2003 Saab 9-3 Linear--5-speed--super Clean on 2040-cars

Auto blog

New Saab parent NEVS: we're not totally broke

The many fans of 1987's The Princess Bride will recall Billy Crystal's Miracle Max character optimistically referring to the protagonist Westley as "mostly dead." It looks like National Electric Vehicle Sweden (NEVS), the company that now owns the Saab brand, fits that description. Of course, Westley does end up surviving and getting the girl. NEVS put out a statement last week saying that, while it doesn't have the cash to pay off all of its outstanding debt (hey, who of us does?), it is "not insolvent" because its assets are greater than its debt. Its suppliers will get paid, but that NEVs "cannot say exactly when." NEVS, the partnership between a Chinese company and a Japanese investment firm that acquired the Saab name in 2012, restarted production at its Trollhattan plant in Sweden last year and had promised a vehicle line that would include a battery-electric version of the 9-3 sedan. Instead, NEVS stopped the production line that was only making about a half-dozen vehicles a day (the gas-powered, turbocharged 9-3) in May because it said shareholder Qingbo Investment Co. didn't provide the agreed-upon cash. NEVS now says it held positive talks with two manufacturers this summer, and that once funding is secured, it will rewrite its business plan with its new partners to resume production. The supplier that filed a bankruptcy petition is withdrawing it based on this new information, says NEVS. Saab made its first cars in 1947 and was eventually owned by General Motors before being sold to Spyker in 2010. Bankrupt by the end of 2011, Saab was acquired by NEVS the following year. Check out NEVS's most recent press release below. And have fun storming the castle. Information from Nevs Nevs hereby clarify that the company is not insolvent. The company does not have enough liquid cash as today to pay all outstanding debt but Nevs' assets are larger than its debt. Nevs today cannot say exactly when, but Nevs' suppliers will get paid. During the summer, the dialogues with the two major vehicle manufacturers have continued and developed in a positive direction. It is a thorough evaluation process that is still ongoing, and the discussions have not been finalized yet. After the funding is secured, and after that Nevs business plan is updated together with its new partners, Nevs will be able to make the decision on when the Trollhattan factory can resume its production.

Saab didn't want this electric, 99-like delivery van from the 1970s

National Electric Vehicle Sweden (NEVS) purchased the remains of Saab in 2012 to turn it into an electric-only brand. While its vast heritage is turbocharged and rooted in racing, Saab didn't shy away from dabbling in battery-powered drivetrains, and there's an experimental mail delivery van in its official museum to prove it. The name Saab in the last paragraph should be followed by an asterisk. The prototype kind of looks like a 99 when viewed from the front, and it wears the soccer ball-style alloy wheels seen on several of the brand's models during the 1970s, but the museum's curator told Autoblog it was built in Linkoping, Sweden, by the company's defense and plane-making division. It's certainly a Saab, but not quite the kind you're likely thinking of. Engineers began the project in the early 1970s, at about the same time archrival Volvo launched its own experiments in the field of electrification. The idea was to create an electric, short-range distribution van that could be used by Sweden's postal service, for example. Two prototypes were built in 1975 and 1976, including the example in the museum, and each had a low-speed driving range of about 40 miles. Additional technical specifications are lost to history, partly because Saab's car-building division in Trollhattan -- the folks that developed the 99 and the 900, among others -- didn't like the van at all and wanted nothing to do with it. Saab electric van prototype View 2 Photos We peeked inside and under it and spotted a bulky, lead-acid battery pack integrated into a tray that could be pulled out from the back after flipping up the panel onto which part of the rear bumper was mounted. This layout was relatively common in early electric prototypes, like the Bus that Volkswagen developed in 1972 and tested in select German cities. Recharging the battery pack took hours, so swapping it out was considered the more practical alternative. Period documents and images confirm the electronics were mounted under the hood. Saab made two electric prototypes, including one it fitted with front-end parts like headlights (complete with wipers), turn signals, and a plastic grille from a 99. The second wore round headlights, bullet-shaped turn signals, and looked more like something you'd see in an episode of "Scooby Doo" than what you'd find in a Saab showroom. The van's resemblance to the 99 was purely artificial; it was its own thing, on its own chassis.

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.