Saab's Buyer Backs Out

Koenigsegg, the Swedish boutique car maker, has terminated its purchase agreement to buy Saab from GM. General Motors just released a statement from CEO Fritz Henderson:

"Many have worked tirelessly over the past several months to create a sustainable plan for the future of Saab by selling the brand and its manufacturing interests to Koenigsegg Group AB. Given the sudden change in direction, we will take the next several days to assess the situation and will advise on the next steps next week."

What the next steps will be is uncertain. GM recently decided to keep Opel, it’s German subsidiary instead of selling it off. Could Saab possibly remain under the GM umbrella? Or will it suffer the same fate as Saturn?

The sale was based on a loan from the Swedish government of roughly $600 million and a Chinese company was planning on a minority stake as part of the deal as well.

Related
No New Saabs Until 2010
Poll: Will the Saab 9-5 Save the Company?
Saab Closing 37% of Dealers

Comments

I think GM should give Saab a few more years, as they finally have some desirable products for consumers, most notably, the upcoming 9-4x and the new 9-5. Considering how unimpressive their product line has been for the past 15 years, this could make a big difference.

Although I am not a fan of GM, The product's coming out for Saab, from GM in the next few years have promise. This Brand has a built in loyal customer base and could be expanded, all it takes is the right products. Come on GM, this is your chance to do something right!

Saabs are irrelevant. I looked at the 9-3 before buying my new Prius. Aside from being smaller than the Toyota, having worse build quality and a lousy reputation, getting less than half the mpg and it's weird styling the Saab stacked up OK. Saabs are so irrelevant not even a Swedish company will touch them.

I thought part of the conditions the US Government bailout of GM was selling off Saturn and Saab.If they cant sell either and drop them (at a loss) the US Government should ask for their $50 million back.
Bye bye GM.

Hybrit, I think you are missing the point. I don't think any future business model would be predicated on the success of the very mediocre current lineup. Everyone, including GM, is aware of those shortcomings. The point is, after many years and many dollars investing in their future products, they are on the verge of seeing the fruits of those investments. I am convinced that both the 9-5 and 9-4x would be good sellers. They haven't had compelling products like either of these vehicles in years. Good product turns companies around. Period. See Carlos Ghosn.

If GM can make a case keeping Saab makes their portfolio more profitable, then they should. I see little evidence that forcing the sale of Saab would in any way increase the odds that GM repays the taxpayers. Giving away that technology to a competitor could prove to be far worse 10 years down the line.

By the way, Hybrit, I assume if you were looking at a Prius, the most comparable 9-3 you would have looked at would have been the Sportcombi. In which case, you are wrong about it being smaller. Even if it was the sedan, the sedan has more room in many of the dimensions.

"I am convinced that both the 9-5 and 9-4x would be good sellers."

Idiot statement of the day.

Hybrit, you really are as stupid as you look to be if you think a Saab 9-3 sedan and Prius hatchback are in any way similar except for the fact that they have four cylinders and four wheels.

Saab has been hit and miss (more miss) the past 15 years. I need some consistancy before I consider buying one.

Hopefully a Chinese manufacturer and save Saab.

Carlos, I'd love for you to articulate your point further. Please, tell me why they are such bad products? You sound like a really knowledgeable person on the subject. I think everyone stands to gain quite a bit from any of your future contributions.

Jm, The prius has a four cylinder engine, PLUS AN ELECTRIC MOTOR. It's a hybrid and offers more than the Saab for less money. Please confine your comments to car stuff and keep your petty vendettas to yourself.

"Please, tell me why they (Saab) are such bad products?"

Idiot statement #2.

Darn, now who will offer overpriced, under-featured, and woefully fuel inefficient cars to the .01% of the population who buys them?

Carlos, while I take much amusement from ignorant people such as yourself, why do you keep dodging the question? I'm guessing it's because you know very little about either vehicle or cars in general. If that's the case, just admit it and shut up. I think we all know where you stand. You obviously have little to add to the conversation.

Angelo: See Billy4202 post as that's how the majority of people see Saab. You know there's a reason Saab is going under - or maybe you don't because Carlos is right after all.

Jack, I COMPLETELY agree with the analysis of what Saab has done in the past. I owned an '01 Saab 9-3 and used the phrase, "piece of crap" way more than I should have. I get it.

However, that is not a reason to write Saab off completely. It boils down to their future product pipeline. While there are still many GM doubters, I'd wager to say that there were more of them a few years ago, before they started to improve their product line. GM has demonstrated that they are turning things around with their new products like the Malibu, Lacrosse, Traverse/Enclave/Accadia, Equinox/Terrain, CTS, SRX, etc.

So, why is it so unrealistic to think that Saab, a much smaller company, cannot start to turn things around with two new products (again, the 2011 9-5 and 9-4x)that are based on the same successful GM platforms that I just mentioned? They are good cars. All of them have had very favorable professional reviews and very positive sales numbers.

I agree that Saab has been way too slow to the market with these products. However, the US taxpayers have already spent the money. Why not give Saab one more chance to turn it around? At the very least, it makes Saab a little more valuable in a sale a couple years down the road.

GM can use its' excess industrial capacity at home in creating a modern mass-transit system and freight train facilities; nuclear generation facilities can be manufactured in the modular and transported anywhere in the nation or around the world.

It would be a shame for GM to contract itself into oblivion.

photo

Almost nobody in the rest of the world wants American cars, besides maybe Ford.

Why can't these companies come up with producing something else?

Their cars are ugly and insufficient, so, no more money to them.

Money should go to their workers skill training for a different employment.

"Almost nobody in the rest of the world wants American cars, besides maybe Ford."

....except the 1 billion people in China who are buying both Ford and GM products at a rapid pace. GM still sells the second most vehicles in the world. So, your statement is not really backed up by any facts.