If a Malaysian company you never heard of can buy Lotus, then I'm sure there is someone to buy a car company that only produces... what... 150,000 cars per year?
Fiat just got a big payoff from GM.. maybe they could use Saab dealerships as a new entry point for Alfas?
I'm pulling for either cash rich Honda or Toyota, but neither seem to be interested in an acquisition. (especially since Toyota just came off that FHI investment)
Nissan/Renault would work, but can Ghosn engineer another turn around?
Fiat... hmmm... Not a bad idea, there might even be some room for platform and factory sharing, but can they afford the cost of bringing Saab back to life?
Forget Ford or DCX. Hyundai maybe? If they don't want to "build" a luxury brand, perhaps they could buy it...
The Chinese? I sure hope not.
Fuji Heavy Industries? Subaru and Saab could work together, but I think FHI wouldn't touch Saab after the 9-2X...
enough over capacity and problems that it does not need SAAB. Their premium brand, comparable to SAAB, is Alfa Romeo so they will pass, I think. Potential buyres are in Asia or Renault, which does not have premium brand and its upmarket attempts were rather unsuccessful but... Nissan has Infinity and the may leverage this.
Between the FWD dominated H/A lineup, the latest developments in Turbo applications (RDX, possible TSX), and Hondas knowledge and dedication to safety, I don't see what Saab could offer to Honda motor.
Toyota on the other hand, maybe an experiment with the Swede-Speed division could make for some interesting product. Heck, they have plenty of cash to play with it probably wouldn't hurt them a bit if the idea failed... Still don't see it happening though.
is on their rapidly expanding, world domination kick right now. They wouldn't be interested in buying Saab. Maybe in ten years. And then they would probably rebadge a lot of Korean cars as Saabs, similar to the GM approach that is currently killing Saab.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Perhaps Toyota may purchase Saab if the Swede is on the block. Rumour has it Toyota just purchased shares/ownership of Subaru (just a rumour I heard from a reliable autoholic) - why not continue with the Sub/Saab association and gobble up both brands?
BTW, the 'new' Saab 9-5 is sweet looking. Whether you are a quirk Saab owner or not, there is lots to like about the looks of the vehicle. Reliability and performance may be another issue. Are/were Saabs really that bad for reliability?
I'm still not so sure no one would want saab--a company who wants to fill a niche ("practical" turbocharged cars designed for performance and safety), and/or gain access to the US market COULD benefit from it.
It's complicated. Alfa? Pugeot? Daimer-chrysler? I could picture MB wanting a lesser-premium FWD brand. I don't think it'd be bad for honda or toyota, but obviously others disagree.
I think it might actually be GOOD for Toyota as they need a little more excitement in their lineup, some turbocharged engines, and Saab needs to learn how to actually piece together a reliable machine. It would work. Except for Toyota and Honda don't like acquisitions. (although Toyota's stake in FHI might mean they're interested in a buying spree now)
Doesn't DCX already have Chrysler as a lesser-premium brand? The Pacifica, Crossfire, 300, and Aspen are all supposed to show what direction Chrysler is taking itself. I could see how they might want Saab, but then it would collide with Chrysler. (unless they bring Chrysler back down market and seperate DCX like this:) Chrysler: Mainstream Automobiles Dodge: Performance Automobiles Mercedes-Benz: Premier Luxury Automobiles Saab: Upscale Automobiles
But doesn't DCX want to bring Smart to the US? How would Saab fit in with Smart?
I could see how Toyota would benefit- Lexus is more of a quiet refinement luxury brand, a Mercedes fighter, and Saab could be thier BMW fighter. (although Lexus wants the IS and GS to take care of BMW, but I doubt thats happening anytime soon)
Alfa Romeo, Fiat, and Citroen/Peugeot (are they owned by the same company?) might want Saab to enter the US market, as you said.
What other suitors might there be? I think GM's eventually going to dump Saab, especially if it doesn't turn a profit this year.
They seem to have lost their quirky image since GM bought them. Maybe Saab engineers should try the following to regain that wacky persona:
- Introduce a six wheel car (because some jets have six tires) - Make the driver's seat removable, so when parking in seedy areas, would-be car thieves would avoid a car without a driver's seat. - Place triangular "No Step" stickers on the hood to prevent Saab service technicians from walking on the car to change wiper blades.
---
The last thing you'd want to see is a warmed over TrailBlazer with a Saab badge to fill a gap that didn't need filling.
I just don't know what to say about them anymore. There are so many possible buyers and solutions for this brand. Which is right? The only thing I do know at this point is that they're dying. I still have a thing for the 9-3 Cabrio always have even back in the "900" days. I think GM has too much on their plate to worry about Saab so the best solution may be to sell Saab. Who would buy them? I say one of the Chinese or Koreans would make the best choice because they'd gain some engineering know-how and Saab would get some much needed cash without being told what to do with every dollar of it. Why? Because I doubt any of the Koreans and especially the Chinese would know what to make of a Saab so they couldn't possibly tell them how to design the cars, but this is is pure fantasy. No one has (well maybe Toyota does) enough money to just give it to Saab without some say so in what to do with it. Toyota does, but they're way too smart for that.
Which manufactures niche vehicles for several of the European companies and makes the Saab 9-3 convertible may be ready to step from behind the scenes and into the limelight of having an actual brand.
There are continuing rumors M-S wants to buy the DiamondStar plant in Normal, IL from Daimler.
M - S also makes the MB G Class, European market Grand Cherokees, 300C, and Chrysler Mini-Vans, components for MB awd cars, and the abovementioned 9-3.
Which of course brings a potential complication with any Magna Steyer Saab acquisition:
Is having the Saab brand worth potentially losing the sub-manufacturing contracts?
Good one Introduce a six wheel car (because some jets have six tires Lets wait until they get AWD on 4 wheels.
- Make the driver's seat removable, so when parking in seedy areas, would-be car thieves would avoid a car without a driver's seat. Great idea - can always get a seat at a restaurant, a heated one for the football or hockey games, on the sidelines at kids sports etc etc.
I caught a new Saab SUV commercial that makes it appear that their new SUV is able to transform into a jet fighter.
This seems like a cool feature. Sure would make trips to the store a blast (no pun intended)! Does anyone know if the turbine engine will run on regular unleaded?
Also, I understand the "Decepticon" version is able to transform into a giant robot allowing drivers to walk thru bumper-to-bumper traffic.
But Magna-Steyr has contracts to build other cars, like the X3. Owning Saab might cause all those contracts to instantly go away.
My concern as well.
Magna-Steyer has the money and the engineering to pull it off.
But is owning a brand better business than making cars for the brand owners? These days, I am not so sure.
What's interesting is that all of us think GM will sell it and GM is denying that they are planning to sell Saab.
The other day I read a good article by a long time Detroit pundit with his own connection to the auto blog scene where he argued Saab and GM should do just fine now.
His argument is GM has essentially folded Saab engineering into the Opel facility in Germany. (Saturn engineering as well, but that is for another thread) Opel has cut all of its old, one line only facilities in favor of the multiple line assembly facilities. So it will be relatively easy for GM to continue making Saabs as somewhat more luxurious, and, one hopes, slightly quirky, versions of Opels.
My main issue with the argument is that to someone in the US, Opel and Saab appear to make similar products.
has GM denied it has any plans to do something, and then five minutes later turned around and done just that? The sale of FHI stock last year is one example, continuing employee pricing another.
If GM were to sell Saab, it would be denying it right up until officials walked into the room and signed the deal.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
From a business point of view, you do not let the cat out of the bag (or tip your hand) until it is to your benefit. Why announce employee pricing extensions prematurely when you want people to come in and buy cars now.
It is no different any other business. Look at sports. Trade rumours are denied right up until announcements.
This behaviour certanly doesn't help credibility but makes perfect sense to me.
I agree, but that means pointing out that GM has denied any intention of selling Saab really means nothing, or about as much as its insistence that it will never declare bankruptcy.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
On the one hand, GM management appears to want to keep Saab. On the other hand, many influential industry analysts along with members of Carl Icahn's group think GM should cut Saab loose.
There are valid arguments for either position.
US Industry, like every other area of our society, is competitive and adversarial. People take positions, argue, and either come to a conclusion that works, part ways, or collapse in a stubborn heap.
Personally, I think Saab is less attractive than it may have been with the apparent renaissance of Opel in Europe and the combination of Opel and Saturn in the US.
Some, apparently many at Opel itself, think Saab still has a place with GM. We shall see.
In the meantime, I really look forward to seeing a Combi at the auto show.
I'm tempted to think that this is just the "lets ride this sucker right down to the end" strategy. But, every six months or so Saab comes out with an new agressive ad campaign which indicates continued interest. ( I read recently that Saab in all of '05 sold in the US only one week's production total of Camry. This which makes the per car ad cost really high.)
I suppose GM is positioning saab as "european luxury cars at a reasonable price". A 9-3 or 9-5competes with features with bmw/merc/audi even though it isn't quite as nice, but it can be a lot cheaper. For example, a 9-3 is pretty loaded (even heated rear seats!), has 260hp/trq, and it 34.8K.
The question is, is there really a market for this, or will people wait until there are lease deals on the competitors that "work" because of their better resale?
As stated in the press, though Saabs aren't a big seller for the States (never have been, probably never will be)they are an intregal part of GM's growth in Europe and a keeper as Ford with Volvo. Platform sharing is mandatory with any automaker today, being the largest investment in a vehicle's development, so that argument is just a lack of the knowledge in the auto-industry. Platform sharing is not a rebadge, the 9-2 and 9-7 or rebadges, the 9-3 and 9-5, though they share platforms with other cars, once the suspension, engine, transmission are changed, the car is tuned, you have a completely different handling automobile. The 9-5 is not a Cadillac Catera, or Opel, never handled or drove like one.
Please... If you are going to attempt to quote techical information, let's be accurate here. All of the Saab's products now are on common platform with a GM or Opel product. Might check your sales figures too!
9-2 -> badge engineering -> Subaru Impreza 9-3 -> platform shared with Opel Vectra(?) 9-5 -> the last original one (?) but I might be mistaken 9-6 -> will not happen, it was supposed to be Subaru Tribeca based 9-7 -> GM truck that every dealer carries under many different names
Is partially opel based. The engine is a saab engine. That's both good and bad. It is kind of "rough" and turbo-laggy, but it has a rep of running forever(with care) and can get great fuel economy for 260hp and 260lb-ft.
I was asking why does top-level Saabs don't have basic premium features in a car that costs well into the $40's ??? Basic premium features in todays world are AC seats(except 9-5), DVD Surround Sound Systems, Voice Recognition, 6-disc in the dash, 6 speed automatics, etc etc. Where's the High Performance "VIGGEN" models at ????
I'm not here to trash Saab, and do like the brand very much. I just want a lil' bit more than safety for my money. :shades:
Rocky
P.S. I hope GM doesn't sell Saab, since it could be a great selling brand with some rework.
Just checked out the new Saab line up at the DC Autoshow, as a lifelong Saab fan, I have to say that from a styling point of view, I was dissapointed. I keep waiting for GM to wow me with a great model - while I really like the 9-7x SUV, none of the sedans did it for me...
I don't care if GM rebadges all of their cars as Saabs, I'll still like the 9-3 until they do something to mess it up. For me the 9-3 Convertible is as appealing now as it ever was.
GM today announced a Kerkorian person will be given a seat on the board of directors.
The Kerkorian camp wants GM to sell Saab and Hummer. The philosophy is fewer delivery channels will make it easier to bring GM to profitability.
GM's response has been that by folding Saab into Opel, it has for all practical purposes eliminated the separate delivery channel.
Now that Kerkorian has a person on the board, Kerkorian will have access to all the financials. If the GMfigures convince Kerkorian, then Saab will probably continue as an outlet for quirky, albeit upscale Opels. If not, I expect GM will either sell or fold Saab.
York (the new Kerkorian board member) wants an overall leaner company.
The reasoning probably is that a spun off Hummer would - for the time being anyway - continue to buy platforms and components from GM.
GM on the other hand would not have to pay for engineering, design and marketing, for a vehicle that detracts from keeping GM from becoming as lean as possible.
The GM brass, on the other hand, argue Hummer is a money printing facility and should be kept.
My thinking is this may be worse for Saab. The GM established brass may cut Saab in some compromise with York to save Hummer.
Comments
Sell the brand? Who on the face of the earth is interested?
Fiat just got a big payoff from GM.. maybe they could use Saab dealerships as a new entry point for Alfas?
Maybe Renault?
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Nissan/Renault would work, but can Ghosn engineer another turn around?
Fiat... hmmm... Not a bad idea, there might even be some room for platform and factory sharing, but can they afford the cost of bringing Saab back to life?
Forget Ford or DCX. Hyundai maybe? If they don't want to "build" a luxury brand, perhaps they could buy it...
The Chinese? I sure hope not.
Fuji Heavy Industries? Subaru and Saab could work together, but I think FHI wouldn't touch Saab after the 9-2X...
Potential buyres are in Asia or Renault, which does not have premium brand and its upmarket attempts were rather unsuccessful but... Nissan has Infinity and the may leverage this.
Krzys
Toyota on the other hand, maybe an experiment with the Swede-Speed division could make for some interesting product. Heck, they have plenty of cash to play with it probably wouldn't hurt them a bit if the idea failed... Still don't see it happening though.
Hyundai? Didn't they say they wanted to build a luxury brand? Perhaps they could just buy it...
"Visit your local Hyundai-Saab dealership!"
Hyundai has never been very good with sporty driving dynamics, in my opinion....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And at the Detroit show, I asked one of the guys there about Saab's future, and here's what I got:
"Saab plans on staying a 4 model lineup for the immediate future"
"There are currently no plans for a 7 passenger vehicle or a second SUV at this time"
And third...
"We don't know much" (agreed)
Saab can't last long just selling 4 cars, especially with the lame duck 9-2X (which was hidden behind a display) and no seven passenger crossover.
I hope these product representatives are just "out of the loop" because Saab desperately needs some extra product. :surprise:
And word was a while back, that when the TB was redone (which should be coming up this year or next), the 9-7 would not be.
They could be a TWO model line-up again before they know it....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
BTW, the 'new' Saab 9-5 is sweet looking. Whether you are a quirk Saab owner or not, there is lots to like about the looks of the vehicle. Reliability and performance may be another issue. Are/were Saabs really that bad for reliability?
The current 9-3, though, isn't that hot reliability wise.
I'm only going by the CR ratings.
Also, I asked the crew at the Saab NAIAS display specifically about either a second SUV or a 7 passenger thing, and they said "no current plans"
GM! Gasp! Get some product in showrooms!
link title
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
An investment bank maybe, but not a company that sells automobiles.
And GM can make it work while platform sharing. Witness Volvo and Ford.
It's complicated. Alfa? Pugeot? Daimer-chrysler? I could picture MB wanting a lesser-premium FWD brand. I don't think it'd be bad for honda or toyota, but obviously others disagree.
Doesn't DCX already have Chrysler as a lesser-premium brand? The Pacifica, Crossfire, 300, and Aspen are all supposed to show what direction Chrysler is taking itself. I could see how they might want Saab, but then it would collide with Chrysler. (unless they bring Chrysler back down market and seperate DCX like this:)
Chrysler: Mainstream Automobiles
Dodge: Performance Automobiles
Mercedes-Benz: Premier Luxury Automobiles
Saab: Upscale Automobiles
But doesn't DCX want to bring Smart to the US? How would Saab fit in with Smart?
I could see how Toyota would benefit- Lexus is more of a quiet refinement luxury brand, a Mercedes fighter, and Saab could be thier BMW fighter. (although Lexus wants the IS and GS to take care of BMW, but I doubt thats happening anytime soon)
Alfa Romeo, Fiat, and Citroen/Peugeot (are they owned by the same company?) might want Saab to enter the US market, as you said.
What other suitors might there be? I think GM's eventually going to dump Saab, especially if it doesn't turn a profit this year.
- Introduce a six wheel car (because some jets have six tires)
- Make the driver's seat removable, so when parking in seedy areas, would-be car thieves would avoid a car without a driver's seat.
- Place triangular "No Step" stickers on the hood to prevent Saab service technicians from walking on the car to change wiper blades.
---
The last thing you'd want to see is a warmed over TrailBlazer with a Saab badge to fill a gap that didn't need filling.
M
There are continuing rumors M-S wants to buy the DiamondStar plant in Normal, IL from Daimler.
Krzys
M - S also makes the MB G Class, European market Grand Cherokees, 300C, and Chrysler Mini-Vans, components for MB awd cars, and the abovementioned 9-3.
Which of course brings a potential complication with any Magna Steyer Saab acquisition:
Is having the Saab brand worth potentially losing the sub-manufacturing contracts?
Most likely M - S would want to move production to its own facilities.
I've heard that M-S manufactured autos are typically concerned better than the brand owners.
Introduce a six wheel car (because some jets have six tires Lets wait until they get AWD on 4 wheels.
- Make the driver's seat removable, so when parking in seedy areas, would-be car thieves would avoid a car without a driver's seat. Great idea - can always get a seat at a restaurant, a heated one for the football or hockey games, on the sidelines at kids sports etc etc.
How about ejection passenger seat?
But Magna-Steyr has contracts to build other cars, like the X3. Owning Saab might cause all those contracts to instantly go away.
Alfa Romeo maybe?
What's interesting is that all of us think GM will sell it and GM is denying that they are planning to sell Saab.
Saab needs an automaker willing to give them time, $$$, TLC, and quirky engineers.
This seems like a cool feature. Sure would make trips to the store a blast (no pun intended)! Does anyone know if the turbine engine will run on regular unleaded?
Also, I understand the "Decepticon" version is able to transform into a giant robot allowing drivers to walk thru bumper-to-bumper traffic.
My concern as well.
Magna-Steyer has the money and the engineering to pull it off.
But is owning a brand better business than making cars for the brand owners? These days, I am not so sure.
What's interesting is that all of us think GM will sell it and GM is denying that they are planning to sell Saab.
The other day I read a good article by a long time Detroit pundit with his own connection to the auto blog scene where he argued Saab and GM should do just fine now.
His argument is GM has essentially folded Saab engineering into the Opel facility in Germany. (Saturn engineering as well, but that is for another thread) Opel has cut all of its old, one line only facilities in favor of the multiple line assembly facilities. So it will be relatively easy for GM to continue making Saabs as somewhat more luxurious, and, one hopes, slightly quirky, versions of Opels.
My main issue with the argument is that to someone in the US, Opel and Saab appear to make similar products.
If GM were to sell Saab, it would be denying it right up until officials walked into the room and signed the deal.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
From a business point of view, you do not let the cat out of the bag (or tip your hand) until it is to your benefit. Why announce employee pricing extensions prematurely when you want people to come in and buy cars now.
It is no different any other business. Look at sports. Trade rumours are denied right up until announcements.
This behaviour certanly doesn't help credibility but makes perfect sense to me.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
On the one hand, GM management appears to want to keep Saab. On the other hand, many influential industry analysts along with members of Carl Icahn's group think GM should cut Saab loose.
There are valid arguments for either position.
US Industry, like every other area of our society, is competitive and adversarial. People take positions, argue, and either come to a conclusion that works, part ways, or collapse in a stubborn heap.
Personally, I think Saab is less attractive than it may have been with the apparent renaissance of Opel in Europe and the combination of Opel and Saturn in the US.
Some, apparently many at Opel itself, think Saab still has a place with GM. We shall see.
In the meantime, I really look forward to seeing a Combi at the auto show.
I'm tempted to think that this is just the "lets ride this sucker right down to the end" strategy. But, every six months or so Saab comes out with an new agressive ad campaign which indicates continued interest. ( I read recently that Saab in all of '05 sold in the US only one week's production total of Camry. This which makes the per car ad cost really high.)
The question is, is there really a market for this, or will people wait until there are lease deals on the competitors that "work" because of their better resale?
dave
9-3 -> platform shared with Opel Vectra(?)
9-5 -> the last original one (?) but I might be mistaken
9-6 -> will not happen, it was supposed to be Subaru Tribeca based
9-7 -> GM truck that every dealer carries under many different names
Krzys
dave
The 9-5 is partially Opel based and partially based on the old 9000 model.
I'm not here to trash Saab, and do like the brand very much. I just want a lil' bit more than safety for my money. :shades:
Rocky
P.S. I hope GM doesn't sell Saab, since it could be a great selling brand with some rework.
The 9-5 BioPower prototype they had at NAIAS also impressed me.
M
How many 9-5s, 9-7Xs, and 9-2Xs combined do they move per month?
M
Well, a 9-5 sedan starts at 34.8K, and a 9-3 sedan starts at 26.6K.
The Kerkorian camp wants GM to sell Saab and Hummer. The philosophy is fewer delivery channels will make it easier to bring GM to profitability.
GM's response has been that by folding Saab into Opel, it has for all practical purposes eliminated the separate delivery channel.
Now that Kerkorian has a person on the board, Kerkorian will have access to all the financials. If the GMfigures convince Kerkorian, then Saab will probably continue as an outlet for quirky, albeit upscale Opels. If not, I expect GM will either sell or fold Saab.
Kerkorian does not play around.
Many of us here think it can be saved. Some cash, some engineers, a good marketing plan, and Saab could be back in the black.
M
The reasoning probably is that a spun off Hummer would - for the time being anyway - continue to buy platforms and components from GM.
GM on the other hand would not have to pay for engineering, design and marketing, for a vehicle that detracts from keeping GM from becoming as lean as possible.
The GM brass, on the other hand, argue Hummer is a money printing facility and should be kept.
My thinking is this may be worse for Saab. The GM established brass may cut Saab in some compromise with York to save Hummer.