Brief comment on recent events regarding debt enforcement

For various reasons – legality and confidentiality – we can’t comment in detail on proceedings that are taking place from today via the Kronofogden enforcement agency here in Sweden.

All I can do for the moment is simply repeat what I wrote earlier this week in an editorial on this site – The Deal and the Future:

There are now day-by-day accounts of the legal mechanisms that are in place for our stakeholders in this situation. Those mechanisms are a matter of procedural fact. We’re aware of them and the deadlines they involve, we address them as best we can, as methodically as we can, as the various situations arise. We want nothing more than to be rid of them, to re-establish normal relations with our stakeholders. This is why we’re negotiating The Deal with such vigour.

A process is in place. The core focus for us, whilst we fully cooperate with this process, is to do the right deal to get our business back on track. That’s the one solution to address this issue, and other issues as well.

You may also like


  1. Thanks Swade for the update.
    Fingers crossed and my greetings to all of you in Trollhattan …

  2. First of all, I really appreciate the efforts of keeping an open and transparent dialogue with Saab customers and prospects during these difficult times. 

    I’m emotionally connected Saab, having had Saab cars in the family for the last 25 years. 

    However, yesterday’s news regarding the Saab board’s shock raised remuneration needs a further explanation than just: “the difficult times since acquiring Saab have generated a heavier workload and that renumerations hadn’t been raised since 2004.” (Well crafted corporate BS as usual…)

    I appreciate that the board with Victor in the lead is doing everything possible to save Saab and eventually bring it up to speed again.

    But in a time where employees wages are lagging behind, manufactures not being paid, and a deal is not sealed, a raise in remuneration with over 500% seems somewhat unjustified. 

    But of course, we all now that Victor isn’t leaving with empty pockets from his Saab legacy. That’s totally fine. What is not fine however is to drain the company on any available assets for his on personal wealth before it’s to late… explain that to all the Saab employees. 

    We all believe in Saab, the question is if Victor is to?

    1. Joakim,

      My advice would be to look at the financial amounts involved rather than the eye-catching percentages, then look at the workload involved in running Spyker (the small boutique sports car business) and compare it to the workload involved in running Saab.  Remember, it was said at the start of 2010 that Spyker’s sports car operations comprised around 1% of the new company’s total operations.

      1. As I’ve commented elsewhere online on this matter, if you want to keep decent talent to run your company (or save it) you have to pay something. If you want the village idiot, ask them to work full time for €10k per year.

        If you don’t pay, they walk away. I don’t know what Swade’s paid, and I wouldn’t ask him, but he didn’t fly half way around the world for a few kroner. He is, I’m sure, paid a fair wage in return for his work, and probably a lot less than he could have got elsewhere in return for working at Saab.

        It seems, however, that some would rather the board of SWAN were saints and martyrs, working flat-out to the detriment of their other business interests for little or no money.

        When the CEO of Ford offered to work for a year for $1, he could do that against a backdrop of having been paid $millions per year up to that point – I guess he had some savings and investments… I don’t believe that was true for SWAN’s board – as far as I know, Muller’s money went into saving Saab so that people could complain about it later!

        If SWAN’s board had simply opted to leave in the face of a large workload and no adequate remuneration, what it would have cost to attract new talent, or consultants, or lawyers to work? After many years in business, I’d wager that it would have taken a lot more than that which has been paid to SWAN’s board.

        Ladies and gentlemen of the Saab firmament, this is the real world. It isn’t perfect – if it were, GM would not have tried to shut down Saab, for instance. VM & Co were the only takers for Saab, and were lauded for it. In their attempts to keep Saab alive, they have to work hard, and have to be paid for that work. Perhaps many here wish they hadn’t have bothered?

    2. I agree totally. Maybe the raise is somehow justified, but the point in time to do so is the WORST POSSIBLE! Period.

      1. Well, the decision was, afaik, made in april and itwas made public back then. That’s even before wages were lagging. The swedish journalists decided not to comment on it back then. They choose to do so at this point of time.