G.M. Plans to Close Saab After Talks Collapse

Page 1 of 2  
G.M. Plans to Close Saab After Talks Collapse http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/19/business/global/19saab.html?_r=1&hp
Unable to find a buyer for Saab after a year-long search, General Motors
said Friday that it would begin shutting down operations at the Swedish carmaker.
G.M. had been in final sales negotiations with a Dutch maker of high-end sports cars, Spyker Cars, but issues arose during the due diligence process that made the sale impossible before G.M.s Jan. 1 deadline, the company said in a statement.
Despite the best efforts of all involved, it has become very clear that the due diligence required to complete this complex transaction could not be executed in a reasonable time, the president of G.M. Europe, Nick Reilly, said.
We regret that we were not able to complete this transaction with Spyker Cars, Mr. Reilly said. We will work closely with the Saab organization to wind down the business in an orderly and responsible manner.
Saab will continue to honor warranties, while providing service and spare parts to current Saab owners around the world, G.M. said. Mr. Reilly said that the move was not a bankruptcy or forced liquidation, so he expected Saab to pay its debts, including those of suppliers.
But with a narrow, though loyal, customer base focused on Sweden, Britain and the American Northeast, Saab has proved too small to lure the worlds big automakers, many of which are seeking tie-ups to increase economies of scale.
Earlier this month, the Beijing Automotive Industry Holding Company struck a deal for the right to produce versions of the older 9-5 and 9-3 models in China.
In late November, the Swedish sports carmaker, Koenigsegg, backed out of the deal to buy the unit. It was the third time in less than two months that a sale of a G.M. brand has been called off, reflecting the difficulty of selling underperforming divisions in the midst of a global sales slump.
In early November, G.M. also backed out of a deal to sell its European operations, Opel, to a Canadian parts supplier and Russian bank. And in September, G.M. announced that the Saturn brand and dealerships would close after Penske Automotive terminated its deal to buy the carmaker.
G.M. still has a tentative deal to sell Hummer to a Chinese industrial machinery manufacturer.
Saab, which filed for bankruptcy protection in Sweden in February, has been a perennial money-loser and is among G.M.s smallest brands, with sales of 93,000 vehicles worldwide last year.
It is on pace to sell fewer than 10,000 vehicles in the United States this year.
G.M. paid $600 million for half of Saab in 1990 and $125 million for the rest in 2000. Terms of the deal with Koenigsegg have not been revealed, but it was contingent on $600 million of financing from the European Investment Bank and Swedish government guarantees.
Saab, which originally made fighter planes, began to make cars after World War II in an effort to branch out.
--
Civis Romanus Sum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I hate to hear this. I only owned one of them, a pre GM model, and it was a wonderful car. They were truly special.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I will always have my 1990 classic 900 convertible, with 6,500 miles on it... Wonderful vehicle, a classic in every way.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Good riddance, there will be a few less friggin oddballs for some poor sod to try to fix when it breakes.
Now if Americans would only stop buying those friggin Jettas and other oddball cars that nobody can work on and only the dealer can get parts for at costs of thousands for anything other than a belt.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do you have a particular dog in the fight?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott wrote:

Since when can you work on a GM? Teh best cars don't require repairs like transmissions, engines and body issues.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Canuck57 wrote:

Then point out the brand that doesn't require any of this work. I know of NONE.
Guess it's time to start walking, Of course even humans have failing parts...
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

However I've to date yet to encounter any electrical or mechanical device that could actually affect repairs to itself though (and no, while defaulting to an integrated or redundant backup system may qualify as a rectification of an issue, such a process does not constitute a repair).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve W. wrote:

True, there is no such thing as a perfect car. But there are ways to get better cars. First, abandon the irrational urges on model/style/fad/hype and think.
Look for vehicles that at high volume and lower cost, top two in it's class and in production for 5 or more years without any major changes, especially the drive train where expensive money goes.
These types of cars also tend to sell better, last longer and are less headaches for the owners on average. The traditional Toyota Camry for example.
Skip the fad vehicles, first time runners, Volt type hype. These are unproven, lots of kinks to go that owners end up paying for in low resale or repairs.
While GM and Ford can make a decent V8, so so on V6, neither can make a decent 4 cyl. In fact, GM's 4 cyl. is over weight, unreliable and expensive.
GM tends not to have such vehicles. Often 3rd or 4th place runner ups at best. And some like Regals (no longer produced) started off good, later crashed in reliability and thus people didn't buy them any more. Plastic manifold crap issues going on so long were a huge blunder on GMs part.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Once again our friend Canuck57 is telling us the sky is falling

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Canuck57 wrote:

Must be why I stick with the Chevy Blazer - 1983 - 2004 Only real drive train change was going from the 2.8 up to the 4.3, but it was designed for the 4.3 from the beginning.

I won't buy a first year of ANY make. I don't buy vehicles for any other reason than functional for the task at hand.

I can't agree on that. I have spent WAY to many hours working on various makes. They ALL have good and bad engines.

Or Toyota's with sludged up engines and Tacoma's with frames rotting off.
Face it ALL of them have made crap over the years. Personally I wouldn't own a Toyota or Honda. Seen how bad they are with OEM replacement parts pricing and the attitude of most of the dealers just turns me away.
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have owned several Toyotas including one of the first sold in the US, a 57 Toyopet. My last six Toyotas were Lexus LS V8s.
You are right about their dealerships. Stopped buying them when the Lexus dealer started to take me for granted.
He expected me to by a 1999 with at $4,000 smoke and mirrors back while offering me $3,000 under wholesale for my trade.
I stopped at a Ford Lincoln-Mercury dealer down the street and bought on of the just introduced 2000 Lincoln LS V8s for almost $25,000 less than the Lexus dealers price on the 1999.
The FLM dealer was so nice to me I also bought a 1999 Mustang GT V8 convertible from him as well for $27,300.
I found the Lincoln LS to be just as good as the Lexus and thereafter I purchased a 2002, 2004, 2005
Since then I bought a 2007 Zephyr, a 2009 now called the MKZ and the 2010 MKZ that I currently own, as well as a 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 Mustang GT convertibles.
I still have the 2005 LS that I keep at my home in Key West and currently drive the 2009 Mustang convertible and a 2010 MKZ.
I have saved thousands of dollars in purchase prices as well as hundreds of dollars in service fees, since I stopped buying from Toyota, because the FLM dealers shop rate is $25 LESS than the Lexus dealers shop rate.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hunter wrote:

Funny how you stick up for GM yet own Fords. They are the best of the D3 and that is why they are having the least trouble.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't "stick up" for any brand, all manufactures are building good vehicles today. The only real difference among them is style and price, as I pointed out in my post.
I simply have been trying to be fair by pointing out that you have no Idea what you are talking about most of the time, when it comes to GM.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The reaon you don't understand me with regards to GM is you chose not to hear it.
GM got a $60,000+ handout for nothing per vehicle produced this year and they still can't turn a profit!
And that handout came by Obama slapping the debt anto the taxpayers along with the bank handouts. This is a unparalleled ammout of corruption as income tax system should not be used to prop us bad failing companies. I call this taxpayer abuse.
We need an amendment that makes it a crimal offence to use public dollars for private business and to prevent government marxism. (Government Motors)
Mike Hunter wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Once again our friend Canuck57is telling us the sky is falling.
Like I said you have no Idea what you are talking about. GM is in the position to start paying down the government loan by 1.5 billion.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
They lost money. Taking money from reserver of taxpayers cash back to taxpayers cash isn't a payment. It is like paying one credit card with another.
GM stated it lost money yet is paying back... listen to that gibberish.
GM is a loser, tick tock, GM is on a rock, tick tock GM can bite its ....
Mike Hunter wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are correct, once again our friend Canuck57is telling us the sky is falling.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Once again our friend Canuck57is telling us the sky is falling.
Like I said you have no Idea what you are talking about.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.