Our Daily Saab: Pang Da And Youngman Bail After Muller Rejects Buyout

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

With a Halloween deadline to get its restructuring back on track looming, Swedish Automobile has rejected an offer by Youngman and Pang Da to buy 100% of Saab’s shares. Moreover, the struggling Swedish brand has canceled the existing agreement with Youngman and Pang Da, its erstwhile would-be rescuers. A Saab presser notes:

Today, Swedish Automobile N.V. (Swan) announced that it has given notice of termination with immediate effect of the Subscription Agreement of July, 2011 entered into by Swan, Pang Da and Youngman.

Swan took this step in view of the fact that Pang Da and Youngman failed to confirm their commitment to the Subscription Agreement and the transactions on the agreed terms contemplated thereby as well as to explicit and binding agreements made on October 13, 2011 related to providing bridge funding to Saab Automobile AB (Saab Automobile) while in reorganization under Swedish law.

Pang Da and Youngman have presented Swan on October 19 and 22 with certain conditional offers for an alternative transaction for the purchase of 100 percent of the shares in Saab Automobile which are unacceptable to Swan. However, discussions between the parties are ongoing


So, what exactly happened? Per SvD.se [via Google Translate],

The rejected bid for Saab from Youngman and Pang Da was around 200 million SEK (about $30m), according to new information. An improved bid is expected before long, but the parties are not close.

Victor Muller has had a telephone meeting with Rachel Pang representing Youngman and a representative from Pang Da – while also continuing negotiations with the U.S. investment company North Street Capital.

The Chinese 200 million bid for Saab, according to several sources, concerned 100 percent of the shares of Saab Automobile. It was made last Wednesday and effectively reflects the market capitalization of the parent company Swedish Automobile (Swan). This offer was subsequently rejected. After this, Guy Lofalk requested an halt to the reconstruction.

So, $30m for 100% of Swedish Automobile… that’s less than Saab needs each month just to keep the lights on in a “nuclear winter” scenario (about $50m). And yet Muller and Swedish Automobile won’t give up… although they are having to up their daily Kool Aid intake. Saab’s online mouthpiece at inside.saab.com gives some insight into the company’s current state of self delusion, writing:

Saab doesn’t have a debt crisis. We have a liquidity crisis. Our debt is manageable if we are producing and selling vehicles. In that scenario, the value in the company is much greater than our present market capitalisation.

We are a fantastic company, building great cars designed by fantastic people and we have a market for them. What we don’t have at this second is the lubricant needed to get the machine moving – cash.

There are other entities out there who recognise this and will be attracted to investing in Saab and that scenario is better than a lowball offer such as the one that our board has just said no to.

We have time pressures, for sure. But it ain’t over yet. Not by a long shot.

Speaking of those time constraints, SvD adds

Time is of the essence. On Tuesday the wages are due. On Thursday, must, in principle, an agreement of some kind be completed – because Saab need to show the district court that it is worth continuing reconstruction. Otherwise, bankruptcy awaits.

And speaking of bankruptcy, Saab’s court administrator lays out the grisly endgame (and provides some much-needed counterpoint to Saab’s baffling optimism) in an interview with Swedish TV, translated by Saabsunited.

Svt: Have there been any money at all?

GL: We have got some smaller amounts like twice 4.5milion dollars and once 1.5 milion dollars so we have been able to keep our nose above the surface.

Svt: How come no money arrived sofar?

GL: What I have seen is that the parts have not found an agreement about the deal that was suppose to bring those 70 milion euros. There has been a lot of discussions about this agreement and thats why no money have been transferd.

Svt: So you think that a reconstruction is no longer current because there is not enough liquidity?

GL: The liquidity is about to end so we can not continue the legal process so we have to terminate.

Any questions? Anyone? Bueller? Well, start shutting off the lights… the sad story of Saab’s demise shouldn’t take longer than another week or so.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 17 comments
  • Jeff_vader Jeff_vader on Oct 26, 2011

    A quick update; they would appear to be suggesting that whoever the white knight on the horse is, they aren't Chinese. Surely not North Street Sixpack?

  • Jeff_vader Jeff_vader on Oct 27, 2011

    The Trollhatten local paper is reporting this lunchtime that no defence against the ending of Re-Construction was handed into the Courts by the 13:00 deadline today. It is also reporting that although the government loan for the payment of the wages has been paid because it doesn't cover a full month, they can't actually pay the staff until additional funding arrives. Read this as you will but my guess would be that means that Saab's bank account hasn't even got $100000 in it. The Unions aren't impressed and are yet again getting the staff to vote on bankruptcy. Time for the Swedish Chef one last time?

  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Thankfully I don't have to deal with GDI issues in my Frontier. These cleaners should do well for me if I win.
  • Theflyersfan Serious answer time...Honda used to stand for excellence in auto engineering. Their first main claim to fame was the CVCC (we don't need a catalytic converter!) engine and it sent from there. Their suspensions, their VTEC engines, slick manual transmissions, even a stowing minivan seat, all theirs. But I think they've been coasting a bit lately. Yes, the Civic Type-R has a powerful small engine, but the Honda of old would have found a way to get more revs out of it and make it feel like an i-VTEC engine of old instead of any old turbo engine that can be found in a multitude of performance small cars. Their 1.5L turbo-4...well...have they ever figured out the oil dilution problems? Very un-Honda-like. Paint issues that still linger. Cheaper feeling interior trim. All things that fly in the face of what Honda once was. The only thing that they seem to have kept have been the sales staff that treat you with utter contempt for daring to walk into their inner sanctum and wanting a deal on something that isn't a bare-bones CR-V. So Honda, beat the rest of your Japanese and Korean rivals, and plug-in hybridize everything. If you want a relatively (in an engineering way) easy way to get ahead of the curve, raise the CAFE score, and have a major point to advertise, and be able to sell to those who can't plug in easily, sell them on something that will get, for example, 35% better mileage, plug in when you get a chance, and drives like a Honda. Bring back some of the engineering skills that Honda once stood for. And then start introducing a portfolio of EVs once people are more comfortable with the idea of plugging in. People seeing that they can easily use an EV for their daily errands with the gas engine never starting will eventually sell them on a future EV because that range anxiety will be lessened. The all EV leap is still a bridge too far, especially as recent sales numbers have shown. Baby steps. That's how you win people over.
  • Theflyersfan If this saves (or delays) an expensive carbon brushing off of the valves down the road, I'll take a case. I understand that can be a very expensive bit of scheduled maintenance.
  • Zipper69 A Mini should have 2 doors and 4 cylinders and tires the size of dinner plates.All else is puffery.
  • Theflyersfan Just in time for the weekend!!! Usual suspects A: All EVs are evil golf carts, spewing nothing but virtue signaling about saving the earth, all the while hacking the limbs off of small kids in Africa, money losing pits of despair that no buyer would ever need and anyone that buys one is a raging moron with no brains and the automakers who make them want to go bankrupt.(Source: all of the comments on every EV article here posted over the years)Usual suspects B: All EVs are powered by unicorns and lollypops with no pollution, drive like dreams, all drivers don't mind stopping for hours on end, eating trays of fast food at every rest stop waiting for charges, save the world by using no gas and batteries are friendly to everyone, bugs included. Everyone should torch their ICE cars now and buy a Tesla or Bolt post haste.(Source: all of the comments on every EV article here posted over the years)Or those in the middle: Maybe one of these days, when the charging infrastructure is better, or there are more options that don't cost as much, one will be considered as part of a rational decision based on driving needs, purchasing costs environmental impact, total cost of ownership, and ease of charging.(Source: many on this site who don't jump on TTAC the split second an EV article appears and lives to trash everyone who is a fan of EVs.)
Next