Saab Why did Saab have to die?

[slicknick]

I wanted to take the opportunity to create this thread to discuss the fate of Saab, a company that has been declared ''brain-dead'' long ago, even though the bureaucratic life-support is still not removed, to let it die completely.

Let's discuss how & why Saab failed, all posts/comments from anybody is most welcome.

Here are two articles presenting different points of view on the fate of Saab.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2011/12/20/why-saab-had-to-die/
http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/heres-why-gms-reinvention-of-saab-didnt-work.html/?a=viewall

Well, let the discussion begin...

 

[Kowalski]

Saab was the black sheep of GM's family. They were given the Vectra to create their first 9-5 and while the Vectra achieved two stars in the EuroNCAP crash tests, the 9-5 achieved four stars in a time when four stars was the maximum rating. Clearly they had done some over the budget work to ensure that their flagship model was as safe as it could possibly be and that probably pissed GM's executives off.

 

[Mr Robert]

They simply made cars that were too expensive to build compared with what people were ready to pay for them. They were good and safe cars but SAAB could never really communicate this enough to the public (and thereby being able to charge a premium).

 

[SCOTT27]

If Saab ever gets a Chinese sugar daddy like Volvo has done and the ability to get on with it, it could be great again. The effort with Saab from a looking back perspective is actually non-existent with nothing really that stands out or shows the true history of early Saabs. It is one of the automotive worlds greater tragedies.
If you look at Volvo it has done wonders for the brand not just in early sales to the XC90 but the fact that Volvo is being mentioned in the premium conversation.

 

[ZicZachZo]

GM killed it. Slowly and painfully.

 

[Mr Robert]

The mentioning in preemium discussions, that's new.

 

[Centurion]

They simply made cars that were too expensive to build compared with what people were ready to pay for them. They were good and safe cars but SAAB could never really communicate this enough to the public (and thereby being able to charge a premium).

Pushing safety as a selling point worked in the 70-90 but after the 2000s car manufacturer became fixated with Euroncap test and subsequently scoring 5 stars became common place.

What also killed Saab, and almost Volvo is positioning. They were trying to compete with Mercedes, Audi & BMW but their cars were not much more luxurious than a well specced VW, and they quickly fell behind the Germans in engine, gearbox and infotainment advancements. Additionally they relied on babyboomers for too long and neglected to diversify. By the time it was clear that the Swedish brands were falling behind the curve, they lacked resources to make big leaps.

Thankfully Volvo is on a new path and I think we'll witness them re-surge like Jaguar has.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

Natural selection ?

 

[slicknick]

Now that I have been reading all the posts and the different opinions of you guys, it seems there were a variety of reasons one can point out, that led to the demise of Saab Automobile.So, with all things read, analyzed and considered, here is my personal take on it.

1) Bad Management under GM:
Well, guess we all know that for an ambitious cars company vying for the luxury-sport segment, like Saab, the GM's efforts to apply badge engineering based on the budget brands belonging to the group was a recipe for disaster right from the start.Not only did it upset the avid enthusiasts of the brand, but perhaps, it prevented a new generation of potential Saab fans from ever developing a liking for the brand

2)Obsession with sticking to certain principles is costly (I mean VERY costly):
We all know that Saab have always been uncompromising about safety, certain aspects of engineering and all that...However, such principles are only good if you have the financial resources to enable them.And Saab did not.Well, GM did, but they had no interest in anything but a product that turns quick profits.

3) The brand targeted a difficult segment from the 1970's onwards,starting with the Saab 99:
With the introduction of the larger, more comfortable, and sportier Saab 99, the brand suddenly found itself in the same league as BMW,Merc and Audi.To put it into context, it was a bit like Crystal Palace or Leicester City (not bad teams at all) suddenly finding themselves in the Champions League, vying with the likes of Barcelona,Real Madrid and Bayern.They'd simply eat you alive. To play with the top dogs, it is imperative for you to have the means and resources to do so.

4) No sugar daddy to the rescue:
Volvo still exists today purely thanks to Geely and its financial resources.Saab was unable to find a rich savior, which leaves me wondering if the brand wouls ever catch the glory days once again if it were to be bought by VAG,Tata,Geely,BMW or anyone else after being dumped by GM

5) Even after the first bankruptcy protection in 2010, GM did, and still is, doing its best for Saab to never ever come back:
Bit of a grudge match or something it seems.Even after it was sold to Spyker, GM blocked a lot of the machinery/technology transfer and etc...Of course, they did the same to the new owners,NEVS.The final blow was when Saab blocked NEVS from using the Saab name last year (not to mention NEVS also went belly up shortly thereafter)

6) Swedish firms really did fall behind starting from the 90's:
As mentioned above by Centurion, not to mention they really did lack the resources to catch up by the time they realized how much more ahead the Germans had gotten

 

[slicknick]

The effort with Saab from a looking back perspective is actually non-existent with nothing really that stands out or shows the true history of early Saabs. It is one of the automotive worlds greater tragedies.

I agree with this statement 120 percent Scott,such a shame if you think about it.
As for Saab being great again under a sugar daddy, I doubt any sugar daddy will ever come to the rescue...The brand has been in vegetative state for so long that, I'm afraid the only decent thing to do beyond this point would be to let it die peacefully (though if by any miracle, the brand does get saved, I'd be chuffed to bits about it)

 

[Centurion]

2)Obsession with sticking to certain principles is costly (I mean VERY costly):
We all know that Saab have always been uncompromising about safety, certain aspects of engineering and all that...However, such principles are only good if you have the financial resources to enable them.And Saab did not.Well, GM did, but they had no interest in anything but a product that turns quick profits.

Could you give an example of these costly principles. Were they related to manufacturing in Sweden, material or overly complicated engineering?

 

[SCOTT27]

At the near end BMW did extend some help in the offer of supplying 4 cylinder engines. Alas it was too late.
BMW also did look at Saab facilities in regards to a satellite MINI/BMW UKL plant before settling on Nedcar in the Netherlands. But given that early orders for the X1 are very high.
Nedcar could be used if Regensburg goes full capacity. It will build the next MINI Countryman/Countryman Coupe.

 

[klier]

GM killed it. Slowly and painfully.

Took some time to do that with such an iconic brand, but they did it. Congrats GM.

 

[slicknick]

Could you give an example of these costly principles. Were they related to manufacturing in Sweden, material or overly complicated engineering?

Mostly due to complicated engineering....Like their no-nonsense approach on safety,as just an example right off the bat...Even in the 80's, when they were modifying their stock cars for rallying (with Stig Blomqvist as the driver),their B & C pillars were so much stronger than other participants that they did not really "need" to fit roll bars inside the rally car (they ended up doing due to regulations but the car was strong enough not to require it per se)...
Another one would be their refusal to settle down for lesser products, especially when GM wanted to perform badge engineering...They even developed their own software; or even their own GPS systems independent from GM for crying out loud

 

[SCOTT27]

Volvo are in the midst of one of the greatest comebacks.
The XC90 is very impressive as is their forthcoming ideas.
With OICA indicating a press launch in Sweden at the end of August it indicates perhaps something new for the IAA.
If they can apply the same visuals to a sedan from the Coupe they could have something really interesting. Same goes for the XC Coupe which could take advantage of the Sportier side of SUVs? Or even be the next XC60.

 

[slicknick]

Now that I have been reading all the posts and the different opinions of you guys, it seems there were a variety of reasons one can point out, that led to the demise of Saab Automobile.So, with all things read, analyzed and considered, here is my personal take on it.

1) Bad Management under GM:
Well, guess we all know that for an ambitious cars company vying for the luxury-sport segment, like Saab, the GM's efforts to apply badge engineering based on the budget brands belonging to the group was a recipe for disaster right from the start.Not only did it upset the avid enthusiasts of the brand, but perhaps, it prevented a new generation of potential Saab fans from ever developing a liking for the brand

2)Obsession with sticking to certain principles is costly (I mean VERY costly):
We all know that Saab have always been uncompromising about safety, certain aspects of engineering and all that...However, such principles are only good if you have the financial resources to enable them.And Saab did not.Well, GM did, but they had no interest in anything but a product that turns quick profits.

3) The brand targeted a difficult segment from the 1970's onwards,starting with the Saab 99:
With the introduction of the larger, more comfortable, and sportier Saab 99, the brand suddenly found itself in the same league as BMW,Merc and Audi.To put it into context, it was a bit like Crystal Palace or Leicester City (not bad teams at all) suddenly finding themselves in the Champions League, vying with the likes of Barcelona,Real Madrid and Bayern.They'd simply eat you alive. To play with the top dogs, it is imperative for you to have the means and resources to do so.

4) No sugar daddy to the rescue:
Volvo still exists today purely thanks to Geely and its financial resources.Saab was unable to find a rich savior, which leaves me wondering if the brand wouls ever catch the glory days once again if it were to be bought by VAG,Tata,Geely,BMW or anyone else after being dumped by GM

5) Even after the first bankruptcy protection in 2010, GM did, and still is, doing its best for Saab to never ever come back:
Bit of a grudge match or something it seems.Even after it was sold to Spyker, GM blocked a lot of the machinery/technology transfer and etc...Of course, they did the same to the new owners,NEVS.The final blow was when Saab blocked NEVS from using the Saab name last year (not to mention NEVS also went belly up shortly thereafter)

6) Swedish firms really did fall behind starting from the 90's:
As mentioned above by Centurion, not to mention they really did lack the resources to catch up by the time they realized how much more ahead the Germans had gotten

Forgot to add a number 7 to the post above guys, apologies for that... So here it comes

7) Quirkiness only works if the market calls for it
As quirky as Saab cars were, they never really appealed a large clientele, apart from a select few, well -educated bunch, yet limited in numbers...Rest of the people found Saab's ideas either strange or downright annoying... Just like the key right behind the gear lever (you had to leave the car on reverse to be able to take the key out), or the Saab 96 which had a manual gear lever where the wiper stalk is in modern cars... As for their joystick -operated Prometheus concept, let's just say it didn't really work that well

 

[slicknick]

Now that I opened this thread, started seeing Saab's on a regular basis... Spotted this Saab 96 this past Saturday

 

[slicknick]

Bit of a throwback with the Top Gear tribute, though it is a bit too one-sided, where they only mention point no.2 in the sumary I've made above

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[slicknick]

Volvo are in the midst of one of the greatest comebacks.
The XC90 is very impressive as is their forthcoming ideas.

This is true...And it is almost as though certain models of Volvo (likethe turbo-charged variants of the V40 and S60) are eyeing the quirky spot vacated by the Saab's, as if they are trying to act as the brand's successor in some ways

 

[slicknick]

Sad seeing that the tower website is still running, and that a select few still keep the faith that Saab can still succeed one day (talking about the bunch over at saabsunited.com)

They did produce a few hundred cars at some point last year, didn't they? Wonder where they were sold (though they weren't allowed to use the Saab badges, so the badge was replaced by a sign saying "SAAB ")