GM lost $5000 on every Saab
- Thread starter hone eagle
- Start date
- Status
JHZR2
Staff member
I love my 2004. I don't doubt that they loose money - I couldnt have gotten a camry or accord or similar sized car for the price of my new 9-3 as it was equipped...
Saab used to be a very good little car company, selling safe cars that had good performance and were fun to drive. I owned a '73 99 EMS and it was great. Then I owned a '84 900 Turbo and it was almost as good.
But GM turned Saab from a car company into a division, and finally into just a brand -- sticking the Saab badge on Opels and Suburus. They turned it into a mediocre and unreliable car that was grossly overpriced -- mostly they were leased and not sold, and when the leases expired then a person could get a very good deal on a greatly-depreciated used Saab. But regrettably they had lost the technological edge that they had 20-25 years ago, when turbo Saabs were every bit as good as BMW 3-Series cars for about the same price. Now I don't know anyone who would choose a Saab instead of a BMW for the same price.
GM want Saab to die. It could just kill off the brand, but instead it tried to sell it first. Koenigssegg discovered, in time, that GM did not want the "new" Saab to compete against GM's remaining car divisions. So there were going to be limits on what technology Saab could use and where it could sell cars. The deck was stacked against Saab, GM wanted to make sure it could never be profitable.
But GM turned Saab from a car company into a division, and finally into just a brand -- sticking the Saab badge on Opels and Suburus. They turned it into a mediocre and unreliable car that was grossly overpriced -- mostly they were leased and not sold, and when the leases expired then a person could get a very good deal on a greatly-depreciated used Saab. But regrettably they had lost the technological edge that they had 20-25 years ago, when turbo Saabs were every bit as good as BMW 3-Series cars for about the same price. Now I don't know anyone who would choose a Saab instead of a BMW for the same price.
GM want Saab to die. It could just kill off the brand, but instead it tried to sell it first. Koenigssegg discovered, in time, that GM did not want the "new" Saab to compete against GM's remaining car divisions. So there were going to be limits on what technology Saab could use and where it could sell cars. The deck was stacked against Saab, GM wanted to make sure it could never be profitable.
I am sure the bailout covered the loss per car .
Originally Posted By: Tornado Red
GM want Saab to die. It could just kill off the brand, but instead it tried to sell it first. Koenigssegg discovered, in time, that GM did not want the "new" Saab to compete against GM's remaining car divisions. So there were going to be limits on what technology Saab could use and where it could sell cars. The deck was stacked against Saab, GM wanted to make sure it could never be profitable.
As painful as it is, I think you're probably right.
GM want Saab to die. It could just kill off the brand, but instead it tried to sell it first. Koenigssegg discovered, in time, that GM did not want the "new" Saab to compete against GM's remaining car divisions. So there were going to be limits on what technology Saab could use and where it could sell cars. The deck was stacked against Saab, GM wanted to make sure it could never be profitable.
As painful as it is, I think you're probably right.
I hope GM makes it. But I still think they should break up into 3 seperate subidiaries and each better focus on their products.
1. GM Truck Division
2. GM Car Div.
3. GM Luxury Div.
GM trucks & Cars would be sold at the same dealers and the Luxury Div. would have it's own dealer network specifically charged to go after the Lexus/Mercedes market share.
JMHO.
1. GM Truck Division
2. GM Car Div.
3. GM Luxury Div.
GM trucks & Cars would be sold at the same dealers and the Luxury Div. would have it's own dealer network specifically charged to go after the Lexus/Mercedes market share.
JMHO.
My 1984 Saab 900S was a great, reliable, fun to drive vehicle. I replace one WP at ~ 155,000 miles and sold it running just fine at ~ 216,000 without any major repairs. Anything GM manages in the previous 30 years has been a disaster. That management philosophy seems to be fully in place today.
- Status
Similar threads
