GM Is Selling Saab To Spyker Cars 264
johncadengo writes "General Motors said today that it has struck a preliminary deal to sell Saab to Spyker Cars, a tiny Dutch maker of high-end sports cars, saving the Swedish automaker from what seemed like certain extinction after previous bids for it collapsed. A previous bid from Spyker was rejected by GM in late December because GM was uncomfortable with Spyker's Russian backers. The biggest investor in Spyker is the Russian bank Convers Group, which is controlled by Alexander Antonov. In March, Mr. Antonov was shot seven times and reportedly lost a finger in an attempt on his life in Moscow. No arrests have been made. His son Vladimir, 34, is a top executive at Convers and the chairman of Spyker." GM is taking a bath on the deal, financially speaking.
How is this news for nerds? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How is this news for nerds? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nerds buy geeky cars. Saab is a geeky car. At one point they had sodium inside the valves for cooling. They had standard turbochargers whey you couldn't get turbocharges. They had heated seats and a rear windshield wiper, again not normal for the time. And I have a Saab.....
Geeky indeed (Score:5, Informative)
Nerds buy geeky cars. Saab is a geeky car. At one point they had sodium inside the valves for cooling. They had standard turbochargers whey you couldn't get turbocharges.
At one point they also had 2-cycle engines (you had to add oil to the gas tank every time you filled it up) and, if you did it right, you could get the engine running backwards, giving you a car with one speed forward and four in reverse. If that ain't geeky, I don't know what is. You could probably win a lot of bar bets with it.
Sodium-cooled valves isn't all that geeky, though. The 292 CID V-8 in my 1964 Ford F-150 pickup had them, as do a lot of other heavy-duty vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
Saab is a geeky car.
I don't even understand the concept of a "geeky car".
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry.
If it makes you feel any better, I sold that old Ford almost thirty years ago. I do currently drive a pickup truck, but it's one of those little ones with a four-banger in it and it's studded all over with ham radio antennas. That's pretty nerdy/geeky, no?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sodium cooled valves are for durability, not performance. The little Alfa four-cylinder had good output because of it's DOHC layout.
Re:How is this news for nerds? (Score:5, Funny)
It's a 'nerdy' car.
The new owner of Saab gets shot 7 times, then has the guts to buy one of the most under-performing brands in automotive history.
A Klingon coming to earth would buy a Saab.
And if you say anything bad about Saab, he would make you wish you were Ferengi looking at Saabs' last quarterly statement.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
As cool as Saabs are, a Klingon coming to Earth would have to drive one of these [wikipedia.org].
A Minbari might drive a Saab, though,
Sorry, is it OK to cross compare SF universes like that?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
As cool as Saabs are, a Klingon coming to Earth would have to drive one of these (Rambo Lambo) [wikipedia.org].
But then they would seek out and destroy all the other '300' LM002s, so that no-one else gets to drive one.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What makes a '70s car nerdy? I could make a venturi tube (think carburetor) when I was in 3rd grade. Six injectors, a continuous-feedback fuel control system, servo controlled throttle body for drive by wire?
Nah, my MY2000's a lot more fun to screw with. I'm pretty sure I could tear down just about any simple-as-pie 70's muscle car like a tinkertoy in a day and a half. In high school.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that for most of the components, you actually *can* tear them apart and repair them, you can pull a carb apart and work on it, I'd like to see you try that on a fuel injector. Most modern cars contain single use items that are press fit and sealed at the factory, never to be serviced because you simply *cannot*.
But thats just the beginning, the geekiest thing about a 70's car is it is usually very easy to shoehorn modern technology into them and even program that shit yo
Re:A real geeky car is a GTO. (Score:5, Funny)
My 73 Olds Delta 88 would crush your little Saab!
Probably true. Saab pioneered crumple zones and collapsable steering columns.
You'd be dead, and my car would be ruined. I know which side of that equation I'd prefer to be on.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I think Mercedes did, but of course the Swedish did pioneer the moose crash-test for obvious reasons.
Re:How is this news for nerds? (Score:5, Funny)
Just stick around for a while. Somebody will come up with a good car analogy to explain all of this to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Just stick around for a while. Somebody will come up with a good car analogy to explain all of this to you.
Yeah its like if you make a front drive car but with a longitudinal engine so the front overhang is 1/3rd the length of the body and then you sell it to people who like using the brakes....
Re:How is this news for nerds? (Score:4, Interesting)
See, it's like if Saab were to be sold, and an exotic car manufacturer saw opportunity where GM pillaged and neglected the company for 20 years, and bought the company seeing that the "quirky" nature of the car is that the design makes sense, since the ergonomics are designed around performance-oriented driving and safety, which makes them different. How's that for an analogy? ;)
Seriously though I'm excited this deal went through. GM bean counters held Saab back and it is rumored they used Saab to cook their books, by "over billing" Saab for GM-manufactured engines, shifting profits and losses around for tax and stock price advantages. It's disgusting that the Saab-designed engine's best configuration has not been allowed to go into the 9-3 and 9-5, but instead went into the Cobalt SS at 260hp (but the engine internals and turbocharger are good for >300hp reliably with minor mods). Also GM beancounters position it against BMW and Audi, and it would do well, except with power output (especially in the XWD models) and with GM's choice of interior coatings (the rubberized paint that peels all too easily) and the inflated MSRP (which no one ever pays for a Saab), why would anyone step into the showroom?
Here is what Spyker needs to do to turn Saab around:
1. Keep MSRPs where they are on the Turbo X, but fix Trionic 8 engine management and boost power output to compete with the 335i and 135i power output.
2. Go RWD and XWD in the new 9-3
3. Lower MSRP on the base "touring" and "comfort" sedans to what people actually pay for them (well under $30K) and institute "no haggle" pricing across the board
4. Improve the interior panel coatings (paint). Spend the extra few cents GM would not spend and get rid of GM's choice of prone-to-peeling coating.
5. Advertise the cars heavily. "Born from jets" needs to promote the ergonomics which are designed around the driver, safety, and better engine options GM bean counters would not allow need to be introduced to put some performance behind the implied promise "Born from jets" implies. Saabs are only "quirky" in that the ergonomics are unusual because they are more natural and centered around driving.
6. Shitcan the dealers with poor customer service.
7. Bring us Aero X!
I love my 9-3. I hated Saabs until last year when I had to drive a friend's (he insisted). I fell in love with it immediately and ended up buying one. Sure, the power output may be somewhat (read: a lot) lower than I'd like but the car is a blast to drive, and it performs a heck of a lot better in the real world than the numbers would imply, However, numbers sell cars, so they really need to bump up the HP and Torque output.
Spyker can do it. I hope they turn Saab around just like BMW turned around when BMW was about to tank.
I'll definitely be buying the new 9-3 if/when it comes out.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm totally with you on all of your points -- except "2. Go RWD".
Are you mad!? Whatever happened to your opening statement of SAAB being all about "performance-oriented driving and safety"?No sir, rear-wheel drive is only for sports and race cars, as well as for American cars, Mercedes and BMW (who seem to think that all their cars are sports cars?). XWD is quite another matter, of course.
I'm very glad to see SAAB once again in the hands of a manufacturer that actually loves cars (rather than only their bot
Re: (Score:2)
I'll counter your "costs money"
1. GM did it in the Cobalt with basically the same engine. What does the Saab 2.0T need to produce over 300hp? Downpipe, higher pressure wastegate (well, really, just ECU tweaking), different bypass valve, upgraded exhaust, upgraded downpipe, and upgraded airbox. It's all the same cost if you make it part of the car in the first place, rather than a tuner kit. You need a downpipe, you need a wastegate, you need an exhaust, and so forth. How much did the Cobalt SS go for? An i
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm guessing he's referring to SAAB Cross Wheel Drive:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_XWD [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm waiting for someone to make a computer analogy to explain why selling Saab to Spyker is a bad idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Spyker makes this [wikipedia.org] (which was featured in the Jet Li/Jason Statham movie War.) Car nerds are nerds too.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just a car analogy, that's all.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Classic Saab's are the ultimate nerd car, they were designed by vikings and hand built by trolls!
*** FULL DISCLOSURE *** I'm a computer programmer who drives a 20 year hold Saab 900 T16 Turbo convertible ;-)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It will be spelled S@@b, $aab, or some combination of the above.
good (Score:5, Insightful)
I used to want a 900 back in the 80s, then GM bought them. I hope Spyker can undo the damage GM has done, and turn the cars into something I would like again.
Sheldon
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am sure the new owner will be better than GM. It is not hard to come up with better ideas than "lets slap a sunroof on a WRX wagon and call it a 9-2 and sell it for many thousands more!".
Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is, there is no place in the luxury market for Saab. When people want a luxury car, they think Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc. They have long since forgotten about Saab, Cadillac or Lincoln. Brands that don't evolve will die off. Saab needs to be taken off life support.
Re: (Score:2)
With cars being so generic these days I wonder if there is a market for "eccentric" or "different" cars? The problem of course is doing it in sufficent numbers to be economic, but computerized logistics and crowd sourced marketing may make a difference.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They need to do what GM refused to do for Saab:
Let Saab engineers put the powertains they designed in Saab models, not cherry pick Saab's best work and put it in other models, leaving Saab with lower-end crap (the XWD would be a great match for the I4 GM "borrowed" for the Cobalt, for example. I know, the current 2.0T is now a GM engine, but they used the best of Saab's induction designs for the one that went into the Cobalt. The 2.0T is good for over 300 reliable HP. PERFECT match for XWD! Also, GM "borrow
Re:good (Score:5, Interesting)
Lexus and Audi were awful in the 80s and early 90s, but cleaned up their acts to get them to where they are today.
Mercedes has always done a good job with their super-high-end models, although their entry-level luxury sedans (ie. the C-Series) have always been mediocre at best. They were also among the last to cave and admit that rear wheel drive cars don't make sense for the vast majority of the population (something that Saab were among the first to do). Front wheel drive makes far more sense if you live anywhere where it might possibly ever snow, while Audi discovered that AWD offers the best of both worlds.
If nothing else, the automotive industry needs extra competitors in the marketplace, given that the number of brands has slowly been whittled away over the years with no serious new entrants into the mainstream industry in quite some time. Saab have the manufacturing facilities, engineering talent, brand heritage, and penchant for unconventionality that could potentially make them a (minor) force to be reckoned with in the marketplace. The notable outcry that resulted when GM announced it was killing the brand is proof enough that there is still plenty of interest alive in the company.
Re: (Score:2)
I owned an 85 audi quattro and I still consider it better than my current BMW 5 series so am I missing something (other than perhaps nostalgia)?. The only major problem with it was the display electronics and AC died in the late 90s, compared to my Taurus which the entire thing nearly disintegrated after 6 years.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I owned an 85 audi quattro and I still consider it better than my current BMW 5 series so am I missing something (other than perhaps nostalgia)?. The only major problem with it was the display electronics and AC died in the late 90s, compared to my Taurus which the entire thing nearly disintegrated after 6 years.
Display electronics? Either you lived in Europe or had a eurospec urquattro. US cars received analog gauges, Europe got the talking digital dashboard (that usually broke). Ironically the AC compressor was pretty much the only part of those cars Made in the USA. The hoses usually leaked all the freon out after a few years.
Re: (Score:2)
Front wheel drive makes far more sense if you live anywhere where it might possibly ever snow,
The position of the drive wheels is irrelevant. What makes the difference is having the engine on top of the drive wheels. The VW bug and Chevrolet Corvair were excellent snow cars, as was the Olds Tornado/Cadillac Eldorado. All enjoyed the engine-over-drivewheels advantage and they all existed decades before front-wheel-drive became the default configuration for most cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't it the Audi Quattro that was the first ever 4WD road car?
Re: (Score:2)
No, Subaru was first, Audi Quattro was most popular/better marketing so people remember it more.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Subaru was first, Audi Quattro was most popular/better marketing so people remember it more.
No, AMC Eagle FTW!
Re: (Score:2)
According to Wikipedia, none of us are correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-wheel_drive [wikipedia.org]
It's unclear to me which would appear to be the first "street car" with 4WD, but it's pretty clear it's none of the above.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The A and B class Mercedes are FWD. The Mini is BMW's way of having FWD without having to use the BMW badge on it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My dad was a huge Saab fan. If they returned to their pre-GM roots, he'd buy another.
Because they're luxury? No. Because they were solid cars, good for wintery conditions, and fit tall people quite well.
Re: (Score:2)
"... and fit tall people quite well."
Eh, no. I'm 2 meters tall (6,5 feet), my dad has a '98 Saab 9-5 and I don't fit comfortably. Not enough headroom.
Which is a shame, because it's a great car to drive.
Re: (Score:2)
When people want a luxury car, they think Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc.
Nothing ever changes.
Hyundai will someday make good and reliable cars? HAH!!!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, I don't trust this Victor Muller guy one but. His track record is abonimable. He first fired Maarten de Bruijn, who was the designer of the Spyker cars and the founder of the company because Maarten Maarten had a more conservative idea about money making than Victor had. Then Victor started a Formula 1 adventure that drove Spyker to the edge of bankrupty. And now he has borrowed 400 million euros to buy Saab, an amount of money he will never be able to pay back if you ask me. He has no experience at a
A bath? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is something, instead of nothing. I call it a win.
True, they would of been able to sell it for far more if they had not completely devalued the brand, but they have no right to complain on that fault.....
Re:A bath? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
No.
Its more like they bought a Lamborghini for $2 million and then proceeded to treat it like a rental and sell it for $10,000 in its nearly destroyed state.
Did GM make money off of Saab over the years? I'm guessing the answer is yes. So clearly they probably made back their initial investment and then some. Anything less than a billion for a marque like Saab is chump change. I guess they figured they should take all that they can get.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you sell something for less than you buy it for, its a bath. They lost large amounts of money on buying Saab. This may be a better choice than stopping production entirely, but that doesn't mean it isn't a major fuckup overall.
Financially Speaking? (Score:2)
Did kdawson worry that we might think GM executives would have to take a bath literally?
Marriages Made in Haste.. Oft Leave a Bad Taste.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Spyker has 130-odd employees and builds around 40 cars a year.
Saab has 34,000 employees and builds around 100,000 cars a year.
Neither of them make money.
- Who is kidding who with this particularly peculiar "takeover"?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Marriages Made in Haste.. Oft Leave a Bad Taste (Score:2)
To be fair, most of the players in the automotive industry haven't made any money in quite a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
There's more to the auto industry than Detroit.
Toyota and VW were making huge profits before the financial collapse -- they will probably be joined by Ford and possibly GM when the global economy recovers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True. I'm bullish on Ford because they've finally adopted a business strategy of selling higher-margin, higher-quality products worthy of their first world cost structure. It might take a decade for people to catch on, but IMO there's a good chance Ford will become the American VW, if not the American Honda.
GM ... I'm not sure if they've divorced themselves from the idea of "sell the most cars, make the most profits", despite the fact that "sell at a loss, make it up on volume" put them in bankruptcy court.
Re:Marriages Made in Haste.. Oft Leave a Bad Taste (Score:2)
Kind of like what happens when you mix Swedish and Russian vodka :/
OK, let's reword it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Spyker has 130-odd employees and builds around 40 cars a year.
Saab has 34,000 employees and builds around 100,000 cars a year.
Neither of them make money.
- Who is kidding who with this particularly peculiar "takeover"?
Some of those 130 Spyker employees are high-level management. So let's reword it:
Saab is being bought by a Russian bank, who is installing Spyker executives as its management.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Marriages Made in Haste.. Oft Leave a Bad Taste (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see:
* GM is run by beancounters who landed GM where they were last winter
* Spyker can't produce enough cars and needs production facilties; which Saab factories provide in spades
* Saab needs passionate management, not an owner who will just take the best engineering Saab produces for other products, leaving Saab with crap to work with.
Given how badly GM has mismanaged Saab, it is amazing just how good the 9-3 and 9-5's track records are. They are extremely reliable (2003 9-3 teething issues aside; pretty much expected with any new car model), they are the best in their class for crash testing, are very comfortable, can achieve well over 30mpg(combined.. My best full tank to date is 36mpg) when driven conservatively. Handling is really good (the passive rear wheel steering helps!), it has the only stability control system and ABS I don't hate, and braking is incredible.
Saab can turn around. Look at what BMW and Audi have done; both have been at the brink of failure in the not so distant past.
Re: (Score:2)
Spyker builds 40 crappy cars a year but manages to stay alive due to verv good marketing.
Saab builds 100,000 good cars a year but nearly died because GM destroyed the brand.
Combining them can go two very different ways.
Re: (Score:2)
And obviously SAAB doesn't need to be profitable, if they manage to restore a bit of the brands credibility, that in itself will increase the share value enough to sell it back to GM with a profit.
Re: (Score:2)
It will give Saab employees a little bit more time to search for a new job.
That's all.
In Soviet Russia ... (Score:3, Funny)
In Soviet Russia, you WILL buy our car! It doesn't cost an arm and a leg ... yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this headline news only because (Score:2, Troll)
It is tangentially connected to someone getting shot?
Re: (Score:2)
> Is this headline news only because
> It is tangentially connected to someone getting shot?
No, it's news for nerds because it is rumored that Vladimir Antonov, son of Alexander Antonov, the power behind Convers Group, the biggest investor in Spyker Cars owns a computer...
Wait for it... ... that runs Linux.
.
.
There, Slashdot relevance in 5 degrees of separation!
GM sells saab... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:GM sells saab... (Score:4, Interesting)
Come to New England sometime; Saabs here are more commonplace here than BMW and Audi. I never had any idea Saabs were not as popular elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
The main details are missing (Score:3, Informative)
From a better source [aol.com]:
"But three crucial issues remained (and still remain): Spyker must deliver the cash, the Swedish government must guarantee a loan, and Spyker Chairman Vladimir Antonov must leave the company."
Many more details [saabsunited.com]:
"The Antonovs were not allowed to start a branch of their Baltic bank Snoras in Britain.The British financial supervisory authority rejected the application, due to the Antonov's nasty reputation for being reluctant to cooperate with the authorities and their general uncommunicativeness.
It is still unclear why the oligark Vladimir Antonov was gunned down and seriously wounded in Moscow in March. But the Antonovs have operations in the harbour in Kaliningrad (former Königsberg), which is notorious for being controlled by the Russian mafia. Kaliningrad is one of the main harbours for shipping guns and drugs to western Europe. In Russia, it is assumed that the attempted assassination is linked to a struggle for power over the operations in Kaliningrad.
No Russian journalists dare to comment on the Antonovs on camera, but off the record they claim that the family has links to shady arms deals.
The Antonovs own a bank in Panama, known as a tax haven. It is not unusual for wealthy Russians to use banks in tax havens for money laundry operations, according to TV4."
Re: (Score:2)
If the Russian Mafia are upset with them the Antonovs may actually be good guys.
Re: (Score:2)
or maybe those were his loan officers
Re: (Score:2)
I am confused (Score:3, Funny)
So how does this work in car analogies? Do I have to find a computer analogy instead? ... does not compute.
SAAB are long dead (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why Spyker wants to bring back the '80ies glory of Saab. Maybe that will work, maybe not, but at least Victor Muller is a lot more passionate about the design of the cars than GM will ever be.
I'm looking forward to what Saab will bring from 2012 onward, because that's when Spyker's influence will start to show from Saabs in the showroom.
GM Spyker SAAB (Score:2)
GM Isn't taking a bath, I am. (Score:2)
GM isn't losing shit really, I am, since I paid to bail their asses out and their making retarded decisions that even Timmy knows better than to make.
They didn't even bother to SELL their 3rd most profitable brand, they just terminated it.
These people need to be exterminated. They draw massive freaking salaries and have 0 accountability. Its time to pull out the tar, feathers and nooses. This time we hang the right people though.
Re:GM Isn't taking a bath, I am. (Score:4, Insightful)
They didn't even bother to SELL their 3rd most profitable brand, they just terminated it.
In their defense, there really wasn't much to sell of Pontiac other than the arrowhead and some trade dress. Basically all of the technology in modern Pontiacs came from other divisions. And unlike some of the divisions they decided to sell, *if* they found a buyer for Pontiac, all they'd be doing is creating a competitor on their home turf competing in their core market.
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't even bother to SELL their 3rd most profitable brand, they just terminated it.
Pontiac was their third best selling US brand, but if you look at the figures, that was mostly on the back of rental fleet sales.
If you know Pontiac's actual profitability, you are ahead of 99.9% of people who don't work for GM accounting. Frankly most of their lineup has been junk for years and its totally believable the brand was structurally unprofitable and a total write-off.
(I'm aware Pontiac has had some exceptional reviews recently, but the general consensus was they were selling cars like the G8 an
Re: (Score:2)
There hasn't been an "exciting" Pontiac since they stopped making Pontiac engines. My '64 GTO was essentially a Chevelle with a nose job, but it came with a pretty hefty Pontiac 389. I eventually yanked it out and stuck in a 421 Tri-power engine from a Catalina. I also owned a 67 GTO with a 400 and a 67 Firebird with a 326 (which I replaced with a 400)
Of course gas was 33 cents a gallon back then...
Not many people know this. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not my friend, guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was going for a "You're not my friend, guy". "You're not my buddy, friend". "You're not my guy, buddy." South Park thread, but oh well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't a bailout, it was a loan, which they are already paying back. Go back to your fox/cnn/nbc news network and leave the intelligent people alone.
Re:free SAAB? (Score:4, Informative)
Pretty much the same thing was with Goldman Sachs - they were about to collapse, government came to the rescue with tarp plus lent money practically for free (0,5%), so folks at GS could buy treasury bonds (maybe around 4% - difference is pure risk-free profit at the taxpayer's expense) and gambled in stock market. Thanks to their 'brilliant' strategy they could repay tarp to be free of constraits again... and pay record high bonuses to their managers.
Even 7 year old would make a profit with heavy subsidies from the buddies in government.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It wasn't a bailout, it was a loan, which they are already paying back. Go back to your fox/cnn/nbc news network and leave the intelligent people alone.
For an intelligent person, your claims are factually incorrect. It was partially a loan, mostly a cash for equity deal in which the government essentially bought General Motors for ~$40B.
The government won't be paid back until new shares are sold to private investors.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is itself a stupid bit of design that I have never seen any good reason for. All it achieves is making the area around the keyhole look scratched and worn as in real life most people have other keys on their car-key ring. It also means there's no steering lock. But worst of all it will catch you out if you're used to a car with more normal placement, and that can mean a major loss of valuable time when you need to get th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This along with some other design features originated with the fact it was designed by people who were in cold places.
It's far easier (in theory, I don't own a SAAB) to get the key into that location and start the car wearing large gloves, than behind the steering wheel..
Re:Saab (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
w8, takeover from US company results in cars becoming Euro junk?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Go ahead. Tell me what so special about it. Something more than the superficial key hole in the middle aisle and the like.
Rather than explaining it to you, I'll just point out that you seem qualified for a marketing job at GM.
"Oldsmobile? They're just like Chevys, except with a superficial split grille. (10 years later) Holy crap! What happened to Oldsmobile sales?!?! We gotta shut it down!"
Cars, being the most expensive mass-produced purchase that people make, create a lot of emotional values among their customer base. You can't just boil them down to a rationalized list of superficial features, because customers will figure
Re: (Score:2)
If that were true, it would correlate with European automotive industry in general being "parasites"; which is far from true, they managed to go through the hard times in a much more gracefull way than US automakers. Maybe there's a problem with the latter and their handling of subsidiaries...
Re:Time for GM to dump all European brands (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Time for GM to dump all European brands (Score:4, Informative)
If European brands are so terrible, why did GM go through hell and high-water to hang on to Opel?
The truth is that a good chunk of GM's engineering is done in Europe; their modern american cars use the same platforms and engines.
Re: (Score:2)
How about a (-2) 'hate speech' mod.
Then I can read slashdot at a -1 threshold without having to read this crap.
(some Offtopic -1 post are still interesting)
I agree wholeheartedly. And who the hell modded this Flamebait? Offtopic, perhaps, but still a very valid point, considering the recent crap that trolls have been posting on Slashdot.