|
In the overall scheme of running a complete but small company how long is £135 million going to last? It won't fund much R&D or development of any new models. Looks to me a bit like a bandage for a major wound but I hope I am wrong, as usual!
|
200 million couldnt keep a DIY chain afloat in the UK, let alone a car maker.
This is China buying the assets of the company, they will fail, and the chinese will have it all away for the tiny sum of 135 million. Smart move.
|
>> This is China buying the assets of the company, they will fail, and the chinese
>> will have it all away for the tiny sum of 135 million. Smart move.
MG Rover v2.0
|
They don't need the money for R&D, they have new models on the way and development is moving forward on new platforms and sharing with BMW etc. What they need today is money to bridge their immediate cash flow problem. Unlike Rover say, Saab do have a new car out on a new platform and others close to, or about to, go on sale.
The trouble is, Saab now have the stink of death, which puts people off buying them, which in turn causes cash flow problems which creates bad press, which puts people off buying them... At this point, a billion quid wouldn't be enough to keep Saab going when the customer base is so spooked, so I agree with Zero, it must be about China nipping in and getting hold of some tasty western technology.
|
Funding deal founders as Chinese Shareholders did not approve.
Where to now for SAAB?
Last edited by: Falkirk Bairn on Thu 12 May 11 at 12:29
|
Sad, sad, sad - especially for those of us who had fun in real Saabs.
But better dead than Red I guess?
|
I understood that it is the PRC Govt which won't approve the deal, it is looking at managing some consolidation in the number of Chinese car manufacturers and this particular local manufacturer was was considered too small to manage a loss-making foreign subsidiary even if it could raise the funds.
The Govt of the PRC takes an interventionist approach to managing many aspects of the economy whereas I'd observe that the UK has (since the 1980s) relied on the market to do this. I'd argue that the result for Saab would be the same with either approach.
Sad but inevitable.
|
|
not dead yet, talks still ongoing.
|
|
That's got to be it for Saab now. A dead cat only bounces so often. With all the negative press, who in their right mind would buy a new Saab now?
|
Such a shame to hear this. A company with a very strong brand image, run for years by a bigger company who really didn't understand it, and who effectively ran it into the ground.
I still think there's a market for a premium European brand which isn't German, if the products are up to scratch. The problem is the R&D costs which have to be borne up front to get there. The sad truth is that the volume car market is simply no place for small or cash-strapped companies. Even the big boys are collaborating and sharing platforms to save money.
|
>> who in their right mind would buy a new Saab now?
It seems to me that, for several years now, new SAABs are far more common as company cars than as private purchases. Does anybody buy brand new bread-and-butter 9-3s, Audi A4s etc with their own money? If not, and the majority of purchases are made in bulk by fleets who run them for 3 years max, is this news enough to take SAAB off the fleet lists?
|
|
Saab, the carmaker on the brink of financial collapse, said Monday it has signed a deal to obtain last-ditch rescue funding from a large Chinese distributor.
|
|
The fat lady isn't even out of her dressing room yet ---- I hope
|
This was mentioned in yesterday's China Daily, Pang Da are a car distributor and they've signed a deal with Spyker to purchase EUR45M of cars.
I have to say that Volvo's appear popular in Beijing so I guess that Saabs will sell over here.
|
Press release from SAAB here:
inside.saab.com/an-open-letter-from-saab-automobile/
It's a roller coaster ride for we SAAB fans
|
Chinese car makers Pang Da and Youngman have agreed to buy Saab in its entirety from Swedish Automobile.
It's the latest extraordinary twist in the saga of Saab, which has been technically bankrupt since September 2011 and built just 11,000 cars this year. The deal, which will see the Chinese car makers pay €100 million for Saab, has not yet however been signed and sealed.
The memorandum of understanding announced today is valid until 15 November 2011. Chairman of Saab Victor Muller today said he hoped the deal would be closed and in place in one month's time. 'I am confident approval will be granted this time,' he said.
tinyurl.com/64l6f74 - www.carmagazine.co.uk
|
|
Lets just hope they make a better job of it than SAIC have done with MG. Although at least SAAB has some decent cars to start with.
|
www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/8924038/Saab-GB-goes-into-administration.html
SAAB GB in administration
Writing was on the wall with all the problems in Sweden
|
|
Does this mean current owners of newish Saabs will have warranty and parts issues?
|
|
Shame really - there was a flirtation here with a smart looking 9-3 Limear estate during our fleet review. Parts availability will become an issue I would imagine, especially Saab specific stuff, no doubt bits from the GM family will fit.
|
No doubt it'll be like Rover: pattern parts and mechanical components easy to find for a few years, but a gradual dearth of trim/bodywork parts?
Seems scarcely believable that barely 10-12 years ago SAAB seemed to be a reasonable player in the UK. SAAB City seemed to churn out loads of new cars on to London's roads.
So who's next?
|
>>
>> So who's next?
>>
Sad, I like Saab simply for being a little different, they have some reasonably good cars in their line-up and near to production too.
I think that JLR are probably OK - with a wealthy parent, I wonder if a Japanese manufacturer might be next - Subaru or Suzuki perhaps ? No UK-owned brands left to worry about that I can think of.
|
I wouldn't be surprised if Suzuki goes, Hyundai and Kia are steeling too many of their sales.
I am staggered Proton are still going in the UK giving their pathetic sales figures, but I am guessing the UK importer must make a decent margin on them.
Good chance Subaru may go haven't seen a brand new one for ages.
It all comes downs to sales volumes and margins at the end of the day. I think Saab's other problem was that decade or so they have been too similar to their GM cars they were based on.
|
|
Proton's home (and ASEAN) market has significant trade barriers I think, they don't need European sales to survive.
|
|
Err there is a good 45 million people that live outside of London you know :).
|
>> I wouldn't be surprised if Suzuki goes
Suzuki is #1 car manufacturer in India which is their main market.
Unlike Daihatsu, some of their models are imported from India for European market. So they might hang around here in future. Daihatsu had to go because they imported from Japan and strong Yen made it non-viable.
Last edited by: movilogo on Wed 30 Nov 11 at 12:46
|
|
I was meaning the UK importer, not the manufacturer. The two threads got merged hence the confusion.
|
|
A lot of saab underpinnings are GM. I don't think Saabs have been proper Saabs for years. And with the first whiff of trouble any sane person wouldn't buy one so sales would drop even more and compound the issue.
|
|
As soon as they dropped off the Fleet managers list of approved company and lease cars they were doomed.
|
The 'GM underpinnings' argument is of interest only to types who frequent forums like this. To the car-buying public, there was a touch of distinctiveness about Saabs - the 9-5 was based on the Vectra platform but was a vastly nicer car because of that human-centred design.
For me, the rot started not in the 1990s but in 2002 with the 9-3 that threw away the distinctive Saabisms of the five-door model and went for a bland, me-too sub-Audi package. I saw a review in the paper last weekend of a revised 9-3 estate and it stirred nothing at all in me. I used to drop into my local Saab dealer just for a chat and a poke about, so I'm sad to feel so indifferent now.
|
It's official now.
From Saab's inside web site :-
Zeewolde, The Netherlands, 19 December 2011 – Swedish Automobile N.V. (Swan) announces that Saab Automobile AB (Saab Automobile), Saab Automobile Tools AB and Saab Powertrain AB filed for bankruptcy with the District Court in Vänersborg, Sweden this morning.
Apparently if I wait a few hours to write this, as I’d like to, then it would have to be approved first by whoever the court appoints as the bankruptcy administrator. Screw that.
I think I can speak on behalf of my colleagues in thanking all of you for your support over the last months. It’s been a troubling time for everybody and I can’t help but think of the customers who have supported us and all of those who planned to do so in the near future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
link :-
inside.saab.com/
so is this a re-run of Rover ?
Will the Chinese let it fold then later on go in and purchase for a knocked down price then lift and ship to China ?
Last edited by: diddy1234 on Mon 19 Dec 11 at 12:54
|
GM wanted to close Saab because they didn't want to invest. Spyker thought they could make a go of it and the renamed Spyker company is now in administration.
Could this have been foreseen? Possibly. The cars were no longer real Saabs just part binned GMs. And there was no chance GM would let the Chinese get hold of the technology in the cars. Maybe if it was a European company trying to buy it but even then who would.
I think it's been a prolonged end for Saab. Maybe GM were right to close it down.
|
maybe your right there.
GM are selling cars quite well at the moment in China :-
chinaautoweb.com/2011/12/best-selling-new-cars-in-november/
Shanghai-GM: 116,235 --------- number one selling last month !
It would appear that GM have their own agenda.
|
|
I think GM's policy was right, if we keep selling European technology off to Chinese for cheap but we know it could spell the end for all of the European car industry. Do we really want a company call Great Wall PSA?
|
>> It would appear that GM have their own agenda.
It's not an agenda as such is it. GM paid billions developing technology and are trying to make money selling it. They used to use it in a subsidiary which they were going to close. Sold it to Spyker (Dutch company?) and licensed the technology to them.
Now two Chinese companies want to buy Saab for $135m and would be expecting access to GM technology and IPR? I suppose GM would be happy for Saab to be sold without a licence to use the technology.
I would we willing to bet the two Chinese companies want the GM IPR and not Saab.
|
It's Erik Carlsson I feel sorry for.
|
|
As I understand it now that the firm is actually bankrupt the Saab name reverts to the aircraft company, so even if the Chinese try to do a Rover they won't be able to call whatever they make a Saab.
|
Rover became Roewe IIRC
SAAB could morph to SABB
Mind you there are not many Roewe on the UK roads
The Chinese wanted a back door to GM Licences possessed by SAAB.
Mind you it was the GMing of SAAB that killed it over 20 years
|
>> Mind you it was the GMing of SAAB that killed it over 20 years
Rubbish, SAAB was a small niche maker that would have gone bust 20 years ago without GM money (or someone else's money)
|
SAAB was a small niche maker that would have gone bust 20 years ago...
Z is right about that. GM's culpability lies not in its takeover of Saab but in the direction it imposed on it. It pulled off the singular feat of alienating Saab's established customer base without winning new buyers from the likes of Audi. The marketing department went on pushing the 'intelligent individualist' line, while apparently failing to notice that the products were just 'me too' Audi imitations. (That they were based on GM mechanicals is far less relevant than some here imagine.)
Ford may not have made money out of Volvo, but nor did it destroy the brand's entire identity. It also allowed some design flair to creep in, which attracted some new buyers, like me, while not frightening off the old ones.
|
>>
>> >> Mind you it was the GMing of SAAB that killed it over 20 years
>>
>> Rubbish, SAAB was a small niche maker that would have gone bust 20 years ago
>> without GM money (or someone else's money)
>>
You are both right,Saab would have gone bust without GM's money though it was (edit:) / may have been the GMing that killed it.
Jaguar, Volvo and Land Rover would/may have been bust but for Ford though they were allowed to flourish without being Fordized.
Last edited by: Cheddar on Tue 20 Dec 11 at 12:29
|
>> Jaguar, Volvo and Land Rover would/may have been bust but for Ford though they were
>> allowed to flourish without being Fordized.
because SAABs sales volumes and price premiums were not high enough to allow GM to work it any other way. It had to be "parts bin" engineering. Frankly they were daft to buy it, the sums never made any sense. Lets not get over sentimental here, pre GM SAABS were not the 8th wonder of the world.
|
>> Rover became Roewe IIRC
>>
>> SAAB could morph to SABB
Agreed. Don't forget, China is the land of the HiPhone, the iPed, and the PolyStation 3! :-)
|
>> >> Rover became Roewe IIRC
>> >>
>> >> SAAB could morph to SABB
>>
>> Agreed. Don't forget, China is the land of the HiPhone, the iPed, and the PolyStation
>> 3! :-)
jalopnik.com/382010/chinese-mini-cooper-clone-revealed-by-lifan-takes-badge+copying-to-new-level-of-crazy
|
|
Parking sideways in a wind tunnel seems an odd way to prove a point. Or was it as aerodynamic sideways on as well? Carlsson would probably have said it was. And upside-down.
|
|
People are suggesting that taking a parts bin approach does not work. Skoda uses this approach, shares VW chassis and all sorts... they are doing okay.
|
|
Exactly, RTJ. Parts bins are fine if they contain decent parts, but if you're trying to sell what you make them into at a premium price, you'd better have some design magic handy. The 1990s first generation of GM Saabs weren't world beaters but they were distinctive and fantastic to live with - I had two. After 2002 the parts bin content increased and the distinctiveness fell away - double whammy.
|
The first GM based Saab 9-3 was interesting. With the full blown Aero spec a bit of a handful but characterful.
Move onto the later 9-3's and the only thing that really said Saab was (a) good seats and (b) the ignition key next to the gear lever. Well not only those.
They seems to have forgotten what Saab was about. You cannot blame GM for that. The underlying bits would do the job.
|
The latest 9-3s are fine, the problem is they try to compete in the Audi / BMW / Merc arena where as Volvos have retained a differential, retained more character. Who cares that a V50 or a C30 are based on the (old) Focus, they have there own niche, though post 1990 Saabs have lost that distinctiveness.
EDIT: spellin.
Last edited by: Cheddar on Tue 20 Dec 11 at 17:18
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25180698
Saab will restart production on Monday as the firm's new owners look to get the carmaker back on track.
Saab went bankrupt in December 2011 and was bought by a Chinese-Swedish investment group, National Electric Vehicle Sweden (Nevs), last year.
The carmaker will restart production of its 9-3 sedan model at its Trollhattan factory in western Sweden.
|
NEVS has set an optimistic target of 120,000 units per year by 2016, with sales focused in Europe and China – there's no official word on if NEVS ever plans to bring the Saab name back to North America.
120,000 is a lot more than they managed in the year before they collapsed
Sales momentum continues to grow quarter by quarter
11,448 cars sold in Q4 2010, up 129% compared to Q4 2009 and up 31% compared to Q3 2010
Global sales in 2010 amount to 31,696 cars
Total 2010 production rose to 32,048 units as compared to 20,950 units in 2009 (up 53%)
|
|
They didn't sell before, they got less chance of selling now. They got no chance, SAAB is dead no point prodding the stinking corpse.
|
|
Limited production and limited sales really Mike. 103 UK sales in September 2012, I don't know if that included TFs. There are some sold in China SFAIK
|
They don't have to sell in Europe.
The Chinese bought 1.61 million cars and SUVs in October in a market growing by about 20% per annum. By comparison, Europeans in our entirety bought 970,000 in a largely stagnant market.
European consumer attitudes and preferences aren't where the money is these days.
|
|
Yep. Wasn't NF telling us how they sell a fair few MGs in Chile?
|
>>Wasn't NF telling us how they sell a fair few MGs in Chile?
1500 / 1% or something like that.
|
>> They don't have to sell in Europe.
>>
>> The Chinese bought 1.61 million cars and SUVs in October in a market growing by
>> about 20% per annum. By comparison, Europeans in our entirety bought 970,000 in a largely
>> stagnant market.
>>
>> European consumer attitudes and preferences aren't where the money is these days.
The chinese buy cheap and mid range locally made cars, and high price exotica from europe.
The Saab does not fit any of these moulds. They were not buying Saabs before it went under.
|
>> The chinese buy cheap and mid range locally made cars, and high price exotica from
>> europe.
>>
>> The Saab does not fit any of these moulds. They were not buying Saabs before
>> it went under.
It's a growing (some would say exploding) market driven by a burgeoning middle class. The Chinese like large cars with lots of leather and wood, and stacks of gadgetry. They also like brand names. Saab ticks all those boxes.
I agree and accept that Saab is dead in Europe, but with a good business plan and the right marketing, they could succeed in China.
Far better business brains than yours or mine clearly think there is something in it.
|
SAAB - £135m Chinese cash to keep SAAB on recovery road - Perky Penguin
