1951 Chevrolet Deluxe Two Door Hardtop Resto Rod 6 Cylinder Dual Exhaust 4 Speed on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Saab to hire 200 engineers, might build gas cars with Mahindra

The brand formerly known as Saab is still intent on teaching The Little Engine That Could a few ticks about persistence. We say "formerly known" because it turns out that National Electric Vehicle Swedent (NEVS), the Sino-Japanese investment consortium that just bought the majority of Saab's assets, minus Saab Automobile Parts AB, may not actually own the rights to the Saab brand name. According to a report in Di.se via Saabs United, NEVS will need to negotiate with Scania and the Swedish aerospace and defense group, Saab AB, for the right to name its forthcoming electric car the Saab 9-3.
NEVS is hiring 200 engineers now to work on its electric car program, and reports are that it will hire more as it gets closer to the 2014 launch. It will be based on the current (read: ancient) 9-3, and we hope NEVS is succeeds in getting the naming rights, because the NEVS 9-3 just doesn't have the same ring. NEVS will likely target China as the model's main market.
However, it's rumors of their second negotiating ploy that we're really rooting for: to work with Mahinda & Mahindra, the Indian company once in the running for Saab's assets, develop a petrol-powered 9-3 on the next-generation Phoenix platform, based on Jason Castriota's design.

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.

Spyker's $3B lawsuit against GM for blocking Saab sale thrown out

US District Judge Gershwin Drain has dismissed a $3-billion lawsuit Spyker filed against General Motors. In the suit, Spyker accused GM of attempting to bankrupt Saab after the US automaker had already sold the company to Spyker. GM in effect blocked the sale of Saab to China's Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile Company by prohibiting the transfer of some of its intellectual property. But the court found that GM had a "contractual right" to approve or disapprove any change of ownership. Furthermore, Reuters reports Judge Drain said the contract between GM and Spyker "is clear, unambiguous and absolute" on the matter.
GM, meanwhile, says it is pleased with the ruling. Spyker CEO Victor Muller has not said whether or not his company will appeal the ruling. The Dutch automaker is expected to make a final decision once the court issues its written order on the case.
You can read the official Spyker press release about the court ruling below for more information.