weird, but just watch what happens to all American businesses (not just automotive) as each new law is passed.