A few years ago Lucid was running out of cash, which eventually cost them a couple years of time-to-market. I said at the time Mercedes should scoop them up. Still think it could have worked, the EQS is pretty underwhelming.
No, losing on every car you make means higher sales will cause higher losses. If your sale price equals your variable cost then higher sales volume will not change your loss. If sale price exceeds variable cost then higher sales mean lower losses even if gross margin is negative.
Correct. It was a much different time, though. Rivian in particular is trying to ramp much faster than Tesla did. Lucid is..... well, I'm not sure what Lucid is trying to do. Achieve some zen state of automotive perfection, perhaps?
No, losing money on every car sold, means losing money on every car sold. We don't know exactly how costs would go up as they increase production, it could result in less loss per vehicle, or more loss per vehicle.
+1
That final sentence is hilarious: Back in September of 2020 Lucid's CEO explained to Forbes that he knows of no other company than Tesla that has production hell, and that he doesn't plan to experience that with Lucid.
I was wondering about the same thing. I tried to google it and also went through the ER but found nothing on that 1.136 billion short-term investment that suddenly appeared and drained cash reserves. The Q4 ER did have a "short-term investments" line that showed zero (dash), but the Q1 ER did not have that line.
On the call they just said they invested it to get better returns than they were on their cash. But that it was fully liquid and they could sell it at any time to get the cash back.
Agreed. Bulls like him give the 'cult' status to the rest of us. I would also put Gali in that bucket to some extent.
I would assume that it is enacted when the President signs it. (But I am certainly no expert.)
Yah, that is the typical meaning, but the timing clause indicates parts do not take effect until later. So transition might allow a car purchased in December to get 2022 credit even if it is delivered in 2023. Otherwise, it's not much of a transition.
They may have worded it that way to try to prevent gaming the credit. But still allowing someone that has actually ordered something before the change that won't be delivered until next year to get what they thought they would. (I know someone that has placed a hard order for a Hyundai EV a month ago that they don't expect to get until the end of the year or next year. So it would be important for them, as they took the $7,500 into account when figuring out if they could afford it.)
Was your deposit just $300 like is currently listed on the site? Q3 of this year or next year?
