5 ms·

My understanding is that while yes they were great pieces of engineering, they weren't profitable. They would have died on their own without change. GM tried to

My understanding is that while yes they were great pieces of engineering, they weren't profitable. They would have died on their own without change. GM tried to change that by having them re-badge existing platforms, but Saab made changes anyway which increased cost and made them incomptible. It was a classic engineering vs management situation.

hef19898 3y ago
There are quite a few of those once great brands that ran into trouble: Saab, Volvo, Jaguar... The latter two are doing a reasonably good job today under new ownership. A pitty Saab didn't survive so, those were pretty cars.
- jabl 3y ago
  I think what did them in was that the auto market is operating on thin margins, and with ever increasing R&D costs for new platforms, it was inevitable that the small vendors would be knocked out.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Yeah, it kind of was that as well. That Saab ended up with GM didn't help neither. For some reason GM is pretty good in ruining their international brands. Ford almost did as well, but kept Jaguar alive long enough for them being saved by Tata Motors.
    - oblio 3y ago
      GM probably centralizes decision making in the US and no matter how much you try, not everything can be piloted from the US. Several big US tech companies do the same and we'll keep seeing them failing in the international arena for the same reason. For some strange reason, not everyone in the world is an American or thinks like one :-)
modo_mario 3y ago
They really underplayed their lack of compromise on things like safety and whatnot tbh. People should have seen them as quality above and beyond and be willing to pay a lil premium for that but i'd guess the average person saw em as fairly mediocre. I'm not scandinavian but kinda wish Sweden had been protectionist towards saab (& finland to do the same with nokia). That kind of protectionism shouldn't be as looked down on as it is especially when it's prevented so selectively and the lack of it has lead to a less broad, less competitive market in many areas. There's still Koenigsegg, volvo/polestar & related, scania, etc but other than koenigsegg those are all foreign owned now.
- b112 3y ago
  be willing to pay a lil premium for that but i'd guess the average person saw em as fairly mediocre. No, the average person barely cares for quality, vs cost. The average person will buy the cheapest thing possible, even if it means it lasts a year instead of 10, at a 20% discount. You can see it in all the "made in china" stuff, mostly sold as in-house brands for retailers. Whether Europe, Canada, the US, people but these retailer brands, this junk, and seem, bizarrely, happy. But then the average person thinks they can profit at the casino, and cannot think beyond today.
  - sofixa 3y ago
    > No, the average person barely cares for quality, vs cost. The average person will buy the cheapest thing possible, even if it means it lasts a year instead of 10, at a 20% discount. Not on the car market, or there wouldn't be such a proliferation of SUVs and pickups which are a useless waste for 90%+ of their users, and there would be few luxury/mid-tier brands - everyone would be driving around in the smallest Dacias and Skodas. Cars are a status symbol, and many people would prefer to pay more for the same car with a different badge indicating a higher status - case in point, the VW Group has a big range of brands, with cars being pretty much identical outside of small changes in visual design (interior and exterior), and VW (mid-tier) and Audi(higher-tier) outsell the "cheap" Skoda and SEAT - https://www.statista.com/statistics/275868/sales-figures-for-volkswagen-by-brand/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/275868/sales-figures-for....
drcongo 3y ago
I think you're right. Saab died for most Saab lovers the day they released the first GM re-badge, which was not only ugly, but also pretty crappy.

hef19898 3y ago

There are quite a few of those once great brands that ran into trouble: Saab, Volvo, Jaguar... The latter two are doing a reasonably good job today under new ownership. A pitty Saab didn't survive so, those were pretty cars.

jabl 3y ago
I think what did them in was that the auto market is operating on thin margins, and with ever increasing R&D costs for new platforms, it was inevitable that the small vendors would be knocked out.
- hef19898 3y ago
  Yeah, it kind of was that as well. That Saab ended up with GM didn't help neither. For some reason GM is pretty good in ruining their international brands. Ford almost did as well, but kept Jaguar alive long enough for them being saved by Tata Motors.
  - oblio 3y ago
    GM probably centralizes decision making in the US and no matter how much you try, not everything can be piloted from the US. Several big US tech companies do the same and we'll keep seeing them failing in the international arena for the same reason. For some strange reason, not everyone in the world is an American or thinks like one :-)

modo_mario 3y ago

They really underplayed their lack of compromise on things like safety and whatnot tbh. People should have seen them as quality above and beyond and be willing to pay a lil premium for that but i'd guess the average person saw em as fairly mediocre. I'm not scandinavian but kinda wish Sweden had been protectionist towards saab (& finland to do the same with nokia). That kind of protectionism shouldn't be as looked down on as it is especially when it's prevented so selectively and the lack of it has lead to a less broad, less competitive market in many areas. There's still Koenigsegg, volvo/polestar & related, scania, etc but other than koenigsegg those are all foreign owned now.

b112 3y ago
be willing to pay a lil premium for that but i'd guess the average person saw em as fairly mediocre. No, the average person barely cares for quality, vs cost. The average person will buy the cheapest thing possible, even if it means it lasts a year instead of 10, at a 20% discount. You can see it in all the "made in china" stuff, mostly sold as in-house brands for retailers. Whether Europe, Canada, the US, people but these retailer brands, this junk, and seem, bizarrely, happy. But then the average person thinks they can profit at the casino, and cannot think beyond today.
- sofixa 3y ago
  > No, the average person barely cares for quality, vs cost. The average person will buy the cheapest thing possible, even if it means it lasts a year instead of 10, at a 20% discount. Not on the car market, or there wouldn't be such a proliferation of SUVs and pickups which are a useless waste for 90%+ of their users, and there would be few luxury/mid-tier brands - everyone would be driving around in the smallest Dacias and Skodas. Cars are a status symbol, and many people would prefer to pay more for the same car with a different badge indicating a higher status - case in point, the VW Group has a big range of brands, with cars being pretty much identical outside of small changes in visual design (interior and exterior), and VW (mid-tier) and Audi(higher-tier) outsell the "cheap" Skoda and SEAT - https://www.statista.com/statistics/275868/sales-figures-for-volkswagen-by-brand/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/275868/sales-figures-for....

drcongo 3y ago

I think you're right. Saab died for most Saab lovers the day they released the first GM re-badge, which was not only ugly, but also pretty crappy.