How to save Saab

[borism100]

First, sorry for bad english.

How to save Saab. Why people can't save Saab? Because every manager until now don't know how to solve main problem. Saab don't have spirit. Soul. What it's mean. Saab is a car. But people don't want to buy a car. Why you want to buy speed car? To have a car? No. Because you want excitement. Status. Sex. Love. Bigger dick. Something to show. Why you want to buy family car? To have a car? No. You want comfort. Quality. Space. Safe. That your wife is satisfied. Saab don't have it. Saab is a car. OK. Who cares. When I see Saab I tell: "Look, it's nice".

When I see Audi RX8, I will not tell anything, because my lower lip will hanging. This is what Saab don't have. But, I don't know how managers didn't know that. This is simply modern marketing mix rules. You can't sell product if customer don't see in your product desire. Why Ikea is so good? Because Ikea have good quality and low price? No. Quality of Ikea product is in the middle, price is- just OK. Saab have good quality and OK price. And- where is Ikea, and where is Saab? But Ikea have what customers think that they want. Good sport car must have... sound. Eyes. Eyes that look at you.

Saab can be saved. But only with totaly new design and approach to customers need. Not only new design of cars. Design of every marketing mix item. Look at 4P, 6P, SWOT analise, PEST... and not to shut managers eyes. They must know that they don't have good article, but still they have good people, who have knowledge. And after that, after 1 year and app. xxx mil. euros, Saab can be better than Audi, Ford...

[Burnsside42]

Thank you for your indtroduction. Sounds like you should write a collumn in a local paper. Looking forward to your next approach to solve the industries problems.

[borism100]

Thank you for your indtroduction. Sounds like you should write a collumn in a local paper. Looking forward to your next approach to solve the industries problems.

I'm just mad because potentialy very good firm were ruined because of incompetent managers. Or just stealing. Or someone must make room for other company. Or interest for other company. I am from Croatia, and have seen all scenarios how to ruining a good company.

[Burnsside42]

I'm just mad because potentialy very good firm were ruined because of incompetent managers. Or just stealing. Or someone must make room for other company. Or interest for other company. I am from Croatia, and have seen all scenarios how to ruining a good company.

This is just called General Motors here GM is the biggest corrupt automotive corporation around these days it seems. I'd rather drive a Skoda then a GM

[rpiereck]

Yeah, GM seems to be ran by incompetent people, and I always wonder how they stay in business so long. They bought Saab and had twenty years to figure out what they wanted to do with the brand and for a while it seemed like they were doing the right thing (early 2000s), but then the corporate heavy hand comes in and spoils everything (mid 2000s). Saab could have been GM's Audi.

But see what GM did to Saturn and you can see that GM's plans are short sighted. Initially Saturn was supposed to be a brand to fight the Japanese cars, but they failed at that when corporate heavy hand came in and turned all their cars into plastic boring machines no one wanted.

Hummer too. Stared as a brand making the H1, a truck with a pedigree like no other, a brute on wheels, a go-anywhere vehicle that had been proven in the battlefield. The H2 and H3 that followed? They could barely go offroad as their steering was weak, and were barely more than Chevy trucks with new skins and a new badge. The brand became a symbol for people with too much money but no taste, and soon perished too.

Pontiac? Could be saved, they were producing horrible cars in the 90s, not much more than rentals, but in the mid 2000s they had a come back when many cars were introduced that brought back Pontiac's sporting background (Solstice, G8, GTO, etc). But GM's marketing was all over the place and the good cars didn't translate into sales, and it soon got the axe when GM needed to cut back on production.

Oldsmobile went away because GM had two brands occupying the same bracket in the market, that between the regular family cars (Chevrolet and Pontiac), and luxury (Cadillac). Buick won this battle with Oldmobile because Buick sells like hot cakes in China, so it survived.

GM just had too many brands and needed to trim up the fat. Unfortunately Saab as the one brand that GM never really understood, and it soon got the axe. GM did its best to get some ideas and technology from Saab (see the Buicks of lately?), and they disposed of Saab like an unused milk carton.

If I had been in charge of GM, this would have been my brand line-up:
- Chevrolet: the meat and potatoes of GM, Chevy has everything from family sedans and minivans, to pick up trucks and full size vans.
- Hummer: a product line under Chevy, these are off-road capable special trucks under the Chevy brand (think Chevrolet Hummer H1, the Hummer label would be like the TRD label Toyota uses on its trucks).
- GMC: get rid of this brand that has huge overlaps with Chevry trucks. Turn this into a "Commercial" label. Think Chevrolet Commercial 2500.
- Saturn: budget, economical cars. Think city cars (like the Chevy Spark nowadays), small sedans, perhaps a small minivan and CUV. Trim levels would be below Chevrolet, engine sizes smaller too. No V6. Want leather? Buy a Chevy. They're made in Korea by the former GM Daewoo (now Chevrolet Korea), and go head to head with other Korean cars (e.g. Hyundai Accent and Elantra).
- Holden: keeps doing its thing in Australia.
- Pontiac: family cars with a sporty character, all of them rear wheel drive, think Solstice, G8, etc. No G6... No overlap with Chevy. They are made in Australia by Holden, but get a steering wheel on the left and are rebadged as Pontiac for the US.
- Saab: the international Euro brand. GM sets a vision for Saab (fight Audi and Volvo, not BMW), and allows Saab to have its own independent engineering, design and development away from North America (in Trollhättan, where else). Saab is semi-independent.
- Corvette: becomes a separate brand from Chevy (as it already is in Europe), gets better interiors.
- Cadillac: move this brand a bit up market, stop fighting BMW (and Benz) for the 3-series, concentrate on 5 and 7 series. Make it true American luxury: opulent yet comfortable, slightly outrageous styling but yet classy. Make them ten year cars instead of the current five year life cycle. Make them last as much as they cost, make them bullet proof like the Benz were in the early 80s.
- Opel/Vauxhall/Buick: Buick dies in America but continues in China (sorry Buick lovers). This is GM's face in Europe and China. These occupy the same space in these markets as Chevrolet, Saturn and Pontiac do in the US market. Opel cars continue being sold in some foreign markets as Chevrolet (like Brazil).

[Dave T]

Yeah, GM seems to be ran by incompetent people, and I always wonder how they stay in business so long. They bought Saab and had twenty years to figure out what they wanted to do with the brand and for a while it seemed like they were doing the right thing (early 2000s), but then the corporate heavy hand comes in and spoils everything (mid 2000s). Saab could have been GM's Audi.
.

I'll give a completely different opinion. GM is not completely incompetent. It sells more cars than any company in the world, though Toyota sells about the same number. GM is reasonably competent in engineering. It knows how to do research involving technical areas. It has some understanding of a certain segment of the market. It does not have a good understanding of the segment of the market occupied by Saab or the market occupied by Mercedes Benz.

GM has been reasonably successful in Australia. It doesn't have a huge loyal following there but people buy the cars. In contrast, Mitsubishi recently ended all production in Australia as did Nissan many years earlier. GM sells in the U.S. well, though there are sharp regional variations.

Although lacking in auto management experience, if I could reorganize GM, I would split it into three competing branches, with mostly shared research, sharing of some parts, but having some duplication, in effect having three separate car companies.

GM G (maybe with an internal name of GM Galileo), GM M (maybe with an internal name of GM Magellan), and Buick would be competing companies. GM Galileo would be the smaller, nimble GM. It would have the following components.

GM Galileo
Corvette: A separate brand with initially one car model, the current one. A smaller Corvette may be possible.

SAAB: This would be the Saab that we like. Models might include the 9-2, 9-3, 9-5, 9-6X (9-4X), 9-7 Sonett (sporty 9-2), 9-8X (larger SUV that would come out after the 9-4X is downsized), and possibly a 9-9 (either a bigger sports car or bigger sedan). It would be the flagship brand for GM Galileo, much as Cadillac would be the flagship brand for GM Magellan.

Holden: Become the luxury brand worldwide but keep downmarket models for Australia. This would be a gamble because the Holden name is not well known worldwide. It would try to mimic Mercedes Benz and Land Rover.

Saab/Holden/Corvette: combined dealer network in the U.S. Local dealers in the U.S. could also sell Saturn.

Vauxhall/Opel/(Daewoo)/Saturn (Opel models rebadged with little or no changes): This would hopefully have technical excellence in small cars.

GM Magellan
Cadillac/Pontiac: Cadillacs similar to the current Cadillacs. Pontiacs would be sold in Cadillac/Pontiac dealers. They could share or buy/sell technology with Saab/Holden. Pontiacs would be sporty cars that are more expensive. GTO type cars would be the standard. It would have a different design language than Cadillac, perhaps rounder versus the angular Cadillacs. Sales of Pontiacs would be much less than before.

Chevrolet/GMC: Chevrolet would continue to try to sell well in the Midwest and sell in the Middle East. GMC would make trucks instead of Chevrolet. I would gamble that the Chevy Truck buyer will migrate to GMC and not waste resources to develop two lines. Hummer would remain an exclusive brand that developed military looking vehicles, like the H2. Marketing could decide if Hummer were to be a sub-line of GMC, technically a GMC Hummer H2. If the H2 didn't sell well, the brand could be eventually closed.

Buick
Buick would be the third company. It would contract with GM G and GM M to produce and help design cars. Buick would choose the lowest bidder. If might choose Cadillac to badge engineer larger cars for the U.S. market and Opel to badge engineer smaller cars for the mainland Chinese market. Saab/Holden/Corvette dealers could sell Buick. Cadillac/Pontiac or Chevrolet/GMC/Hummer dealers could also sell Buick if they got the franchise. I doubt there would be standalone Buick dealers but there could be Buick dealers who also sold non-GM brands.

Crazy ideas, huh?

[nordwulf]

Perhaps GM should do the same as Ford and only have one main brand and one luxury brand worldwide. Or like Toyota, Nissan and pretty much any other car manufacturer) Ford also had Volvo and Aston Martin but they didn't try to integrate them with other Fords, even though some of the technology was shared. They messed up with Jaguar and made them too much like a Ford.

So keep only Chevrolet and Cadillac and get rid of all the others. But Chevrolet doesn't really has much brand recognition in Europe and Australia (I assume) so that may be a problem.

Currently, only the Saab brand with a rich history remains. The company doesn't exist anymore. You could say Darwinism was at play here and Saab just wasn't strong enough and didn't conform to the taste of the general car buying consumers. You can blame GM all you want but it is what it is. I didn't really care for the direction Muller and Castriota were going for much either so perhaps it is even a good thing. There are so many other good and better cars out there and perhaps we are focusing too much on companies and brands. Cherish the past but look to the future with other brands and Happy Motoring.

[borism100]

Perhaps GM should do the same as Ford and only have one main brand and one luxury brand worldwide. Or like Toyota, Nissan and pretty much any other car manufacturer) Ford also had Volvo and Aston Martin but they didn't try to integrate them with other Fords, even though some of the technology was shared. They messed up with Jaguar and made them too much like a Ford.

I agree. Only two models- Megan and Focus (in Saab view) for the start. Ford was in very big troubles, but they were reborn with new Focus and Mondeo. Or, where was Kia in 90ies? And look at Kia now: Optima- Kia Cars, SUVs, Crossovers, Minivans, & Future Vehicles | Kia Motors America. I will wait that someone buy Saab brand and start making three cars: 1. something between Pasat and A6, 2. Something between Focus and Kia Rio, and 3. something between Audi R8 and... xxx.