I'm sorry, but taking money from a European subsidy and putting it into American cars like Impala/Malibu is not how the world works. Maybe you would have an argument here if you were talking about Opel instead.

 

Yeah I think that's true.


I think part of the problem here, is that GM has essentially homogenized and mainstreamed Saab. They're like really nice Opels with some Saab-esque cues. Most of the things that made the brand what it was are sort of gone.

Saabs always kind of went there own way. Were always very efficient and small. And their engineering was alway interesting - especially since it usually was different than the rest of the pack.

Saab has lost all that. What the 9-3 is now, IMO, is the best damned G6 the world has ever seen.

As with alot of business deals GM does, GM got something out of it (namely a great inhouse engineering group), but spent BILLIONS misdirecting the brand.

 

To be fair to GM, Scania sold Saab, because they didn't see how to make money on it. The Saab 9000s really weren't all that small and neither was the 900. A lot of what made Saab special got copied by everyone else. FWD, lots of space inside compared to size of car, turbos. The mainstream of the car market essentially moved onto Saab's turf. In the end, all that made Saab unique were the quirky bits like the ignition key between the seats.

 

I see what you mean about turbos and FWD.

When I was about 7, I lived in Europe for afew months and attended school there. My teacher had, as I recall, a Saab 96 , a red one. He was quite avante-garde buzzing around town in it. Especially since everyone else either walked, had a donkey, a Vespa or a VW Beetle, maybe a Fiat if you were well-to-do.

The point is, that the car made a statement and it was very attainable. And that is what's missing with today's Saab. I mean, Saab had the potential to be GM's Mini. Not that it should emmulate Mini exactly, but have the that kind of energy and brand awareness, if you get what I mean.

 

To be honest, I always thougt SAAB's were butt-ugly until GM took over.

That doesn't mean I think GM should have bought SAAB, but I'm just sayin'...

 

Yeah. BMW got very lucky with the 1st gen of the new Mini. Look at the money it brought with that lousy reliability record and that cheap engine. A triumph of marketing for sure, though it was also a very fun car to drive. Mini was also helped by the fact that it didn't have any direct competition here in the U.S. Maybe if Saab had built a successor to the 96: small, good gas mileage, fun to drive -- instead of building mid size, reasonably powerful, space efficient FWD sedans (gee, only everyone builds one of those now, but Saab had that to themselves in the late 1970s). Something like the Saabaru, except not such a blatant rebadge.

 

Luck to great measure is recognizing opportunity. GM wasn't very "lucky" with Saab.

 

It's better to be lucky than good.

But being good and lucky is best!

Mini really had a great marketing campaign. Just like Chrysler with the original Neon. GM needs something like that for the new Cruze.

 

I hope they have a GREAT marketing campaign with the Cruze. GM needs a string of hits right now, like never before. That plus Cruze should get around 40 mpg. GM will need to sell a boatload of 'em if for no other reason other than CAFE.

 

I'm reminded of an old podcast...

"It's a Chevy TrailBlazer... with the key between the seats."

Of course, that was before Jason and Chris actually bought TrailBlazers.