1999 Saab 9-3 2-door Convertible on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Greetings from Trollhattan. I'm Emily, but I'm not a Saab.

What’s Swedish for “never give up”? Saab, apparently. The fondly-remembered car company formerly called just that — and now named NEVS — is only a shell, employing just a limited crew in the land of trolls. But itÂ’s got something to sell, and that something seems like it's really something. ItÂ’s called Emily. The Emily GT exists as six prototype electric cars, according to NEVS, with a combined horsepower rating (per car) of 484 powered by an enormous 175-kilowatt lithium-ion battery thatÂ’s good for 600 miles of range. In development almost since Saab's demise — the company, once owned by General Motors, was closed down in 2010 — the Emily is a very real product and needs a real sponsor, according to NEVS CEO Nina Selander, speaking to Carup. “It is for sale, it is also a joy to be able to show it. It should be allowed to live on, itÂ’s too nice, too good and too modern a car for nothing to come of it. Interested parties are welcome,” she said. Photos of the car show a modern, forward-thrust profile with handsome lines, a look similar to the last Saab 9-5 and VolvoÂ’s S60 (must be a Swedish thing) and a fashionable, sci-fi-ish interior. A hopeful engineer on the project estimates that the car is less than two years away from some kind of series production, but according to the modest NEVS website, the company is currently in “hibernation” even as it continues to solicit buyers for the Emilys. Said Peter Dahl, the Emily project manager, “Many have asked us what we have been doing for 10 years. We have developed 13 different car projects, this is one of them.” Related video: Volvo Saab Automotive History Electric Future Vehicles Classics

Spyker to appeal dismissal of Saab lawsuit against GM

It seems as if Spyker CEO Victor Muller has made a decision on whether or not to pursue a legal battle between his company and General Motors. Spyker has announced it will appeal a US District Court decision to throw out the company's lawsuit against GM. As you may recall, on June 10 Judge Gershwin Drain ruled tht GM had a right to approve or disapprove Spyker's sale of Saab to Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile. Spyker sued GM for some $3 billion, claiming that the American automaker had forced Saab into bankruptcy by stopping Spyker from transferring intellectual property to its Chinese partner.
Spyker has said only that it plans to appeal the decision. Until now, the company has been silent about the ruling. GM, meanwhile, has said it is pleased with the original outcome. You can read the quick Spyker press release below for more information.

Spyker files $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors over Saab's demise

"Smack." That's the sound of Spyker's process server dropping a big ol' pile of legal documents on the doorstep of The Renaissance Center, home of General Motors - or wherever GM's attorneys live during business hours. Contained therein is a Complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and demanding a jury trial, that seeks $3 billion in damages due to "the unlawful actions GM took to avoid competition with Saab Automobile in the Chinese market." Spyker accuses GM of "tortiously interfering" with Saab's business relationship with Chinese automaker Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile (Youngman), actions that Spyker CEO Victor Muller (above) said "deliberately drove Saab Automobile into bankruptcy."
(From Wikipedia: "Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships.")
The interference in question specifically refers to the very last potential deal, called the Framework Agreement, that Spyker worked out with Youngman. With lots of GM engineering embedded into the 9-4X and 9-5, The General had the right to approve any Saab partnership that would involve the transfer of GM intellectual property. Spyker had been rebuffed over every previous deal with a Chinese firm, including two bids by Youngman, due to GM concerns over its IP getting into Chinese hands and having to face Chinese-market competitors using its technology. The Complaint alleges that the Framework Agreement would have put a firewall around all GM IP - Youngman would only work on Saab's Phoenix platform, said to be just about free of GM tech, and would have no access to 9-3, 9-4X or 9-5 technology until after Saab ceased all ties to GM.