Saab Submitted To Chinese Water Torture

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt

Saab’s white collar employees were getting blue in their faces from waiting for last month’s paycheck. Saab had to sell off slices of the company to pay workers who sit at home twiddling their thumbs. According to the always well informed Saabsunited (when it comes to good news), salaries were transferred today at 5pm. On to the next payday.

Meanwhile, things don’t look so good in China. In June, Saab signed a non-binding memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Chinese distributor Pangda Automobile and car manufacturer Zhejiang Youngman Lotus. This had been feted as the second coming of Christ over in Flagwavingland. Put your ear on the ground. Hear that sound? It’s the Chinese, dragging their feet.

As we all know, time is money and Saab has neither. Pangda’s and Youngman’s investment into Saab must be approved by the Chinese government. For that, they need an application to get a lengthy process going. One would think those applications had been filed months ago. If Chinacartimes is correctly informed, those applications still need to be written. Says CCT:

“They are likely to submit the feasibility plan for Saab case to NDRC within three weeks.”

Now this is China. “Likely to submit” means: “Maybe we will, maybe not.” And “within three weeks” means: “Don’t rush me.”

It also means: “Don’t come to us for more money, sorry, our hands are tied.”

According to the CCT report, “due to restrictive policies by the Chinese government, the two Chinese companies are not allowed to make more investments to save Saab at the moment.”

Ordering more cars also is out of the question. Says CCT:

“Pang Qingnian, Youngman’s chairman, said that they could not make further investment in Saab by buying vehicles, as Youngman has limited quotas for vehicle import, but he believes Saab could go through the difficulties through various financing means.”

Then, Pangda’s Chairman had encouraging words. Report CCT:

“Pangda’s chairman Pang Qinghua said that if the plan could obtain approval in two or three months, Saab’s financial problem won’t exist, but there will be crisis if the approval takes a longer period.”

You can bet that this approval will not happen tomorrow. The deal needs approval from at least three regulatory agencies in China, one of them the powerful National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC). This agency, and many other parts of the government are on record that they want just a few big car companies in China, and not more than 100 as it stands now.

In the unlikely event that the deal should be looked upon favorably, any approval will take a long, long time. The joint venture between PSA Peugeot Citroen and China’s Chang’an took a whole year to get all necessary official blessings. The fact that Chang’an is a state-owned enterprise, one of China’s largest automakers, and owned by government-owned China Weaponry Equipment, did not speed up the paper-shuffle. Imagine how long it will take when a car dealer and a small Chinese busmaker want to get permission for a ménage-a-la-trois with a walking dead.

The scuttlebutt amongst expat car-execs and expat auto-writers over a beer in Beijing’s Sanlitun bars goes like this:

  • An ice age in hell is given better chances than an approval of the threesome.
  • Pangda is thought to have written off any money sent to Trollhättan as advertising. Imported Saabs are thought to be too expensive and too close to much cheaper Buicks made in China.
  • All bets in China are on Saab going under, which will save the all-important face . The government will have to deny nothing, Pangda and Youngman are spared the mission impossible.
  • A bankruptcy will probably rev up interest in China. We hear the Chinese delegation was impressed by what they had seen in Trollhättan, and may want to bring parts of the factory to China on the cheap.

[UPDATE: The Swedish site di.se reported that “a major US investor plans to become part owner of Saab. Within hours, Saab denied the news. The speculation is that GEM, which funded Saab’s white collar salaries this month was pumping the stock (which it just bought yesterday) in order to dump it fast. -EN]


Bertel Schmitt
Bertel Schmitt

Bertel Schmitt comes back to journalism after taking a 35 year break in advertising and marketing. He ran and owned advertising agencies in Duesseldorf, Germany, and New York City. Volkswagen A.G. was Bertel's most important corporate account. Schmitt's advertising and marketing career touched many corners of the industry with a special focus on automotive products and services. Since 2004, he lives in Japan and China with his wife <a href="http://www.tomokoandbertel.com"> Tomoko </a>. Bertel Schmitt is a founding board member of the <a href="http://www.offshoresuperseries.com"> Offshore Super Series </a>, an American offshore powerboat racing organization. He is co-owner of the racing team Typhoon.

More by Bertel Schmitt

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 7 comments
  • Robert.Walter Robert.Walter on Aug 04, 2011

    The saga of SAAB is pure mystery. And Bertel's "Put your ear on the ground. Hear that sound? It’s the Chinese, dragging their feet", is pure poetry.

  • CurtInFalcon CurtInFalcon on Aug 05, 2011

    It doesn't make sense that GEM initiated the rumors of an American investor. Yes, the stock did surge for one day but the period of performance of the stock is for 15 days. If the American investor doesn't come through, the stock will fall again before the end of the period. Higher stock prices are better for Saab because they reap the rewards at the end of the period. GEM doesn't want to pay the higher price.

  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
  • Bill Wade I was driving a new Subaru a few weeks ago on I-10 near Tucson and it suddenly decided to slam on the brakes from a tumbleweed blowing across the highway. I just about had a heart attack while it nearly threw my mom through the windshield and dumped our grocery bags all over the place. It seems like a bad idea to me, the tech isn't ready.
Next