http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/business/global/the-divergent-fortunes-of-saab-and-volvo.html
I would like Saab to revive in some form or another. After reading the article above, it looks like financing is coming along too slowly for that to happen.
My dad swore that he would never buy another Volvo after the one we purchased in 1972 ("the poor-man's Mercedes") failed like clockwork. Many a drive to Colorado was spent somewhere between Des Moines and Kearney waiting for repairs on that vehicle. The family we travelled with on our way to Colorado for ski trips would spend the day at a hotel pool (I'm sure they packed their swimming suits near the top of the suitcase for just such a contingency), while my brothers and I were stuck in a repair garage waiting room. Why didn't we just sell the Volvo and get a different car? My dad justified keeping it because we sunk so much money in the thing, it should have been a good car. I'm sure I've held onto a stock a bit too long with the same reasoning.
Saab was bought by General Motors, while Volvo was bought by Ford. While these purchases didn't really help either company, one company seemed to suck the lifeblood out of the purchased company, while the other was more an absentee owner.
My parents owned both types of cars. One our family loved dearly, one we despised. One was totalled on a roll-over (the 'rock-and-roll-over' mobile). The other burned up just a mile from my parents' house (my dad would have lit a molotov cocktail and thrown it inside to finish the job-- after my mom was safely outside, of course). Ultimately, our family switched allegiances and became Toyota loyalists. Japanese reliability is thicker than Swedish blood.
