Saab And Youngman To Spin Undisclosed Amount Of Cash Into 3 Cars

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

[Editor’s note: the initial draft of this piece misunderstood the structure of the deal. Youngman and PangDa have paid over $350m for a 51% of Swedish Automobile, Saab’s parent company (which has a market cap of $68m). Funding for the New Product Joint Venture (50% owned by Youngman, 50% owned by Swedish Automobile) has not been disclosed. See comments for more background.]

Just when the lights seem to be going out all around Saab, with employees calling for bankruptcy, suppliers in revolt and even the Swedish government pretending like nothing was happening, Saab always seems to find away to prolong the agony. Selling, then leasing back the factory was one step that’s been approved by the EIB. Getting the suppliers to take ten percent down on deliveries? Well, it turns out that management has some time to sort that one out, as the factory’s annual vacation starts in a week, and Saab is letting its employees go a week early rather than starting up and then shutting down the line. And the company is certainly hoping that it won’t have to restart the line simply to restore confidence, as it’s announcing the “final agreement” with China’s Youngman Auto and the dealer group PangDa for €245m (about $365m) which it hopes will clear up the perception that Saab is a sneeze away from death. Needless to say, this agreement fits squarely into the “stringing along” category rather than the “game changing” category…

For one thing, this is not a new deal, but simply a more detailed “final” version of the agreement it reached in principle with Youngman and PangDa nearly a month ago. For another, it still needs Chinese and Swedish government (not to mention GM) approval… the former of which is hardly likely, given that Saab will compete fairly directly with well-connected BAIC ( motto: “From Saab, Better Than Saab”), and the government is looking to consolidate its auto industry, rather than duplicate efforts. And Sweden’s government? According to accounts in the Swedish press, the auto industry is now wondering aloud if Sweden cares whether it stays or goes. Saab’s plight seems to be the curiously unspoken subtext, although long-term problems like the “lack of Swedish engineers” are openly acknowledged. In any case, if the industry that has “lost” Saab and Volvo first to Americans and now to the Chinese has to be asking if the government cares about it, the answer isn’t going to be pleasant. Not knowing enough about Swedish politics to have an opinion on the matter (sorry car fans…), I can’t help but wonder if the Swedish government’s silence isn’t simply its most tactful option.

After all, like most of Saab’s eleventh-hour deals, the details of the most recent “rescue” are hardly encouraging. Like Sergio Marchionne angling for a stake in crippled Chrysler, Saab’s Victor Muller is playing with his sunk investments, Saab’s “know-how,” rather than actual cash. As a result, the Saab-Youngman joint venture seems to be a full-sized enterprise with a half-sized undisclosed budget. Consider the following, from Saab’s presser:

The NPJV will be 50 percent owned by Saab Automobile and 50 percent by Youngman Passenger Car, and forms the foundation for an expansion of the Saab product portfolio with three models which until now did not form part of Saab Automobile’s current and future product portfolio. As such the NPJV will focus on developing three completely new Saab vehicles: the Saab ’9-1′, Saab ’9-6′ and Saab ’9-7′.

Within the development process of these three new vehicle lines, Saab Automobile will be responsible for controlling and managing the design, the development and testing process to the start of production and providing other necessary technical and quality control support. For this, Saab Automobile will source existing capabilities and expertise from its state-of-the-art technical development department in Trollhättan. Youngman Passenger Car will be responsible for providing the necessary financial investments in the joint venture.

Now, to a “career blogger” like myself, $350 million and change is a lot of money. But best-case scenario, we’re talking about at least two new platforms here, possibly three. Industry rule of thumb states that a billion dollars must be spent on an all-new competitive platform. Building even one credible car that performs to Saab’s oft-touted “premium” standards for $350m would be quite the accomplishment, but it’s clearly even worse than that. After all, that $350m+ will have to be augmented by an actual development budget. And, according to Saab

The Saab ’9-6X’ and Saab ’9-7′ will be key to enhancing the prestige of the Saab brand to an even larger group of customers in China and the US, while the entry level Saab ’9-1′ will appeal to urban motorists around the globe.”

Thus, the 9-1 becomes a MINI-fighter, the 9-7 becomes some kind of large “prestigious” sedan, while the 9-6X is presumably a three-row SUV. The 9-7 and 9-6 clearly sound like modified platform-mates, while the 9-1 will require another new chassis… which means one full-size premium chassis (modifiable for passable CUV/SUV duty) and a premium-ish small car for an undisclosed sum. Designed, developed, tested and overseen by Saab’s not-cheap Swedish engineers (who are, in their defense, both well-vacationed and rare).

If this formula succeeds, it will prove that A) China is the land of industrial miracles, and B) Sweden is the land of auto marketing miracles. After all, Volvo has been trying very hard to monetize one large platform ( P2, aka Ford D3) as “prestigious” sedans and crossovers for a while now, with little-to-moderate success (hampered, it must be added, by even-less usccessful smaller cars). And what has Saab got that Volvo didn’t, besides the raw motivation born of gnawing terror that comes with having a Chinese car dealer as your backer instead of a giant global automaker? Before you answer that, consider that Volvo spent $387m simply to update and retool its Ghent plant for production of the current S40… so the answer sure isn’t “money” (unless Youngman is willing to spend over ten times what it’s already dropped on Saab equity). Meanwhile, a “global” small car sounds marvy, especially in light of Muller’s obvious obsession with the ur-92, but the tiny budget, Chinese production and “global” description seem at odds with the “prestige” part of the story. Which basically sums up the entire problem with the Saab predicament.

What happens next? Who knows. Though the Chinese were willing to spend well over the market rate for Swedish Automobile equity, Saab has a money-losing short-term problem in the form of a shut-down factory and laughable (if they weren’t so sad) sales. This investment might help on that front, but it leaves the brand’s future very much in question. Meanwhile, the Swedish government clearly no longer sees its auto industry as a unique symbol of national pride, and won’t shell out krone one to save it. And the EIB has probably dug up new dirt on Vladimir Antonov, Saab’s somewhat dingy white knight in waiting, only approving the lease-back deal without Antonov’s involvement, and won’t give money to failing firms. Plus, Beijing has reasons to veto the deal. Which means the Chinese could get everything they want from Saab with fewer headaches when their Swedish paramour swoons, seemingly inevitably, into bankruptcy. Unless Victor Muller is able to pull just one more “rescue” out of his hat… otherwise, Saab seems doomed to become a low-cost Chinese brand hocking cars with tiny development budgets [see comments below].


Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 17 comments
  • Trollhattan Saab Trollhattan Saab on Jul 05, 2011

    176770 has it correct - there are two separate deals involved here and covered in yesterday's press release. In fairness to Edward, I had to read the releases several times myself and event went to the trouble of writing this summary of the deals and the way they've evolved. http://inside.saab.com/summary-saab-deals-with-pang-da-and-youngman/ But in fairness to Saab (disclosure: I work for Saab in Trollhattan) it must be pointed out that this TTAC article is factually incorrect in stating that the equity funds being put up by Pang Da and Youngman is the extent of funding available for this new model development plan. Steven Wade - http://inside.saab.com

    • See 1 previous
    • Trollhattan Saab Trollhattan Saab on Jul 05, 2011

      @Edward Niedermeyer Thanks for the update to the post, Edward. I'm not going to try and convince you about the merits of the deal or go into the minutiae of it. Neither of us knows enough about the details to make that a worthwhile exercise here and now. Just remember that each time you write us off as dead, we seem to have an annoying habit of being not dead. And if you'll permit me a (very) little bit of dry humour, the fact that I've been able to point out an error on TTAC and get a correction (after my recent BS experience) has restored a little of my faith, so perhaps there is indeed some hope for us all. Take care. SW

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh since most EVs are north of 70k specc'ed out + charger installation this is not news. You don't buy a new car every few years.This is simply saturation and terrible horrible third world country level grid infrastructure (thanks greedy exces like at the holiday farm fire where I live)
  • MaintenanceCosts I think pretty much all of the difference between this year and last year is that the right-wing noise machine, facing an audience crisis, has decided that EVs, and wildly distorted claims about EVs and EV mandates, are a good way to to get gullible people angry and start replacing lost traffic.
  • MaintenanceCosts I'd like to see a comparison between this and the base Model S, which should have similar performance numbers.I spent five days and 500 miles with a base 2022 Model S in Texas last week, and enjoyed it far more than my previous Model 3 drives - I think the Model S is a very good to excellent car, although "FSD" is a huge fail and I'd still have a lot of trouble giving Elon Musk money.
  • DesertNative In hindsight, it's fascinating to see how much annual re-styling American cars received in the 1950's. Of course, that's before they had to direct their resources to other things like crash-worthiness, passenger safety, pollution controls, etc. It was a heady time for car designers, but the rest of us have benefited immeasurably from the subsequent changes.
  • Cprescott Aside for how long it takes to charge golf carts since I don't live in a place where I can have my own charger, is the game that golf cart makers play when your battery fails and they blame you and charge you $15-25k to replace them.
Next