43 responses so far ↓

• 1 Saabboy1 // Jan 13, 2009 at 3:02 am

  It’s so sad to see all these manufacturer’s rolling out these new vehicles, but nothing from Saab! Nothing!

• 2 Kroum // Jan 13, 2009 at 3:19 am

  Carl-Peter Foster had this to say to CNN Money about Saab:

  It is possible that GM’s Saab brand could be part of the industry-wide consolidation, Foster said, adding that GM has been approached by one auto maker interested in buying the Swedish mark.

  “We were talking to one auto company that has volunteered, was interested, by the sale,” Foster said.

  But before any deal can be reached, GM must first complete negotiations with the Swedish government on proposed credit guarantees.

  An agreement of some kind must be reached before a March 31 deadline by which GM must present the U.S. government with its global sustainability plan in exchange for billions of dollars in loans.

  “We don’t need a detailed, signed loan agreement. What we need a good term sheet and we believe it’s doable,” Foster said.

  The key question for Saab’s survival and attractiveness for potential sale is whether it can generate sufficient cash flow to support product development, Foster said.

  “If we have an autonomous or quasi-autonomous company [that is] well funded, the pressure to sell it is not that evident,” Foster said, adding that “all options are on the table.”

• 3 Dippen // Jan 13, 2009 at 3:48 am

  Translated from from Svenska Dagbladet:

  Right now on the agenda: Possible sale of Saab and if GM can survive the summer.

  One problem is that governments only want to provide support for activities within their own borders. And that GM and Saab is now fully integrated.

  GM now wants to solve this by separating the Saab from GM – like Ford has done with Volvo.

  - It is new that we try to separate the Saab from GM – to make it clearer for governments to provide support, “said Carl-Peter Forster.

  He stresses that GM will not reduce support for Saab – which continued to have strong ties in terms of technological development, parts, engine and component collaborations.

  But it means that Saab in the future could be forced to sign a agreement for all the cooperation with GM. And there are many.

  Carl-Peter Forster mentions for example, that Saab could have an agreement with GM in Rüsselsheim to produce the new 9-5 model next year.

  But Saab’s important new model 9-4X, presented 2010, for example, will be produced in Mexico. What aid money can be used there? Hardly the Swedish government.

  U.S. government?

  - I honestly do not know how the U.S. government looks at manufacturing in Mexico, “says Carl-Peter Forster and looks tired.

  While Saab Automobile Managing Director Jan-Åke Jonsson, who SvD meets in the Saab stand, confirmed that Saab is now distancing itself from GM – after all these years of strugge to integrate wihtin GM.

  - It also means that we have greater autonomy, he says.

  Jan-Åke Jonsson mentions that Tata Motors, which in March bought the Jaguar and Land Rover by Ford, were then forced to write more than 60 service contracts with Ford on various partnerships.

  Will Saab like Volvo to publicly disclose their results?

  - It is too early to tell, says Jan-Åke Jonsson.

  Saab is now under a “strategic review” – which means that a sale is a way out. And another advantage of a separation is that Saab will be easier to sell.

  According to Automotive News there are no buyers.

  Carl-Peter Forster is irritated on those speculations.

  - We have had talks with a buyer who approached the Saab for a couple months ago, he says.

  But it did not reach any deal.

  It also looks dark for Saab to make a smaller Saab, which in size is less than 9-3: an. The rhetoric has changed from a yes in principle – to doubtness

  - Today we focus on 9-5, 9-4X and 9-3, “said Carl-Peter Forster shortly.

  Even Jan-Åke Jonsson is on the same line. He would not comment on the major expansion of the model program for Saab.

  - We must be realistic. Now we focus on a new 9-5, the present is 11 years old.

• 4 ctm // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:00 am

  Does Forster and Putz work for the same company? I feel like they are worlds apart on the current situation, with Forster talking about the actual facts while Putz is just stabbing blindly at things that happens to come to his attention…

• 5 ctm // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:17 am

  Lutz continues to make a fool of himself all over the Swedish media…

  From an auto magazine:
  —
  Bob Lutz is a big Saab fan. But now is enough.
  - “We are losing so much money on Saab that we simply can not afford to keep the brand. Especially as the situation is now with the crisis in the automobile industry.”

  But you like Saab is so much?
  - “Absolutely,” responds Lutz, “I love Saab, my wife loves Saab, we all love Saab, it is maybe because of this that we had such great patience, too great patience.”

  What is required then to GM should keep the Saab?
  - “To double its sales and raise prices.”
  Not so easy today…

  Who then can afford to buy Saab? It is not that car manufacturers can afford to outbid each other to do business. What if no one wants to buy? Will you then scrap Saab?
  - “I don’t want to answer that right now,” is the short reply from Bob Lutz.

  We try a different angle. The talented engineers at Saab that obviously contribute with a lot of knowledge and innovation? Is that not a reason to keep the brand?
  - “Everything is GM technology,” is the short answer from Maximum Bob, before running away.
  —

• 6 Kroum // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:23 am

  “Everything is GM technology” actually made me laugh. The sooner we get out of GM’s grip the better – you then wait and see all those “GME engineers” flee back to Trollhattan.

• 7 NineTwoX // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:36 am

  He was probably referring to the fact the GM owns all the technology. Thus they can stick it into whatever they want.

• 8 Andy Rupert // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:40 am

  Let me take the other side of the debate for a minute. While I wish SAAB was doing better, I can see the wisdom in GM using SAAB’s technologies and Ford doing the same with Volvo and Jaguar. It really does make sense to make ALL of your cars better by sharing technology. Wouldn’t you do it, too?

• 9 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:43 am

  Patience??!! then the company was runing alone?? who take de decisions?? who decided to cancel the projects and new product range?? WHOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SAAB MANAGERS????!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

  WHOOOOOOOO CONTROLS THE COMPANY!!! WHOOOOO DECIDES!!!! WHOOOOOOOOO MAKES THE STRATEGIC PLAN!!!!!!!!! WHOOOOOO RUNS THE COMPANY!!!!!! WHOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

  bunch of idiots, whith those words, the only conclusion I could take is that GM only check for the costs reductions and short terms profits(as always)

  If the problem now is the integration of Saab in GM, then?? who is responsible of all that mess??

  WTF!!!

• 10 ctm // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:52 am

  Some more Lutz wisdom:

  —
  Detroit Motor Show is mostly about green fuel-efficient cars, but Bob Lutz does not give much for this show.
  - “America’s politicians are forcing us to develop great new technology, which will cost lots of money. If we don’t do that, then we won’t get any money. If we can’t meet emission regulations, then we must pay a fine. But the politicians do not dare raise the price of gasoline. And who will buy an expensive green car when the petrol is cheap. No one!”

  Bob Lutz also wonder if the politicians and common people thinks that all auto executives in the U.S. has become idiots at the same time?
  - “The problem is not the car manufacturers,” according to Bob.

  The only thing that can save the car industry is a higher tax on fuel, but that is something neither politicians nor voters wants.
  - “The worst thing that could happen is if fuel prices remain at current levels when the Volt arrives in a year,” says Bob.

  What’s Bob Lutz opinion on Saab?
  - “I love the brand, our wives do not want to drive anything else. But there is no return. We can not keep something that costs money. GM will not keep Saab, that is for sure.”
  —

• 11 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 4:59 am

  everything is GM technollogy because since the last year, every patent is under GM GLOBAL TECH OPERATIONS INC

• 12 Lundin // Jan 13, 2009 at 5:32 am

  This man bob lutz seems to be out of reach.

  Yes,just do it then.

  He IS confused and seems to making things up as he goes along.

  Here are just some comments by Lutz

  -”adding Swedishness” ??????

  -“Look at other manufacturers, nobody has production in their land of origin.” ????????

  - “The only important thing is that we maintain the connection to Sweden. We do that with the Saab Brand Center, where 120 people are working with safeguarding what’s typical for Saab.” ??????

  -”It will be profitable soon, Of course we’ll keep it.” ?????? thanks for atleast trying

  -”We realize they’re not working, and something needs to be done.’” ??? hey its 2009

  -”In fact, I think the Swedish engineers and designers worked very hard with the Fuji people to make it into something that is very close to a real Saab” ???? ah..this is about addding “the Swedishness”???

  -“I wish we had sold more of the BLS. It’s a good car, but it got a poor reception in the press.” ???

  -”Saab is a “jewel” to GM and there are no plans to sell it” ?????

• 13 Mats // Jan 13, 2009 at 5:39 am

  Well at least he’s right about gas being too cheap in the U.S…..and as soon as the worlds economy start reovering from this mess we’ll see prices go back well over $100 per barrel and hopefully -all- car manufacturers has used this pause to make the right decisions, whatever they may be.

• 14 zippy // Jan 13, 2009 at 5:49 am

  Its Lutz suffering for some kind of dementia?

  One minute he more or less implies that Saab is the whole reason GM is in trouble and then he says Saab is “a jewel” to GM.

  Myabe its time for this doddering old fool to retire on his ridiculous GM pension which is the main reason GM is up sh*t creek in the first place.

• 15 max // Jan 13, 2009 at 5:57 am

  As I prevoiusly commented. Klutz is a clown In the GM Freak Show…time to move on “Old Boy” time to move on. We can all see what you have accomplished Jack S.it

• 16 ctm // Jan 13, 2009 at 6:24 am

  I guess there were some men in white robes carrying a straightjacket, pushing through the gathered journalists to reach Lutz, telling him to take the medication and be calm and cooperative while they help him leave the place…

• 17 Jan // Jan 13, 2009 at 6:25 am

  what a mass…can’t hear it anymore. It’s about time that something happens and a decision is made about how to proceed. Since months we
  are hoping and hoping. I’m tired of waiting and reading all this GM management crap.

• 18 Dan9-1 // Jan 13, 2009 at 6:33 am

  I’m still confused… are they selling them or just starving them and hoping that the Swedish government will fund Saab for sometime, making them separate from GM financially with a view to sell later in the future?

  Please make it clear and thank God for MaxLutz, if he was twice as intelligent we wouldn;t know half as much about what he really thinks

• 19 zippy // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:02 am

  This just in from AutoCar a UK magazine…

  General Motors product boss Bob Lutz has signalled that Saab’s future is under threat, despite a fondness for the brand among the top brass.

  “Saab is a luxury that we can no longer afford,” said Lutz.

  Speaking to Autocar, Lutz also confirmed that GM’s Swedish subsidiary had never paid a profit, but had cost its parent company up to 800 million dollars a year since it was acquired.

  Lutz wouldn’t comment on whether the next Saab 9-5 would ever see production. He did admit however that senior GM executives had an emotional attachment to the brand that couldn’t survive the current economic climate.

  “The fact that we all liked Saabs has meant that we have indulged it,” said Lutz.

  The future for Saab therefore looks uncertain and Lutz conceded that other loss-making GM brands were under threat. Also facing sell-off or closure are Hummer and Saturn, whilst Pontiac is likely to be scaled down.

  Vauxhall’s future is secure, however. “There’s no reason to move Vauxhall to Opel,” said Lutz. “Why go through the pain and expense of changing?”

  LUTZ SAYS THE NEW 9-5 MAY NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY, OMG!!! SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE GONNA SHUT SAAB DOWN COMPLETELY!! WHAT ON EARTH HAVE THEY BEEN SPENDING $800MILLION A YEAR ON AT SAAB, CERTAINLY NOT CARS?!

• 20 Arild // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:02 am

  Lutz, it is time for you to go to the senior citizens retirement home.

  God, I hope someone can buy Saab and make it very profitable and I hope Cadillac suffers huge losses in Europe!

• 21 zippy // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:15 am

  Arild, seeing as the European importer of Cadillacs stopped importing that American cr*p one can only assume they are losing big time.

  I think Saab is going to be shut down. If so, I hope GM NA goes down with it!!!

• 22 MarkoA // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:22 am

  Lutz is one BIG AR*E! OMG!! Now it really really looks bad. If there would be no new 9-5 then there would be nothing. Nothing!!

  If GM will trash Saab and it will be gone, I´ll do everything to avoid buying GM based produtcs ever again. No matter how good products there will be.

  I still keep my fingers crossed that some company, somewhere is really interested in buying Saab and making it Profitable and Swedish again. Same goes to Volvo too!

• 23 Tompa // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:29 am

  Well I just watched swedish national news reporting from Detroit. A swedish government representative told the reporter that Saab and the Government have very fruitful talks and that things would work out between the Saab, the swedish government and that they would find ways to keep money not flowting overseas. GM and Saab are drifting apart per Saabs and the Government/swedish taxpayers interest.

  What I think needs to be done with the money guaranteed by the government is to launch the NG9-5, have the 9-4X ready for production somewhere else and present this and a distancing from GM to a potential buyer. That is what is missing now for the buyer that GM allready has spoken too. IMHO that is.

  Cheers/ Tom

  P.s. And boys and girls.. Don´t worry

• 24 Dan9-1 // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:33 am

  Steve Shannon is on Autoline Detroit Live at the moment at autolinedetroit.com
  you can ask him things about Saab

  He’s being very careful not to say anything at all about Saab 9-5 or the Swedish government, the Interviewer is keeping him on Cadillac, nothing to see here

• 25 Dippen // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:36 am

  A rough translation from SVT.se (swedish public service TV)

  The government is now negotiating with General Motors on a total restoration -
  of Saab Automobile. If pre -negotiations go well, the Swedish Government prepared to inject 28 billion SEK to the crisis in the automobile industry.

  The requirement for car manufacturers to get the money is that money stays in Sweden, and that profit plans are presented and the companies announce any sales.

  According to Swedish News (Rapport) Saab, which currently has the greatest need for
  money, wants all development for new
  car models in Sweden.

  Also Saab wants to produce a convertible model and the new 9-5 in Trollhattan, which today are made in Austria and the new model of 9-5, to be produced in Germany.

  -Saab could meet the requirements for
  rescue loan in connection with the on -
  structuring, “said Secretary of State
  Jöran Hägglund.

  GM is prepared to inject money to a reorganization of Saab Automobile in exchange for the Swedish Government money support

• 26 Tobias // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:46 am

  more on from SVT

  Saabs plan is to bring all development, research and manufactoring back to Sweden.

  But Lutz as mention before is willing to put an end to Saab

• 27 Tompa // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:48 am

  Zippy.. Don´t be gloomy. That crap about closing down Saab is Lutz talking out of his a***.
  Don´t listen to that big ol´f.

  Listen to people like J-Å J, Eric Geers, Forster and the Swedish government instead. People that realy are trying to solve this and maybe earn a buck + keeping people at work.. And in the end making Saab profitable.

  Cheers/Tom

• 28 zippy // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:49 am

  RE: ‘reorganization’ of Saab Automobile.

  Sounds like GM wants to use Saab as some sort of research vessel (as they have been for the last five plus years) and ditch car production altogether!

  Tompa, I hope I am wrong – I really do! I adore my Saab!!

• 29 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:15 am

  800 million, well, its easy, count for all the projects cancelled by the same GM Managers. And then add to that amount the technollogies from Saab applied to GM models, then you add the costs of new models and nowadays project range, of those total of amount you should subtract it from the income, profitability from the product range. Isn’t strange that Saab wasn’t profitable. Let’s take a look at the 420 million euros spent in the Trollhattan factory for the new 9-3ss, many of those millions, 85 million were spend in the new stamping line, as the 9-3 has some aluminium materials, and the idea in the future was to produce more aluminium parts. It was useful that invesment??? no. It was useful to go from a about 170000 units per year of capacity to 250000 units per year?? in Trollhattan, no. GM did something to increase the product range and make it possible, no……..then?? Why those complains about Saab?

  If they spent more time looking all its brands as a global company instead of loosing its time in GM USA and doing badge engineering and the same models again and again and spending the money in stupids big gas guzzlers…..

• 30 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:19 am

  As I said, those guys are trying to put fear in Saab and Swedish government, after there are funds and they could use them for Cadillac in Europe, then………kick in the ass to Saab, but we take the important assets for GM, as the Technollogical know-how.

• 31 Nate 9-3 // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:23 am

  I don’t want to stoop to the divisive rhetoric that characters like Bob Lutz or GW Bush can often illicit by their baffoonery.

  However, in all honesty, does Bob Lutz have Tourrettes? He doesn’t even make sense if you listen to him!-

• 32 NineTwoX // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:38 am

  If GM is going to plunder all of Saabs innovations/technology as their own, it’s not fair to the Saab brand to keep them around.

  It’s obvious that GM doesn’t have Saab’s best intentions in mind. With that being said, I really think Saab should be discountinued in the NA market. Keep the brand as a European only brand.

• 33 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:39 am

  from autonews.com

  Sweden won’t take over Saab, Volvo

  DETROIT (Reuters) — The Swedish government has no intention of taking stakes in either Saab or Volvo from General Motors or Ford Motor Co. and is not currently planning any further emergency aid for either automaker, a senior Swedish government official said today.

  “I made it clear to General Motors and Ford that under no circumstances will there be a way that the Swedish government, the Swedish state, will become an owner of either Volvo or Saab,” Joran Hagglund, state secretary of the Swedish Industry Ministry, told reporters at the Detroit auto show.

  “They (GM and Ford) have to take the full responsibility for the actions that have to be taken to secure good futures for the brands of Saab and Volvo,” Hagglund said.

  In December the center-right Swedish government announced that it would provide up to 25 billion crowns ($3.1 billion) in credit guarantees and emergency loans to its ailing auto industry.

  When the aid program was unveiled, the Swedish government said it had no plans to buy stakes in Volvo — owned by Ford — or Saab — owned by GM.

  Hagglund said there were “no discussions” on any further aid for the Swedish car makers beyond the 25 billion crowns already promised.

  The state secretary was in Detroit to talk to both U.S. automakers about the Swedish government’s aid program for its carmakers and to find out more about GM and Ford’s plans for their Swedish units.

  Hagglund said he was “aware of the different discussions” GM and Ford were engaged in to sell Volvo and Saab, but added that the government had no political agenda as to who those new owners should be.

  “We don’t have any political or ideological point of view of who will be the new owners,” Hagglund said. “We are certainly interested in whether the owners have a knowledge of the industrial sector, manufacturing, do they have a long-term commitment to these brands, questions like that.”

  Ford CEO Alan Mulally said on Sunday that the No. 2 automaker had been approached by several potential bidders for Volvo.

  GM, however, has not found any buyers interested in Saab, sources have told Automotiove News.

  U.S. auto sales dropped by 18 percent in 2008, pushing both GM and Chrysler — owned by private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP — to the brink of collapse. Both have received aid from the U.S. government through a $17.4 billion bailout in the form of emergency loans. Ford has not sought federal loans but is asking for a $9 billion credit line it could tap if conditions worsen.

• 34 ctm // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:48 am

  Nate 9-3,

  Interesting you should mention it. Almost every report in Swedish media today regarding Lutz’ appearance in Detroit mention details you usually don’t find in those kind of short, fact based articles. They note his waving of his arms, his inability to concentrate on one subject, his going into rapid ramblings about other stuff, his abrupt shifts between a positive/constructive and a negative/ridiculed state of mind. Guess he is under a lot of stress…

• 35 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:59 am

  I thought that a man like Bob Lutz, the man that did so much for BMW and Chrysler, was more intelligent and good Manager it was suppose to be and why GM hired it.

  But I see that GM hire him in his worst moment. I thing its time to go to Florida Bob, take your cadillac there and meet with the Seinfeld parents, you could use an astronaut pen, play bingo, and explain some automotive and Marine histories to your grandchild.

• 36 Dippen // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:05 am

  This is from Trollhattans Tidning (local news paper in Trollhattan)

  Saab 9-5 can stay in Trollhättan

  TROLLHÄTTAN Saabs future is under question. However, the crisis may also lead to an unexpectedly positive – that the production of the next Saab 9-5 ports in Trollhättan.

  We do not pretend that it happens. But that is no utopia either.
  A prerequisite for Saab’s survival is that the Swedish government set up with short-term assistance in the form of loan guarantees, for Saab to be able to cope with the acute crisis and be able to pursue its product plans.
  But the Swedish government will hardly support / save Saab and not be able to make demands.

  - If the government goes in with aid also means that you can put tougher requirements on GM,

  Anna Petre, responsible for Saab’s contacts do agree .

  And high on the government’s requirements list is reasonably to ensure the jobs on the Swedish Saab.
  Problem is that the company’s next two new model will be manufactured abroad – 9-5 in Germany and 9-4X in Mexico.

  In negotiating between the Swedish government and Saab / GM is therefore now, as TTELA learned discussion are ongoing for Trollhättan to keep the 9-5-production
  in the future.
  GM has previously determined that the car be built in Rüsselsheim, starting later this year. There is little time to change the decision, but still quite possible.

  Saab informationschef Eric Geers do not want to comment on the findings of the next Saab 9-5 may be produced in Trollhättan. He says negotiations with the Government continued and that the Saab’s part is to ensure the product plan laid forward in 2005.

  - It is about finding a structure that works for Saab, “he says.

  If GM wants to sell Saab, this would be a suitable structure. To sell Saab would be easier if everything related in concentrated in Trollhättan, instead of production is scattered in a number of different GM factories.
  As TTELA earlier mentioned Saab is also keen to take home the production of 9-3 convertible from Austria.

  But this requries that Saab will need a short-term aid in the form of rescue loan and / or supported through the european investment bank to get through the crisis. And the company is dependent on how the GM chooses to look at Saab’s future.
  - We are looking at the possibility of obtaining some of the aid, but it is still at discussion stage. It is a big administrative process, says Anna Petre.

  IF Metall Club President Paul Åkerlund view is that the ongoing negotiations are conducted is good for Saab’s part.
  - I think you have reason to be pretty optimistic in this emergency situation, “said Åkerlund, who do not believe that a buyer shows up as long as the market is so weak.
  Instead, he hopes that Saab has a different role within GM.
  - I believe it is necessary that we may be more independent. And I think that it would also be good for GM to put Saab little to the side

• 37 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:15 am

  The problem of moving all that production to Trollhattan is the costs of doing it. Its profitable to spend big part of the rescue funds for moving the production of those models?? at least the 9-3 convertible. I thing the 9-5, with the volume could produce and the next 9-3, could be, but the convertible, i don’t know.

  Thos funds should be spend in a reestructuration makes the company more eficcient, more capable in terms of advanced technollogy and meet the market requirements, to clean the financial statements and with all of that done, then lets speak about were is produced some of the models. But be careful with that. As we know to produce the 9-5 in terms of costs its cheaper in the Trollhattan factory than in the Russeulheim factory, also we could move part of the retoling invesment in Russelheim to Trollhattan, that could save some money.

• 38 zippy // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:20 am

  Moving the production to Trollhattan also means that Saab will still have to deal with the currency exchange rate between the kronor and USD.

• 39 Markac // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:37 am

  Consolidating Saab production in Sweden does make it a much more saleable commodity. As I’ve said many times, a new owner of Saab will be reluctant to source one vehicle from GM factories, let alone two. Saab just needs an investor to take a controlling interest while this consolidation is happening. There is still the very real threat that GM wont’t survive this year, at least in the form we know it. The greater separation Saab can achieve, the safer it will be.

• 40 Ying // Jan 13, 2009 at 10:01 am

  “The fact that we all liked Saabs has meant that we have indulged it,” said Lutz.

  INDULGE????????????????
  EGG ——–> LUTS HEAD, me want to throw

• 41 Eduard(Edusaab) // Jan 13, 2009 at 10:13 am

  If the Saab factory in trollhattan is able to manage the production of the new 9-5, the 9-3 and new 9-3 and the convertible, and put the 9-1(with the 9-3 as they should use the same platform), then this should be a fantastic way to do the Trollhattan plant profitable and one of the best factories in the wolrd. Because the flexibility needed to build those models and with about 5000 thousand people and produce at least 175000-200000 units that with those models could achieve, then Saab is going to be profitable.

  I thing if Saab do a good strategy in terms of product range development with more vertical synergies, like Audi, with its modules, it could achieve that flexibility in terms of product development and production.

  for me its the way to follow, instead of now I develop a 9-5 in EpsilonII, the 9-3 in epsilonII, but after that in delta, the other in Delta, the other in theta or other platform. Why don’t like BMW or Audi, more vertical synergies between the models of the same brand, this could give to saab a little more independence in terms of development and the synergies in important issues with the other brands and manufactures, but also between the models of the brand, spending the money where it should be spending and doing Saabs more Saabs.

• 42 Ken H // Jan 13, 2009 at 5:50 pm

  I read in ams.se that one idea was to make Saab a separate business entity, making the cash flow more visible. Saab would charge GM for all R&D and other services, and Saab would pay for whatever they would have to get from GM. Realistic idea?

• 43 Rune (the other one) // Jan 14, 2009 at 8:13 am

  In other news: Fundo wheels are bankrupt. They made aluminum wheels for Volvo, Saab, Audi, VW and BMW.