|
You never know, another last-minute investor may be found, but I fear that it'll only stave off the inevitable for a short while.
I guess the rot set in during GM's tenure of the company. GM just didn't manage the company properly, under-investing in the brand, which had a much stronger image in Europe than sister GM products. The attempt to badge-engineer Saabs into Cadillacs (remember the BLS? Did anybody buy one?), was a crazy move. And the other way round, with the Impreza-derived 9-2X. And the 9-7X. Not good.
Under different circumstances, today Saab may have proved a credible rival to BMW, Audi et al. I feel sorry for the workforce, much as I did when MG Rover went bust. I guess these days if a car manufacturer doesn't have enough scale to match the likes of Toyota, VW Group, Ford and Renault-Nissan, etc, as soon as it falls behind it won't catch up. Tough world out there!
Will there ever be room for those companies that make products that are a little different to the norm? Or is everything just going to end up horribly homogenised?
|
|
The french government won't allow their carmakers to fail, too much national pride involved. makes you wonder how long GM can keep manufacturing in the uk. VAG group will still be around, and ford and gm will keep their plants in germany but will use the capacity in the low-cost eu counties as much as possible. BMW and Mercedes High end but not all mercs are built in germany, not all BMW's either. At a guess next european to go will be Fiat, which is probably the next weakest. with the costs of legislation and future emissions control getting sky high, can see some of the smaller japs pulling out of europe too. Jaguar land rover are now well and truly out of reach of the budget motorist so will have a lot of eggs in one basket.
Yes, i'd like something different, but what i want is something reasonably priced in my budget and reliable. Just DON'T care about anything else now! If you buy a saab, assume that it'll be like a Rover, no warranty and make sure you get a stonking great discount!
Edited by OldRoverboy on 12/05/2011 at 19:24
|
|
Actually its hard to believe but Fiat is extremely strong financially at the moment.Fully expect Opel to be trouble in the near future sales have plumited here in Germany.
Saab have been pointless cars for years just vectras with not so good build quality.
|
|
|
|
The trouble was by the end Saab weren't very different at all. At least the Swedish government aren't going to get screwed by the Dutch equivalent of the Pheonix 4. Spyker just aren't a convincing company to run a volume carmaker. Why buy an ailing company many times bigger than your own if you haven't got any liquid capital to get the aquisition back on its feet again? It smacks of arrogance to think that the government/Chinese invester should hand over hundreds of millions to a bunch of amateurs to play at being car makers. I watched an interview with the CEO of Spyker and it was pretty pathetic. He was spinning his hopes on a crossover-20 years after everyone else jumped on the bandwagon.
|
|
I've had 4 SAABs - all proper ones of course with the first being a 2 stroke.
SAAB were too small in their original form to survive and their acquisition by GM as an upmarket receptacle for their sticky labels was the inevitable kiss of death.
I'm surprised it has taken so long.
RIP SAAB (Sweden) - you made the best designed cars I've ever owned. Each one I had showed the true dedication and enthusiasm of its designer with clever and thoughtful features in all places, obvious and hidden.
My "committee designed" VAG vehicle feels just that - but it has the good diesel engine SAAB never had.
659.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with Andy Bairsto on this one. Fiat are no longer the whipping boy of European carmakers. Their innovation has always been pretty good (unlike Saab), and the pricing keen. Now the build quality is up to scratch, the cars and light vans are very popular, they sell engines to other carmakers. Basically they have everything going for them.
Hopefully Alfa will be the next casualty. IMO their cars are pointless. There's no room for also rans in the modern car industry. If you can't run with the best, go to the wall.
|
|
£135m investment by Chinese Co pormised 2 weeks ago has been withdrawn so SAAB needs to find megabucks - on the back of falling sales due, in part at least, to their precarious financial problems. They need current cars to sell to fund their new models - suppliers are said to be withholding parts as they want cash upfront - which SAAB does not have.
Lights out or SAAB?- looks on the cards
|
|
|
|
Ah yes! Alfa Romeo. Now there's something a little different to the usual stuff. I've owned a Rover, now a Saab, and when that's due for changing, I think I'll go for an Alfa... They do tick the "different" box (by which I mean not the usual BMW, Audi, Merc, etc), and with Fiat group doing ok, as we have established, there shouldn't be much trouble with supply of parts and support in the long term...
Saab have been innovative in some respects, not so in others. The first gen 9-3 was getting NCAP four stars when the equivalent C-class was getting two. Active head restraints were an innovation of theirs, which trickled down to Vauxhall/Opel cars later on... Then there's the whole turbocharging thing that they've been doing for years. But their conservative engineering approach (up to the full GM acquisition) had meant that the cars were very evolved, so virtually all faults were designed out. That's why you can run a B-series engine (in all Saabs from the late sixties up to the first gen 9-3 and previous gen 9-5) for up to 300,000 miles without missing a beat. I know two people that have Saabs that have done that. They were rot-proof long before their competitors (Volvo excepted). Before the GM ways crept in, build quality issues were few and far between.
I think Saabs are a bit marmite-ish - you either saw the appeal, and liked the design and different approach, or you didn't. I've never heard anyone say they could take them or leave them, at least, not before the Vectra-derived models!
|
|
Chinese Co was said to be paying £135m into the dying Swedish Co 2 weeks ago
Chinnese shareholders vetoed the move.
The lights at SAAB might well be extinguished as they cannot raise sales as they are reckoned to be on the verge and they cannot raise Bank cash as they are burning money rather than tarmac.
Catch 22 - you cannot get new models if the old models are not selling and the old models are not selling because the company finances are shaky.
|
Chinese Co was said to be paying £135m into the dying Swedish Co 2 weeks ago
Chinnese shareholders vetoed the move.
In my original Post a few weeks back "Saab going going gone" I pointed out that the "chinese were circling the corpse" Anyone remember MG/Rover? looking like they (SAIC )were interested in investing then They got the lot for peanuts when it failed. History repeats itself again and again.
|
|
|
|
Then there's the whole turbocharging thing that they've been doing for years
I don't want to be argumentative but the Saab turbocharging myth is the main reason I'm unsymaphetic towards Saab. Saab never developed a single turbo; they bought off the shelf Garretts and Borg Warners like everyone else. They didn't even get into the turbo game early. In fact, the unloved step-parent of Saab, produced the first turbocharged passenger car (Chevrolet Corvair) way back in '62. They used a water injection system as well. BMW turbocharged the 2002 in '73 and Saab finally jumped on the hairdryer bandwagon in 78. Trucks had been turbocharged from the 50's.
|
|
Oh absolutely, I wouldn't dispute the application of turbos by other manufacturers prior to Saab using them; I'm aware that they weren't the first. What I meant is that the Saab turbo engines had a characteristic which, to many, added to their appeal. I just love the mid-range "shove" you get from those engines, which are fantastic for overtaking, very useful on the kind of roads I have to drive on! If I remember correctly, the 9-5 HOT Aero had in-gear acceleration that could match far more exotic stuff from Porsche at the time. And the fact that the car was very understated added to its appeal; it wasn't showy at all, but was quite a serious piece of kit.
|
|
That's a point well made; you can't compare cars solely on superlatives, first, fastest, lightest, lowest etc. Understated is good too, until it crosses the blurry boundary into anonymous and bland. The old 900 were understated, the new 900, 9000 and 9-5 were bland IMO.
With tender loving care the 900 could have occupied the niche currently ocupied by the Audi A5-they even look a bit similar. But GM are notorious for badge engineering; Pontiac, Buick, Vauxhall, and Saab simply became clones of other marques.
|
|
That's got me thinking: what cars are out there that are reasonably understated yet have a good dollop of performance? I'm thinking along the lines of the old 900 turbo, Sierra Sapphire Cosworth, Merc 190 Cosworth, Cavalier GSi, Pug 405 Mi16 etc. Affordable wolf-in-sheep's-clothing type of cars. They seem to be few and far between now. Although I guess there's the Octavia vRS and Golf GTi, but I can't think of many others - particularly saloons - that have similar performance yet remain fairly understated...
|
|
If you ignore the any preconceptions about the marques, the BMW 5 series saloon and audi A4/A6 saloon are paragons of elegant, understated design that age gracefully. It's the cheap brands that are desperately tossing out garish 'look at me!' designs that look futuristic for a year and jaded disasters thereafter.
Big saloons have fallen from favour since estates make better use of the floor plan and, arguably, look better to...er...boot!
|
|
Unfortunately BMWs and Audis are well beyond my price range! Maybe one day...
|
|
Ha ha! I'm in the 'volume' manufacturer price range too.
|
|
If I remember correctly, the 9-5 HOT Aero had in-gear acceleration that could match far more exotic stuff from Porsche at the time.
You don't! It was Ferrari.
Despite it's age, my 9-5 HOT Aero estate still brings a smile to my face. There aren't many estates that can match the overall ability and the performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
