26 responses so far ↓

• 1 The Fop // Jan 9, 2009 at 10:35 pm

  “Has there ever been a clearer example of why Saab need a safe pair of Swedish hands at the tiller?”

  Let’s see.
  The MD is Jan-Ake Jonsson
  Head of Marketing? Knut Simonsson
  Powertrain? Kjell Ac Bergstroem
  Finance? Lars Haegerborg

  I am sure there are plenty more at the top. I cannot say for sure if these folks are Swedish becuase I don’t know, but those names don’t sound like they come from Detroit to me… and that is just how I think it should be.

• 2 Swade // Jan 9, 2009 at 10:41 pm

  Yeah, and everything they do is subject to veto or rules set buy Rick Wagoner, Bob Lutz and Fritz Henderson - none of whom are Swedish or have Saab’s best interests at the top of their lists.

  The point of the post - Saab need some independence to make the cars they really need to make. Whether GM or someone else ends up controlling the purse strings, Saab need to regain some autonomy.

• 3 ctm // Jan 9, 2009 at 10:57 pm

  Swade: “…just about everything from Europe is regarded as premium here in Australia.”

  It easy to forget this when one lives in Europe. I can’t say I ever heard anyone think of non-European car as premium just because they were non-European. Call it snobbery, ignorance, or whatever… This is just how it is. So I fully understand that fact that Saab is considered premium or exclusive in some places. However, Saab roots and heritage is in Sweden and I’m pretty sure that the people who designed and engineered all those Saabs over the decades never thought about creating something premium. They were thinking outside the box, doing what they thought was best.

  Someone also mentioned that Saabs have been relatively expensive cars. I guess most of that really can be explained on currency situations over the time and Sweden as a high-cost country. I don’t think they actually priced Saabs this way just to get a premium feel. Out of curiosity, I checked the prices here in Sweden on a Subaru Legacy. Base model with no extra start at SEK 240,000, with a bigger engine and/or some equipment easily pushes the price towards and beyond SEK 300,000. Those prices are generally higher than those of a Saab 9-3, but I never hear anyone say that Subaru is a premium car. Sure, there are some extra gadgets you get with the Subaru, but it is Japanese and Japanese cars are generally considered cheaper and more reliable - but definitely not premium. I guess people pony up the dough because they get something that stands out and have some trademark technologies (Boxer engines and AWD).

• 4 michael900 // Jan 9, 2009 at 11:00 pm

  …. and bring back the 2 door coupe/hatch while they’re at it.

  Why has Saab stopped building these just when Audi, Volvo, BMW, Mercedes etc have introduced these models?

  …. end rant.

• 5 Markac // Jan 9, 2009 at 11:10 pm

  I think it’s GM that wanted Saab to be “premium”. But that’s only because they can’t get their head around different! Trying to get GM to think outside the square is impossible because they are just plain square!

  Swade: “…just about everything from Europe is regarded as premium here in Australia.” Funny, I never thought of a Holden Astra as premium, but I guess some people do?

  I never really thought of the C900 as premium, although you certainly had to pay a premium for an Aero!

• 6 Arnold // Jan 9, 2009 at 11:33 pm

  Saab never started out as “premium”, but as “intelligent” design. It so happens that that is what makes Saab a ‘premium’ car. When the alternatives are either appliances, or juvenile rockets, practical intelligence is a premium.

  I never regarded any of my machines as luxury so much as quality cars.

• 7 Per // Jan 9, 2009 at 11:44 pm

  I couldn`t agree more on the Sabbish vs. premium thought.

• 8 saabista63 // Jan 10, 2009 at 12:58 am

  I’m afraid to say that this premium thing is all about the money. It’s easier to make money with premium cars - at least if you do your marketing by the book.
  In fact, GM has been following that premium stategy for years now - and look how far it took them!
  In the end, it’s true what they say: You can’t fool all the people all the time.
  But as it seems, we’ll have some more of the attempt to market to people who don’t care - because they want German premium - and to fool those who are or might be really interested - but don’t want to pay German premium price tags.
  As it seems, GM have read their Paul Watzlawick very well - they just didn’t really get him!

  Yours

  saabista 63

• 9 Bernard // Jan 10, 2009 at 1:09 am

  I think that “premium” just means “more expensive than Toyota” here in North America.
  It used to mean “more expensive than Chevy,” but Toyota is now the benchmark.

  Premium also used to indicate that power windows, door locks and air conditioning came as standard equipment, but that’s true of almost all cars now.

  The hierarchy would be:
  economy
  mainstream
  premium
  luxury
  exotic

  I don’t mind Saab being premium by that definition.

• 10 Martin // Jan 10, 2009 at 1:55 am

  Excellent post. I can’t stand the word premium when related to cars. If I’m going to pay more for an everyday car I don’t want “premium feeling” plastics like an Audi. I’ll pay for excellent design features and turbocharged powerful yet efficient engines. I want actual value not perceived value. Well thought out design is value to me, a soft dashboard isn’t.

  There seems to be an obsession here in Europe with this premium feeling car thing.

• 11 Adam // Jan 10, 2009 at 2:02 am

  When I was in Sweden I saw Saabs with roll windows.

  I totally agree that intelligent design is more important than premium. But for example I also don’t think heated, comfotable seats should be considered a premium feature. That’s just well-designed.

• 12 sam // Jan 10, 2009 at 2:59 am

  I always assumed that GM decided to position Saab as “premium” because they wanted something to compete against BMW. Audi, and so on. It was a way to position Saab in the brand lineup. Personally, I don’t see the need to do that, but, then I am not the one making the decisions.

  Another reason for Saab being considered “premium” is that for the last couple of decades, the cost of European cars in the US has been more than the domestic brands or Oriental brands. If you can’t compete on price, then going premium is a way to escape the lower-cost competition. That is why the Detroit brands went so heavily into trucks and SUVs. They couldn’t compete against the Japanese and Koreans in small sedans because Detroit’s costs were higher, so they went to more large trucks that they could price at a premium.

• 13 Mats // Jan 10, 2009 at 4:06 am

  A car company cant decide to build a “premium car” Premium is something that a whole brand is evolved into or down from. 20 years ago there wasn’t any talk about BMW and Audi being premium, Mercedes perhaps but I dont think that word was used. BMW and Audi have step by step built their cars and brand to get there, it’s not done overnight or with just one car modell (or two for that matter) Right now VW is a heck of a lot closer to being close to considered premium than Saab ever has been. Saab have to few models, almost always a step or two behind in technical gadgetry. GM needs Saab to first needs to catch up with VW before going for the bigger fish. Personally I dont think they should aim higher. At least not untill they break the 250.000 yearly sales limit.
  …and I hope they do.

• 14 Kurt W. Krauss // Jan 10, 2009 at 4:37 am

  How do you explain the new Mini being introduced as a premium sole model?

• 15 Bill P // Jan 10, 2009 at 4:37 am

  Got it in One CTM

• 16 Kroum // Jan 10, 2009 at 4:37 am

  I think this Saab 99 ad posted by Swade awhile back basically explains where Saab positioned itself long before GM even entered the picture:

  http://www.trollhattansaab.net/wp-content/76saab99coupe.jpg

  An Audi, Volvo, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Peugeot all in one. How Swedes, Americans or Aussies choose to label it is a completely different story.

• 17 Kroum // Jan 10, 2009 at 4:42 am

  I think this Saab 99 ad posted by Swade awhile back basically explains where Saab positioned itself long before GM even entered the picture:

  trollhattansaab.net/wp-content/76saab99coupe.jpg

  An Audi, Volvo, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Peugeot all in one. How Swedes, Americans or Aussies choose to label it is a completely different story.

• 18 Karen // Jan 10, 2009 at 5:29 am

  add to ctm’s EXCELLENT list of attributes (just say YES to center ignition key which always annoyed the auto critics): the turning radius.

  I agree with all who say GM tried to make Saab a luxury brand to compete with BMW, Audi, even Mercedes, but remember that started before GM with the 9000. yes, the currency hurt, but it hurts all European imports to U.S. equally unless the parent company knows how to hedge currencies.

  I bought my 1976 99GL because I wanted front wheel drive and only Saab and Fiat(?) had it at the time. I remember looking at the comparably priced back then BMW 2002, but felt uncomfortable in the driver seat, and no leg room in the back. I have very long legs, comparable to a man who is 6′4″.

  It was never about snobbishness, always about safety, especially in winter; and that turning radius, that kept me buying Saab. and being so much fun to drive, responsiveness of which is actually related to safety.

• 19 Troll96 // Jan 10, 2009 at 6:01 am

  How refreshing to hear folks extol the virtues of Saab w/o always having to make the usual comparisons with fancy, more expensive cars. “Standard platforms…decent details….timeless design” all sound good enough for me.

• 20 bjorn n // Jan 10, 2009 at 6:40 am

  I have a lot of SAAB history myself and I can only agree with ctm. However, I would say that the difference in consumer perception is not Europe versus US, I think it is Sweden versus other countries. When i moved abroad twenty years ago I was very surprised that for example in the UK and Ireland when you mentioned SAAB everybody perceived it as “premium” and consequently “expensive”. In Sweden it was different, here a SAAB was “different”, “good and safe in all wheather conditions”, “new thinking, “inventing”, “not volvo” etc.

  If I take the current 9-3 and 9-5 it has nothing of that. Although I drive a new SAAB 9-3 and think it is extremely good I can understand that if a buyer wants a premium car he will chose a German car. This is their niche. It does not matter if other cars are better, more reliable etc. When it comes to the general consumer the Germans own the “premium” category, it is their niche. For SAAB to sell they need to come up with something “different”. It can be in the engine department or the packaging but it has to be something. I think the current prototypes are very promising. Although I fear that they will water them down before production, if they come to that stage.

• 21 Mats // Jan 10, 2009 at 4:42 pm

  Swade will probably kill me for this but I think the add in this link is one of the best ever made for a Swedish car, even though it’s not a Saab. http://www.x40nordic.com/Members/14/Diverse/740_reklam.jpg

  Somehow this represents so well the “Swedishness” that I think both Saab and the V-brand has lost alot of the last 15 years.

  Also someone mentioned Sweden as a high cost country, in a way yes but compared to Germany we’re a low cost country. Had I as an automotive engineer with 10 years of experience, worked in germany my salary would be about 1,5-2 times higher.

• 22 TRBXWD // Jan 10, 2009 at 5:33 pm

  Good comments all around, l will also add that Saab has a unique situation not shared by all car ‘brands’ l may be stretching this but Saab must have one of the most loyal owner groups internationally and also possibly one of the largest fleet of older cars still on the road, this also is differentiating Saab as a brand to a “marque ” where people hold there cars lesser for financial value but actually the desire to keep it because they actually enjoy owning it and resist the need to constantly upgrade. From my contacts around the international Saab car club community many of the clubs car owners have and prefer the older Saab’s, in Australia this would certainly be the case .
  Hence there are a lot of Saab owners but not as many new Saab owners, l don’t think Saab can be blamed for this as they would expect to ” churn ” the market with replacements as do most car manufacturers in fact it they probably have to work twice as hard for repeat new car buyers it would be interesting to find out from your readers the age of their Saabs in a poll and how many have actually ever bought a new Saab? Finally premium cars tends to have a short life, it will be replaced by the next “fantastic ” model and the marketing that virtually states that you need to upgrade now , or your life will never be the same , your kids and pets will hate you and your wife will never talk to you again and your mother in law will then know that her daughter has married a real loser, Saab owners don’t have any of this grief

• 23 fuzzi // Jan 10, 2009 at 7:34 pm

  here in Luxembourg/Europe people consider following brands “premium”:
  MERCEDES
  BMW
  AUDI
  VOLVO
  LEXUS
  JAGUAR
  SAAB only the convertible
  the other SAAB’s with restrictions only

• 24 PT // Jan 10, 2009 at 9:25 pm

  Interesting topic. CAR magazine often take up the “premium” discussion - lately mostly to do with the new Insignia and Mondeo, which they seem to think re-define premium. Whatever that is. These both seem to be excellent cars BTW. As is the new Citroen C5. Saw the new estate yesterday. Very sharp.

  I’ve personally always thought of Saab ( and often Volvo) as being like Apple. They are just different and somehow more intelligent, more focussed on the human experience. I don’t know if premium is the right word for it really.

  Whats at the heart of this topic is the concept of Saabs positioning and its competitors. If GM could get it right, I’d wish them well in developing Cadillac to take on the luxury ( MB/Lexus/BMW) market while Saab focussed on the broader appeal of the Audi/Volvo/VW/Subaru drivers. BMW used to be in this second group but they seem to have happily become trinkets of wealth as a first priority. Shame, because they make great cars which can be awesome to drive.

  Perhaps Saab could look to the French for some inspiration in terms of positioning? Renault, Peugeot & Citroens ranges & design essence are quite inspiring in some ways.

  But I digress.

  The harsh reality is probably that any car company with a two model range in 2009 must be classed as exotic, if not endangered!

• 25 Tom // Jan 11, 2009 at 12:49 am

  I totally agree with Bjorn N. Brand perceptions vary by location, which is no problem provided that the marketing strategy and messages which come out can tune into this. If UK ‘premium’ is a different concept to Aussie ‘premium’ this is no big deal, you need to be able to run the brand in a different way - but not so much that it results in a load of different cars that aren’t cost effective to produce.

  I can’t pretend to know what everyone else in the UK car community believes premium to mean; that would be arrogant. For me however it means somewhat luxurious but not too much, not mass-produced, a little exclusive but still accessible to a certain few. Brands that spring to my mind here are Apple, Jaguar, Dunhill. I want Saab to be in line with this concept of premium, and i want it to keep its design and its quirkiness - mostly because this is in line with my own self-concept.

  For me the question here is whether or not the brand of Saab still has global equity. My perception is that it doesn’t, but it does have loyalty in certain specific demographic segments. In which case, perhaps it is sensible to scale back production to those markets where the brand still has some power, and to effectively reboot the marque. This would probably not include the US.

• 26 Bruce // Jan 11, 2009 at 8:15 am

  SAAB has to be premium whatever that means because GME is built around the Opel (Vauxhall) brand that provides the bread and butter models. I recall from a year living in the UK that SAABs were considered “executive” models in the lease market (cars as job perks are much more common there than in NA and there is a clear hierarchy), probably middle executive.

  Earlier comments were right on about needing more than a 2-car range, and I’d love to see a TS survey on age of car and bought new or used. The used market demands respect because it sets resale values and grabs future buyers, but the new market is what keeps the company afloat.

  B

Leave a Comment