Spyker saves Saab! Maybe. Probably not.

Out of the burning ashes known as Government Motors, it appears as if boutique supercarmaker Spyker has won the rights to take over the money pit known as Saab.

After a long, drawn out affair, rose-colour-glass-wearing Saabistas are rejoicing that Swedish-designed Opels will continue.

Potentially still-born product like the next 9-5 sedan, 9-4X crossover, 9-3X and maybe even a smaller, compact 9-1, will keep the brand humming along nicely…

Maybe.Probably not.

The reality is something more like this:

 • The Spyker/Saab deal is still subject to a Swedish government guarantee on a €400m (US $564m) loan from the European Investment Bank. Based on what we’ve seen from GM’s announcement of its sale of Opel to Magna (oops) and the “still working on it” sale of its Hummer brand to those Chinese back-end loader makers, don’t count your knoners yet;

 • Even if Dutch Spyker gets control of Swedish Saab, there’s no guarantee it will return to the Canadian market. Despite such obvious unadulterated passion for the brand, Saab is still an unpopular marque in Canada. Sales peaked at 2,640 in 2006, falling to 1,568 in 2008, followed by less than half that last year;

 • Spyker’s 100-odd employees have zero experience as a volume automaker;

 • Saab hasn’t made a dime in over a decade, with GM apparently losing $5,100 US on each Saab it sold.

 • Spyker may end up using the newfound money to keep its operations afloat.

 Sorry, kids. But if you add it all up, things aren’t really all that different for Saab than at this time last week, or the week before that...

 [Source: Wall Street Journal]

 

Comments

[John Frewen-Lord]

John, you may be right, sadly. And I say this as a former SAAB enthusiast, owned three in Canada in the 70s and 80s.

The bit you missed out (and what will probably doom SAAB), is that Spyker has yet to make a profit. It posted a loss of $35m in 2008, and has yet to make a profit in six years.

I understand Spyker has agreed to pay $74m in cash for Saab, so, notwithstanding the guarantees by the Swedish government, where is this money coming from?

It would be lovely to see SAAB survive, as its new products really look the business, But I fear that events have simply overtaken the rescue deal, and there will simply not be the cash flow to survive the critical next two years.

SAAB, RIP.

[Randy]

I guess we better get used to paying BMW prices (or even more) for Saabs, but if they are really good, then why not. BMW sells almost 1.5 million cars a year and turns a healthy profit, Saab wants to do the same selling only 100,000? I think they will need to sell a lot more than that.

This is a big challenge for Spyker and Saab to return to profitability, but with all the new products in the pipeline they've got as good a chance now as ever did under GM ownership.

[Scott Hutchings]

First you miss the point and purpose of the Save Saab Convoys.

Now you are slagging on a sucessful outcome of talks between David and Goliath.

At least for another day, some 4000 plus workers at Saab headquarters in Sweden know they have a job. At least 137 dealerships in the US know they will be selling Saabs in the future and will keep their staff employed. 80 more some dealers in the US may have their agreements renewed. As many as 30 dealerships in Canada may be re-hiring staff in the near future. And some 850 or so dealerships around the world are looking forward to coming into work tomorrow.

Given all of the unemployment we are facing globally right now, I would say that the Spyker group has done what no one else has been able to do ... save jobs around the world and possibly increase their work force.

I for one look forward to seeing what the future holds for Saab. Perhaps they will now be able to get back to their roots and become the innovators they used to be.

I drive a Saab today and plan to for the foreseeable future and can not wait to get behind the wheel of a NG 9-5.

Scott Hutchings
President, The Saab Club of Canada

[Saab 9-zzzzzz]

Saab may have won an extra year or two of operating, but despite the efforts of fanatical (and annoying) Saabistas, the company is dead as Oldsmobile.
First of all: Throughout its 50 year old history, Saab has only made a profit a handful of years. The reason for this is simple: It wasn’t made to make profits. Saab is an anachronism, a nationalist project born at a time where it was seen as a wise investment for a country just to have a car company, never mind the profits, or in Saabs case: The deficits. If Saab couldn’t pull a profit at a time of massive government subsidies, duty-barriers and little international competition, the chances of the company being profitable in an era where car companies have to compete with Japanese, Korean and Chinese imports is, are about equal to, well... Do (Swedish) pigs fly?
Second of all: Where will the cars come from? Never being particularily gifted at designing cars themselves (they hasn’t actually done that in over 25 years!), Saab took advantage of other companies under the GM umbrella: Putting GM-engines into cars built on Opels platforms. (Or in some cases, ignoring any pretense and just straight out rebadging GM or Subaru models).That kind of pinching is common and understandable. After all, developing a new platform can cost billions of dollars. It’s something that only a company that sells millions of cars can afford. But Saab, who on a good year didn’t sell more than 150.000 cars? Nope, not going to happen.
And just to answer the Saab fanboys, who undoubtedly are about to launch into another tirade about how “innovating” Saab is, give up already. Sure, Saab might have been the first company to put a seatbelt in a car, but that doesn’t mean that any of their models the last 30 years have been particularly good cars. Au contraire, all surveys have them way down the list in terms of reliability, performance and quality. Then again, other car companies can let their work speak for itself, instead of listing 40 year old achievements that have no relevance today. Have you ever heard a Cadillac-fan proudly announce how their company was the first one to introduce the windshield wiper? Well, that’s because past performance is a poor indicator of current success, and all car companies have been innovative at some point. And unlike your run of the mill, fanatical Saabista, they actually can point to current models that are great cars, unlike the rebadged Opels that Saab have been pushing (without much luck) for the last couple of decades.
Bye Saab. You won’t be missed.

[kalle]

Ha ha, you are funny Mr "Saabisdead" guy. You have been spot on about Saab and the future of the brand in the past, so I guess you will be right again. Not.

[josimar]

• Spyker’s 100-odd employees have zero experience as a volume automaker;
=> Which is exactly why they will continue making SAABs by SAAB employees in SAAB's factory in Sweden. You missed the point here
• Saab hasn’t made a dime in over a decade, with GM apparently losing $5,100 US on each Saab it sold.
=> Paying for GM's US emplyees helathcare and pensions that is
• Spyker may end up using the newfound money to keep its operations afloat.
=> Impossible, because the Swedisch national treasury office are monitoring that as wel as the EIB.

[Rune Moberg]

Given that Saab's accounting has been intimately tied in with GM's, it is difficult/impossible to say much about their profitability throughout the past decade.

What is known, is that they sold a hefty bunch of cars in 2001 and 2007.

What is also known is that Saab's people think it is a bit strange that a part that used to cost 10000 SEK pre-GM suddenly cost 18000 SEK when sourced from GM. It is also believed (source: Paul Åkerlund wrote a piece in di.se) that GM NA pocketed the profits from selling Saabs in the US. Saab still paid for all the parts and labour.

It is tempting to keep commenting on your other claims, but I'll simply end this with the following question: Saab has 60 years worth of experience as a volume car manufacturer. Why do you think it is necessary that Spyker should have the same experience? Victor Muller makes a good point when he says both companies bring different things to the table.

There is an important difference between people who make serious amount of cash and those who don't: Seeing opportunities where others see naught.

[Saxel]

Mr. Leblanc,
Thank you for taking the time to write a follow up regarding your last article that SAAB is doomed and GM will not change its mind about selling SAAB. As you know, GM and Spyker have reached a binding agreement on the purchase of SAAB Automobile AB yesterday. This is due in part to the incredible efforts and tenacity of Victor Muller of Spyker and his team who have worked around the clock to save this iconic brand. During his press conference today, he thanked the owners and enthusiasts from around the world who participated in the SAVE SAAB convoys for their incredible support and encouragement. I believe it is his vision that SAAB should go back to building "SAAB SAAB's" rather than "Opel SAAB's" that will guide the company into the right direction of building unique cars that people will want to buy.

In regards to your comments above about the realities:
-Sweden has already stated that they will guarantee the EIB loan. Let's hope GM doesn't change their mind again.
-I believe that SAAB will return to Canada as Victor Muller has stated that dealers are an important life line to its customers. Where Koenigsegg wanted to cut dealers, Muller would like more dealer networks. Spyker Cars already has a dealer in Calgary. It would make sense that they would expand that to SAAB dealers in Canada in the future with increased exposure for SAAB.
-Spyker may not have experience as a volume automaker yet, but that is why Jon-Akke Jonsson and his management team at SAAB will be an asset to the new company. Jon-Akke has proven to be a rock during these uncertain times and has won the respect of all the SAAB employees for his leadership. Muller and the management team at SAAB will guide the new SAAB into the future.
-Regarding GM losing $5100 on every SAAB sold, that is probably due to GM mismanagement over the years. They underestimated and undervalued the brand over the years making more cars that they thought would appeal to the masses. The result being cars that lacked its uniqueness and appeal to loyal SAAB owners. The last year or so obviously has been due to SAAB's uncertain future.
-The EIB loan that the Swedish government has guaranteed can only be used for environmental and safety related projects. It can not be used to keep operations afloat as stated above. I believe that as a condition of the sale, Spyker had to provide a viable business plan for at least the next 10 years that would satisfy GM's interest.

In short, most SAAB owners are very educated and well aware of all the points you mentioned in your article. It has been noted and debated many times over. The time is now that all SAAB owners, employees, dealers, suppliers and everyone else that cares about the brand can celebrate it's potential as an independent company. What the future holds, time will surely tell. It will not be easy given today's market and economy, and will require hard work from all parties involved. It will also take a few years before the new "SAAB SAAB's will arrive. If they do not succeed, then SAAB Spyker Automobiles N.V. would have died trying building cars they truly believe in. That in itself is admirable in today's age. Sometimes being a non-conformist is a good thing. It is those risk takers with vision that will usually succeed in bringing something new and innovative to the world beyond all doubts. Perhaps that is the optimist in me.

Things ARE different for SAAB today than they were a week ago or a year ago, Mr. Leblanc. The difference is that SAAB has now been given a chance to develop into a viable brand. For the first time in history, SAAB will be the focus of it's owner, not just a division of another company. I think this focus will be the key to SAAB's success.

This leads me to the Spyker motto "nulla tenaci invia est via" meaning "for the tenacious no road is impassable". So true....

Regards,

Saxel

[Saab 9-zzzzzz]

"which is exactly why they will continue making SAABs by SAAB employees in SAAB's factory in Sweden. You missed the point here"

Hehe... Nice thought, but kinda naive. Spyker has allready outsourced its own production to Lotus in the UK, so it would only be natural for them to outsource production of Saabs to Poland or the Czech Republic. ESPECIALLY since the factory in Trollhattan was built for a production of +100.000 cars yearly.

A production half of that, or less, will be much more realistic for Saabs near to medium term future.

Besides the overproduction in Trollhattan, both Poland and Czech have wages far lower than Sweden, and extensive experience in autoproduction.

"• Saab hasn’t made a dime in over a decade, with GM apparently losing $5,100 US on each Saab it sold.
=> Paying for GM's US emplyees helathcare and pensions that is"

Doesn't really matter, since Saab was a lossmaking operation even BEFORE GM stepped into the picture. Saab began as a nationalist project, the goal of having an autoproduction was seen as more important than having a profitable autoproduction.

It's a relic of those days, and have neither relevance or any hope of surviving in a world flooded with asian cars and no duty walls to protect it.

And not only has Saab been stacking up deficits for most of it's 50+ years, Spyker THEMSELVES is a lossmaking operation. Why on earth would you think that TWO financial failures would be a profitable company if merged?

"Saab has 60 years worth of experience as a volume car manufacturer."

Saab has 60 years of experience in deficits and being a marginable entity in a very, very tough market.

May I ask the faithful a painful question?

Where exactly are the new Saabs going to come from?

Developing a new car platform is a billion dollar exercise, which is why Saab had to rely on GM (Opel) to supply those new car models that are oh-so-unique (LOL!). Even then it took 13, THIRTEEN years to develop a new 9-5 model.

With GM out of the picture, where will they come from?

Don't look at Spyker, who not only have no experience in making volume cars, but also depend on VW group for their knowhow and engines.

Nah, sorry... Spyker deal or not, Saab is dead, dead, dead.
And not just creatively speaking which they already have been for well over 20 years.

[Scott Hutchings]

I have to say ... I can understand people who are enthusiastic about something. Those people want to talk about what they are enthusiastic about. This makes sense.

But to put energy into something you don't like, that you don't care about?
Quite frankly, that baffles me.
If you don't like something, leave it alone.
Why would anyone want to put something down that someone else likes, believes in?

Mind boggling if you ask me.
I get a journalist commenting negatively (whether I like it or not). It is in their nature, sometimes to dress something up to make it better or worse than it actually is.
But a why would anyone else take their time?
I would have thought their time would be better put to use on something THEY like, they believe in.
I guess I am mistaken.

I say to you (the above poster), leave it alone.
Take your anger, frustration, whatever it may be out somewhere else and let us enjoy this ... at least for a couple of days.
Perhaps by then you will have forgotten all about this and moved on to try to make someone else's life miserable.

[A Private Citizen]

While I can accept other peoples opinion, some people's arrogance deserves a response.

Saab 9-zzzzzzz:

"Even then it took 13, THIRTEEN years to develop a new 9-5 model."
Wrong. Saab wanted to redesign the 9-5 back in 2004, but GM axed it, they had to content themselves with a major rework of the already-old 9-5. That was GM's fault not Saab.

"so it would only be natural for them to outsource production of Saabs to Poland or the Czech Republic. ESPECIALLY since the factory in Trollhattan was built for a production of +100.000 cars yearly. "

Let me get this straight, you are saying now that Spyker has acquired Saab's production assets to build cars, they will outsource it? Why even bother buying Saab? That's like Microsoft buying Apple then outsourcing it and losing all the Corporate knowledge at the same time. That would be colossally STUPID.

"Saab began as a nationalist project, the goal of having an autoproduction was seen as more important than having a profitable autoproduction." and "And not only has Saab been stacking up deficits for most of it's 50+ years, Spyker THEMSELVES is a lossmaking operation. Why on earth would you think that TWO financial failures would be a profitable company if merged?"

This statement has no basis in fact. If Saab was losing money since its incorporation, it would have gone bankrupt before 1950. Also, GM said in made a profit in 1995, which was the first time in 7 years, so that means they made money in 1988 as well. This is contrary to what you imply that they have never made a profit at all.

"With GM out of the picture, where will they come from?" (the architectures to build their cars)
Wrong again. Saab and GM have an agreement to share platforms and technology.
"Even after the purchase, G.M. will continue to supply Saab Spyker with power-train technology and engineering services. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/business/global/27saab.html

While I can accept your opinion that Saab is dead, instead of just slagging the brand and its supporters, you could at least avoid presenting false and unsubstantiated arguments.

[Saab 9-zzzzzz]

" I believe it is his vision that SAAB should go back to building "SAAB SAAB's" rather than "Opel SAAB's" that will guide the company into the right direction of building unique cars that people will want to buy."

"Unique cars"?!? Hardly, though it was always entertaining to see how Saab could rebadge an Opel, borrow some designcues from other manufacturers (Which they still do btw. Look at newer Audis, and then take a look at the new 9-5), put the ignition between the seats, and the fanboys and fangirls would praise it like the second coming of Christ...

And as for uniquenes, that has little to do with why people don't buy Saabs, and won't do so in the future. Saab simply doesn't make good enough cars for the price it's charging. It can't compete safety-wise performance-wise or quality-wise with other imports in the same pricerange like BMWs, Mercedes and even Volvos, and as for their build-quality and sturdyness, even cheap import brands like Kia and Hyundais leave Saab in the dust.

"But a why would anyone else take their time?
I would have thought their time would be better put to use on something THEY like, they believe in.
I guess I am mistaken."

Yes, indeed you are. And I don't know how long it takes you to put a post together, but in my case, it's a couple of minutes I don't mind sparing. It's such a harsh world out there, eh? With people having different opinions from you, and with time and energy to set people straight about their illusions. Harsh I tell ya!

"Also, GM said in made a profit in 1995, which was the first time in 7 years, so that means they made money in 1988 as well."

Well thank you for proving my point, though it hardly needed it!

So far that would be TWO profitable years in OVER TWENTY years, which hardly bodes well for Saabs future, considering the added expenses of not being able to mooch off GMs platforms for free, AND the fact that their sales are down over 50% even not counting 2009.

"This is contrary to what you imply that they have never made a profit at all."

Please read my post again. I wrote that Saab has been stacking up deficits for MOST of their existance, which, sorry to burst your bubble, you have just confirmed yourself.

[p00ch]

No matter how well Spyker manages Saab, one of the biggest challenges will erasing the last few years from consumers' memories. The trick will be to convince non-Saabistas to shell out $40K+ for a car with a very troubled past, especially the last few weeks; people will be afraid to take a costly gamble. Saab would have had a better chance if they had gone to a large manufacturer with deep pockets, such as Ford or even one of the Chinese firms.

[Randy]

"It can't compete safety-wise performance-wise or quality-wise with other imports in the same pricerange like BMWs, Mercedes and even Volvos, and as for their build-quality and sturdyness, even cheap import brands like Kia and Hyundais leave Saab in the dust."

That's a joke right? I own a Saab plus I've had both Kia's and Hyundai's as rentals and believe me they are like a candle in the wind in comparison to a Saab, in ANY category. (Build quality, performance, ride, fuel economy etc.)

You must have owned a Saab like, 30 years ago or something and you're still bitter over the experience? Cause you a few problems did it? Did you know that every single Saab with the exception of the 9-7 is a recommended buy in Consumer Reports?
Yep Saabs are pretty crappy all right.
Ha! Ha! Ha! That's a good one.

[Saab 9-zzzzzz]

Ahhh yes, Consumer Reports, let's take a look at that, shall we?
Wonder what it says about the 9-3...
(Trust me, you don't want to see what they say about the 9-5!)

"Falls short among strong competition", "Engine lacks refinement", "Ride is stiff", "Interior cramped and noisy, and fit and finish could be better", "Reliability is average for the sedan".

And all that for the bargain price of 35.000$!

Saab falls well short in every category if you compare it with VWs, BMWs and Volvos in the same price range, so in order for our quality-challenged Swedish friends to have a chance, let's compare with the Hyundai Sonata, which is 15-20.000 CHEAPER.

"Roomy, quiet interior and lots of features for the price", "The ride is comfortable", "Handling is secure but not agile", "The rear seat is spacious, theinterior is nicely finished, and controls are simple".

And here's the kicker...

"Reliability has been above average"

Did I mention that the Hyundai gets better fuel economy, and scores better in crash and rollover tests than your oh-so-safe Saab, according to Consumer Reports?

(Not going to bore you, with quotes on some of Kia's excellent new models, let's just say that they are so reliable, that Kia gives a 7 year, all inclusive warranty on their cars in Europe. Could you imagine Saab doing the same? Nahh, thought so!)

I reckon that Saab isn't going to have an easy time in the future, considering that they don't even compare quality-wise and in terms of reliability with a 15.000 dollar cheaper Hyundai.

Sorry guys. The days where Saab made cars that ranked with, and that you could compare with other premium European brands like Volvo and BMW are long gone...

[kitty]

Sounds like you need to convince yourself that the Hyundai or Kia you was right for you. Good luck with whatever you bought. I bought my SAAB back in 03 (it was had the highest IIHS safety score) and it has been a fantastic car (perfect for Canadian winters I might add). We'll check back with you in 6-7 years and see how you like that Hyundai/Kia thing.

[9395]

To Saab 9-zzzzzz:

I have read all of your comments made over the last several days. As I have said to Mr. Leblanc and I will say to you, all of the comments you have mentioned have been noted and debated many times over in the SAAB community. You have not provided any new insight into the quality, design, profitability, manufacturing, and price value of a SAAB that every SAAB owner does not already know. For every argument that you give, there will always be a counter argument. It would be nice, however, if some of your statements were based on facts and were accurate and not based on conjecture.

As a SAAB owner, we know that most people either love SAAB or hate SAAB. We respect people's opinion as we know that liking a car brand will always be subjective to the owner's taste, values, and needs. I feel that there is room for many car brands on the road in the world. Every car brand will have it's good and bad qualities. As someone whose own family have owned the top of the line Mercedes and BMW, along with friends who have owned Volvo's, Kia's, Honda's and Toyota's, I must say that my family's Mercedes and BMW have had much more problems than my SAAB has ever had. My Volvo driving friends have also had their share of problems. Along with Toyota's recent throttle trouble, you can see that not all brands are infallible.

There is one aspect of the SAAB brand loyalty that you have not covered. That aspect is the emotional appeal that this car brand has on its owners. Sometimes it defies all logic and reason, but is why we will never consider buying any other car brand no matter what other people say and will say.

Once the SAAB Spyker Automobiles N.V. deal closes, SAAB will have a tough road ahead. They will have to work incredibly hard to build, distribute, and sell it's new models to become profitable again. They have to improve SAAB's brand perception to the world and show that SAAB is alive and well.

I am looking forward to SAAB's new models in the future and will patiently await it's new 9-3(secretly wishing for a hatchback). My current 9-3 is 11 years old now and has almost 250,000 kilometers driven. It's body and interior is solid and drives incredibly well. A classic example of SAAB quality....

Needless to say, I am a proud SAAB owner and the SAAB community is as stronger than it has ever been. The global efforts of the SAVE SAAB campaign has united us in a way that no other brand has ever come close to achieving. When you have come so close to death, it only makes you stronger and more resilient.

SAVE SAAB, SELL SAAB, SAAB SAVED......Long live SAAB...

Regards,

Saxel

[Randy]

"Did I mention that the Hyundai gets better fuel economy, and scores better in crash and rollover tests than your oh-so-safe Saab, according to Consumer Reports?"

Who cares? People who buy Saab's won't even look at a Kia or Hyundai. They have all the character of a beige 1995 Buick in a Walmart parking lot.

And which Hyundai are you referring to? The Sonata I assume? I've driven them. They drive like a hovercraft on wheels. The ride sucks, they are gutless and I don't like them. I would NEVER buy a Hyundai.

I bought a Saab, and I bought it because it was bigger than a VW, was better on fuel than a Volvo, and cost substantially less money than an Audi or BMW of the same size and power. My Saab has been flawless. I'm very happy with it. Can't wait to see the new 9-5 in wagon form.

Go ahead and buy your Hyundai Mr Saab-Hater, I'll give you a wave as I pass by with a big grin on my face with my fun to drive Saab.

[CarGuy]

I'm just happy to see Saab get a second chance. This is a brand with history, albeit mostly on the quirky side. What is wrong with that? Quirky is... well..kinda cool. Vive la difference.

If the future of Saab includes some Spyker influence, it may work out better than anyone expected.

[Scott Hutchings]

It sounds to me that you need to get a life or some semblence thereof.
Why you contine to waste your time (however little of it you spend on this) is beyond me, but obviously you have nothing else to occupy your time.

I hope you find something that you like in life ... other than bashing things you don't that is.

Not sure what has set you off about Saab, but you would be a much happier individual if you focused on positive things for a change.

Good luck with your life ... and if you are ever in an accident, I hope it isn't with my Saab as it would undoubtably cause significant damage to your vehicle while allowing me to walk away unscathed. At which point in time I will drive away in my large, safe, comfortable Saab, able to get as little as 6.8L/100kms on the highway while having more than enough power on tap to be able to get around pretty much any other vehicle on the road and get on with my day. It is my hope that you aren't so miserable in your life away from the computer that you will have friends and/or family that will visit you in the hospital after said collision.