By on December 6, 2011

The accounts are empty, GM keeps saying no, the reconstruction administrator is about to pull the plug on Saab. Unfazed, The Church of The True Saab goes from clumsy spinning to simply telling lies. First, they turned “a bank in China” into “the Bank of China.” As Chinacartimes quips, this “could be anything from the smallest local city bank to a national level bank.”

Now, Saabsunited spins another yarn to keep the faithful from losing faith and face:

“Pang Da says that they are not out of the deal, on the contrary, they continue talks.”

Not true. Pang Da is not part of any deals and is in no talks. The alleged enthusiast blog, which in reality is an amateurishly run mouthpiece of Victor Muller and Vladimir Antonov, usually prides itself on inside knowledge (which is never released). This time, the information comes from Reuters.

According to this report, Pang Da is far from being part of the deal.

“In principle, we would not oppose any plan that would be good for Saab’s restructuring and help it out of the current plight.”

This in turn is pulled from a milquetoast statement Pang Da had posted on the Shanghai stock exchange late on Monday. Our sources in China say that Pang Da is out of the deal, but would not mind to be back in. We are told that the team that had led the negotiations between Pang Da and Saab has been reassigned to other jobs, ostensibly as part of a re-org at Pang Da. We are also told that a new team is being assembled. That’s it.

All the rah-rah about white knights du jour may keep the hopes up, but it does not help to keep the lights on at Saab. They are flickering.

  • The money that is supposedly on the way from China has not arrived.
  • GM, which needs to approve any deals involving its technology, has not changed its position, it hasn’t even seen a new deal, Sveriges Radio says. GM spokesman James Cain told the station: “As of today, there is no change. We haven’t changed our position on the matter.”
  • Dagens Industri is not surprised. A source predicted that GM would turn down the deal, because it is just a diversion.
  • Reconstruction administrator Guy Lofalk is unimpressed by any last minute deals and is ready to pull the plug. Lofalk told Dagens Industri: “We are at the end of the road. We would be happy if there would be other options. There just isn’t any money left.”
Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

39 Comments on “Our Daily Saab: Administrator Ready To Pull The Plug...”

  • avatar
    Oren Weizman

    Why doesn’t Toyota take over Saab, imagine that Scandinavian security coupled to japanese reliability.

  • avatar

    is this potential liquidation only for saab automotive? or is the entire organization going down? aeronautics, etc

    • 0 avatar

      Saab AB, the aerospace and defense company, is a separate corporate entity. GM bought 51% of Saab Automotive from Saab AB in 1990, and the rest in 2000.

    • 0 avatar

      Saab aeronatics is a totally different company – 24 billion in revenue – and profitable. They sold Saab auto and allowed them to keep the Saab name.

      • 0 avatar

        Seems to me that GM should sell SAAB Automotive to SAAB AB for 1 kr if for no other reason than to prevent all the negative publicity of the collapse of SAAB Automotive making potential customers think that SAAB AB is out of business too.

  • avatar

    The church says its’ Guy Lofalk fault. Everything was going smoothly until he messed it up, because he’s just in it for the money. Yeah right.

    I expect when the plug is pulled, the faithful will hit the GM facebook site again , but this time it won’t be “Pretty please”.

    On another TTAC Saab story, I believe I may have posted something about the faithful being fanboys similar to Commodore Amiga fanboys 20 years ago.

    Lo and behold, at the church site, someone goes by the name of “Amigabuz” or “Amigabuzz”. Let it go, the Amiga AND Saab are not going to be coming down for dinner anymore.

  • avatar

    Who is benefiting from keeping the patient alive? Wouldn’t the time and energy of everyone involved be best put to use to more profitable endeavors?

  • avatar

    “aeronautics, etc”

    Used to be together. GM owned 100% of the cars in 2000. Just the name is similar now.

    Just like Volvo trucks + heavy equipment have nothing to do with the Cars. Same name and similar logo.

  • avatar

    R.I.P Saab

  • avatar

    very sad bow an iconic brand is being dragged through the mud at the end state

  • avatar

    Hope the poor Swadester can get his Outback civil service gig back.

    • 0 avatar

      Indeed… Maybe even take over SaabsUnited again, and disband the current church occupying the domain.

      • 0 avatar

        Visit Inside Saab to see what Swade is up to.

        He’s a Saab coworker, doncha know. It’s an official Saab website, so not quite as warped as saabsunited for legal reasons, but features the same kind of highly tangential reasoning.

        Swade going back to the outback? He’s from Hobart, Tasmania which isn’t the outback, merely the back of beyond.

  • avatar

    GM is not interested in saving SAAB, they seem to be actively working against them. That reason alone is preventing many deals from being done.

    • 0 avatar

      GM only has to work in gms interest by weighing the benefits of selling vehicles and components to Saab vs long term risk that some of those sales will siphon off GM intending vehicle buyers. Not to mention time lost just having tondealnwith Saab; why spend any time trying to keep a dying non player of a competitor alive? Seems there would be better uses of GM intellectual and mgt capital…

  • avatar

    While I am in no way a fan of GM (or Saab), they are not actively working against them.

    They have a signed deal from a couple of years ago.
    The players on both sides are big boys. VM and company knew what they were getting into. VM said himself that the Chinese deal wasn’t going to make it. Those provision over I/P were in there for a reason. EVERYONE knew about the provisions.

    They also have SAIC to answer to in this and their relationship goes back to the late 90’s. I’m sure SAIC would not be thrilled to have a home grown competitor using many of the same parts.

    Did you get your panties in a wad when GM had to pay Fiat $2,000,000,000 to get out of buying Fiat?

    If not, why? If Fiat wasn’t so mean, maybe GM would have invested
    that money in Saab. It’s Fiats fault because Fiat was going to stick to the agreement to sell Fiat auto to GM. GM had to pay it to escape buying Fiat.

  • avatar

    Somebody just take SAAB out behind the cattle shed and blow it’s brains out. This sh*tty tale has gone on long enough. End it already.

  • avatar

    IT IS WORSE! GM has just turned down the last proposal. Looks like the negotiating parties aren’t listening too well. To any outsider it was clear that GM did not want to risk that its technology came in to Chinese hands – period. Ownership percentages was of secondary importance. I suspect that administrator Lofalk will stop the restructuring, which provided debt protection, and that suppliers and unions will file for bankruptcy before the end of this week.

  • avatar

    Incredibly Muller is now claiming that there is a plan C! But as now even The Church Of The One True Saab is saying that NSC are out so any ‘rescue’ won’t be coming from there. Which is interesting as Mr SixPack quite clearly never had anything to be in with in the first place.

    I agree completly with voyager. Lofalk will probably pull the plug tomorrow morning, this charade has gone on long enough.

    P.S. Hey “Jeff”. As I was banned from The Church Of The One True Saab for posting that Mr SixPack was a dreamer, can I now be re-instated?

  • avatar

    From the church:

    Quijote said on December 6, 2011


    Also on GMs Facebook page:

    Andreas Felldin
    Okay. I was on the way to buy a Corvette but now it will be a Porsche instead because of Saab. Sorry GM, you now lost a customer willing to pay a lot for a new sportscar.

    SO, it begins……..

    The SLF, Saab Liberation Front has come up for air. Hide the children and women folk. It’s going to get rough.

  • avatar

    Mullers delusions are now spinning out of control. Plan C would appear to be some nonsense about Youngman lending the company BILLIONS to buy out everyone now so that they can take full ownership when the GM IP runs out. I think.. something about equity, blah, blah, blah.
    It doesn’t matter, its a redudant. I would strongly suggest that it is an attempt by Muller to be able to claim when Lofalk pulls the plug,
    “Look! Look! I had a deal! They were just about to sign! But that horrible Lofalk and those nasty GM people wouldn’t let them. I’m the good guy, I was going to save Saab Don’t blame me!……
    When’s the next flight to Curacuo? I need to cash my cheque…”

    And why is it redundant? According to this morning, its High Noon. Lofalk will pull the plug at midday unless the wages are in. Not a promise of the wages, not a MoU, not a piece of paper that can be waved in a meeting. Cold, hard, cleared funds. Noon.

  • avatar

    For God’s sake, let someone pull the plug. Please, Lofalk. This is no longer a soap with more twists and turns than the Republican candidacy, but an embarrassing tale of someone who does not know when to call it quits. Muller gives new meaning to the expression “going Dutch”.

  • avatar
    Seán Moloney

    You know, if Saab does go under it’ll be the 34th brand that GM has run into the ground. Or is that the 35th? I don’t know, there are so many, is it even worth keeping count anymore? Maybe GM see’s them as notches on it’s corporate belt. I don’t know, all I know is that GM appears to be the anti Midas, instead of gold everything GM touches turns to crap. Honestly 5 brands, 5 in the last 8 years, now possibly 6. VW has only lost 5 brands in it’s whole history…

    • 0 avatar

      …which is more evidence that they had too many brands. The smaller brand count seems to be working, and working damn well.

      • 0 avatar

        Here is a list of brands sold in USA over the last 100 years or so.

        I personally blame the fall of Rauch & Lang on the Stevens-Duryea company. While J. Frank Duryea + his brother built the 1st american car, he obviously turned Rauch & Lang into crap. B**tard!!!!

  • avatar

    Lofalk has officially stopped the Re-Organisation. The court will wait until the 14th to hear SWANs defence, will pass ruling on the 15th and announce its judgement on the 16th. In his statement today Lofalk took time out to remind everyone about the last time Re-Organisation was extended and the 100% Youngman/PangDa deal that never was.

    TV crews are now gathering outside the gates of the factory and Muller is due to make a statement at 15:00 Swedish time.

  • avatar

    Over that church someone is saying that maybe if they can get 1,000,000 Saab owner to kick in a 100 Euros, they just might save this thing.

    In other news Micky Rooney says he might come out of retirement and reprise his Andy Hardy character and put on a show to raise money for the cause. He’s asked Liza Minnelli to help out, with her being Judy Garlands daughter.

    The Little Rascals were unavailable for comment.

  • avatar

    Even better than that they have just posted up a picture of the production line saying that the workers are happy and are getting ready for the restart of production.

    Which is odd because the photo shows cars but no actual workers and could have been taken at any time in the last two years.

    Plus they are going to need a new head of production to help get the line started anyway because the last one had enough & walked last week.

    That Kool-Aid is really beginning to kick in.

  • avatar

    Saabsunited says that CEO Muller is working on a solution with Youngman for which no GM permission will be required as no ownership change will take place. Youngman will infuse hundreds of millions of euro’s into the company without asking for any compensation that would upset GM. *rolling eyes*

    • 0 avatar

      If this is such a good plan, why wasn’t this brought out weeks ago?

      I smell lawsuit on GMs part if this is allowed. Someone is going to be the sugar daddy and have no say so? If daddy is paying, daddy wants his sugar.

  • avatar

    The new plan is this; SWAN borrow 600 million euros from Youngman & an unamed Chinese bank now. In two years time, once the GM IP deal runs out, they get the entire Moosehouse. Sounds great doesn’t it? Just a few small problems with that.

    1.) 600 million euros won’t pay for the development of one new model let alone the development of three which is what Saab will need once GM take their toys away.
    2.) If there is any GM IP left in the PhoeniX platform you can’t use that either.
    3.) And actually that 600 million euros isn’t really 600 million euros because has to pay off both the EIB & GM to get total ownership…. oh and the 40 million needed to get the factories back from Hemfosa Fastigheter… oh and 25 million euros loan from Gemini…oh and the 10 million euros needed to buy out GEM Global Yield Fund….oh and any money that PangDa has paid in…..oh and the loans for the wages that the government have paid since the company has been in Re-Organisation…..oh and all the creditors you currently owe money to… and finally the 74 million euros that might be required to be paid back to the Lithuian and Latvian banks as it was lent to Muller by Antonov and is pending an investigation to find out if its ill-gotten gains.
    3.) Then there is the worldwide advertising budget that is going to be needed to re-launch the brand and get people to buy cars that they didn’t want 12 months ago and which they know should be obsolete two years after they have bought them. And don’t forget these cars that no one has wanted to buy will be your only source of income for the next two years because the 9-4X won’t be coming now either.
    4.) Then there is restarting the dealer network, which in the UK at least is on its last legs with two main dealers closing this week and Saab GB in administration.

    So no worries then. They’ll be up and challenging the VAG group by this time next year.

    • 0 avatar

      That’s crazy talk. None of those problems exist according to the church (or at least the church doesn’t talk about them).

      I say go for it. Maybe, then, all/most of the creditors get a substantial amount of what they are owed back, and the Chinese are left holding the bag. If the Chinese are dumb enough to do it, they should be allowed to.

    • 0 avatar
      Seán Moloney

      Your second problem doesn’t exist. The PhoeniX platform is based on the old Epsilon platform which GM gave to Saab when it sold it because it is “old” GM tech which GM has no need for anymore.

      Hemfosa doesn’t own all of Saab’s property, it only owns half and Saab has already paid Hemfosa for a 15 or so year lease of their half.

      The 9-3 replacement is already more then halfway through development, so Saab only needs to develop 2 new models and all are to be based on the PhoeniX platform.

      I will concede to your many other points though. Though nobody said it was going to be easy. Hell, life isn’t easy, so should I take the shotgun up to the back paddock and blow my brains out? No, I should do everything I can to stay alive and live a reasonable life. If every car company gave up when the end looked near then we wouldn’t have any car companies at all. Even VW had near death experiences and look at it now.

      I’m not saying that if Saab survives that it’ll become the largest car maker in the world, and I don’t want it to be. No Saab fan wants Saab to become a large producer, we like the fact that we are the only household in the street that owns a Saab. We like the fact that in the shopping centre car park it is easy to spot our car in the sea of Toyota’s, Subaru’s and Audi’s. Even if it is because many of you think they are ugly, we like our odd looking sedans, estates hatches and convertibles. We like the fact that there is a button, knob or dial dedicated to a specific purpose as opposed to scrolling through a digital menu which you wouldn’t be able to do in rush hour traffic anyway. We like the fact that Saab has a history and heritage that while short by many standards, has seen it contribute more safety and technological breakthroughs to the automotive industry then most others. We like that, you mightn’t, but we do.

      Now you may think that I’m blind, I’m not. I like to think of myself as a realist, I know there is a very VERY high chance that Saab won’t exist next year and so I will have to decide whether JLR or VW gets the majority my automotive enthusiasm. But there is also a chance (as slim as it may be) that Saab pulls through. Slim I know, but a chance none the less.

      • 0 avatar

        I googled saab safety technological breakthroughs to see what the world has archived on these points. Aside from a self-serving Wikipedia article, there is nothing. Which is what I would have said from memory.

        This is the problem. Overly enthusiastic Saab fans think that Saab walks on water, when an objective look reveals nothing of note. You claim to not be blind, but you sure are self-hypnotized. Does reality rarely intrude in your life, or do you merely regard it as an inconvenience?

        That’s what the rest of us wonder about Saab fanbois. Just how whacked out are you all?

        And more to the point: why?

  • avatar

    “But there is also a chance (as slim as it may be) that Saab pulls through. Slim I know, but a chance none the less.

    Your optimism is the kind we want around when 3 of 4 engines have been shot off the bomber, the 4th is on fire and there’s a bomb stuck in the bomb-bay door.

    Pointless and mis-guided optimism, but cheering.

    • 0 avatar
      Seán Moloney

      I could rather be depressed if you rather? Though last time it took 3 years to get out of it, so f you don’t mind I’ll hold on to my pointless optimism thank you.

      Reality? Well the reality is that 12 years ago my dad was driving our old 900 home when he lost control of the car and totalled it in a crash that he was told should have killed him. The only injuries he sustained was a bruise where the seat belt held him in his seat as the car was tossed around eventually landing on it’s roof. I’ve seen less severe crashes where people have died due to the fact that the passenger cell couldn’t handle the impact.

      Say what you will about Saab, but when I get in my 9-5 everyday and drive to work, I can feel the solidly of the car. The car will be 13 years old next year and there is no squeaks, rattles, knocks or anything. The car I had before the 9-5 was a Subaru Outback Limited and everything knocked and rattled.

      I’m not what you would call a slow driver by any means whatsoever. I regularly take corners at 60km’s, but the 9-5 feels permanently stuck to the ground. It is a big and heavy car, but it never feels it. I’m not whacked out, or however you put it. I just love my car, and by extension the company that makes it. To someone like me, my car isn’t just another car, it becomes a part of me, like an extra limb. I’d really hate to lose any of my limbs.

      I don’t know why people don’t like Saab’s. I often hear people say that Saab’s are expensive to fix and service. Really? I’ve never had a problem with the 9-5 and the services are just as cheap as my parents Honda CR-V. About $200 AUD. Subaru’s on the other hand, I owned my Outback for not even two years, and I spent over $9000 AUD in services and repairs and when I sold it I got $6000 AUD. It was a nice car, but it cost me.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • mtr2car1: I’m not sure its the ads that generate the “good will” that Elon thinks it does, but I...
  • SCE to AUX: “Though it’s difficult to imagine anybody visiting a showroom within the last 12 months having any...
  • golden2husky: No surprise – dealers for the most part are opportunistic scum. But while “car...
  • Jeff S: Finally a generation that doesn’t go for the sleazy car dealers bs. Inflatable stick men blowing in the...
  • jmo2: A lot of GMs issues can be traced back to an excessive focus on market share.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber