I strongly believe GM should be leaner and meaner.
GM needs to cut it's portfolio badly but not at saab or hummer or a Hummer/GMC trim expense.
Chevy- combine Impala, Monte Carlo in a coupe, sedan with RWD and big V-8 aka Charger like. Get rid of the horrible Aveo. Keep the HHR and Colbalt and keep the balance of price and performance high. Keep the Silverado and Tahoe but make them the stripped down versions of the Full size platforms. trailblazer would be stripped version of Envoy Denali. Comaro will be a hit. I'd add a CUV
GMC- Yukon Denali should only come in Denali trim. Envoy Denali would be only trim level for the small ute. Sierra Denali would be only trim level for Sierra. All would have premium features and distinguished features from Chevy counterparts. (What I would do as GM CEO) I'd get rid of Tahoe, and Trailblazer, Silverado all togeather and bring it under GMC or Chevy brand nameplate called Sierra, Yukon, Envoy since GMC would be my truck division. But getting rid of GMC would be hard for me. Perhaps the Hummer brand needs to come under GMC brand and the trim or body design be named Hummer ????
Pontiac- GTO I'd keep and wait for G-8 aka Holden Commodore to be my BMW 3 killer with it's LS-1 V-8. Scrap Torrent. G6 would give it a hybrid engine. Grand Prix would become dead since G8 would be it's replacement.
Saturn- Greenline gets green light. It'd trim the fat under Saturn too. Saturn would be a Hybrid GREEN brand that sells cars that all get good gas milage and are economical but with fewer models. 1 SUV, 1 coupe/convertible (SKY), 1 sedan- Aura, 1 crossover- Relay
Hummer- bring it under the GMC nameplate and have a trim line called GMC Hummer H2, H3 ? good idea ?
Buick- Big Cushy luxurious RWD/AWD cars that are less expensive than Saab. Dependable Northstar V-8's and V-6's marketed torwards people wanting conservative designs. I'd have the Enclave as my Crossover, Drop the Rainer or distinguish it further. Lucerne would be RWD/AWD. Lacross would be FWD. Velite Roadster would be Twin Turbo 3.6 V-6 @ 450 Hp and be image flagship car for the brand.
Cadillac- Keep it the way it is with some minor improvements. I'd redesign the CTS and make the DTS a Big V-8 Boat. Cushy, Luxurious, RWD/AWD car that floats like a cloud.
Saab- Take money and poor it into Saab. Bio-power engines, diesel applications, high horsepower turbo engine, niche division. 9-5, 9-3 sedan and convertible, (9-7x or 9-6x) Would be a Luxurious, Safe, Performance, all weather/season premium brand that does it better than Volvo, or Audi in all of the above categories.
I agree GM needs to either combine brands or make fewer rebadged cars. I do think their is a market for Saab and Hummer and if Management would quit "badge engineering" they would beable to cut enough expenses to save Saab and Hummer instead of (holding on) to slow selling product that should get the knife !!!!!
Just Like FORD has the FORD brand, Lincoln, Mercury
Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge
I think the 3 brand approach is best. Yes Cheverolet has more cachet, but has a bad brand image. The Cadillac, Saab, GMC all have a much better image for marketing if GM doesn't destroy them.
So you think it's impossible to put the profitable cheverolet's cars under GMC ?
I think if the advertising was done right the transition wouldn't be that hard. Most people know that a Cheverolet is a GMC car and the ones that didn't would think GMC has just expanded its car line-up
I think having the Chevy logo's changed to GMC would provoke interest by the uneducated public that doesn't know the difference of who makes the Mustang and Camaro
Mainstream Cars: Consisting of: Chevrolet- Mainstream Bread and Butter Cars Pontiac- Affordable Performance automobiles; also the youth brand and Scion fighter (they could add a little subcompact Pontiac G2 or G4)
Ok good line-up. I don't want the Denali trim to die. I also like the Yukon, Sierra, Envoy grills alot better than Chevrolet. The GMC Truck line-up is more conservative than Chevy. However you have a good line-up.
If GM wanted to keep GMC they should make the Chevy Trucks cloth only (no high end models) and make the GMC models only the high end models. That way they wouldn't overlap.
There is technically a way to keep everything, even Saturn, but in that case platform sharing would really have to work its magic.
Saturn could be GM's answer to Scion- scrap all the current models and totally start over. A spunky, youthful brand offering excellent value.
Reports today say Kerkorian sponsored GM Board Member Jerry York now thinks Saab has a future as a GM brand. York had said GM should sell Saab and Hummer a few weeks before getting the Board nomination.
I expect GM will continue consolidating Saab functions into Opel. Saab will slowly change from being a Swedish car maker to a German one.
I also think it quite likely at least a percentage of the next generation 9-3s and SportCombis will be made in Spring Hill.
(That is, unless GM moves Western Hemisphere Astra production to the former Saturn plant - everyone knows Saturn has trademarked the Astra name, no?)
gradually becomes Opel, and Saturn is supposed to become the American Opel, what will differentiate the two, except the better service and wider network of the Saturn dealers?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
My understanding is that Opel has a Chevrolet to Buick level following in Europe. An everyman's car without high end cachet.
While Saab engineering (and probably most manufacturing) will move to Opel facilities, Saabs themselves will be designed for the higher end of the European FWD market. (Apparently, GM is serious about bringing Cadillac to Europe, we shall see)
Especially if GM can move Saab production to the US, I think the better question might be why keep Buick and Pontiac if Saab and Saturn have the better product in between Chevy and Cadillac?
I thought GM was going to close Spring Hill. Rumor here was that the Ion was going to die, and the next generation Vue will be sent somewhere else to produce.
Yes, VUE will be consolidated to whatever facility its like cousins, be they US or Opel cousins still not clear, uses. Appears the ION will be replaced with the Astra, what with Saturn trademarking the name and all.
I do not believe GM will shutter the relatively new, and only recently upgraded Spring Hill facility. Unless another manufacturer wants to buy it, I expect GM will move something there. I've read GM is looking at making Saabs and Opels there for sale in the Americas and possibly export to the EU.
Does that mean for us Nashvillians that we can take the "Spring Hill Delivery Program" save 8% and drive our new ride from Spring Hill to wherever we live?
While the visible parts are all Saab (more jet than ever), some of the the concept underpinnings are from the ... C6.
At the introduction, Lutz also said Saab priority number one is something smaller than the 9-3. Are we talking a Sonnet on the Kappa frame or something based off the next generation Corsa?
Lutz, a car guy, probably has more affection for Saab than York, a money man.
I think the future of Saab boils down to vagaries of the European mid-lux market. The Lutz side apparently believes Opel/Vauxhall will never rise above its status as family and mid-management type appliances. The York side figures Opel can make some more upscale models and save the money supporting a separate brand.
VW really stumbled trying to do the latter. Imagine Lutz is constantly reminding York about the VW experience.
One thing is for sure, neither Lutz nor York have any committment at all to making Saabs in Trollhatten. If Saab survives, the quirky cars are going to be rolling off assembly lines in Belgium, Poland and Tennessee, not Sweden. (I suppose Magna-Steyr will continue making the 9-3 convertible in Austria and maybe in Illinois if it buys the Diamond Star facility from Mitsubishi)
I have read in a few places that Saab may get sold to Porsche. Is this bogus rumormill garbage or is their some inkling of a possiblity there? It has really peeked my interest if rumors are true.
Saab does not develop its own platforms or engines. Rather, it takes other platforms and engines and modifies them.
Porsche would have no problem with the engine part, I suppose. Does Porsche want to spend time on four cylinder development when they use sixes everywhere else?
Pirsche could leverage their interest in VW to get VW platforms (and 4 Cyls.) for Saab. VW also owns Audi. Isn't Audi a direct Saab competitor?
"Saab does not develop its own platforms or engines. Rather, it takes other platforms and engines and modifies them."
I would be the first in line for a new gen 9-3 based on an AWD 911 chassis running the 3.6 mill massaged by Saab engineers. Just dreaming, I know...
I would like to think Saab is a direct Audi competitor however Audi does have the advantage of years in AWD systems. Good thing about Porsche is so do they. So I say, cut loose the ties with VW (and their QC issues) and pick up Saab to play a role in the $40k performance sedan arena. Heck, wasn't Saab one of the first to develop FWD? would certainly compliment RWD and AWD offerings...
WOuld really be quite a cool partnership IMO. :shades:
I still think the whole porsche idea is very weird(tm).
However, porsche wouldn't have to design an engine--they can source the 2.0T from audi, or continue to use the ecotec in various guises, or move to all sixes.
I don't see where the synergies would come from, but perhaps i'm obtuse. Any sort of merger needs to be justified by some degree of sharing of engineering, components, etc. In other words, saab would need to be able to get enough out of the porsche parts bin that they could turn a profit at current volumes. Now, i could see a saab SUV based on the cayenne. But a saab needs to be FWD or -maybe- AWD, and 4 doors.
I can see the idea of selling lower-priced lower-performing porsches without diluting the brand, but i don't see the engineering rationale.
Heck, wasn't Saab one of the first to develop FWD? would certainly compliment RWD and AWD offerings...
Elaborating on Dhanley's point, Saab has the requisite fwd competence (the current 9-3s have almost no torque steer) and turbo competence (the 2.0 and 2.6 turbos are very nice), but they do not have the facilities.
Trollhatten is a finishing plant. GM ships platforms and engines components built elsewhere in Europe to Sweden where they are then crafted into Saabs.
If GM sold Saab, it would sell the brand, engineering and Trollhatten. GM would not sell any of its other factories in Europe. Leastways, not the modern nice ones Porsche would want to use.
Perhaps Porsche could work a deal with Magna Steyr. MS is a quality company. But it does not work cheap. I just cannot think of a way Porsche could swing this without massive investment.
Pulling out of VW makes some sense. My understanding is that German politics are so tight with manufacturing it may be very difficult for Porsche to attempt to dump VW. Especially if doing so would mean a major facilities investment to make an independent Saab work.
I don't see where the two can share items, but perhaps that is the beauty of the plan- 0 overlap, so Saab can be a full line of luxury vehicles and Porsche can still be the niche automaker.
", but perhaps that is the beauty of the plan- 0 overlap, so Saab can be a full line of luxury vehicles and Porsche can still be the niche automaker."
Ok, but the problem is, how does saab turn a profit with a full line of luxury vehicles and no profit sharing?
Porsche would have to buy a lot of the components from elsewhere to be cost effective. Just developing an engine takes many many millions of dollars. I remember reading that developing the current merc c-class platform (not the engine or components!) cost well over a billion dollars. Unless saab increased both price and volume significantly, they can't afford anything close to that.
That's why honda made sense to me, the accord platform WOULD be anemable to saab-izing, fwd, good safety scores, good handling, engines anemable to boost, etc.
That's why honda made sense to me, the accord platform WOULD be anemable to saab-izing, fwd, good safety scores, good handling, engines anemable to boost, etc.
That would be too redundant with the Acura lineup if that happened... Maybe Toyota? Leave Lexus to RWD luxury/performance... I know, far from reality.
The whole Opel/Vauxhall idea does seem promising, if it doesn't get too confusing with the same mission for Saturn. :confuse:
would be competing with each other. Otherwise, the idea would be brilliant.
Toyota is another possibility- Lexus can chase after the baby boomers while Saab can focus on the younger set.
I saw a small article in the Personal Journal section of WSJ Wednesday that Peugeot was contemplating a return to America. Could buying Saab be a quick and easy way to build a dealer network? The Saab dealers could be turned into Saab-Peugeot dealers, and platform, factory, and engine sharing could work. Saab would be the sportier brand and Peugeot could be more mainstream.
Trollhatten is a finishing plant. GM ships platforms and engines components built elsewhere in Europe to Sweden where they are then crafted into Saabs.
I cringe reading that. I think it was Shiftright that said that GM would turn Saab into another poodle in GM's circus or something like that. Seems they've done a good job of it.
It would be interesting. Which of these companies participates in WRC (World Rally Championship)? Hint - they use French in the office.
Saab as a luxury brand for PSA? Maybe. Do not forget that Peugeot and Citroen are part of PSA and P is more sporty and C more luxurious, if I am not mistaken.
The "Peugeot is gonna come back to the US" is an old story that keeps popping up. Not sure if the best move would be to graft Peugeot onto a marginal dealer network. Now, Peugeot and Jag would have some synergies!
Is Saab on the road to recovery ????? The signs are are there. I think the brand within 3 or 4 years could become a money maker and possibly a good cash cow and lead the "green" crowd with solid well made vehicles with Euro flavor.
What possible signs do you see?? A new head of SAAB USA who is ex-Caddy middle management? Old, obsolete product lines? Being years away from AWD? Trotting out the same 9-5 they have been flogging for 8 years? A parent company whose President may be shown the door shortly (yesterday's WSJ). A parent company which is on the verge of bankruptcy? Come on. Its not happening. You and I could do a better job than these guys. (I will wager that no GM exec-with the exception of current Saab management, rifle squad size that it is-has ever even sat in a stick shift Saab.)
You and I could do a better job than these guys. (I will wager that no GM exec-with the exception of current Saab management, rifle squad size that it is-has ever even sat in a stick shift Saab.)
I agree 100% you and I could turn GM around. However from what I've read I do see hope for Saab. The new Saab 9-5 isn't that far away (couple of years) along with the bio-powered engines and a few new designs in the works I believe management does feel the need to keep Saab around. The AWD thang from what I've read is going to happen for Saab. I am taking it all with a grain of salt until I see concepts. I do believe the brand could be Audi/Volvo-ish with a little BMW mixed in We will see....
Published reports say Lutz owns a 9-3 Aero. I think it has a manual. Don't know, never saw it.
I do not understand how making a company whose reputation is built on front wheel drive prowress into an AWD manufacturer would help. AWD vehicles use more fuel and really do not bring all that much value for 90% of the market.
Saab needs to expand on what it has with the 9-3 Sedan and Combi and the make a real honking Sonnet, IMO. Not try and be another Audi.
I disagree with you. FWD is worthless for a brand like Saab. Scandanavia is snowy, so people expect good all season/weather cars. AWD is most definitly the way to go and the trade off is minimal for the control and safety of AWD. BTW- Audi doesn't make only AWD cars, but Subaru does.
Well, Scandinavians have been getting around just fine in FWD cars from Saab and Volvo for decades. And, while Saab has had its problems in the US, it actually has been doing quite well in Scandinavia.
FWD cars drive well in snow. They use less energy than AWD. Sweden, Norway and Denmark are all working on zero imported oil initiatives - read, even higher gas taxes than currently exist. I imagine Scandinavians will be more inclined than ever to want fuel savings.
BTW- Audi doesn't make only AWD cars, but Subaru does.
Yes, but, Audi is the European company that is known for AWD and is the more logical comparison point for Saab.
Comments
GM needs to cut it's portfolio badly but not at saab or hummer or a Hummer/GMC trim expense.
Chevy- combine Impala, Monte Carlo in a coupe, sedan with RWD and big V-8 aka Charger like. Get rid of the horrible Aveo. Keep the HHR and Colbalt and keep the balance of price and performance high. Keep the Silverado and Tahoe but make them the stripped down versions of the Full size platforms. trailblazer would be stripped version of Envoy Denali.
Comaro will be a hit. I'd add a CUV
GMC- Yukon Denali should only come in Denali trim. Envoy Denali would be only trim level for the small ute. Sierra Denali would be only trim level for Sierra. All would have premium features and distinguished features from Chevy counterparts. (What I would do as GM CEO) I'd get rid of Tahoe, and Trailblazer, Silverado all togeather and bring it under GMC or Chevy brand nameplate called Sierra, Yukon, Envoy since GMC would be my truck division. But getting rid of GMC would be hard for me. Perhaps the Hummer brand needs to come under GMC brand and the trim or body design be named Hummer ????
Pontiac- GTO I'd keep and wait for G-8 aka Holden Commodore to be my BMW 3 killer with it's LS-1 V-8. Scrap Torrent. G6 would give it a hybrid engine. Grand Prix would become dead since G8 would be it's replacement.
Saturn- Greenline gets green light. It'd trim the fat under Saturn too. Saturn would be a Hybrid GREEN brand that sells cars that all get good gas milage and are economical but with fewer models. 1 SUV, 1 coupe/convertible (SKY), 1 sedan- Aura, 1 crossover- Relay
Hummer- bring it under the GMC nameplate and have a trim line called GMC Hummer H2, H3 ? good idea ?
Buick- Big Cushy luxurious RWD/AWD cars that are less expensive than Saab. Dependable Northstar V-8's and V-6's marketed torwards people wanting conservative designs.
I'd have the Enclave as my Crossover, Drop the Rainer or distinguish it further. Lucerne would be RWD/AWD. Lacross would be FWD. Velite Roadster would be Twin Turbo 3.6 V-6 @ 450 Hp and be image flagship car for the brand.
Cadillac- Keep it the way it is with some minor improvements. I'd redesign the CTS and make the DTS a Big V-8 Boat. Cushy, Luxurious, RWD/AWD car that floats like a cloud.
Saab- Take money and poor it into Saab. Bio-power engines, diesel applications, high horsepower turbo engine, niche division. 9-5, 9-3 sedan and convertible, (9-7x or 9-6x) Would be a Luxurious, Safe, Performance, all weather/season premium brand that does it better than Volvo, or Audi in all of the above categories.
I agree GM needs to either combine brands or make fewer rebadged cars. I do think their is a market for Saab and Hummer and if Management would quit "badge engineering" they would beable to cut enough expenses to save Saab and Hummer instead of (holding on) to slow selling product that should get the knife !!!!!
Rocky
If you wanted to get really lean and mean. 3 brands
GMC- Would be the cheaper cars/trucks
Cadillac-American Luxury Brand
Saab-European Luxury Brand
Don't you think Chevrolet as the base brand would have more cachet?
I think the days of waiting or over. GM has the union willing to work, Kerkorian's guy is on the board, now it is time to make the big moves.
We will trade the fun of speculating for the equally joyful Monday morning quarterbacking.
Just Like FORD has the
FORD brand, Lincoln, Mercury
Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge
I think the 3 brand approach is best. Yes Cheverolet has more cachet, but has a bad brand image. The Cadillac, Saab, GMC all have a much better image for marketing if GM doesn't destroy them.
Rocky
P.S. Pass to you
dave
I think if the advertising was done right the transition wouldn't be that hard. Most people know that a Cheverolet is a GMC car and the ones that didn't would think GMC has just expanded its car line-up
I think having the Chevy logo's changed to GMC would provoke interest by the uneducated public that doesn't know the difference of who makes the Mustang and Camaro
Rocky
Mainstream Cars:
Consisting of:
Chevrolet- Mainstream Bread and Butter Cars
Pontiac- Affordable Performance automobiles; also the youth brand and Scion fighter (they could add a little subcompact Pontiac G2 or G4)
Premium Automotive
Consisting of:
Buick- Refined luxurious automobiles
Cadillac- Performance luxury automobiles
Saab- Technological Innovators
Hummer- The Macho, Go anywhere brand
What Will Be Killed:
Saturn: Image is too close to Chevrolet; affordable automobiles
GMC Truck: Its trucks are just Chevy trucks
Isuzu: No clear image whatsoever
Buick could go, but I think they could find themselves a little niche- the American Lexus.
Rocky
There is technically a way to keep everything, even Saturn, but in that case platform sharing would really have to work its magic.
Saturn could be GM's answer to Scion- scrap all the current models and totally start over. A spunky, youthful brand offering excellent value.
Rocky
No, i never said anything like that. but since chevrolet sells better, why not do the reverse?
> Most people know that a Cheverolet is a GMC car
I think most people know that GMC is all trucks.
I expect GM will continue consolidating Saab functions into Opel. Saab will slowly change from being a Swedish car maker to a German one.
I also think it quite likely at least a percentage of the next generation 9-3s and SportCombis will be made in Spring Hill.
(That is, unless GM moves Western Hemisphere Astra production to the former Saturn plant - everyone knows Saturn has trademarked the Astra name, no?)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
While Saab engineering (and probably most manufacturing) will move to Opel facilities, Saabs themselves will be designed for the higher end of the European FWD market. (Apparently, GM is serious about bringing Cadillac to Europe, we shall see)
Especially if GM can move Saab production to the US, I think the better question might be why keep Buick and Pontiac if Saab and Saturn have the better product in between Chevy and Cadillac?
Yes, VUE will be consolidated to whatever facility its like cousins, be they US or Opel cousins still not clear, uses. Appears the ION will be replaced with the Astra, what with Saturn trademarking the name and all.
I do not believe GM will shutter the relatively new, and only recently upgraded Spring Hill facility. Unless another manufacturer wants to buy it, I expect GM will move something there. I've read GM is looking at making Saabs and Opels there for sale in the Americas and possibly export to the EU.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.tennessean.com/assets/gif/DN123931122.GIF
While Spring Hill is definitely not going to be the home of Saturn after making the last '06 ION, it will be retooled and used by GM.
The factory is too new to mothball.
Does that mean for us Nashvillians that we can take the "Spring Hill Delivery Program" save 8% and drive our new ride from Spring Hill to wherever we live?
Just Kidding
You can pick up the 9-3 Convertible free in Trollhaten, but have to pay almost $600.00 to pick it up in Vienna.
But the convertible is made in Vienna.
Rocky
P.S. I like the idea of Saabs being made in the States with a euro/swedish flavor.
While the visible parts are all Saab (more jet than ever), some of the the concept underpinnings are from the ... C6.
At the introduction, Lutz also said Saab priority number one is something smaller than the 9-3. Are we talking a Sonnet on the Kappa frame or something based off the next generation Corsa?
Rocky
I guess SAAB needs to deliver to survive.
Krzys
Lutz, a car guy, probably has more affection for Saab than York, a money man.
I think the future of Saab boils down to vagaries of the European mid-lux market. The Lutz side apparently believes Opel/Vauxhall will never rise above its status as family and mid-management type appliances. The York side figures Opel can make some more upscale models and save the money supporting a separate brand.
VW really stumbled trying to do the latter. Imagine Lutz is constantly reminding York about the VW experience.
One thing is for sure, neither Lutz nor York have any committment at all to making Saabs in Trollhatten. If Saab survives, the quirky cars are going to be rolling off assembly lines in Belgium, Poland and Tennessee, not Sweden. (I suppose Magna-Steyr will continue making the 9-3 convertible in Austria and maybe in Illinois if it buys the Diamond Star facility from Mitsubishi)
How does anything else fit?
Saab does not develop its own platforms or engines. Rather, it takes other platforms and engines and modifies them.
Porsche would have no problem with the engine part, I suppose. Does Porsche want to spend time on four cylinder development when they use sixes everywhere else?
Pirsche could leverage their interest in VW to get VW platforms (and 4 Cyls.) for Saab. VW also owns Audi. Isn't Audi a direct Saab competitor?
I would be the first in line for a new gen 9-3 based on an AWD 911 chassis running the 3.6 mill massaged by Saab engineers. Just dreaming, I know...
I would like to think Saab is a direct Audi competitor however Audi does have the advantage of years in AWD systems. Good thing about Porsche is so do they. So I say, cut loose the ties with VW (and their QC issues) and pick up Saab to play a role in the $40k performance sedan arena. Heck, wasn't Saab one of the first to develop FWD? would certainly compliment RWD and AWD offerings...
WOuld really be quite a cool partnership IMO. :shades:
However, porsche wouldn't have to design an engine--they can source the 2.0T from audi, or continue to use the ecotec in various guises, or move to all sixes.
I don't see where the synergies would come from, but perhaps i'm obtuse. Any sort of merger needs to be justified by some degree of sharing of engineering, components, etc. In other words, saab would need to be able to get enough out of the porsche parts bin that they could turn a profit at current volumes. Now, i could see a saab SUV based on the cayenne. But a saab needs to be FWD or -maybe- AWD, and 4 doors.
I can see the idea of selling lower-priced lower-performing porsches without diluting the brand, but i don't see the engineering rationale.
dave
Elaborating on Dhanley's point, Saab has the requisite fwd competence (the current 9-3s have almost no torque steer) and turbo competence (the 2.0 and 2.6 turbos are very nice), but they do not have the facilities.
Trollhatten is a finishing plant. GM ships platforms and engines components built elsewhere in Europe to Sweden where they are then crafted into Saabs.
If GM sold Saab, it would sell the brand, engineering and Trollhatten. GM would not sell any of its other factories in Europe. Leastways, not the modern nice ones Porsche would want to use.
Perhaps Porsche could work a deal with Magna Steyr. MS is a quality company. But it does not work cheap. I just cannot think of a way Porsche could swing this without massive investment.
Pulling out of VW makes some sense. My understanding is that German politics are so tight with manufacturing it may be very difficult for Porsche to attempt to dump VW. Especially if doing so would mean a major facilities investment to make an independent Saab work.
Porsche certainly has the cash...
GM isn't going to sell Saab anytime soon.
Rocky
Ok, but the problem is, how does saab turn a profit with a full line of luxury vehicles and no profit sharing?
Porsche would have to buy a lot of the components from elsewhere to be cost effective. Just developing an engine takes many many millions of dollars. I remember reading that developing the current merc c-class platform (not the engine or components!) cost well over a billion dollars. Unless saab increased both price and volume significantly, they can't afford anything close to that.
That's why honda made sense to me, the accord platform WOULD be anemable to saab-izing, fwd, good safety scores, good handling, engines anemable to boost, etc.
That would be too redundant with the Acura lineup if that happened... Maybe Toyota? Leave Lexus to RWD luxury/performance... I know, far from reality.
The whole Opel/Vauxhall idea does seem promising, if it doesn't get too confusing with the same mission for Saturn. :confuse:
Toyota is another possibility- Lexus can chase after the baby boomers while Saab can focus on the younger set.
I saw a small article in the Personal Journal section of WSJ Wednesday that Peugeot was contemplating a return to America. Could buying Saab be a quick and easy way to build a dealer network? The Saab dealers could be turned into Saab-Peugeot dealers, and platform, factory, and engine sharing could work. Saab would be the sportier brand and Peugeot could be more mainstream.
I cringe reading that. I think it was Shiftright that said that GM would turn Saab into another poodle in GM's circus or something like that. Seems they've done a good job of it.
M
Which of these companies participates in WRC (World Rally Championship)?
Hint - they use French in the office.
Saab as a luxury brand for PSA? Maybe. Do not forget that Peugeot and Citroen are part of PSA and P is more sporty and C more luxurious, if I am not mistaken.
Krzys
You could be right. I think they appeal to a somewhat different audience, but i'm not a marketer, and am probably wrong.
Other than that, I think Honda would make a great parent for Saab.
And my mistake on the Peugeot vs. Saab in terms of sportiness. I'm just not that well rehearsed in the inner workings and record of Peugeot-Citroen.
"Go Saab" :shades:
Rocky
I agree 100% you and I could turn GM around. However from what I've read I do see hope for Saab. The new Saab 9-5 isn't that far away (couple of years) along with the bio-powered engines and a few new designs in the works I believe management does feel the need to keep Saab around. The AWD thang from what I've read is going to happen for Saab. I am taking it all with a grain of salt until I see concepts.
Rocky
I do not understand how making a company whose reputation is built on front wheel drive prowress into an AWD manufacturer would help. AWD vehicles use more fuel and really do not bring all that much value for 90% of the market.
Saab needs to expand on what it has with the 9-3 Sedan and Combi and the make a real honking Sonnet, IMO. Not try and be another Audi.
Rocky
FWD cars drive well in snow. They use less energy than AWD. Sweden, Norway and Denmark are all working on zero imported oil initiatives - read, even higher gas taxes than currently exist. I imagine Scandinavians will be more inclined than ever to want fuel savings.
BTW- Audi doesn't make only AWD cars, but Subaru does.
Yes, but, Audi is the European company that is known for AWD and is the more logical comparison point for Saab.