• Mar 28th 2006 at 1:06PM
  • 13

Mark LaNeve is out to put the kybosh on any notion that General Motors has designs on folding Saab and/or Hummer in its bid for solvency. The automaker's head of North American sales and marketing noted in a conference call that the two brands are "intrinsically woven" into GM's global outlook.

While Hummer has been experiencing growth and turning a profit, the General's Swedish outpost has been awash in red ink for many years. With a lack of fresh product and a clear brand identity, Saab has been on the 'Will-They/Won't-They' Ferris wheel of brand consolidation speculation for as long as the discussion of portfolio tightening has been taking place.

[Source: News.com.au]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 9 Years Ago
      Good. They should ax Pontiac instead, and I've never understood why having both GMC trucks and Chevy trucks was necessary.
      • 9 Years Ago
      GM really needs to get rid of their "duplicate" vehicle divisions. I mean, divisions which don't have a unique line-up of vehicles.

      That would mean, at least, axing Pontiac and GMC, since they only duplicate Chevy and Chevy Truck. Possibly even axe Buick since their lineup duplicates vehicles in Chevy and Cadillac.

      GM also needs to decide if they want to be a car company or a cell phone company. Basically, give up on OnStar. Trying to force OnStar to be a viable cell phone company, by making all purchasers of GM vehicles to buy the $1,000 cell phone hardware, and require them to pre-pay for a year's service, just doesn't make GM vehicles competitive. I mean, because of OnStar, Cadillac is the only lux car brand name that doesn't even offer Bluetooth (well, except for the STS which does uniquely offer it).
      • 9 Years Ago
      If that is their decision, can we please make the product better.
      Hummer H2-6L80 transmission & new aluminum 5.3 DOD V8, I want to see 12/18 mileage or better.
      Hummer H1-Throw in the extra overdrive Allison T1000 & a shorter axle ratio (or maybe the hub redution ratio)
      Hummer H3-6L60 with the 3.5 I5, how about H3 sport, a turbocharger 2.8 I4, with front mounted BIG intercooler, 250hp 250 ft-lbs & same 6L60 transmission. How tall is Pike's Peak? 14,000+ feet.
      Saab 9-5 & 9-3, 6 speed automatics, 9-5, transverse direct injection 3.6 V6 and alfa romeo's torsen 3 four wheel drive.
      Bye-bye Saabaru
      • 9 Years Ago
      That's a (beautiful?) Saab 9-2x... be sure to check out www.saab92x.com for more info!
      • 9 Years Ago
      GMC is not pontiac. as the owner of not only GMC trucks but several pontiacs...I loved both
      Quallity was great on both cars, I've never had to return any of them for manufacturing problems.
      I recently leased a New Buick Rendevous... everyone should check them out
      Keep it up GM, Let's all hope it works out.. A lot is at stake
      • 9 Years Ago
      No need to kill Saab because it's already dead.

      GM has the Cadillac BLS which is a Saab 9-3 in Caddy drag. GM doesn't need 2 brands based on the Saab 9-3, so the Cadillac BLS can replace Saab overseas.

      The bigger Saab 9-5 is just a weird-looking, but otherwise derivative GM car (Opel maybe?). Who needs it?

      If GM could sell Saab it would be a smart move, but who'd buy it and why?

      Saab is like a night club that features waltz dancing and eel dinners. The 5 guys in town who like that combination go there with frequency, but the place goes broke because nobody else cares. Saab is like that.
      • 9 Years Ago
      Pontiac is fine. It has an identify (low cost performance) and distinctive stling. GMC trucks are for the non Chevrolet dealerships, which makes sense. Saab, on the other hand never made sense to me. That investment has proven to be a waste of money. I feel the same about Ford and Volvo. Saturn was a great idea but things like the Saab purchase gave GM to many plates to juggle. Saturn eventually got overlooked and tired with so few offerings. Now it may be too late to get the momentum back.
      • 9 Years Ago
      Bill: GMC at one time was a different animal mechanically, although they shared bodies with Chevy. Now, GMC is just a badged Chevy. Its purpose is to allow dealers in other makes to sell a CM pickup truck. You often, in small towns, might see a Pontiac GMC dealer, or a Pontiac-Buck-GMC dealer. In Pasadena California many years go, there was an AMC-GMC dealer. Two different manufacturers under one roof. And they sold a hell of a lot of trucks, including stuff right up to Astro 95 (tractors with diesels, not a minivan).

      Combine the sales of Chevy and GMC pickups and they actually surpass Ford most years.
      • 9 Years Ago
      HEY, I went on that 9-2X ferris wheel ride in Toronto :)
      • 9 Years Ago
      I think GM should stick with it's current brands, no need to cut anymore, they need to build each brand it's own identity. Example, I should feel the difference (suspension) between a Saturn and a Pontiac...etc.
      Share platforms, but stop the mass rebadging of vehicles, every brand does not need every model offered by another brand.
      • 9 Years Ago
      Why ax Pontiac? That would be stupid. The only company I can't understand is Lincoln. Their trucks are a joke, and on top of all that they are unreliable.
      • 9 Years Ago
      "Saab is like a night club that features waltz dancing and eel dinners. The 5 guys in town who like that combination go there with frequency, but the place goes broke because nobody else cares. Saab is like that."

      That cuts deep. Real deep. I have 2 Saabs.
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X