SAAB News: Not This Again: Spyker Sues GM Over Saab Sale

[William Maley]

---

William Maley

Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

August 6, 2012

Former Saab owner Spyker has filled a $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors for its actions of blocking the sale of Saab to Chinese automotive firm, Youngman Automotive.

"This lawsuit seeks redress for the unlawful actions GM took to avoid competition with Saab Automobile in the Chinese market," Spyker said in a statement.

"GM's actions had the direct and intended objective of driving Saab Automobile into bankruptcy, a result of GM's tortiously interfering with a transaction between Saab Automobile, Spyker and Chinese investor Youngman that would have permitted Saab Automobile to restructure and remain a solvent, going concern."

"It is hard to believe. We have no comment until we see the lawsuit," GM Spokesman James Cain told Reuters.

GM might not have seen the lawsuit, but we have. The suit filled in U.S. District Court for the eastern district of Michigan alleges that GM prevented the reorganization of Saab even after agreements were put in place that no GM technology went to Saab's Chinese partners. Saab's Phoenix platform, which was developed separately from GM, was going to be sold to China. The lawsuit further alleges that GM even torpedoed an 11th hour agreement that would have prevented any near term participation of Youngman until after Saab's use of GM technology had passed.

Source: Reuters

Spyker's Statement and Filing is on Page 2

William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

---

SPYKER FILES A THREE BILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT AGAINST GENERAL MOTORS

Zeewolde, the Netherlands, 6 August 2012 -- Spyker N.V. ("Spyker") announced that it has filed a complaint against General Motors Company ("GM") in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Michigan today at 08.00 AM EST. Spyker filed the complaint in its own right and on behalf of its 100 percent subsidiary Saab Automobile A.B., which was declared bankrupt on December 19, 2011.

This lawsuit seeks redress for the unlawful actions GM took to avoid competition with Saab Automobile in the Chinese market. GM's actions had the direct and intended objective of driving Saab Automobile into bankruptcy, a result of GM's tortiously interfering with a transaction between Saab Automobile, Spyker and Chinese investor Youngman that would have permitted Saab Automobile to restructure and remain a solvent, going concern. The monetary value of the claim amounts to US$ 3 billion (three billion US dollars).

Since Saab Automobile is in receivership and hence incapable to contribute to the costs of litigation, Spyker and Saab Automobile have entered into an agreement pursuant to which Spyker will bear the costs of such litigation in exchange for a very substantial share of Saab Automobile's award when the proceedings are successful. Spyker has secured the financial backing required to see the lawsuit through to the end from a third party investor.

Victor R. Muller, Spyker's Chief Executive Officer said: "Ever since we were forced to file for Saab Automobile's bankruptcy in December of last year, we have worked relentlessly on the preparation for this lawsuit which seeks to compensate Spyker and Saab for the massive damages we have incurred as a result of GM's unlawful actions.

We owe it to our stakeholders and ourselves that justice is done and we will pursue this lawsuit with the same tenacity and perseverance that we had when we tirelessly worked to save Saab Automobile, until GM destroyed those efforts and deliberately drove Saab Automobile into bankruptcy."

The Complaint, as filed this morning at 08.00 EST, is attached to this Press Release.

View full article

[riviera74]

Two words for Spyker from GM: Drop dead.

[regfootball]

Spyker! Spyker! Spyker! Spyker!

Looks like I picked the wrong week to file bankruptcy.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Oldsmoboi
Can't hotlink to that picture apparently.

[Justin Bimmer]

Interesting, but seems like grasping at straws.

[G. David Felt]

I would be surprised if this actually goes anywhere. GM exercised their right and this is the end result. Grow up spyker

[Drew Dowdell]

I would be surprised if this actually goes anywhere. GM exercised their right and this is the end result. Grow up spyker

That is the whole thrust of the lawsuit. Spyker alleges that the deal with Youngman was structured in such a way that GM no longer had the right to interfere.

[Turbojett]

honestly, they both need to grow up. this is old hat. somebody--whoever ends up with Saab--needs to just liquidate them and be done with it. I think that unfortunately, Saab is long past saving. not exactly the best scenario, but it's proably best for everybody. what else can be done, honestly? It seems as though Saab has changed hands--or almost changed hands-- so many times, it's hard to keep track. and every next owner knows that if they try to save it, Saab is just going to drag them down with it.

[Robert Hall]

In the olden days when GM had a lot of money and power, they would have squashed Spyker like a bug.

[A Horse With No Name]

I would be surprised if this actually goes anywhere. GM exercised their right and this is the end result. Grow up spyker

Agree with you there, sir!

In the olden days when GM had a lot of money and power, they would have squashed Spyker like a bug.

Hopefully, they do so now....

[Observing and Reporting]

It would have been very nice if GM in its entirety had been allowed to die. In reality, this suit seems reasonable. GM is focusing only on the Chinese market at this time as this is where their profits are being made. Their American cars, with the exception of a few buicks that are Opel clones, are junk. The Volt is a joke that is being propped up by government purchases and loss-leading leases. They can not run Opel because their attitude about giving the customer the lowest quality product they will accept has made their vehicles less desirable than those made by the VW group companies. Ford is doing a good job, they have quality, competitive products, both here and abroad, they treated Volvo, Aston Martin and Land Rover well when they were sold, and they are pushing forward. GM used threats and the media to squash Saab's deal with the Chinese that was perfectly within the bounds of their technology licensing agreements with GM. GM, apparently, even threatened to stop producing the SUV made for Saab in their plant under contract.

This entire issue is even more absurd when one considers that GM has very little technology worth stealing. GM's technology is dated, it is not an innovative company, it is simply a dinosaur run by dinosaurs who still have the misguided belief that the American car industry, and the country as a whole, is a leader and on top.

I had to laugh. In a conversation with friends recently, no-one had owned a GM vehicle. No-one had friends that had GM vehicles. Several had distant family members in the midwest that still drove GM cars, but the family members were old, and being from the midwest, conservative and backwards thinking. Many had Hondas and Toyotas, a few had Fords, there were a few Jeeps, many BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Volvo drivers, a few Saabs, but nothing from GM. The opinions of the group were that Cadillacs were tacky and driven by old people, drug dealers and people striving to attract attention to themselves. Buicks were for middle class people who were disappointed with their lives and needed tacky chrome trim to show that they were not poor, and Chevrolets were rental cars. police cars, and a brand favored by white trash. The trucks and SUVs were for tradesmen, people with large families (Suburban) and rednecks. GM had lost any credibility with successful people from 25-45. The subject of the Volt brought a chuckle. The typical response was "Why buy a Volt when we could buy a Prius?"

[Z-06]

I guess Victor Muller is shooting a shotgun with a 6-inch barrell on Cheers and Gears?

The Question like - "Why buy a Volt when we could buy a Prius?" makes your enlightened statmement as ignorant as the GM owners you are ranting about. Oh does Prius not have any subsidy from government both US and Japanese?

[Robert Hall]

I guess Victor Muller is shooting a shotgun with a 6-inch barrell on Cheers and Gears?

The Question like - "Why buy a Volt when we could buy a Prius?" makes your enlightened statmement as ignorant as the GM owners you are ranting about. Oh and I guess Prius does not have any subsidy from government both US and Japanese?

Someone is trolling...wonder if it's smk's alter ego...

[Z-06]

Honestly, Victor Muller should be nullified by GM. Court should call the $3B lawsuit as frivolous and throw it out of the window. When SAAB was worth less than tenth of the price how can he claim that much money? We need to see GM's side. I hope Ackerson and company knew what they were doing when they made those calls for denying the takeover.

And whoever his financial backers are, they just like before, will lose money of their shirts and skirts.

[Drew Dowdell]

many BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Volvo drivers, a few Saabs, but nothing from GM. The opinions of the group were that Cadillacs were tacky and driven by old people, drug dealers and people striving to attract attention to themselves. Buicks were for middle class people who were disappointed with their lives and needed tacky chrome trim to show that they were not poor, and Chevrolets were rental cars. police cars, and a brand favored by white trash. The trucks and SUVs were for tradesmen, people with large families (Suburban) and rednecks. GM had lost any credibility with successful people from 25-45. The subject of the Volt brought a chuckle. The typical response was "Why buy a Volt when we could buy a Prius?"

"A few Saabs but nothing from GM".... uh.. what? Unless they're driving a 25+ year old Saab, they're driving something from GM.

but, your anecdotal evidence from inside your bubble is just that.

[Robert Hall]

In my demographic bubble of people I know personally IRL (well-educated people 25-45 working in the software industry, primarily developers, a few management types) in the Phoenix and Denver metro areas, I know very few GM owners...for mainstream brands, most have Honda, Toyota, some Nissan, VW, and Hyundai products, and for premium brands, Acura, BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, and Volvo..a few Jeep owners.

I do personally know very few people out of this sample that are GM owners--one couple has a TrailBlazer and a Rendezvous, the other has his-and-hers Escalades (a regular one and an EXT--they previously had a BMW X5 and a Merc ML), another guy has a 4th gen Camaro Z-28 convertible and a Silverado, another has a '69 Chevelle and is looking at buying a new Camaro 1LE.

Anecdotal, to be sure, but troubling considering the preponderance of Camrys, Civics, Corollas, and Priuses in my circle of friends and colleagues.

[Z-06]

Moltar,

GM's problem is perception. The person above gives a good cross-section of ignorance that GM has to deal with. Honestly critics like these need to be taken with heart by GM and worked on. That is where marketing should be effective and concentrated. GM is not doing a good job with marketing.

With his token we can say the same about the brands his cohorts own.

Honda and Toyota - bought by clueless, vanilla public who are still stuck in reading their bible on appliances - Consumer Reports. And by younger kids who want to rice those vehicles.

BMW, Mercedes, Audi - owned by deuchebags and strippers, a herd at higher level.

Volvo - owned by old cadavers who want to keep their skeletons safe.

[Robert Hall]

Moltar,

Honda and Toyota - bought by clueless, vanilla public who are still stuck in reading their bible on appliances - Consumer Reports. And by younger kids who want to rice those vehicles.

BMW, Mercedes, Audi - owned by deuchebags and strippers, a herd at higher level.

Volvo - owned by old cadavers who want to keep their skeletons safe.

Those are stereotypes also, though....I know some DB BMW/MB/Audi owners, but most I know are good people..hard working tech professionals..same w/ the Prius drivers.

[Z-06]

Moltar,

Honda and Toyota - bought by clueless, vanilla public who are still stuck in reading their bible on appliances - Consumer Reports. And by younger kids who want to rice those vehicles.

BMW, Mercedes, Audi - owned by deuchebags and strippers, a herd at higher level.

Volvo - owned by old cadavers who want to keep their skeletons safe.

Those are stereotypes also, though....I know some DB BMW/MB/Audi owners, but most I know are good people..hard working tech professionals..same w/ the Prius drivers.

I agree, "Observing and Reporting" was making stereotypes of GM owners. I just wanted to point out that same can be said of car brands his cohorts own.

[Drew Dowdell]

In my demographic bubble of people I know personally IRL (well-educated people 25-45 working in the software industry, primarily developers, a few management types) in the Phoenix and Denver metro areas, I know very few GM owners...for mainstream brands, most have Honda, Toyota, some Nissan, VW, and Hyundai products, and for premium brands, Acura, BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, and Volvo..a few Jeep owners.

I do personally know very few people out of this sample that are GM owners--one couple has a TrailBlazer and a Rendezvous, the other has his-and-hers Escalades (a regular one and an EXT--they previously had a BMW X5 and a Merc ML), another guy has a 4th gen Camaro Z-28 convertible and a Silverado, another has a '69 Chevelle and is looking at buying a new Camaro 1LE.

Anecdotal, to be sure, but troubling considering the preponderance of Camrys, Civics, Corollas, and Priuses in my circle of friends and colleagues.

def more domestically oriented around me at work. One Mini-Cooper (that is turning into a reliability nightmare) and the rest domestics. My boss in Houston just bought a CTS over the weekend.

Off the top of my head the people who sit closest to me:

LeSabre

Mustang/Focus Hatch

Mini Cooper

Commander (on their second one)

Durango

Harley Davidson

[Robert Hall]

In my current company (which is a consulting company w/ only 12 people):

Grand Cherokee ('00) (moi)

Grand Cherokee ('02) and current-gen Chevy Tahoe (sales VP)

VW CC (my boss/CEO)

Acura TL (current gen, co-CEO)

VW Jetta (1997 or so)

Honda Civic hybrid

Honda Civic (2003 or so)

Hyundai Sonata (previous gen)

Toyota Tacoma (this guy also has a Cessna and '71 Chevelle project car)

Toyota Prius

Honda Accord (about a 2000 or so)

VW Golf GTI and Mercedes Sprinter camper

This company has a much lower percentage of Toyotas that other larger places I've worked over the last 15 years...

[Observing and Reporting]

"GM's problem is perception. The person above gives a good cross-section of ignorance that GM has to deal with. Honestly critics like these need to be taken with heart by GM and worked on. That is where marketing should be effective and concentrated. GM is not doing a good job with marketing."

It has little to do with marketing and more to do with product.

How about simply making appealing products that don't feel and look cheap, and don't feature over-the-top styling and lackluster fit and finish? I have no animosity towards American cars, or any particular love for many of the foreign brands, but I know that every vehicle from GM's core group of vehicles that I have driven or ridden in has been a disappointment on many levels. Some had good engines, some had good styling, some had ok interiors, rarely did they posses all three things. Some examples are below:

Rentals:

Chevy Malibu: OK styling, wheezing engine, cheap plastics inside. An Accord is so much better it is amazing!

Camaro: OK styling, cheap interior, decent engine (the V6-the V8 is fun but old-fashioned)

Cadillac DTS: Cheap Cheap Cheap interior, poor ride quality, engine sounded like a powerboat,

Chevrolet Traverse: Nice styling, nice interior with the exception of many plastic details that were cheap, storage compartments whose latches did not work, poor alignment of panels, and fabric that felt as though it came off a dead mouse. Reasonably smooth engine. Why would a person buy this over a Pilot or Highlander??

GM vehicles test driven while shopping for recent car purchases.

Buick LaCrosse-Excellent styling with the exception of the excessive plasticized chrome (which was rough and uneven on the edge of many surfaces. Good engine, nice interior with too much bling. Cheap fake wood, shiny surfaces that reflected off the windshield. It wants to compete with Acura and Lexus, it even comes close, but it is so far away in the details.

Cadillac SRX: TOO MUCH CHROME ON THE INSIDE. 3.6 engine lacked oomph and sounded rough, instruments difficult to read. many squeaks and rattles. Audi Q5, Lexus RX do it better for the same money. Electronics in the Cadillac were also about 5 years out of date.

GMs halo cars are cheap and fun. The corvette handles well, has lots of power and is inexpensive compared with its rivals. It may have leather that came from a plastic factory and fit and finish that leaves much to be desired, but it is fun and can be a reachable dream for an average person. It is not as well made as a Porsche, but it is viable and a good mid-life crisis car for Joe the Plumber.

The Camaro is much the same-good cheap fun. Not something you would want to drive everyday, filled with antique engines and engineering, a throwback to the late 60s, but great at doing smoky burnouts on deserted country roads. It doesn't have to compete with anything other than the Chrysler and Ford equivalents because they are the only cars occupying this class.

[Observing and Reporting]

I agree, "Observing and Reporting" was making stereotypes of GM owners. I just wanted to point out that same can be said of car brands his cohorts own.

I was not trying to be rude, this is what came up in a lively conversation, in all fairness it was over dinner at a restaurant/pub and was very animated.

[Drew Dowdell]

The reason to buy a Traverse over a highlander or pilot is room room room without any sacrifice in fuel economy or power.

There is nothing "ancient" about the Camaro V8. If you're talking about it not having DOHC, DOHC has been around longer than pushrod/ohv.

[Z-06]

So a Toyota Corrolla with a 4-speed automatic transmission and no platform update since 2003 is a complete package?

The mahogany-tinted high-gloss wood looks like it came from a downmarket furniture store, and what's with the old Mercedes-style shift gate for the shift lever? And we nearly called an anthropologist when we spied the ES 350's cassette tape player. Sure, Lexus drivers are known enthusiasts of books on tape, but does Mark Levinson know it's still there?

That is the high quality and completely packaged Lexus for you.

Or Honda with its 5-speed transmission, no direct injection engines and design that will put GM's 90s design blandness to shame is a complete package? The quality of my 2005 TSX is better than the new TSX. But yes, they are cars that people buy.

How about the howlers from Nissan - Sentra and Versa. Are they complete packages as well?

BMW's fit and finish is nothing short of glaringly deficient. The plastics of my 2005 BMW 330i are terrible, the upholstery is peeling off, leather is blemished. The TSX and my 98 Lumina look better in shape than the BMW. The car has had electrical gremlins and also seen all its windows motors replaced. That is indeed a quality product! Have you heard of BMW's HFPF problem? The F30 has no design theme, the plastics look cheap and the interior is virtually unchanged since 1990s. At least Bangle had balls to be creative and polarizing.

And as for the Corvette and the stereotypes you are adding to the car - the ignorance is similar to the one in your comment about Prius and Volts. Yes Porsche may put clubbed baby seal leather in its anemic 320 odd hp Boxter S but then it clubs the customer $85k for that car. For half that price you can get the 370Z and club the Boxter if you are willing to forget the 85% quality at 105% performance. If I was shelling $200k on a Panamera Turbo S, I will expect the car to have clubbed baby Panda leather sewn by Matthias Muller with his own hands.

I still stand by my statement that GM lacks in perception game that Japanese and Germans have mastered and now Koreans are mastering. The GM products except for a few are vastly better than the perception you have. Is there a room for improvement? Sure, but they are not howlers as you claim to be.

I agree, "Observing and Reporting" was making stereotypes of GM owners. I just wanted to point out that same can be said of car brands his cohorts own.

I was not trying to be rude, this is what came up in a lively conversation, in all fairness it was over dinner at a restaurant/pub and was very animated.

Neither was I. What I mentioned about those brands also came casually in a lively conversation with informed automobile enthusiasts.

[Observing and Reporting]

if you value room over quality then it is perfect. If that is the only criteria why not buy an AWD minivan? My mind was made up when the storage console door fell off of a vehicle with less than 1,000 miles. UAW Quality!

[A Horse With No Name]

if you value room over quality then it is perfect. If that is the only criteria why not buy an AWD minivan? My mind was made up when the storage console door fell off of a vehicle with less than 1,000 miles. UAW Quality!

As the owner of a Mazda Miata and MINI Cooper S, I have to disagree. I love sporty cars, and will be buying another car next year. I think the new Focus ST stands a pretty good chance, and I would say that it would ahve better build quality than a new MX5 or MINI Cooper S.

Test drove a New 13 Mustang before we bought the Cooper S for my wife to drive, fit and finish on the Mustang was much better than even modern BMW products.

And while I like the new FRS/BRZ, park one next to a Verano or Focus ST, the American/UAW cars are better built, I think.

Still doesn't mean I won't end up with a world rally blue BRZ or a Candy White GTI in the driveway next spring....But the American cars are there, quality wise.

Rentals:

Chevy Malibu: OK styling, wheezing engine, cheap plastics inside. An Accord is so much better it is amazing!

Camaro: OK styling, cheap interior, decent engine (the V6-the V8 is fun but old-fashioned)

Cadillac DTS: Cheap Cheap Cheap interior, poor ride quality, engine sounded like a powerboat,

Chevrolet Traverse: Nice styling, nice interior with the exception of many plastic details that were cheap, storage compartments whose latches did not work, poor alignment of panels, and fabric that felt as though it came off a dead mouse. Reasonably smooth engine.

GMs halo cars are cheap and fun. The corvette handles well, has lots of power and is inexpensive compared with its rivals. It may have leather that came from a plastic factory and fit and finish that leaves much to be desired, but it is fun and can be a reachable dream for an average person. It is not as well made as a Porsche, but it is viable and a good mid-life crisis car for Joe the Plumber.

The Camaro is much the same-good cheap fun. Not something you would want to drive everyday, filled with antique engines and engineering, a throwback to the late 60s, but great at doing smoky burnouts on deserted country roads. It doesn't have to compete with anything other than the Chrysler and Ford equivalents because they are the only cars occupying this class.

And see here I honestly disagree with you, and I own 3 Imported cars and two Chevrolet's...

I tend to think Porsche cars have real issues as well, and I know a bunch of the Porsche guys. I've done corner work and worked as a race official for Porsche Club of America races, and autocrossed with the Porsche guys. Interior quality issues and build quality issues are very real here also. While I like Porsches (look at how many I've posted in the car pics thread I started) they have issues also.

And my wife really didn't like the quality of the Accord or Civic when we test drove them...she really, really didn't liek the Civic SI.

Again, I'm from central Ohio which is "Honda Country." I know a lot of people that work at Honda, both on the line and in engeneering and development. Honda has at least as many issues as GM, seriously I think.

Edited August 7, 2012 by A Horse With No Name

[Observing and Reporting]

So a Toyota Corrolla with a 4-speed automatic transmission and no platform update since 2003 is a complete package?

Quote

The mahogany-tinted high-gloss wood looks like it came from a downmarket furniture store, and what's with the old Mercedes-style shift gate for the shift lever? And we nearly called an anthropologist when we spied the ES 350's cassette tape player. Sure, Lexus drivers are known enthusiasts of books on tape, but does Mark Levinson know it's still there?

That is the high quality and completely packaged Lexus for you.

Or Honda with its 5-speed transmission, no direct injection engines and design that will put GM's 90s design blandness to shame is a complete package? The quality of my 2005 TSX is better than the new TSX. But yes, they are cars that people buy.

How about the howlers from Nissan - Sentra and Versa. Are they complete packages as well?

BMW's fit and finish is nothing short of glaringly deficient. The plastics of my 2005 BMW 330i are terrible, the upholstery is peeling off, leather is blemished. The TSX and my 98 Lumina look better in shape than the BMW. The car has had electrical gremlins and also seen all its windows motors replaced. That is indeed a quality product! Have you heard of BMW's HFPF problem? The F30 has no design theme, the plastics look cheap and the interior is virtually unchanged since 1990s. At least Bangle had balls to be creative and polarizing.

And as for the Corvette and the stereotypes you are adding to the car - the ignorance is similar to the one in your comment about Prius and Volts. Yes Porsche may put clubbed baby seal leather in its anemic 320 odd hp Boxter S but then it clubs the customer $85k for that car. For half that price you can get the 370Z and club the Boxter if you are willing to forget the 85% quality at 105% performance. If I was shelling $200k on a Panamera Turbo S, I will expect the car to have clubbed baby Panda leather sewn by Matthias Muller with his own hands.

I still stand by my statement that GM lacks in perception game that Japanese and Germans have mastered and now Koreans are mastering. The GM products except for a few are vastly better than the perception you have. Is there a room for improvement? Sure, but they are not howlers as you claim to be.

Observing and Reporting, on 07 August 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

I agree, "Observing and Reporting" was making stereotypes of GM owners. I just wanted to point out that same can be said of car brands his cohorts own.

I was not trying to be rude, this is what came up in a lively conversation, in all fairness it was over dinner at a restaurant/pub and was very animated.

Neither was I. What I mentioned about those brands also came casually in a lively conversation with informed automobile enthusiasts.

I know nothing of the Corolla, I have never driven or owned a vehicle in that class. I would certainly value that car over the latest GM cavalier-class car. You always see Cobalts driving about in various states of self-destruction, yet you see many nicer old Corollas, although this may have to do with demographics. As for a Civic, so many have been wasted by "enthusiasts" and "tuners."

My business partner has a new Lexus ES, it certainly has no cassette player, so I can not comment on your snippet of info. Even though his ES is little more than a Camry with gadgets it feels modern, comfortable and well made.

You GM people certainly are touchy. I would take the Boxster over the Corvette or a Nissan any day of the week. It feels good. Even if the performance of the Nissan and Corvette are better, the experience would be ruined each time I looked at the tacky wheels or cheap interior. As for stereotypes. the Corvette has always been the "everyman's" sports car, there is certainly nothing wrong with this. It is a high performance "exotic" style car that is within reach of the average person, I like the Corvette, it has character.

As for your issues with BMWs, perhaps they stem from a lack of care on the part of the owner. I have owned three BMWs since 2000, two 7 series and one 5 series and other than hating earlier versions of iDrive I never had an issue. I have since moved to Audi A8s because they are more attractive to my eye. Even though it is an 8-year-old car "Blemished" leather would indicate that you do not care for your car or have it regularly cleaned. From your vehemence and description of yourself as an "enthusiast" I would assume you are the type of person that likes to beat on cars because you feel it is fun. The Corvette is well suited for this as it is simple and anvil-like.

As for Honda's five speed automatic, the vast majority of of people who buy cars in this class do not care. The Accord is smoother, more comfortable and a better value than the Malibu. One drive and it is immediately clear that it is the better car all around. It does not rely on gimmicks or "camaro-style" tail lights to distract from the cheap materials and poor American low-cost engineering. With this being said, the "Americanization" of the Camry has done it no favors.

From my perspective there are also two tiers of Japanese Cars. Honda and Toyota are known for their quality. Manufacturers like Mazda, Nissan and Mitsubishi frequently push loaded "sporty" cars whose quality is dubious. The Americans are not alone in playing this game.

With the Europeans, Mercedes quality has gone down drastically since the mid-1990s. The 124 E-Class and 90s vintage S class and SL were the last of the quality Mercedes. Now they have shunned the engineers for the marketers, and their tacky AMG versions appeal to the same gold chain-wearing people that flock to old BMW M3s.

At the end of the day you can defend GM all you want. I can afford to buy what I want, as can most of my friends, there are no GM vehicles on the list because they are American cars at their worst. GM takes advantage of customers by cutting corners with their manufacturing and engineering. This is old school Detroit, no doubt this is to both maximize profits and make up for the UAW leeches that squeeze every penny out of the manufacturers with their unreasonable demands.

This is not an anti-american car issue. I recently traded a Toyota Tundra for a Ford F150 Ecoboost to tow our boat and horse trailers. This vehicle has proven to be modern, comfortable and fuel efficient.

What I find most interesting is that GM can get it right in other areas. The Saab 9-5 and 9-4, even with their cheap GM stereos and displays, were far nicer than their Buick and Cadillac equivalents, their dashboards were clean and uncluttered, and the Opel Insignia is also more appealing than the Buick version for the same reason. GM in America seems to tart everything up, even when it was unnecessary, and they cheapen the vehicles in the process.

[A Horse With No Name]

The Corvette thing vs the Boxster thing, they are very different cars. I've thought of buying various examples of each over the years, but prefer small cars myself.

But the interior and stereo quality in the Boxster is a little over rated IMHO>

[Z-06]

First do some research before coming and sniping on any forums. Coming here with ignorance and calling out touchy and lack of owner's care is nothing short of being ignorant on your part. You walked into the cave of lions so better be prepared for a fight or get slaughtered.

I know nothing of the Corolla, I have never driven or owned a vehicle in that class. I would certainly value that car over the latest GM cavalier-class car. You always see Cobalts driving about in various states of self-destruction, yet you see many nicer old Corollas, although this may have to do with demographics. As for a Civic, so many have been wasted by "enthusiasts" and "tuners."

Your ignorance does not change the reality that Corolla is piece of junk and your statement of perceived better value of Corolla to Cruze is nothing short of another ignorance on your behalf which I do not have to prove. Do some research beyond Consumer Reports or your limited circle of friends.

My business partner has a new Lexus ES, it certainly has no cassette player, so I can not comment on your snippet of info. Even though his ES is little more than a Camry with gadgets it feels modern, comfortable and well made.

Those statements were straight from Insideline. I do not have time and energy to prove how better the magazine felt the Buick was compared to the Lexus.

You GM people certainly are touchy. I would take the Boxster over the Corvette or a Nissan any day of the week. It feels good. Even if the performance of the Nissan and Corvette are better, the experience would be ruined each time I looked at the tacky wheels or cheap interior. As for stereotypes. the Corvette has always been the "everyman's" sports car, there is certainly nothing wrong with this. It is a high performance "exotic" style car that is within reach of the average person, I like the Corvette, it has character.

Perfect, each on your own. You can sit in the Boxter and feel the experience and blow the money on its depreciation. Just like Nissan and Corvettes are tacky to you, to me Boxter is an overpriced under performing vehicle with no value per $ spent. It just seems that according to you an average person should not have a car that puts the exotics to shame in performance and that is why you nail the car for its so called tackiness and cheapness. It just feels there is a sour grapes thought in those comments when those cars destroy your Boxter when it comes to performance and value.

As for your issues with BMWs, perhaps they stem from a lack of care on the part of the owner. I have owned three BMWs since 2000, two 7 series and one 5 series and other than hating earlier versions of iDrive I never had an issue. I have since moved to Audi A8s because they are more attractive to my eye. Even though it is an 8-year-old car "Blemished" leather would indicate that you do not care for your car or have it regularly cleaned. From your vehemence and description of yourself as an "enthusiast" I would assume you are the type of person that likes to beat on cars because you feel it is fun. The Corvette is well suited for this as it is simple and anvil-like.

Yes in the same token I do not take care of Lumina and TSX as well, yet they have held well to my tortures and enthusiast spirit. Just proves my point further that my BMW is a piece of junk. See it works both ways buddy. Don't come here trashing people. I am not here to listen to "How I need to take care of my vehicles 101" from trolls.

[Z-06]

As for Honda's five speed automatic, the vast majority of of people who buy cars in this class do not care. The Accord is smoother, more comfortable and a better value than the Malibu. One drive and it is immediately clear that it is the better car all around. It does not rely on gimmicks or "camaro-style" tail lights to distract from the cheap materials and poor American low-cost engineering. With this being said, the "Americanization" of the Camry has done it no favors.

Well if that is the case why was GM being panned for putting 4-speeds in its cars? Where is the direct injection in Hondas? Where is design language in the Crosstour, ZDX and other shield faced Acuras? Again it does not work both ways. You bash GM about Camaro styled lights yet you are okay with tacky chrome shields of the Acuras or humongous grilled same sausage different size Audis?

With the Europeans, Mercedes quality has gone down drastically since the mid-1990s. The 124 E-Class and 90s vintage S class and SL were the last of the quality Mercedes. Now they have shunned the engineers for the marketers, and their tacky AMG versions appeal to the same gold chain-wearing people that flock to old BMW M3s.

We are in agreement here.

At the end of the day you can defend GM all you want. I can afford to buy what I want, as can most of my friends, there are no GM vehicles on the list because they are American cars at their worst. GM takes advantage of customers by cutting corners with their manufacturing and engineering. This is old school Detroit, no doubt this is to both maximize profits and make up for the UAW leeches that squeeze every penny out of the manufacturers with their unreasonable demands.

So BMW using electric steering is not cost cutting? BMW using the heavier platform of 7 series for 5er is not cost cutting? VW/Audi using its modular platform for everything from A4 to Bentleys is not cost cutting? Audis, Porsches, and VW sharing components is not cost cutting? In fact GM was pioneer in recognizing this and implementing in the 90s, Germans are just now following GM's innovation in manufacturing.

This is not an anti-american car issue. I recently traded a Toyota Tundra for a Ford F150 Ecoboost to tow our boat and horse trailers. This vehicle has proven to be modern, comfortable and fuel efficient.

What I find most interesting is that GM can get it right in other areas. The Saab 9-5 and 9-4, even with their cheap GM stereos and displays, were far nicer than their Buick and Cadillac equivalents, their dashboards were clean and uncluttered, and the Opel Insignia is also more appealing than the Buick version for the same reason. GM in America seems to tart everything up, even when it was unnecessary, and they cheapen the vehicles in the process.

You know that Insignia and Regal were produced in the same factory in Germany right? The interior of both cars is similar right? The fact you bought the Tundra in first place shows the failure to think outside the box and actually researching a vehicle before buying it. It is a Toyota = has to be the best mentality at its finest.

All the post above just shows the ignorance of your "informed" persona. Did you even read my final statement about room for improvement for GM? Yes that will come from defending GM all I wanted. Stop trolling and do some research and then come back with valid arguments.

Back to Saab fiasco. Anything more about GM bashing will be deleted unless it is a valid constructive argument with supported information.

[A Horse With No Name]

Thank you for your rational response, Z06.

We seem to have let the dog out of the pen to fight...goooood....

[Drew Dowdell]

I know nothing of the Corolla, I have never driven or owned a vehicle in that class. I would certainly value that car over the latest GM cavalier-class car. You always see Cobalts driving about in various states of self-destruction, yet you see many nicer old Corollas, although this may have to do with demographics. As for a Civic, so many have been wasted by "enthusiasts" and "tuners."

The Corolla is quite easily at the back of the pack at this point. Ford, Chrysler, GM, Kia, Hyundai have all exceeded the Corolla in technology, interior quality, you name it. It is the oldest car in the entire class. It is the only one (along with the Scion xB) still running with a 4-speed auto as its base automatic.

As for your issues with BMWs, perhaps they stem from a lack of care on the part of the owner. I have owned three BMWs since 2000, two 7 series and one 5 series

My Grandmother had two 7-series as well. After lemoning out the first one and having lots of additional trouble with the second, she went back to Buick and got a loaded Lacrosse.

As for Honda's five speed automatic, the vast majority of of people who buy cars in this class do not care.

They should, it took Honda 5 years to get that automatic right and not suffer catastrophic failures, and even today it still doesn't shift as smoothly as an old GM 4-speed. Even GM's new 6-speeds don't shift as smoothly as the old GM 4-speed. I'll agree with you that the Accord is a better car than the current Malibu, but I'd take the 2012 Malibu LTZ over an Accord any day of the week. This is a class that GM has moved backwards in, but don't mistake that for Honda moving forward. They are still running the same powertrains they've run for the past 6 years or more and the design department is stuck right there with them in 2003.

The Saab 9-5 and 9-4, even with their cheap GM stereos and displays, were far nicer than their Buick and Cadillac equivalents, their dashboards were clean and uncluttered, and the Opel Insignia is also more appealing than the Buick version for the same reason.

I'm struggling to see the difference in these two interiors... help me out here will ya?

[Observing and Reporting]

I'm struggling to see the difference in these two interiors... help me out here will ya?

If that is the Regal interior then I stand corrected. The Lacrosse we drove had chrome trim on the center stack, around buttons etc. and also had an AWFUL wooden steering wheel (although way too many manufacturers are doing this, it looks and feels bad on all of them-Lexus included)

[Drew Dowdell]

Yes, that is Opel Insignia and Buick Regal. There is no Opel version of the Lacrosse.

[Justin Bimmer]

I'm struggling to see the difference in these two interiors... help me out here will ya?

If that is the Regal interior then I stand corrected. The Lacrosse we drove had chrome trim on the center stack, around buttons etc. and also had an AWFUL wooden steering wheel (although way too many manufacturers are doing this, it looks and feels bad on all of them-Lexus included)

The only real difference between Regal and Insignia is Buick has blue back lights and Opel has red.

I agree that GM can get too carried away with the chrome inside of the car. I own a 2012 regal and I really like it except when i have to use my hand to shield the glare away from my eyes because the sun is hitting the chrome.

As far as quality on my car. It was built in Canada and has almost 8,000 miles on it and is as solid and quiet and rattle free as it was new.