Discussion
[quote=The Hypno-Toad]Sweet Zombie Jesus.....
I'm not going to post them...YET but after todays announcement there are rumours around tonight that I can hardly believe. Actually, I can. Nothing on this subject even remotely surprises anymore. Could well be a busy weekend.
More news as we get it. Now here's Ollie with the weather, how's it looking Ollie?
Toad sleepy... Toad go bed...
[/quote
Oh bloody hell....no.....
I'm not going to post them...YET but after todays announcement there are rumours around tonight that I can hardly believe. Actually, I can. Nothing on this subject even remotely surprises anymore. Could well be a busy weekend.
More news as we get it. Now here's Ollie with the weather, how's it looking Ollie?
Toad sleepy... Toad go bed...
[/quote
Oh bloody hell....no.....
GM even after selling the company still wants to control it...
The tech isn't that special really they are just worried that SAAB might become a success especially in China which wont really effect them really as SAIC sell loads more cars than they do....
If they dont want it going to the Chinese then buy it back themselves and this time do something good with the brand instead of making it suffer
Aghhhhhh
The tech isn't that special really they are just worried that SAAB might become a success especially in China which wont really effect them really as SAIC sell loads more cars than they do....
If they dont want it going to the Chinese then buy it back themselves and this time do something good with the brand instead of making it suffer
Aghhhhhh
Well done HT for keeping the fire stoked; I've been tied-up with work-related issues of my own!
As many predicted at the time of the latest MoU, the game isn't over by any means. IIRC the MoU only runs until 15th November; certainly, the exclusivity deal only lasts until then.
I'm unclear what the rumours are you're referring-to, other than GM's not-quite-announcement (or maybe a public negotiating gambit) indicating it would be a bit tricky for it to say "yes" at present? Do tell
As many predicted at the time of the latest MoU, the game isn't over by any means. IIRC the MoU only runs until 15th November; certainly, the exclusivity deal only lasts until then.
I'm unclear what the rumours are you're referring-to, other than GM's not-quite-announcement (or maybe a public negotiating gambit) indicating it would be a bit tricky for it to say "yes" at present? Do tell
skwdenyer said:
Well done HT for keeping the fire stoked; I've been tied-up with work-related issues of my own!
As many predicted at the time of the latest MoU, the game isn't over by any means. IIRC the MoU only runs until 15th November; certainly, the exclusivity deal only lasts until then.
I'm unclear what the rumours are you're referring-to, other than GM's not-quite-announcement (or maybe a public negotiating gambit) indicating it would be a bit tricky for it to say "yes" at present? Do tell
I didn't really want to post them as gossip because I didn't want to appear to be looking for problems that aren't there but..As many predicted at the time of the latest MoU, the game isn't over by any means. IIRC the MoU only runs until 15th November; certainly, the exclusivity deal only lasts until then.
I'm unclear what the rumours are you're referring-to, other than GM's not-quite-announcement (or maybe a public negotiating gambit) indicating it would be a bit tricky for it to say "yes" at present? Do tell
The following is going through a rumour filter & might be total BS!
Rumour one would appear to be that the reason that GM have made noises about rejecting the deal is that they might not trust Youngman.
Rumour two would then suggest that if SWAN can find anyone but a Chinese company to make the cars, they would be more than happy to let PangDa stay in the game and a takeover to go through.
Rumour filter off
What is confirmed as true though is the Swedish Federation of Motor Trade Suppliers, who are basically most of the creditors who were at the meeting a week ago, have announced that if/when PangDa/Youngman take over Saab they will not be getting any credit terms in the short term. Every spare part delivery will either be paid for on order or C.O.D until the situation can be reveiwed.
Given the events of this year, can't say I'm at all surprised at that.
The Hypno-Toad said:
I didn't really want to post them as gossip because I didn't want to appear to be looking for problems that aren't there but..
The following is going through a rumour filter & might be total BS!
Rumour one would appear to be that the reason that GM have made noises about rejecting the deal is that they might not trust Youngman.
Rumour two would then suggest that if SWAN can find anyone but a Chinese company to make the cars, they would be more than happy to let PangDa stay in the game and a takeover to go through.
Rumour filter off
Nicely caveated The following is going through a rumour filter & might be total BS!
Rumour one would appear to be that the reason that GM have made noises about rejecting the deal is that they might not trust Youngman.
Rumour two would then suggest that if SWAN can find anyone but a Chinese company to make the cars, they would be more than happy to let PangDa stay in the game and a takeover to go through.
Rumour filter off
We may recall that GM and Youngman have form; YM made overtures to buy the Saab brand (but nothing else) from GM in 2009 IIRC. Interesting to see what transpires here.IIRC Saab have already signed (or was that another MoU?!) an exclusive distribution deal with PangDa for China, and given notice on their existing distribution deal. If so, PangDa have already got the rights they want, without having to put any money in at all.
The Hypno-Toad said:
What is confirmed as true though is the Swedish Federation of Motor Trade Suppliers, who are basically most of the creditors who were at the meeting a week ago, have announced that if/when PangDa/Youngman take over Saab they will not be getting any credit terms in the short term. Every spare part delivery will either be paid for on order or C.O.D until the situation can be reveiwed.
Given the events of this year, can't say I'm at all surprised at that.
I've read the same thing. Not speaking Swedish, I'm unclear as to the nuance in the statement by the guy in question. It has been pointed out to me that if the company is still in reconstruction then it would in fact be illegal for it to accumulate more trade debt; therefore any production restart - or moves towards same - during reconstruction would require COD terms. An alternate translation seemed to suggest that he meant that if YMPD didn't pay off all or most of the current debt then there'd be no new credit, regardless of how creditworthy the Chinese are on paper. The latter seems fair enough to me - the suppliers can see that the Chinese have promised money to Saab several times without delivering.Given the events of this year, can't say I'm at all surprised at that.
As you said, this isn't surprising, and would probably be the case whoever bought Saab.
Well, the ball is still in play, the game is still afoot
Swedish outlet P4 West say GM has said NO
What will VM do now? It is fair to say that he's been floating the GM issue for a while now; he might even have acquiesced to YMPD's demands for 100% of Saab precisely because he knew (or believed) GM would say "no", but wanted to keep the reconstruction alive until that happened...
What next? Will VM bring YMPD back to the table to try to push through the original deal, a deal upon which - presumably - GM was happy to sign off? Does VM have any further supplies of rabbits with which to replenish his hat? Stay tuned, folks
Swedish outlet P4 West say GM has said NO
P4W said:
- With the proposal that is at hand right now, we can not continue with the licenses according to James Cain, spokesperson at General Motors.
This comes on the heels of the piece by Reuters which quoted the GM China chief Kevin Wale as sayingReuters said:
Wale reiterated a company spokesman’s comment that GM might block a deal by two Chinese companies to take over troubled Swedish carmaker Saab, in which GM still holds some preferred shares.
Reuters said:
Wale concurred on Monday, saying, “It doesn’t make sense for us to support any change that might adversely affect us. We use global architectures and those global architectures are used in a number of products we make at SGM.”
SGM, or Shanghai GM, also makes Cadillac models.
In other news, it turns out GM haven't made any MY2012 9-4Xs at all, due to Saab not being able to pay for them - I imagine that GM have to be treated like any other creditor, so can't be paid 'preferentially', even if it is to make cars in order for Saab to sell them in order to pay other suppliers... Under Swedish law, it may in fact have been necessary for Saab to force GM not to make any more, so as to avoid increasing the debts during reconstruction.SGM, or Shanghai GM, also makes Cadillac models.
What will VM do now? It is fair to say that he's been floating the GM issue for a while now; he might even have acquiesced to YMPD's demands for 100% of Saab precisely because he knew (or believed) GM would say "no", but wanted to keep the reconstruction alive until that happened...
What next? Will VM bring YMPD back to the table to try to push through the original deal, a deal upon which - presumably - GM was happy to sign off? Does VM have any further supplies of rabbits with which to replenish his hat? Stay tuned, folks
skwdenyer said:
Well, the ball is still in play, the game is still afoot
Swedish outlet P4 West say GM has said NO
What will VM do now? It is fair to say that he's been floating the GM issue for a while now; he might even have acquiesced to YMPD's demands for 100% of Saab precisely because he knew (or believed) GM would say "no", but wanted to keep the reconstruction alive until that happened...
What next? Will VM bring YMPD back to the table to try to push through the original deal, a deal upon which - presumably - GM was happy to sign off? Does VM have any further supplies of rabbits with which to replenish his hat? Stay tuned, folks
GM wanted SAAB to pay COD for every 9-4x that left the plant. That is rich from a company that nearly went pop which led top them selling SAAB in the first place….Swedish outlet P4 West say GM has said NO
P4W said:
- With the proposal that is at hand right now, we can not continue with the licenses according to James Cain, spokesperson at General Motors.
This comes on the heels of the piece by Reuters which quoted the GM China chief Kevin Wale as sayingReuters said:
Wale reiterated a company spokesman’s comment that GM might block a deal by two Chinese companies to take over troubled Swedish carmaker Saab, in which GM still holds some preferred shares.
Reuters said:
Wale concurred on Monday, saying, “It doesn’t make sense for us to support any change that might adversely affect us. We use global architectures and those global architectures are used in a number of products we make at SGM.”
SGM, or Shanghai GM, also makes Cadillac models.
In other news, it turns out GM haven't made any MY2012 9-4Xs at all, due to Saab not being able to pay for them - I imagine that GM have to be treated like any other creditor, so can't be paid 'preferentially', even if it is to make cars in order for Saab to sell them in order to pay other suppliers... Under Swedish law, it may in fact have been necessary for Saab to force GM not to make any more, so as to avoid increasing the debts during reconstruction.SGM, or Shanghai GM, also makes Cadillac models.
What will VM do now? It is fair to say that he's been floating the GM issue for a while now; he might even have acquiesced to YMPD's demands for 100% of Saab precisely because he knew (or believed) GM would say "no", but wanted to keep the reconstruction alive until that happened...
What next? Will VM bring YMPD back to the table to try to push through the original deal, a deal upon which - presumably - GM was happy to sign off? Does VM have any further supplies of rabbits with which to replenish his hat? Stay tuned, folks
I think it is ridiculous that GM can do this after all this time….SAAB deserves to succeed but this kind of restrictive practice is wrong even if they are shareholders. But you would think they would want it to succeed…..It is such a small minnow in the world of cars but with probably the biggest image of any manufacturer right now…Come on GM let it go….
Pistachio said:
GM wanted SAAB to pay COD for every 9-4x that left the plant. That is rich from a company that nearly went pop which led top them selling SAAB in the first place….
I think it is ridiculous that GM can do this after all this time….SAAB deserves to succeed but this kind of restrictive practice is wrong even if they are shareholders. But you would think they would want it to succeed…..It is such a small minnow in the world of cars but with probably the biggest image of any manufacturer right now…Come on GM let it go….
I'm no GM fan but at the end of the day I can understand why they might want to control their IP - afterall the platform for the new 9-5 is used in 3 current GM vehicles and I believe there are proposals that the next Roewe 750 is to be built on it (by SAIC) so it would potentially be disasterous for them for their Chinese partner's rivals to be able to effectively badge engineer the same car with a more powerful brand name on it. GM has managed to pull back from the precipice it nearly fell off in 2009 but it could still topple if they aren't careful. They simply don't have the luxury of just "letting it go", also thinking about it are SAIC not also a shareholder of GM? If that's the case it would only make it all the more likely that GM would be out to protect SAIC's interests.I think it is ridiculous that GM can do this after all this time….SAAB deserves to succeed but this kind of restrictive practice is wrong even if they are shareholders. But you would think they would want it to succeed…..It is such a small minnow in the world of cars but with probably the biggest image of any manufacturer right now…Come on GM let it go….
Evenin' all. I'm still taking in everything that has happened today, so this post may seem a little bit random.
First of all prophets on subway walls;
No. What has made me really angry tonight is other people. I'm just a stupid little bitter old Toad who sits bashing away on this thread night after night. I know nothing of international finance & neither do I have any contacts in Sweden or China who might have clue what all this is leading to. But if I can see that this proposed deal was never going to happen, why couldn't any of the creditors? Why couldn't PangDa/Youngman? Did Muller even speak to GM before doing the deal? Did he tell the Chinese he had? And for Muller to come out tonight and just go,
"Hey Ho, back to the drawing board," is frankly bonkers. Surely, someone, somewhere amongst the massive list of creditors is going to finally grow a pair and draw this mess to the conclusion that has been coming for a very long time.
If you will allow me one final quote.
First of all prophets on subway walls;
skwdenyer on the 28/10 said:
I realise it is usual for Hypno-Toad to be the cynic, but I really don't see - yet - where the cause for celebrations is. On the face of it, all this deal does is to buy Saab time until 15th November. The lack of any cash, the long history of broken "binding" agreements, and the very tight timescale all point to sources of considerable uncertainty for the deal.
The Hypno-Toad on the 28/10 said:
I won't buy it until I see the boss of PangDa & Muller exchanging folders and the money is in the bank.
I'm very sorry to be such a cynical old Toad (no change there then!) but I think this is yet another "the moneys coming, the moneys coming!" delaying tactic. It is only a 'letter of intent' which Muller can wave around at the creditors meeting on Monday in an attempt for it to go peacefully. Plus of course this deal still has to be approved by the EIB,GM, the shareholders of SWAN, the board of both PangDa/Youngman & most importantly of all; the NRDC.
If all that is true & would certainly appear to be from the sources I've checked, this is just another delaying tactic, at least for now.
& even;I'm very sorry to be such a cynical old Toad (no change there then!) but I think this is yet another "the moneys coming, the moneys coming!" delaying tactic. It is only a 'letter of intent' which Muller can wave around at the creditors meeting on Monday in an attempt for it to go peacefully. Plus of course this deal still has to be approved by the EIB,GM, the shareholders of SWAN, the board of both PangDa/Youngman & most importantly of all; the NRDC.
If all that is true & would certainly appear to be from the sources I've checked, this is just another delaying tactic, at least for now.
The Hypno-Toad on the 26/08 said:
GM have announced that they have suspended production of the new 9-4X until mid September alledgedly due to a model year changeover. I'm sure this is totally normal and has nothing to do with the fact that so far they have built just over 450 of them and Saab have sold in America......... 38.
The Hypno-Toad on the 04/11 said:
It will be very interesting to see what GMs stance might be and if PangDa/Youngman would be still interested in the company if GM say;
"You can have the company but you can't have the new 9-5 and the 9-4X. All you we'll let you have is the existing 9-3 & the PhoeniX platform,"
That might be their position but who knows? After all, I'm just a humble Toad.
Then from todays events;"You can have the company but you can't have the new 9-5 and the 9-4X. All you we'll let you have is the existing 9-3 & the PhoeniX platform,"
That might be their position but who knows? After all, I'm just a humble Toad.
skwdenyer said:
It is fair to say that he's been floating the GM issue for a while now; he might even have acquiesced to YMPD's demands for 100% of Saab precisely because he knew (or believed) GM would say "no", but wanted to keep the reconstruction alive until that happened...
This^^^^^110%. As we both knew I think skwdenyer, this deal was never actually done & I think Muller was aware of the issue. In fact..Victor Muller in di.se today said:
“It required no great knowledge to predict this. I warned the Chinese all along that they wanted something that would not go home at GM. ”
Oh really Victor, did you bother telling PangDa/Youngman? And if you knew it wasn't going to happen or that it even was going to be a problem, why the hell did you keep this information from the creditors meeting last week? Personally speaking if I was a creditor I would be trying to track you down urgently tonight to ask you the same question. Never have been a Muller fan but given this evenings events, that statement is fatuous in the extreme. And then it gets worse...Victor Muller in di.se today said:
“Now we go back to the drawing board.”
With what Victor? What is there left to do? James Cain GM spokesman this evening in di.se said:
He said that the decision is final. GM looks to overturn Saab's China Business. The U.S. production line at saying no to selling technology licenses to the current 9-3, 9-5 and 9-4X.
The first time ever in these events I'm really angry tonight. In fact I'm furious. I don't anyone, anywhere to think I'm gloating in the slightest or even being smug about how it appears I might have been right.No. What has made me really angry tonight is other people. I'm just a stupid little bitter old Toad who sits bashing away on this thread night after night. I know nothing of international finance & neither do I have any contacts in Sweden or China who might have clue what all this is leading to. But if I can see that this proposed deal was never going to happen, why couldn't any of the creditors? Why couldn't PangDa/Youngman? Did Muller even speak to GM before doing the deal? Did he tell the Chinese he had? And for Muller to come out tonight and just go,
"Hey Ho, back to the drawing board," is frankly bonkers. Surely, someone, somewhere amongst the massive list of creditors is going to finally grow a pair and draw this mess to the conclusion that has been coming for a very long time.
If you will allow me one final quote.
The lament of the desperate football fan said:
Its not the despair. I can handle the despair. I can cope with the despair. It's the hope I can't cope with, the hope is just killing me....
Sorry if this is a rant. Cross.Toad....
I'm sure there are lots of behind the scenes goings-on as to the why and why-nots...... and the Chinese are not stupid by any means.
As I said in a post the other day, GM publically stated that the collapse of the Koenigsegg deal was because of the financial backing came from China and they couldn't agree to that.....so, it's certainley no surprise to me that GM have this stance now.... and I can't see how it's a surprise to anyone else.
Perhaps, they (the Chinese and/or the Swedish Govt etc) thought at this last gasp chance of this or nothing, GM might have a change of heart...?
I really can't see where VM can go with this anymore, and surely it will all be wound up now by the administrators....?
I'm sure there are lots of behind the scenes goings-on as to the why and why-nots...... and the Chinese are not stupid by any means.
As I said in a post the other day, GM publically stated that the collapse of the Koenigsegg deal was because of the financial backing came from China and they couldn't agree to that.....so, it's certainley no surprise to me that GM have this stance now.... and I can't see how it's a surprise to anyone else.
Perhaps, they (the Chinese and/or the Swedish Govt etc) thought at this last gasp chance of this or nothing, GM might have a change of heart...?
I really can't see where VM can go with this anymore, and surely it will all be wound up now by the administrators....?
Petemate said:
skwdenyer said:
In haste...
In all fairness to those concerned, GM said, during the negotiations that they wouldn't comment at all until there was a firm deal on the table.
So maybe a bit of hope then?In all fairness to those concerned, GM said, during the negotiations that they wouldn't comment at all until there was a firm deal on the table.
The Hypno-Toad said:
skwdenyer said:
Perhaps, yes. At the very least, I don't think VM & co have been quite as negligent - or worse - as H-T seems to imagine.
So what have you heard skwdenyer? You should be able to post using all the provisos that I did about my rumours over the weekend. 
My point was that VM has actually been quite consistent in saying that the deal isn't done yet, that there are still significant hurdles to be overcome, and that GM and other technology licensors were a big part of that. What we don't know is whether, for instance, in the negotiations he was 'assured' by the Chinese that they had the connections to get GM's approval, or that GL may similarly have 'assured' everybody that (for instance) the Swedish and Chinese governments would make sure that came through.As others have stated elsewhere, VM's job is to make a positive case for whatever he can negotiate. If he says 'this deal is great for Saab', he can mean that, and it can be true, even if GM subsequently reject it.
Let us not forget that, in order to resolve 'the MG Rover question', the Chinese stated effectively forced NAC and SAIC to merge. It is not impossible to imagine that something similar might still happen behind the scenes, bringing YM into the SAIC fold in order to keep all of the GM IP relationships under a single roof.
I cant imagine this situation can go on for much longer , something's gotta give.
Surprised that the business brain of Mr Muller didn't think this might happen.
So whats the point of buying Saab ?. You cant have the tech or the name. GM have them by the gonads.
Even more pissed off now.
Surprised that the business brain of Mr Muller didn't think this might happen.
So whats the point of buying Saab ?. You cant have the tech or the name. GM have them by the gonads.
Even more pissed off now.
KaraK said:
To be honest if I was VM/The Administator I'd be talking to GM and seeing if there was any scope for SAIC to take it on lock-stock. There should be no IP issues and I'm sure SAIC would love a proper european brand name to play with.
Perhaps... but given how long SAIC have taken to get MG relaunched, I wouldn't be all that hopeful on that front.skwdenyer said:
KaraK said:
To be honest if I was VM/The Administator I'd be talking to GM and seeing if there was any scope for SAIC to take it on lock-stock. There should be no IP issues and I'm sure SAIC would love a proper european brand name to play with.
Perhaps... but given how long SAIC have taken to get MG relaunched, I wouldn't be all that hopeful on that front.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff