[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
I hold GM compeletly and totally responsible for the demise of this once great car maker. Some points to prove my case:
They waited too long to redesign the 95. The car was existing on 1999 technology. They lost market share to BMW, Benz, and Audi back in the early 2000's because they only made cosmetic changes to its flagship model.
Now we'll never see the new 95 come to market.
They couldn't handle owning a premium car company that might interfere and compete with precious Cadillac. You can't turn to a channel on any given Sunday afternoon without being bombarded by commercials for that American junkbox. How many Saab commercials did we see during the last 5 years?
They intentionally made the 95 ugly. It pains me to say it, but since the 2006 model year the 95 was a plain ugly car. Again, they didn't want any car to interfere or compete with precious Cadillac. I’m sure Trollhatten tried to rectify this blatant miscue, but some pointy headed engineer/accountant in Detroit said that what they wanted to do wasn’t cost efficient.
When GM completed the Saab acquisition they moved all American office operations from Atlanta to the ridiculous center in Detroit where the qualified techs and employees were replaced by incompetent post tech/mechanic school graduates who couldn't tell the difference between a Saturn and a Saab. The dealers and Saab techs felt most of the pain there.
What marketing moron thought they could rebadge one of the most poorly engineered SUV's in the history of GM and think Saab loyalists were going to buy it? Saab buyers didn't want a rebadged piece of junk just because it said Saab on the grille and tailgate.
If I wanted a Subaru WRX, I would have went to a Subaru dealer and bought a WRX. They weren’t even trying to be original here. They rebadged the WRX with a Saab logo and put it on the street. Post college graduates aren’t going to buy a Saab. They should have tried to keep going after the upscale market rather than dumbing down the brand with Japanese engineering.
GM never did anything to fix any of Saabs problems that made them undesirable to prospective new buyers. We never saw a resolution to the DI Cassette failure rate, faulty designed fuel pumps, and other nagging issues. Then when customers needed a resolution, if the car was out of warranty it was the customers’ problem. Great customer service there GM!
The marketing of the 93SS launch was awful. What did we see? 6 months of spotty TV, Radio, and print ads? Then nothing. The 93SS was another rebadged Opel, Saturn, etc, on the epsilon platform. They turned the 93 from a quirky hatchback that Saab owners loved into a car that you could buy in pretty much any showroom.
The integration of GM parts into Saab interiors. I never feel far from home when I travel and have to rent a car because I always knew my rental Malibu or Impala would have the same exact radio and heater controls as the 95 or the 93SS. Didn't anybody tell GM that Saab buyers bought the car for its individuality? I never saw a lot of Chrysler electronics in Mercedes models when Daimler owned them or vise versa. I also never saw this duplication in any of the precious GM Cadillacs.
I could go on but I would probably raise my blood pressure even more. Thanks for the memories GM. The failure of Saab is just another product of your incompetent management and faulty business plan. Maybe sometime you will actually learn from your mistakes and produce a car that might have some quality and ingenuity, but I sure won't be buying it. Anybody have the name of a good BMW or Mercedes dealership in my area?
posted by 65.29.18...
, Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:11:04
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
