Saab crisis: Saab fate day

Anyone who had expected positive signs from Sweden yesterday was disappointed. Due to the renewed rejection of GM, the recovery plan is in the balance. Notably, Americans reject a plan that has not been submitted for approval and is not known in detail. Especially since several voices say that the company structure requires no approval from Detroit.

The fact that General Motors is involved in influencing the court in Vänersborg and Youngman is now clear. A remarkable procedure that shows the clear frontline. So far, I've had an understanding of GM because contracts and intellectual property require respect, so the Detroit group does not have that anymore.

GM wants to dispose of Saab, for the second time, that's fact. A unique process that says a lot about the company culture of this company. We can only express our displeasure with this policy in a long-term boycott of the GM and Opel products. The current Saab will not benefit, but in the long term it will hit the bean counters in Detroit. Anyway, I still try to stay as factual as possible and ask the readers to do likewise.

More important is the question of whether GM's transparent move has affected Youngman and Rachel Pang. I'm afraid he has. So far, no funds have flowed from Youngman to Saab and Rachel Pang will not appear in Vänersborg. Depending on the source one reports that she is ill, other well-informed circles see other backgrounds.

In the short term, the Swedish television reported a withdrawal of investors from China, to then deny. It could come to a solution in the last second, or not. Without money from China and without paying salaries, we will not have a happy day today. Everything is still open, still can a good news about the ticker run.

Muller also negotiated during the night yesterday. Around 22:00 p.m. he said that tomorrow could be a great day for the Saab future, or the start of a big mess ...

News follows when there are new developments in Sweden.

Text: tom@saabblog.net

4 thoughts on "Saab crisis: Saab fate day"

  • New press release from SWAN:

    Saab Automobile said that Saab Automobile could not be completed. The Saab Automobile did not complete the reorganization of Saab Automobile. The Board of Saab believes that the company will not be financially viable. It is expected that the court will approve of the filing and appointing receivers for Saab Automobile very shortly.
    Swan does not expect to sell any of its shares in Saab Automobile and wants to write its interest in Saab Automobile completely

    Dat was it then!

  • blank

    Well, hopefully we can't all bury our “automotive” dreams and hopes today. 🙁

    PS:
    GM joins my list of products / companies / people / etc. one that I consciously avoid financially supporting for various reasons: Nokia, “Mannesmann”, Tom Cruise, etc ......

    • blank

      Please expand the “no go” list, at least I could reduce my frustration more often in the future. Is it clear Nokia because of Bochum, Tom Cruise because of Saintologie or? Why Mannesmann?
      Who else but Adam, Georg, GM, etc. some time ago, I still flirted with the Tahoe. never guarantees again. our community will now slowly dive to the level of Borgward, Trabi and a few more exotics. Tom asked for polite comments, I find it difficult without cursing.

      • blank

        Yes,
        Opel because of "Bochum"
        Tom (and many, many others) for their "belief"
        Mannesmann Mobilfunk because of certain "inconsistencies" (you can find information on Google / Wikipedia)
        a big poultry farmer because of "subsidies and partly the way of keeping"
        Schlecker because of known "working conditions"
        Products of a brand with a two-digit combination because of other "activities that are very suspicious to me"
        etc., etc.,…. the list can be continued indefinitely.

        Well, GM too ... because of Saab (and soon also Opel?).

        Although this refusal will hardly bother anyone, it is the only rejection that can be actively and daily met.
        On the other hand, I also have examples that I consciously “prefer” and thus actively try to support.

        The whole thing probably doesn't bring much and there is certainly a lot of vagueness (or even to be laughed at by some), but at least it is an active examination of my “buying behavior” and corporations / products / etc.

        Long story short, a GM car will certainly never be in the garage with me in the future!

Comments are closed.