GM: Sell SAAB to someone who cares

[Diesel/_]

Also seeSaab eyes low-volume future
I'm not a pro at writing articles, but here it goes:

SAAB, which originally stood for Svenska Aeroplan Aktie (B)olaget (the
Swedish Aeroplane company) started producing Automobiles with its
92 in 1949. Throughout the years, the company became famous
for its quirky Scandinavian style aswell as its innovations in safety.
Saabs were known as safe and fun to drive.
Unfourtunately, in 2000, General
Motors purchased all of Saab (it had owned 50% since 1990) and
things started to go downhill, though not right away. First of all,
Saab wasn't give the funds to create any new models other
than their 9000/9-5 and 900/9-3. After GM adknowledged this problem,
they only made it worse by seriously damaging the brand with such
concoctions as the "Saabaru" (a re-badged Subaru Impreza called
the "Saab" 9-2x) and even worse, the "Trollblazer" SUV (a Chevy
trailblazer with a nose job and a relocated ignition). After GM
finally got rid of the 9-2x, they still did almost nothing to help the aging
9-5 and 9-3 until this year (when the cars, launched in 1997 and 1999 respectively) when they were granted a questionnable makeover.
GM, a large corporation with 10 other brands (Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick,
GMC, Hummer, Saturn, Cadillac, Holden, Vauxhall, and Opel) seems to
busy to be bothered about Saab, which only sold 130,000 cars last year
worldwide compared to it's arch-nemesis Volvo which celebrated 600,000+ sales, which was similarly purchased by Ford Motor Corporation, but was however cleverly transformed into a profit-making cash-cow. How can this
happen? GM has too many brands to deal with, and since Saab has nothing
to do with the other brands, it's become GM's unwanted step-child.
GM, Saab's unprofitability (due to your negligence) is costing you money,
please, I beg you, sell them to someone who cares! It will be better for
the both of you!

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I present to you the evidence:
Object A: The "Trollblazer", a shame to the Saab name:

Object B: The "Saabaru", a desperate (and sad) attempt for some sales:

Object C: The 9-5's questionable new "Dame Edna" styling treatment:

and Finally, Object D: A relic from Saab's glory days:

I rest my case.

[mgescuro]

As much as I love Saab.... I think GM mishandled Saab and continues to mishandle Saab.

Sell it.

[Quickening]

THe current 9-3 came to market in 03 actually.

Saab has everything to do with the other brands. Saab is GM's techno nugget that people fail to see. I'm not going to go into the details because I've done it about 10 times in these forums.

[t-rex]

I stand behind Quickening.

As a Saab lover, the hard truth is the company wouldn't exist unless part of a some large auto giant. And since nobody else has expressed interest in Saab, there's little chance buyers would queue for the marque. So we have little choice but to pray GM does something meaningful with the company.

Two things will ensure Saab's future: Firstly, independence. Saabs need to be as far-removed from GM's other designs, even Opel's, as possible. GM's platforms should be designed with Saab in mind. Saab engineers should get their own suspensions and chassis and body modifications, if needed, to maintain the brand's core character.

Secondly, independence. By this I mean total, unfettered freedom to reintroduce "Saab" characteristics into their cars. And this goes far beyond console key switches and headlight wipers. Someone disagreed with me in another forum about keeping Saab "quirky". Quirkiness, or more succinctly — individuality, or distinction, is what sold the marque to scores of artists, architects, and college professors since the brand's introduction here. While GM may claim they're Born From Jets, today's Saabs are sadly more Born From Osaka. I like the 9-3, and would seriously consider buying one, but it doesn't stand out on the road the way old Saab's did. Look at the old 96s and 99s. Did anything on Earth even remotely resemble them?

If GM are content with keeping Saab a low-volume brand, then for Pete's sake at least make the weird again!

Edit: I just realized something. Why doesn't GM ever capitalize on the fact that Saabs are designed for bitterly cold Norden climates, and use this to maybe appeal to import sedan buyers in the Midwest? Or do the buyers already realize this, thus nullifying the need to make it a selling point? I live in the sunbelt, so I can't say...

Edit again: trivia here: Scandinavia and Finland were big markets for US cars until the 70s. Americans and Russians were the only countries on Earth that built cars tough enough to withstand the cold near-Arctic winters of the region. My grandparents had some old 8mm footage from their vacation there in the early 70s... it's surprising how many Valiants and Chevelles and Fairlanes were tooling around Helsinki at the time!

[Chaz_23]

Sad but true. GM can't do much for Saab. One suspects Saab doesn't have much to offer to GM. If it does, what would it be? Euro style?
Ford should sell Volvo, GM should sell Saab, and someone can combine those two into an independent company.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by t-rex

Edit: I just realized something. Why doesn't GM ever capitalize on the fact that Saabs are designed for bitterly cold Norden climates, and use this to maybe appeal to import sedan buyers in the Midwest? Or do the buyers already realize this, thus nullifying the need to make it a selling point? I live in the sunbelt, so I can't say...

Because GM's marketing department couldn't market a basket of eggs to a bunch of chickens.

[Quickening]

Well Saab has dropped their current marketing company. I'm hoping they will bring it inline with the European marketing which I think is EXCELLENT.

Just one example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw5py5kZQ2g

There is also the Oh Laura- Release Me video, showcasing BioPower. Awesome video. THere are countless really.

[Bravada]

The problem is that Saab was something of a hot commodity (OK, moderately lukewarm commodity) with remains of a strong, though not necessairly mainstream-appealing image back then. Today, they don't have too much of a defined image anymore, and not many people actually care. GM can only either shape it up or write it off. In a typical GM fashion, they put it on statis and wonder why it doesn't perform.

[Quickening]

Well Saab is about to get an entire new line up in the next 3 years? With a new marketing campaign. I think things could work. I just hope the new campaign calms down on the whole born from jets ****.

[Bravada]

PS. Not to be perpetually complaining about GM, here is a constructive gameplan:

Make SAAB what other GM brands could be if there didn't have budgetary constraints. Not deliberately "upscale" cars, just the best "normal" cars you could buy. What Volvos used to be in the early 1990s, until Ford started experimenting with the "sporty"/"designerish" style (to a good effect, unlike GM).

Example - because for the Swedish a purchase of a car was still a rather major expense, their cars had to be very dependable and reliable, as well as last long (I know a lady who abuses her 240 wagon regularly and it still looks as if it was made 3-4 years ago). They also felt safety is not something you can compromise upon, hence all the safety improvements, even if they made their cars more expensive than imports. Finally, Scandivian driving conditions can be very unfriendly, so the cars had to be prepared for them both in terms of active and passive safety and resistance to different conditions.

Also, allow Saab to have their own ways of doing things, be it the "airplane c0ckpit" dashboard, the key between the seats (now actually redundant with push-button start), the "portfolio" headrests and many more things the Trollhattan folk can come up with. And, lastly, leave them in Trollhattan to guarantee the product is genuinely Swedish.

[Bravada]

Well Saab is about to get an entire new line up in the next 3 years? With a new marketing campaign. I think things could work. I just hope the new campaign calms down on the whole born from jets ****.

And I hope the liftback will be back. I don't care if I can order my Saab with 4832104 turbochargers making more HP than a combine harvester, I want to be able to load all my shopping conveniently!

[Quickening]

Lol, ok well trunks definetly lift higher than that picture depicts. Liftbacks would be pretty sweet and also help differentiate between brands, quite easily.

[Bravada]

I actually have a more far-flung plan - leave the whole business at Trollhattan, add models, and make them share a lot between them, but not necessairly that much with other brands (for sure the base stuff, like powertrains and platforms, but not the corpo radio).

For example, take a common front end. Add two doors, a short cabin for two with a hatchback and you've got a 9-2. Add another pair of doors and a longer liftback, and here's the 9-3. Revert to 9-2's doors - 9-3 Coupe. Chop the roof - 9-3 Cabrio. Add a wagon-back - 9-3 Combi. Jack it up - 9-3X.

Now, stretch the rear section for a nice notchback with ample room in the rear - 9-5. Where was that wagon-back again... 9-5 Combi. Off-road treatment again - 9-6X!

Perhaps I am oversimplifying, but it could work that way.

[1931Chevy]

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/...rogress/8.html
Some people just absolutely will not buy an American car. So GM has an answer for them.

In 2000, GM took full ownership of Saab.

The famously quirky Swedish car brand presents a challenge for the famously corporate American company, though. The very reason for GM's existence, after all, is platform sharing. What's the point of being General Motors if not to share engineering and development costs across different consumer brands?

On the other hand, the very soul of Saab is that of independence. Saab is a counter-culture product. You buy it because you want to be unique.

They look and feel different from other cars.

Sharing with Saab has to be done very, very carefully. And mistakes have already been made. Even GM executives admit that the Saab 9-2X was a bad idea.

Creating a Saab by making cosmetic changes to a Subaru Impreza wagon might have filled a hole in Saab's product portfolio. And it wasn't a bad car. (It was every bit as good as a Subaru Impreza.) But there's no way that was a Saab.

After the 2006 model year, GM dropped the 9-2X as it dissolved its corporate relationship with Subaru. But, had it gone on much longer, serious damage could have been done to the Saab name.

With the 9-7X midsized SUV there was, at least, a greater attempt at differentiation in the design, The suspension and steering settings were also tweaked to make sure driving the 9-7X was different from driving the Chevrolet TrailBlazer it was based on.

New Saabs are now designed from the wheels up, but Saab will still share its basic engineering with other GM vehicles. A new Saab SUV might also have a Buick or Chevrolet cousin. But at least the requirements of Saab-ness would have been considered at the outset.

[ChevroletRevived]

Saab is an very important part of GM's plan for the future. There's a lot of potential in the brand that is unrealized. It's going to get an all new lineup and it's going to be awesome. You'll all love what happens to Saab under the new GM. This is the GM that has developed the 08' CTS, Enclave, etc.