GM to 'wind down' Saab business

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8421007.stm

What a great pity, they really did make a quality product -I have been the very happy owner of more than 1.
But with facts like

Last year, Saab lost 3bn kronor (£255m; $412m). It has not made a profit since 2001 and made up 1.1% of GM's global sales.

and unable to sell the business, I guess it makes economic sense.
I wonder what happened to the GM exec that thought buying Saab was a good idea in the first place..

It could be an opportunity to go out and buy one although I'm not sure how GM would handle warranties. I was always put off by reports of the 9-3's poor handling despite never having driven one and being the current owner of an agricultural Volvo.

Source: What Car

http://www.whatcar.com/car-reviews/used/saab/9-3-saloon/summary/23735-2

They say that warranties will be honoured & spares will not be an issue - which I would tend to believe as many car 'bits' are 'off the shelf' items with just the car makers name stamped on it.
I think he 9-5 is generally viewed as a better car than the 9-3 & some of them are lightening quick out performing the cheaper Ferrari's - so maybe not the best choice after a Volvo...
The designs for both are about 10 years old though, so not ground breaking, but I guess no nasty design or wear surprises 2 years down the road. I would think still a good buy as long as a good deal became available..

A good many years back, I vaguely recollect Saab making a 3 cylinder 2 stroke engined car. I think a Saab 96 model.

They also use to make airplanes, I remember a Saab Viggen Interceptor plane.

Well, according to Bob's report, the car and aerospace arms split in 1990. Saab group still make aircraft though.

Check this site out and the report on the joint Thai venture! Funnily enough, my organisation has recently started sub contracting the manufacture of avionics equipment to Thailand.

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/index.htm

It's a shame that Saab couldn't make a bid for its former car division but there's no room for sentimentality in this recession, I s'pose.

The lack of a buyer speaks volumes.

More than emotional recollections.

Texpat wrote:The lack of a buyer speaks volumes....

..... mainly that the seller wants a price that any buyer currently is unwilling and/or unable to pay.

Not quite Jimbo.

I understand that GM has sold/is selling to a Chinese car company some technology which is unique to the SAAB vehicle. Perhaps they are getting more for this than they would for the company ie the value of the parts is greater than the whole.

jackspratt wrote:.... I understand that GM has sold/is selling to a Chinese car company some technology which is unique to the SAAB vehicle. Perhaps they are getting more for this than they would for the company ie the value of the parts is greater than the whole.

I have to confess that with all the financial "stuff" that has been going on I'd not being following the Saab disposal story all that closely and I missed that bit.

The WSJ confirms that China's Beijing Automotive Industry Holdings Co has acquired certain assets, "including intellectual property for two sedans and equipment to produce those cars".

Without knowing the inside details one can only speculate that this transaction (or the possibility of it) played some part in reducing the desirability of the business to the other prospective buyer(s) at the asking price and caused them to withdraw from what had previously appeared to be a done deal.

The story develops...

Spyker submits a new Saab offer to General Motors

Source: BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8423363.stm

Dutch luxury car maker Spyker has submitted a new offer to General Motors (GM) for its Swedish car brand Saab.

GM said this week that it would close Saab after talks with Spyker had collapsed.

Spyker has submitted a new 11-point proposal to GM, addressing the issues that ended talks.

Good news if it is true Fawn.
Have a bit of a feeling that both parties are negotiating through the press though - which is never a good way to conduct business unless 'image' is actually more important than the result...

Yeah, either that or you want to exert a bit of pressure on the other side to close a deal.