Comments on: Saab gains protection from creditors, seeks partner

By: Borat

Borat — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 22:38:31 +0000

GM could not influence SAAB and they didn’t. Unless rape is synonym with influence.
SAAB 90 was build in 70′s and 900 in early 80′s. Of course compare to today’s cars they obsolete, but by today standards Olds obsolete. SAAB was the only car in late 70 with turbo motor (another was Porsche) and 900 was very advanced for its day.
However, even when Olds was produced it was pretty obsolete, starting from 70′s forward. Does anyone remember those grotesque 442 letters on 6 cylinder automatic things of 80′s? What was GM thinking, that country is full of Army rejects?

By: olds307

olds307 — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:37:11 +0000

The GM (Opel, really) influenced Saabs are exponentially better than the old 900s of the early 90s and prior.

By: nestle_s

nestle_s — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 02:25:13 +0000

i agree with needs more oil for gm…saab needs to stay because they are a good alternative to any cars that are rather bland in styling and execution.

By: global_lightning

global_lightning — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 20:49:34 +0000

Selling off Saab/Saturn as a package would be attractive to European manufacturers re-entering the U.S. market. Saturn’s strength is its dedicated dealership network that could be an easy launching point for sales. Saab brings a strongly recognized brand (despite years of GM mismanagement and neglect) that could bring some cachet to the new conglomerate. Some posible buyers could be Fiat, Renault, or Citroen.

By: jayjc08

jayjc08 — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 02:27:03 +0000

ALRIGHT. JUST STOP with the stupid NMOFGM anachronisms. They’re not remotely funny. LLN, start moderating or lose readers. Your choice.

By: Get Real

Get Real — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 01:26:51 +0000

Oooooh…..A big black hole to dump money into.

By: Need more oil for GM is an idiot

Need more oil for GM is an idiot — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:02:12 +0000

Saab aka GM couldnt make an all wheel drive system if their lives depended on it.
Buy audi,its your rally duty!

By: Commissar007

Commissar007 — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:07:02 +0000

Great idea – Lionwithoutpride. I completely agree with you. But alas, it is a dream… I think where all of the companies went wrong is that they’re offering too many different types of vehicles so they are unable to sell enough of any ONE of them to be profitable. Remember back in the day when if you wanted a Saab you got the 900… and the 900 only?? Now they all have too many vehicles so their production costs are UP. They could really knock out some of the useless ones… For instance… Dodge made the Magnum and it turned out to be a dud, so they stopped producing it…. NOW Toyota has started making the Venza and it’s just as ugly and stupid so it probably won’t go over any better than the Magnum did… Granted Saab took a loss last year. But they sold 94,000 vehicles, and let’s be conservative and say those vehicles cost $40,000 a piece… which they probably cost more… but 94,000 x 40,000 equals almost 4 billion dollars!! How do you earn $4 billion dollars and still fail?? There is money to be had, they just need to cut their expenses by getting rid of the duds. When I think Saab, I don’t think SUV… and the ones they came up with are UGLY. And do they really need 3 different colors of gray as options?? I love my little Saab and it’s hard enough to find parts NOW, I can’t even begin to imagine what it will be like if they fold!!

By: 07grandprix

07grandprix — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:17:42 +0000

Is it just me or has GM never really give a shit about Saab. I can’t remember the last time Saab had anything on it’s show room floor that caused a buzz. They need to go back to the days of the 900 and give us something other than a mild restyle that’s been going on for a decade now. Saab needs a partner to let them build what they need to build, not a rebaged trailblazer.

By: ManualorDeath

ManualorDeath — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:06:39 +0000

Lionwithoutpride… you make a lot of sense. Saab and Volvo would be a viable answer to an independent automaker. Both carmakers are known for building cars with an “out of the box thinking.” Both companys are also known for building safe cars. I’d probably would have to add Subaru to make this a winning combination.

By: Lionwithoutpride

Lionwithoutpride — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:28:45 +0000

Even though there would be a lot of problems with my dream solution . . . here it is:

Ford lets Volvo go (while perhaps keeping a minority stake as GM has done with Saab) and Volvo joins up with Saab. Saab can make the sports cars and convertibles and Volvo can make the wagons and SUVs/CUVs. That alone would add SOME of the size that so many commenters here say Saab would need to stand on its own. Maybe Saturn could team up with them as well and badge the cheapest cars Volvo and Saab can bring themselves to make (both companies have proven they can build safe small cars and if they somehow managed to achieve a decent price-point then they might have a chance). Again, I realize the plan is my dream and probably wholly unworkable without billions in loans, but I can dream can’t I?

By: No more oil for GM

No more oil for GM — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:57:49 +0000

I just hope they make it… somehow I know they will… heck, this industry needs some damn saab-mojo as an escape from the lame audis, toyotas, whatever… go go go saab!!!

By: GT2

GT2 — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:40:05 +0000

Gm’s new motto is “Its your money and i need it now!”.

By: Borat

Borat — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:29:49 +0000

I see slew of lawsuits involving all parties (sans Swedish government). The only “clean” way to deal with it would be Chapter 11 for GM, but it refused it, forcing the same on the “child” company. I am sure we are popular in Sweden (and Finland) now and I know why.