Quote:
Originally Posted by garcon
So you base your overall view that Saab workers were "more interested in getting massages and enjoying the sauna rather than building cars" on seeing "a funny video". And then go on to demean working environments that include "pool tables and video arcades" for being the reason for those companies failing, because they don't fit your mantra that "work is for work".
I take it you haven't seen the working environments at Google, Apple and Microsoft? All doomed to fail it seems.
Saab were a very specialised company. The problem they always had with the car business was that their cars were over engineered. As production costs, and therefore retail prices, of other cars dropped they had to drop their own prices to keep their small but loyal customer base. That reached a point of no return when they had to sell their cars for less than it cost to design and build them.
GM could have been a saviour, but instead chose to try and remove every USP that Saab had in a quest for profitability. That resulted in inferior, unreliable cars that stretched the patience of even their most loyal fans. In the end, GM Saabs were priced to compete with BMW but (intentionally or not) built to be worse than Vauxhall.
The last proper Saab was the 9000, and even that started off as a cost saving joint venture ... until Saab realised how dreadful the joint venture car was and completely re-engineered it ... only to then sell it at a loss. (If you don't believe me, try a contemporary Fiat Croma...).
|
At one of the places I work, we have a lot of fun toys and have some laughs, but work is work and if we don't turn out good product because we are too busy goofing off, clients go elsewhere. I have no doubt there were plenty of company men at Saab that put their best effort in, but also there were signs some of the workforce were more concerned with the benefits, rather than turning out product that kicked butt.
Google, Apple, Microsoft? Where will they be in 5-10 years? We will find out. Just as we did with companies 5-15 years ago like Palm, Myspace, Nokia, Yahoo, all once the ones that were the cool place to work and now dead, barely alive or a legacy company trying to desperately hold on. You can throw in Microsoft as well and there are a lot of signs out there to investors that Google is becoming a dysfunctional, bureaucratic company where one hand doesn't talk to another. Apple, who knows how they will do with Steve Jobs gone.
Certainly over engineering for certain price points could have been one of the many problems. Ideally if you are going to "over engineer" something then you need to convince the public that is the case and that it is worth paying for.
I don't disagree about GM. I think it's a terrible company that lived off it's nameplates for decades as it gradually lost market share. I would not have wanted to partner with them or have them invest in my company. The only thing you can say about GM was they kept the brand alive for 2 decades when otherwise Saab would have been toast.
Sad they are gone, but the product wasn't there anymore. I look forward to owning one someday.