Saab – A look at our Product Program

Once again, I believe this article is a rationalization. Almost a defense of why Saab is relevant to GM. 1,500 Saab SUVs on the road and deposits for a few hundred more. The new car market in America is 17 million vehicles. At this run rate, I can be quite confident that GM is losing money regardless of what the internal measures are.

I am surely not debating whether Saab makes a good product. I am debating the viability of Saab in the GM stable. I will also severely debate the conclusions drawn that you will cross sell your SUV in any significant numbers to existing Saab clients. Instead of a misguided attempt at an SUV, GM should have stayed true to the Saab heritage and been a leader in the hybrid space with this name plate. With oil at $3.00 and many industry experts predicting this for years, GM's business strategy should have included a provision of not being caught where it was during the last oil crisis. Instead, we get the same old incompetence.

"History doesn't repeat itself but it does tend to rhyme." - Mark Twain. GM's incompetence has a rhyme to it. So does this oil crisis.

Of course the Saabaru (9-2X) wasn't exactly flying off showroom floors until the GM Employee Pricing made it reasonably priced, after which finding an Aero (Turbo) was no small feat, especially with a manual transmission.

Hopefully the 2006 will be priced more appropriate ($1000-$2000 more than a comparable Impreza/WRX) if you really want to keep the sales flowing.

SportCombi = good.

Diesel SportCombi = better.

9-3 = good

Diesel 9-3 = better.

9-5 = getting long in the tooth

Updated 9-5 = still long in the tooth and in desperate need of a complete overhaul, rather than a freshening.

9-7x = Not bad, but the SUV craze has pretty much been trumped by $2.50 gas.

Diesel 9-7x might make sense, though.

9-2x = Nice, but could have been made better. For instance, why no SID on the 9-2? Why no RDS radio on the 9-2? If it's a Europeanization of a Japanese car, then make it as European as possible.

Looking forward to Saab getting its groove back. The SportCombi is a great start.

"With more than 7,000 sold in the U.S., the 9-2X is bringing new customers to the brand. They’re even younger than the Saab average, and they seem extremely satisfied with the car"

More than 7000 sold? But at what cost? Is GM satisfied with the profit they are making off this vehicle?

I do not see how any profit can be made with the incentives that have been used to move the 9-2X.

On to the 9-7X. Sales through August have totaled 1354. According to Automotive News, 2142 have been produced for the year. The sales/production ratio is fairly good. So why, then, were none produced in August? I kept hearing how the interest was so high for this vehicle - 1,000s of people. Yet, sales do not seem all that great.

It seems like Saab has fallen into the typical GM trap.

- rush product to market, even if it is a weak rebadge.

- wait to you see what we have in the future.

Unless Saab can create truly unique and desirable product, the future is grim.

Please, Mr. Spenchian, convince GM to resurrect and fund development of SAAB's Variable Compression (SVC) and Combustion Control (SCC) engine technologies.

If the GM/DaimlerChrysler/BMW partnership hopes to put a hybrid engine into a GMC Yukon to save 4 mpg average within two years, surely it'd take less time and money to overcome any technical hurdles with the SCC and SVC technologies.

A SAAB with SVC and SCC would rival a hybrid in fuel economy, but would far surpass it in power. GM could put this technology into other vehicles of other divisions and have an advantage over the competition, unlike having to share the hybrid technology with their rivals.

This is good news for GM. I have owned many GM vehicles, Escalade EXT, Suburbans (6,) pickups (too many to count,) and generally am pulling for GM to prosper. I however, own a Titan truck, I felt it rode better and ran better than a GMC or Chev. However, it is a gas hog.

I bought a 9 3 Aero last year and cannot believe how much I like it. It drives great, fast, fun, nice interior, great gas mileage, and it looks good. I often think how unbelievable it is that it comes from the same company that makes many of the plain jane rental type cars. GM needs to copy their own brand within the portfolio. this car is great and I will probably buy more. Good Job, and keep the brand. You need it.

One out of every two vehicles sold is a truck or an suv, and you cant figure out a business case for GM making a SUV for Saab. If you dont think it is brilliantly differentiated then you havent even taken a look at the car. Great job!

I am currently a Saturn owner, and a move up to Saab for my next vehicle makes sense in that Saturn also has a tendancy to use unconventional ideas to good effect. However, if what I have to look forward to are rebadged vehicles belonging to other divisions or companies within GM then I may look to buy something else.

Saab, in my opinion is being badly mishandled. Subaru is doing well because they mainly do their own thing. Saab should be trated in shuch a manner as well. Give them access to GM suppliers, and GM's "Parts bin" and see what they come up with. Forcing products on Saab will only dilute the brand, and soon we won't be able to tell the difference between an Astra, a 9-3 and a Malibu.

Perhaps it's simply a matter of those who are now in charge of Saab just don't understand what Saab is all about. They don't seem to "Get it". Saab does not need an SUV. A crossover, perhaps based on an all new platform for the 9-5 might be more in keeping with Saabs nature. Certainly not a thinly disguised Chevy Trailblazer. Saab also doesn't need a disguised Subaru WRX. Though that is a much more interesting concept, the pricing of the car, as mentioned in comments above, is less than desireable.

GM still needs focus on what each "brand" is all about. The loss of focus on Saturn, Saab, and Pontiac can be seen by even those who don't follow what GM is doing very closely. GM needs "Car people" in place who do understand what it's all about. When the former toothpaste marketers are again marketing toothpaste, and not trying to sell cars, GM can be great again in my opinion. But not until then.

One more thing. Someone made a comment about GM's plastic parts bin interior on the Saabs and the fact that you wouldn't see a Ford Focus component with a different knob in a Volvo.

I realize Lutz has made interior design a key focus and they are surely better than the Romanian Aro style interiors GM is notorious for. BUT, the 9-7 interior is not a Saab interior regardless of who designed it. It is a souped up GM interior designed with contraints set forward by someone to probably save money and it is marginally acceptable for a $40,000 SUV.

Serious pet peeve is the extremely cheap LED style displays for the radio and climate control displays on GM cars. They are cheap, they look cheap, they are blurry and they have a tendency to dim when the exterior lights turn on. They also appear to have some type of burn in problem I've seen in some autos.

Could GM spend another $1 per vehicle and put an LCD display in cars selling for more than $25K? It's just another part of the design and build excellence statement you need to make in your interior initiatives.

The Saab 9-7 is not my idea of a true Saab. That was sorely a business decision that actually makes sense and GM executed more or less pretty well. On the other hand the 9-2 is too similar to the WRX. As a true Saab enthusiast I hate the many similarities between the 9-2 and WRX. The cockpit is not true to Saab tradition. That instrument panel screams Made in Japan not Sweden. The exterior is not too bad but the rear end is again too similar to the Imprezza wagon. A Saab-Subaru-Suzuki dealership in El Paso, TX made the mistake of displaying an Imprezza wagon next to the 9-2 and even my wife was able to see the similarities. For that reason we ended up putting the Volvo V50 on top of our list.
But, to give credit to Saab the new SportCombi is real cool and the 9-5 facelift real elegant. So, hopefully in the near future GM-Saab will be able to fix their entire portfolio. Good luck.

Mr. Spenchian,

Tell me: How much has GM lost for every single SAAB car sold? The last media report I read was between $3000 and $4000 per car.

Of course, you're going to say "GM does not break down those figures" or something. I believe you. GM does not consider those figures, before, during or after SAAB will be eliminated.

SAAB, and to a lesser extent Subaru, were anti-Big 3 vehicles, were anti-big 6 vehicles, and certainly were anti 'too-large vehicles.'
So, GM panic-buying SAAB, and dipping into Subaru, is a laughable concept.

The SAAB 9-2x is just a Subaru tweaked a different way, with a $10k discount off "list." Period. You're not conning anyone into thinking there was any significant development.

Also, advertising the Saab 9-7x SUV as “standing out from the SUV crowd,” when it’s the 10th US model in the GMT360 line (Chevy Trailblazer, Chevy Trailblazer XT, GMC Envoy, GMC Envoy XT, Olds Bravada, GMC Envoy XUV, Buick Rainier, Isuzu Ascender, Envoy Denali) is just crazy.

GM truly thinks the consumer is dumb, and can be conned into anything. Your decline in market share shows you just don't get it.

The 9-2X has some nice things, but its engine is unresponsive and weak below turbo kick-in. How about a direct injection engine option for those wanting a broader torque curve?

The whole concept of rebadging to make sales is a tired worn out plan that has diluted GM core brands to bland sameness. GM bought Saab for it's identity! Too see some brain dead bean counter trashing Saab is revolting to me and death to the brand. You dummies at GM never seem to learn.
Let Saab make it's own path to new products. You might learn something. That's what you bought in Saab, wasn't it.

As the first time Saab buyer (actually leaser), I have been driving a 9-3 for more than two years now. So, I can talk from the experience and say that I have really enjoyed every minute of driving this car. I have also driven 9-5 and 9-2 as loaner cars. I believe that the current 9-5 is not very competitive at its segment, and 9-2 is one the reasons I don’t buy economy cars. When I made a purchase decision, I compared 9-3 with the other cars in the segment, and not because of the Saab history. I believe the partnership of GM and Saab Company has made the new products much more competitive. In the era of global car industry, it does not matter where different parts of a car come from, as long as the final product is done right. I believe 9-3 is done right and with the employee pricing, it is a heck of a value.

Now moving to the next generation of Saab cars: My 9-3 lease will expire next year and I will be looking for a car with a similar size and performance. I will be comparing 6Cyl 9-3, the freshened up 9-5, the new IS300 and BMW 3. To be competitive, I think 9-5 should be in the same price range of IS300/BMW3 and 6-cyl 9-3 should be somewhat lower. The reason being front-wheel vs. rear-wheel and other known market factors like resale value. If that is the case, I think I will stay in the Saab family for another three year term.

Quote - "To give you an idea of the consumer interest we’re getting for the 9-7X: dealers have been taking deposits for the 9-7X, which has not happened to Saab in decades."

So, again, how come not one 9-7X has been produced since July?

Is there some sort of production problem with the 9-7X? Or is consumer interest really not as great as you lead us to believe?

Any comments?

Is there going to be a 2007 Camaro??

GM needs something to compete with the new mustang

9-3:It's good to see a classy convertible that seats 4 in GMs line-up. More of these and less HHRs, obnoxiously large Hummers and GTOs that aren't really GTOs might just make GM a class act again.

What about GM's core brands like Pontiac? Why are they waisting money on Saab and just letting Pontiac sell these plastic pieces of crap

Jay-

I am not a Saab fan (prefer Chevrolet, Cadillac, a couple of Buicks and vintage Pontiacs), but I think that you are doing great work pumping life into the brand.

I think that your marketing needs to be stronger--and bring out Saab's "quirky" identity--sort of like what Geico does in their commercials.

I'll bet that you will sell more cars, because you'll be on more people's radar.

By the way, the 9-5 is sweet, and I'd even entertain buying one.

Good luck Jay!

Having driven the previous Saab iterations (up to the current 9-5), it seems that some people confuse "tradition" with Saab's financial inability to engineer itself out of the 900 for fifteen years.

The current-version 9-3 SS is definitely a cut above previous Saabs in its design, engineering and execution. I have also been pleasantly surprised at the highway mpgs you can get with a 2.0T and 6-speed (34 to 40, depending on speed).

But the 9-3 is still too much car for city driving - and this is where the current 9-2x fails: too close to the 9-3 in size and weight and worse in fuel economy. And as the icing on the cake, the Aero has a trashy air scoop hood that is totally out of place on a European car. Don't ever take styling cues from Subaru, maker of Earth's ugliest vehicles.

Wasn't the 9-2x supposed to be a temporary model to fill in while Saab designed its own product? The 9-2x needs to be a lighter, smaller, cheaper, more efficient Epsilon. My suggestion would be a 2-seat hatchback (or 2+2) on a shortened Epsilon platform with a smaller, non-turbo motor - maybe a diesel or hybrid.

I have always liked Saabs and have owned a few including a 9000 Aero. I miss that car. Best seats ever and fast and very practical with a hatch. Many people who drive a saab love them but getting people to consider them is an issue. Also, saab's are not cheap. To compete saab needs performance/handling biased RWD vehicles and AWD vehicles. The trick is to make AWD perform like a RWD. Also it need upgraded interiors. The 9-3 interior is a very nice design but needs more spark. More aluminum, chrome and black laquer. Also, it needs big improvements in reliability and quality. A nice fat warranty should help with sales in the meantime but it won't be cheap to GM. Now go look at a 9000 Aero and copy those seats.

Saab has an ambitious agenda, and executing will be tough...Spenchian acknowledeges this.

But on the marketing side, Jay is a proven commodity. And given Saab's distinctive brand legacy, look for him to create razor sharp messaging for the brand.

He demonstarted at Cadillac that he knows how to punch through the clutter. Go get 'em, Jay.

In response to BobMahon's above comments. I am not sure what you're talking about. The current direction of Saab is about as focused as gnat with A.D.D.

Let's look at Saab's current lineup: We have one somewhat new car with the 9-3 which if I remember correctly, is riding on a platform that it shares with an Opel and a Chevy. One not so new sedan riding on it's own outdated platform. One Subaru wagon with a nose job, and one Chevy truck also with a nosejob. Yeah, nice.

As for Jay punching through the clutter as you put it, it's more like Jay is adept at creating clutter. Let's look at Cadillac: They have several new cars, which are quite good, one tall wagon pretending to be an SUV which is also made really well. Then we have a series of Chevy and GMC trucks wearing the badge. Trucks that aren't much different than the Yukon Denali and Yukon Denali XL. Give the Chevy Avalanche the denali treatment, and you basically have that version of the Escalade as well.

GM needs to focus on product. Keeping the things that certain companies within GM are famous for. Saab had things that they do that are unique to their cars. They must be responsible for their design. Likewise, I think that with the domestic divisions, GM must give each a certain amount of autonomy. A chance to regain their identity. It was this lack of divisional identity that killed Oldsmobile, and it will kill other parts of GM if it's not stopped.

Dear Jay,

I applaud your bravery for adding your comments/views to the blog and getting into the mix with the Saab "Fanatics"
I love our 2003 9-5 Aero Wagon and am debating getting the 9-7X versus the B9 Tribeca to replace our 1999 Deville.

A couple of questions. Why was it decided to forego AWD on the new 9-3 and what about AWD on the new 9-5?

What's next for the 9-5. I hope it is a bit larger inside, more powerful (300HP)but just as efficient. I hope your engineers will consider revalving the shocks and siffening the anti-roll bars on the 9-5 to get rid of the float/wallow on road undulations. My Aero tracks well but it does hit hard and then float a bit after hitting freeway expansion joints. My fisrt modification will be springs and shocks.

Just saw that you are actually going through with putting 'GM' silver badges on the sides of all your cars.
I have to tell you that they look awful, completely unnecessary, and further cement many peoples notion that GM is absolutely clueless.
I suggest you immediately rethink this lunacy and stop ruining the looks of your vehicles and STOP putting GM badges on your cars.
Good lord, what are you people smoking?

I was curious as to what a Saab 9.2X premium compact is, since it is the only car in Saab's lineup that I would consider (I presently drive an 05 Honda Civic Ex SE 4 dr.).

I went to the link provided by Jay, and priced one out. Came to $27,380 decked the way I would want it.

Sorry Jay, but for that coin, I'd buy an Acura TSX.

Chris, the lack of brand identity and some autonomy was what was killing GM in the 80's and they still have not fully recovered. The product differentiation is about 2/3's complete with the minivans and the Torrant being the biggest issue.

GM was approaching 50% market share when its divisions were independant now with 25% what now?

Well I'll keep this short but DaimlerChrysler will not get too far peddling Mercedes-Benz cars at Chrysler dealerships.

Can some brands share some dealerships sometimes at some locations? Of course. But one caveat.

You yoke 'em you choke 'em.

Interesting statistic, GM has 15% global market but only 8% share of premium market. Cadillac alone can not carry GM. I say dust off Buick stop killing its heritage and dealer network that took 100 years to build and start getting some cache again or there will be no cash.

Yeah, a Chevy/Pontiac/Buick/GMC/Whatever dealership can feed the family.

But what about Buick's soul?

Maybe GM should revive the Saab brand in Malaysia. It can leverage the success of Chevrolet cars here in Malaysia...

It seems to me that this blog generates a lot of common sense feedback that GM needs...and GM just might be listening a bit...witness the return of Zeta (i.e. Camaro), the priority of Solstice production, diesels planned for Colorado, etc. Hopefully some of the Saab feedback will be implemented as well. If GM continues to take this brand in the direction it has been going (which is blatantly rebadging other GM or GM affiliate cars), this brand is as good as dead. Also, it would be my recommendation NOT to follow the market into RWD applications for SAAB cars. Every lux car maker is going to RWD now. If GM starts developing RWD Saabs now, by the time they are introduced (2010 or so) they will be once again late to market, and nothing original. FWD = better fuel economy, more passenger space, better poor-weather traction, etc...frankly; more practical, which is one of SAABS traits. Let Cadillac rule the RWD roost, which it should. And let SAAB remain the quirky maker that doesn't follow the market 5 years late. However, if I were betting, I would bet that GM doesn't have the money, the intelligence, or the will power to manage SAAB correctly. I hope I am wrong about that. I do have one piece of praise...the 9-3 SportCombi...I bet it will do fairly well.

RWD Saabs?

The 9-7X is a Trailblazer, the 9-2X is a Subaru. Are you TRYING to kill Saab?

Product, people. Saabs are supposed to be quirky, innovative, and efficient. The 9-7X is NONE of these things. No wonder they've stopped production. The public looked at ehm and decided that they could buy a crossover somewhere else that drives better, gets better mileage, and is better screwed together.

>>>Further, our target consumer is globally consistent, with approximately the same income, education and values, in North America, Europe and Asia. They are confident individuals, who tend to lead as opposed to follow. They are curious, and enjoy discovering what isn’t necessarily obvious to everyone.>>>

And so GM's marketing plan for SAAB is to try to peddle (as upscale European vehicles) what "obviously" are just badge-engineered / pedestrian Chevrolets and Opels???

"Having driven the previous Saab iterations (up to the current 9-5), it seems that some people confuse "tradition" with Saab's financial inability to engineer itself out of the 900 for fifteen years.

The current-version 9-3 SS is definitely a cut above previous Saabs in its design, engineering and execution. I have also been pleasantly surprised at the highway mpgs you can get with a 2.0T and 6-speed (34 to 40, depending on speed)."

Sorry, but for *product* I think Saab would have done far better with continuous development of the classic 900 much in the way Porsche did with the 911. It took GM 10 years after the last c900 was built, to come up again with something that actually *handled* - only to let the side down with regards to distincive design, steering, engines and interior quality (loook at the center console with the flimsy fittings and the handbrake that threatens to cut your fingers off every time you use it. Look at the dash with hundreds of tiny buttons for audio, sat nav and HVAC controls. Don't crank up the sound system - it's dreadful. At least in the old cars, Saab had the good sense to let customers choose their own).

The classic 900 had, by the end of its design life, its failures as a family/rep car -being cramped and not that refined - but the Turbo versions were iconic as practical, sporty vehicles that looked and drove like nothing else and, like old 911s, felt *engineered* rather than styled. Moreover, its double wishbone front set up and longitudinal engine constituted a far more promising base for a FWD performance vehicle than the current conformist transverse engine/McPherson strut suspension configurations. Coupled with the multi-link ReAxs set up of the latest 9-3, it would have had the potential to become as good as it gets with FWD.

But that's not even the point - the heart of the matter is, that the c900 T16S (SPG) and convertible versions offered a unique proposition in the executive car stakes with their very own sets of strengths and compromises (being less refined and spacious than the competition, but more distinctive, partical, rugged and fun to drive) where current offerings have just become mainstream sedans. From a branding point of view, that can't be good.

The real issue with the classic 900 was, that it had become far too expensive to build. Again, one had only needed to take a look at Porsche for real, working solutions instead of throwing away the child with the bath water.

Not seein' it, Jay. Rebadged Subarus and GMC trucks, and a 9-5 refresh that, on the interior, looks like a Fisher-Price toy. Accessories don't line up, and the big, round dials look out of place in that car. Why invest in such an update when you'd do as well to leave the current interior alone?

A nice, new 9-3 wagon is not enough to overcome the dilution facing the Saab brand. It's ironic ... while so many GM brands struggle to find themselves, Saab's had an identity. Yet you've gone and made it look alot more like GM's other divisions.

The only true SAABs are 9-5 and 9-3. The 9-2 and 9-7 lines are jokes. How can you possibly try to sell a SAAB owner like myself something that so clearly isn't a SAAB.

And people need to stop trying to say that SAAB needs to sell 20 billion cars a year to be worthwhile. Let Chevy and Pontiac sell hordes of cars to people that don't care, and keep SAAB as something special.

I would rather see SAAB die with pride than see SAAB of the future as rebadged Cehvrolets. It makes me sick to my stomach.

Saab 9-3 has, in my opinion, the best exterior look of any near luxury and most luxury class sedans sold today. The interior is unique too with read-outs high on the dash/console.

But - where is the all-wheel drive. Why can't GM build an AWD vehicle that is not a truck? If GM/Saab can't offer AWD in a 'car' perhaps posi-traction is an alternative. It was available on every muscle car back in the 60's. Old technology like drum brakes continue to be offered on many GM cars, why not a Limited Slip Differential that might be enough of a mobility enhancement to siphon off customers who think they need another brands AWD?

For Saab purists moaning about loosing the Saab hatch-back, why can't the sedan rear open like a hatch or a normal trunk. Put a hinge at the rear glass and roof interface and another where the glass meets the 'std' trunk lid. That might even be considered Saab quirky.

As far as I can determine the Saab 9-3 is currently the ONLY sedan to get the highest IIHS safety ratings for all three (front, side, rear) crash tests. That in itself is proof that Saab has not entirely lost its soul to the big GM corporate brother - Cadillac CTS has poor rear crash rating. You would have thought that at least Cadillac would have borrowed the winning seat technology from Saab to give it a good rear crash rating. Perhaps that is telling of the GM corporate culture.

Brand Identity - combining Saab with Saturn dealerships is like co-locating Harrods inside Walmart.

Good luck in making Saab a success.

I thought the 9-2X Aero was a bargain at $17.5K last summer with all of the incentives. I owned a WRX in 2002 that I purchased for $25K and was seriously thinking about trading in the wife's vibe for more soulful trips to the pump for me. The 9-5 Aero wagon was also a bargain at $30K purchased by a friend in NM. My point is GM will not make any profits if they keep giving these cars away at Chevy prices when the inventory is overstocked. I'm not sure what the answer is but Saab should not go after the BMW market like Audi/VW is attempting with a FWD platform. I like the new 9-3 sportcombi styling. What it needs is more boost for the Aussie 2.8 V6 for 280hp/280lb-ft on 89 octane. Call it a SPG model with a true sports suspension and sell it for $32K MSRP max without any incentives. (The base 2.8 in the Caddy CTS is kind of weak with the manual tranny.) I figure GM can't give Saab RWD because it would cut into the Caddy business and AWD without Subaru would be costly in the future. I currently own a 2004 GTO, 2004 Vibe, 1994 LT1 Caprice, and 2005 CR-V.

Saab 9-2x Faded Quietly Into the Sunset?

The day General Motors announced its dissolution of the relationship with Fuji/Subaru the 9-2x was conspicuously absent from the Saab stand at the Orange County International Auto Show in Anaheim, CA.

While 2005 9-2x are shown on the Saab USA website, there is no 2006.

Did 9-2x die without anyone noticing?

When I see a 9-2X I see a Subaru.
When I see a 9-7X I see a Trailblazer.
GM and Ford have a bad habbit of watering down brands they acquire. Please make it stop.

Reign in your marketing team a bit and let the designers and engineers come up with more innovative solutions. Thats what Saab is based on, innovaition.

What I like about the potential for the all-wheel drive technology is the potential for an all-wheel drive 9-3 and 9-5. Direct injection diesel wouldn't be a bad option either.

What would make sense for me as a consumer and the owner of a 9-5 Aero is for GM to take more risks in the area of design. The Saab brand has the potential to be a bit more aggressive.
Not as extreme as Chris Bangle's BMW, but there is room for the engineers and designers at Saab to push the envelope.

The idea of expanding the product line isn't a bad one, however I'm not quite sure American automakers fully understand how to push the "passion" buttons of the consumer anymore. It seems as if it isn't horsepower, Detroit has no clue.

We need less testosterone and more sophistication, elegance, wit and well thought out design solutions.

Wasn't the 9-2x supposed to be a temporary model to fill in while Saab designed its own product? The 9-2x needs to be a lighter, smaller, cheaper, more efficient Epsilon. My suggestion would be a 2-seat hatchback (or 2+2) on a shortened Epsilon platform with a smaller, non-turbo motor - maybe a diesel or hybrid.

Well... We need to accept that GM does not have a history of building automobiles. They accrued all those brands and do not know what to do with that. Unlike Ford that owns Land Rover, Jaguar, and Volvo, and put a lot of greens to let those brands improving the design, quality, making the new models etc, without killing the spirit of Volvo, the off road capability of Land Rover, and luxuries of Jaguar!!!!!!!!! What GM does? GM simply takes a strictly short run business approach, not thinking about long run, not even understanding that customers are NOT stupid idiots that can not recognize new SAAB 9-5 panel taken from Buick or new SAAB 9-3 V6 GM engine. Excuse me, but unlike original SAAB engine that can make 900,000 miles GM engine is ….. you know what it is. Unfortunately my 2004 9-5 wagon is probably the last SAAB I own :( I love SAAB and hate this pure financial company GM that does not have any idea what automobile is….

I think that after SAAB was sold to GM everything has been going down the hill! It dont feel like saab anymore sure they did a great jobb with the 9-3 convertible and the new 9-5 and 9-3 sport combi but the 9-2 and 9-7x a subaru and some other i think a GM suv (dont know wich car it is butthe 9-7) it just change the front and emblem and earn money!! it feels more like GM is trying to squese out every nickel out of the company from my opinion! and this week i did get to know that the engine manufacturing is going to move to germany soon (its a rumor i hope)the whole company will be moved out of Trollhätan and there will be no Swedish feeling left in it and that is what makes SAAB unike like VOLVO!! Im seeing how GM is hanlding this matter and it makes me dissapointed!! Well i hope the brand will survive!! Greetings from sweden

I also find myself quite disappointed, Jay, on how GM is mishandling an opportunity to improve upon such a historical and prestigious brand as SAAB. I would implore you to take a ride on a 1997 SAAB 9000 Aero and note those wonderful Recaro seats, making the driver and its passengers feel like they are riding in luxury and safety. Also, note what SAAB was famous for...utility by way of its HATCHBACK, making it not only a beautiful sedan but also a true sport utility vehicle in every sense of the word, in terms of cargo space. All this and a get-up-and-go 225hp turbo engine that got 25-30mpg! Now that's a vehicle a lot of people would be looking for! Improve upon that with, lets say, all wheel drive (remember...don't forget those Recaro seats) and all of us Saabatistas will be singing the praises for GM.

Well I am so incredibly saddened by what has happened to the SAAB brand. In my opinion, the 900s of 1993 and before were the most distinctive, well designed cars of their time. Those were the models that built the SAAB brand. I look at SAAB's today and see generic cars that represent the absense of imagination and forward thinking. GM needs to go retro here...not unlike VW with the new bugs. GM needs to redesign the old 900s right down to the cockpit style front windows. Than watch as the the SAAB brand begins to rebuild and reignite interest,

I was the target market for the 2003 Saab 9-3 that Jay refers to. I was three years into a Buick Regal that I drove every day to the tune of about 35,000 miles per year. It had the GM 3800 V-6, was an incredibly reliable car (my son still drives it every day at 180,000 miles)My wife and I were about to get a part-year condo on the beach in Florida and we wanted a car to station there that looked great yet wouldn't quite break the bank. Enter a Polar White 9-3 with Parchment leather interior. We loved it!!! We had our "computer issues" and our "schizophrenic headlight" issues and our "CD player with a mind of its own" issues anad our "key fob" issues, yadda, yadda, yadda. But we still loved the car. It rode like a balloon on marshmallows, behaved on the road better than any car we had ever owned (including a 1998 Cadillac Catera)and we used to argue over who got to drive it. It now has 65000 miles on it, (we gave our son the Buick, remember) but it still feels like new. Or it did until three days ago. On that day I got a message on my alert screen that I had a gearbox malfunction. Three minutes later I was sitting sideways at the entrance to a gas station unable to pull forward, backward or any other direction. Today the dealer told me that I need a new transmission at $3,000.00 and Saab tells me its unlikely that they will offer any assistance in the repair as the car's warranty has expired. It's fair to say that I'm a little less enamored with Saab than I was 4 days ago. I've since visited a number of Saab blogs and it seems this geabrbox problem is the stuff of legends for this particular model year. Bad seals on a connector allow coolant to leak into the transmission and destroy it. I didn't have the recall on this taken care of (because I didn't know about it, though I'm told I should have gotten a notice!!)so Saab's bad seals are now my liability rather than theirs. That's my Saab story. Anybody wanna buy my Saab??