What Not

After all the waiting and picketing and the many worldwide convoys, it happened. GM and Spyker signed a binding agreement today for the sale of SAAB. I’d normally write more, but I’m still sick today. So I’ll let you read what happened. Happy happy.

The SAAB factory workers rally in Trollhattan, Sweden (saabsunited.com)

This is the question that has been on my mind during the last year. Why couldn’t they agree with Koenigsegg or Spyker? I realize that there are a lot of particulars that have to be addressed. But what could be stopping them from selling the brand to one of these eager bidders? Apparently, 51 SAAB dealers have the same questions in mind. They’ve organized into a group which is holding GM to their promise to sell the brand. Now that that doesn’t seem to be happening, they are pushing for GM to sell to the highest bidder or face a legal challenge from them.

The dealers may have little legal recourse against GM. After all, the company has been trying to sell Saab for more than a year. Yet, the dealers seem to raise a reasonable issue: Why can’t GM accept the highest offer on the table? Isn’t taking some money for Saab, better than spending money to wind it down? It’s probably not that simple. If GM sells Saab to a bidder that it knows lacks the experience or financing to keep the company going over the long term, then GM could be liable to suppliers and car buyers with warranties for doing the deal, according to one person familiar with GM’s thinking. “They could come back to GM and say you [are] responsible because you knew the buyer had no chance of making it work,’’ this person said.

Saab Dealers Tell GM to Negotiate or Else…

That explanation makes a bit of sense from an otherwise senseless situation. To them, it’s more than the money. There has to be a viable company who can purchase and then handle the aftereffects of the sale. But even still, if you were GM, wouldn’t you want to have an extra $400 million in your pocket if the next company fails?

I’ve been thinking about the possibility that GM will not sell SAAB. With the way GM has been acting lately, it is a possibility that can’t be easily dismissed. So, what if SAAB does die; what then? Would any of the bidders consider buying the rights to the name? Would any of them consider building the brand from scratch? Sure, it would take time and plenty of investment, but are there any companies who look beyond dollars and sense to the idea of saving the brand regardless? Probably not. But it’s a nice thought.

Since 1983 we have been a Saab dealer in the US. We also sell Chevrolet, Hummer, Cadillac, Mazda and Volvo. Chevrolet was first in 1969, Chrysler and Saab in 1983, Mazda and Volvo in 2006, and Cadillac in 2008. I have a wife and two children. My partner has a wife and six children. They can drive whatever we sell. Together we have ten Saabs. That does not include our extended families and our friends. When we lost Chrysler this past June it was sad but it was just business. We made a lot of money being an original Hummer dealer and we will miss the gross profit. Our customers are sad or will be sad if they can not continue to do business with us. But losing Saab hurts by far the most. Our children all learned to drive in a Saab. When my daughter exchanged cars with me for service, she could not find the ignition! “Dad, what idiot would ever put the ingition behind the steering wheel?”. Obviously I left her an inferior car to use that day. If only we had sold more Saabs over the years. People who drive a Saab do tend to buy another. GM messed with Saab, a new owner can bring back the Saab Company we all fell in love with. I look forward to a good conclusion to this sad story.

Richard at SaabsUnited

What if GM had invested their Buick Regal GS energies into a new SAAB 9-3? The new Regal doesn’t look like your typical Buick; but the design could have worked as a compact Swedish four-door. Maybe, just maybe, they could have made it work.

With a new 9-3, 9-4x, and 9-5, they could have done some serious business.