[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
![]() | [Main General Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Why would you say that? And a few thoughts... Posted by peter [Email] ![]() ![]() ![]() In Reply to: I wouldn't believe much in the NYT n/m, Ricardo, Mon, 23 Jan 2006 06:29:33 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
Don't think it's a question of "believing" or not. The article is quoting people saying what's been said elsewhere. You might not like what you read.
The articles did get me thinking. Whether we like it or not, Saab's future in the U.S. (and possibly worldwide) is precarious. Their products just don't measure up (in the public's eye) to their competitors. That in the end is the final barometer.
Those who bought Saabs in the 70s and 80s probably did so as a reaction to the crap put out by Detroit. I know I did. If you remember, there was no middle ground in imported cars...you either bought a Datsun/Toyota or a BMW/Benz/Jag. Audi, Volvo and Saab were your choices if you wanted a mid-range European car. Audis were junk, Volvos were stodgy, but Saabs...they had style. How cool was the first 900 SPG you saw in 1986?
Now the mid-range (or "entry-level luxury") is the most crowded segment out there, and there is just no way that Saab is gonna compete against the likes of Acura...and there's a whole bunch of folks who bought SUV's in the past 10 years who might have bought a Saab.
I thought the review of the 9-7 was quite generous, however, but selling a measly 500 SUV's a month won't help Saab or GM. There's absolutely no reason why a company with a foul-weather reputation like Saab should have waited until AFTER the SUV fad was over to put one out.
posted by 199.181.174...
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.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |