• Aug 27, 2010
An accounting rule, among other things, is ostensibly to blame for Spyker posting a loss and having to declare negative shareholder equity with more liabilities than assets. According to Automotive News, the new owner of Saab had counted General Motor's $326 million in redeemable preference shares in the company as equity, not a liability. So with the company having just got its factory going in October and only having sold 10,500 cars in the first six months of this year, the hard numbers are a loss of €139.1 million ($177.2M U.S.) on €243.1 million in sales ($309.8M U.S.).

The good news is that sales for the same period last year, before Saab's plunge into full out cardiac arrest, were €4.1 million ($5.2M USD). The Swedish maker also has €280 million in cash (around $357M) and another €266 million ($339M) untapped from its European Investment Bank loan. Spyker has been saying for a while that profitability would come in 2012 and that it has enough cash and credit to get it there without needing to raise more money.

Its sales projections of 45,000 to 50,000 cars this year, however, might be on some downward pressure. Company CEO Jan Ake Jonsson said that they're still looking to achieve that low number. Next year's forecast and the company's break-even point is understood to remain at 80,000 cars, with 120,000 as the long-term annual sales target.

[Source: Automotive News – sub req'd | Image: Olivier Morin/AFP/Getty]


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
  • 15 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      Hope Saab can survive this crisis.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Time to pull cash from the C8 and the D8 and start focusing more on developing Saab so that the company can finally produce vehicles that can be sold in larger quantities and higher profits than supercars.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Here's hoping they can turn SAAB around. It hasn't always been my favorite carmaker/brand, but it deserves to live and has the potential to be something great (again). Do they sell SAABs in China? They seem to eat up anything you can throw at them as long as you call it "luxury".
        • 4 Years Ago
        The main thing that was hurting Saab for so long was lack of new product. The rebadged Blazer and Wrx don't count. The cars for the past what 10 years all look the same. Sure lil tweaks here and there but they were subtle at best.

        If Spyker allows Saab to produce a new 9-3 in 2012 and they also produce a new small subcompact be it a 9-2 or 9-1 off the rumored mini-platform you could possibly see a Saab renaissance. A customer said it best once "I'd buy a new Saab but there is no real difference between my 2004 and that 2010 besides mileage.". Once new produce and by the gods a hatchback Saab will be a competitor again.
        • 4 Years Ago
        The Saab brand has been sullied by GMs horrific quality. The only "new' offerings came with what are essentially lawn mower engines, instead of releasing something with if they HAD to use GM parts, a corvette style Z series engine. Sabbs reputation though (unlike Wagoners) can still be salvaged.
        • 4 Years Ago
        After the way the Chinese were basically dissed during the SAAB sale it probably has the worst uphill climb of any "luxury" brand. While established luxury brands can definitely sell a lot of cars in China it's not like their top brands are failures elsewhere-the #1 luxury nameplate in China is Audi and Audi does quite well in the rest of the world too.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @Clavius
        I agree 100%, GM seemed like they were trying to make every unique brand they had into nothing but rebadged rental whores. They took Saturn, a GM subsidiary with unique (and good-selling) product and made them into a modern Oldsmobile. Surprise! That' failed. They took SAAB, a company with a rich heritage and made them into a low-rent Buick wannabe.

        I was at a Volvo product test (a few years ago) and they had the WRX-clone SAAB to compare (forget the name, wish I could forget the car, too). The inside of the SAABaru felt and looked cheap compared to a Focus, much less a Volvo. What were they thinking with that silvery plastic shit on the center stack/console? Was K-Mart having a car-interior sale? No wonder nobody bought them. "Unique SAAB-ness" aside, everybody saw it for what it was, a cheap knock-off of a cheap-to-begin-with car.

        It's as though GM said "oh, we have these unique brands with high owner loyalty and distictive design language. What can we do to screw that up? Oh! We'll just rebadge our bland, slow-selling products and hope they'll work".

        They effectively killed Saturn this way, but I was thankfull that SAAB has a half-way decent chance to not meet the same fate.

        You can say what you want about Ford and Volvo, but I feel they did a much better job with their Sweedish brand experiment. They didn't stick a Volvo badge on an Explorer and up the price by $10K expecting it to sell. They co-developed product with Volvo, and although cars like the C30 and Focus share the same platform, you wouldn't know it to look at them. They let Volvo be Volvo, and worked together when they could.
      kimmyi
      • 4 Years Ago
      We are a 2 SAAB family, 2006 9-3 and a 2008 9-3 convertible. I was a former Mercedes owner. I think that one thing that would help SAAB is if they treated "luxury" car owners like Mercedes dealers (service depts.) like luxury car owners and not the same as pick up truck owners. I also wish that all of the features in my car would work in the U.S. Other than that we are extremely satisfied with our vehicles!
      • 4 Years Ago
      "According to Automotive News, the new owner of Saab had counted General Motor's $326 million in redeemable preference shares in the company as equity, not a liability."

      Autoblog, that's because all share capital is equity by its very nature, not a liability - regardless of the class of shares. Basic accounting equation: equity = assets - liabilities.

      When a preference share is redeemable, it simply means that a maturity date is set upon issue, at which point the benefit of a preference share expire and in many cases, they convert to ordinary shares or lose their existing preferential benefit.

      Issued share capital is never disclosed as a liability on a balance sheet. Whatsmore, only the nominal value is disclosed, whether that amount has actually been paid for by the shareholder or not.
      • 4 Years Ago
      To Thomas: Screw GM they did this to themsleves. They had GMC, Chevy , Buick, Pontiac, Olds, all producing the same damn car with a different name, and then they let their labor costs get absurd and never did anything to reign them in. Good riddance to Pontiac worst cars ever. The best thing to happen to SAAB was to be let go by GM. For those that stated SAAB needed a new style, check out the new 9-5. While its not a radical new design it is different. Love teh SAAB 9-5, had the 2001 3.0 turbo,traded in my Caddy STS for it, best car I ever had, Im now looking at getting the new 9-5
      • 4 Years Ago
      AS THE LEAVES FALL OFF OF THE GENERAL MOTORS TREE,
      AND BEFORE ALL OF OUR CHOICES ARE GONE,
      I URGE "ALL READERS" TO GO INTO THE FOLLOWING WEB-SITE:

      www.savingpontiac.org/joinus.html

      THERE YOU WILL FIND SOME INTERESTING ARTICLES, & CAST YOUR VOTE...

      TO SAVE AMERICAN JOBS & SAVE PONTIAC MOTOR DIVISION !

      TOGETHER...WE CAN SAVE PONTIAC MOTOR DIVISION !

      THANKING EACH & EVERY READER IN ADVANCE ! GOD BLESS !
      • 4 Years Ago
      SAAB need to figure out how they are going to cut their product development lifeline off from GM before they can truly consider themselves independent. The 9-3X, 9-5 and 9-4X were all developed under GM and not until 2012 will Saab have a new model based on an in-house developed platform, the 9-3.

      If sales continue their downward trend, there may never be a 2012 for Saab. Saab are pinning their hopes on the 9-5 and 9-4X to lift sales until they finally get their bread and butter model resolved. The 9-5, however, is based off a platform that underpins $27,000 Buicks while the 9-4X competes against the same model built alongside it, the Cadillac SRX, in an already crowded midsize luxury CUV segment.

      I hope the brand all the best but SAAB will be a tough sell until they can create a car all their own from the ground up. It's the uniqueness and quirkiness that made people fall in love with the brand and that's exactly what fans want to see in future models.
        • 4 Years Ago
        I agree but Saab has done its own suspension tweaks to the chassis of the 9-5 like they have done in the past with shared platforms. The same I'm sure can be said about the 9-4X. The one thing about Saab is that even when GM handed them a rebadged product they attempted to tweak it enough so they could say its not just a new front grill.

        If Saab holds true to the rumors of the return of the hatchback I think they'll see a sales spike due to the fact that in my eyes not one "Luxury" maker has one. If they do then me not knowing shows much much of a success it is.
      • 4 Years Ago
      There are numerous reasons why Saab was going to be closed. It has been on life support and draining itself and its host for 25 years at least. Now it's going to drain it's new host.

      http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/spyker-in-deep-trouble/

      "When Spyker bought Saab from GM, they bit off too much than they can chew. Spyker is upside down, under water, or whatever you call it when you have negative equity. They just announced that their debt exceeds their capital."

      "Spyker has never made a cent in profits. In 2009, they had €19.24m losses on sales of €6.6m. A company like that can’t afford Saab. Oh, well. GM was used to selling cars to people who can’t afford them. Why not whole car companies?"

      Saab loses money, I'm not sure how anyone can honestly think the brand has a snowball's chance in Hell of doing anything. It's not GM's fault other than they stupidly purchased it and enabled the suffering to go on this long. GM is a mainstream automaker and had much bigger volume brands that support the company to try to fix before they could spend billions on Saab which isn't (and never will be) any of those things.

      Spyker is a boutique garage automaker like Shelby or Vector, how on Earth can anyone expect them to really run a niche automaker trying to be mainstream? Unless they want to get the Russian mobster involved, I'm sure that will go well. Pass the Kool-Aid.
      • 4 Years Ago
      If Saab is going to survive (questionable), they need to shrink. Get the volume down to a manageable level, so they can work on their product. It might not work, but the alternative isn't any better.
    • Load More Comments