Faraday Future

[RubberToe]

Make up your mind.

First Third Bank is providing the financing... :smile:

 

[palmer_md]

First Third Bank is providing the financing... :smile:

I thought it was 5/3 (fifth third) bank.

 

[hockeythug]

I guess they let a reporter in.

This is the headquarters of Faraday Future, a young, seemingly well-funded company with an odd name that hasn’t said much about what it’s working on. We know that electric cars are involved, and we know that they’re probably years away from production. In the year and a half since Faraday’s founding, it has transformed this facility into a bustling corporate campus, stacked with a who’s-who list of poaches from some of California’s most prominent tech companies.

This week, Faraday Future chief designer Richard Kim is expected to announce that the company will participate at CES in January, its first major trade show.

Other interesting info regarding a new ownership model:

More pointedly, he focused on the potential for new ownership models that Faraday is considering. "Uber, for instance, is a new way of traveling, a new way of getting about. Some people are considering not even having a car. The cars of the future have got to meet those needs," he says. Sampson imagines various custom vehicles that are designed for specific purposes such as a family trip, the work commute, or Home Depot runs. "I don’t have to buy one compromise vehicle, I can just have use of the perfect model when I need it, like a subscription service. We now subscribe to music; we used to buy music."

Inside Faraday Future, the secretive car company chasing Tesla | The Verge

 

[tftf]

This portrait reads more like a job ad to attract people to FF imho.

Releasing a first car model in 2017 looks impossible to me, no matter how well-funded they appear to be and how often they repeat they can do things in a "third of the time".

Maybe they can show off prototypes and start pre-orders in 2017 but selling (or leasing/renting, depending on their model) within 24 months looks impossibly tight.

It looks like they will show off a mule at CES 2016:

FF will unveil a new concept inspired by our design & engineering vision at #CES2016. [url]http://bit.ly/1ja4h0Z [/URL]

Twitter

 

[brianman]

Other interesting info regarding a new ownership model:

More pointedly, he focused on the potential for new ownership models that Faraday is considering. "Uber, for instance, is a new way of traveling, a new way of getting about. Some people are considering not even having a car. The cars of the future have got to meet those needs," he says. Sampson imagines various custom vehicles that are designed for specific purposes such as a family trip, the work commute, or Home Depot runs. "I don’t have to buy one compromise vehicle, I can just have use of the perfect model when I need it, like a subscription service. We now subscribe to music; we used to buy music."

This sounds a lot like the TMC Connect 2015 talk (back in July).

In case the video is published in the future, I'm referring to this talk:

Who Will Win The Coming Autonomous Vehicle Revolution?

What impact will autonomous vehicles have on automotive manufacturers and service companies, and on society in general? What will the vehicles of the future look like, who will own them, and who will use them? Eric Bergerson is owner/founder of Bergerson Design.

Schedule TMC Connect
Who Will Win The Coming Autonomous Vehicle Revolution? TMC Connect

 

[anticitizen13.7]

I guess they let a reporter in.

Other interesting info regarding a new ownership model:

Inside Faraday Future, the secretive car company chasing Tesla | The Verge

Less secretive than Atieva, another startup electric car company that has provided pretty much zero information to the public. Certainly less secretive than Apple, which has not publicly acknowledged an EV program.

I think it's clear that these 2nd Generation EV startups are attracting a lot of the best technological talent, which bodes ill for Detroit.

 

[Bangor Bob]

This portrait reads more like a job ad to attract people to FF imho.

Releasing a first car model in 2017 looks impossible to me, no matter how well-funded they appear to be and how often they repeat they can do things in a "third of the time".

Maybe they can show off prototypes and start pre-orders in 2017 but selling (or leasing/renting, depending on their model) within 24 months looks impossibly tight.

It looks like they will show off a mule at CES 2016:



Twitter

Ignoring manufacturing, sales and service logistics (which are non-trivial!!!), there is a "minimum time" to get a vehicle on the market - and that's the time to meet regulatory requirements: Certification of FMVSS compliance, emissions certification, etc. You can't do it faster than that, and the federal agencies involved are chronically underfunded by congress.

 

[doug]

 

[1208]

So this is the real deal. Good.

Just wondering what impact the concept reveal will have on the Model 3 design.

If its more futuristic than the 3 I'm sure Elon might want Franz to change it a bit, could delay launch.

 

[RobStark]

So this is the real deal. Good.

Just wondering what impact the concept reveal will have on the Model 3 design.

If its more futuristic than the 3 I'm sure Elon might want Franz to change it a bit, could delay launch.

Doubt it. FF's first vehicle with 95+ kWh pack will be a niche product.

Model 3 is mass market. I don't think it can be "futuristic" much less "more futuristic."

 

[anticitizen13.7]

So this is the real deal. Good.

Just wondering what impact the concept reveal will have on the Model 3 design.

If its more futuristic than the 3 I'm sure Elon might want Franz to change it a bit, could delay launch.

Almost certainly there will be no impact whatsoever, for the following reasons:

At this point, the vast majority of Model 3's design should be locked down. The key tasks are tweaking and figuring out how to build the car in the best possible way. Also, Elon has stated that the company does not want a "weirdmobile", so I doubt that Tesla would attempt to "out-future" Faraday. Remember that the goal is to make EVs more financially accessible. Faraday's focus appears to be more on the Cloud Services side, or having a car "know" its driver and occupants.

It's interesting that media outlets characterize Faraday as "secretive", when they appear far more open about what they are doing than rival startup teams at Apple and Atieva.

 

[Doug_G]

The more, the merrier. But I'll stay in the "skeptic" camp until they successfully launch a product and build a sustainable business.

 

[David99]

The key to success both for all of them and the buyer and the planet is mass market EVs. Tesla has great success selling cars at close to $100k. The to 2% can afford that. I can't thank Elon and Tesla enough for making this happen. This was needed to change the auto industry towards EVs. But the real deal is making an EV that is affordable for the majority of people. We don't need 7 upper class EVs fighting over the top 5% who can afford them.

 

[RobStark]

There are a long line of Green Car Companies in the graveyard trying to out Toyota Toyota on their first try.

I think Elon has shown others a successful template. Many will try to follow most will fail.

Even with all the money in the world you can't build 400k cars in year one. There is a knowledge base to acquire and experience to build.

If you can only build 10k vehicles or less in the first year might as well sell them for $100k. It also gives you halo car that gives your company good publicity for free and builds some brand equity.


Elio Motors projecting 1M units in the first 4 years with a base price of $6800 and ASP of ~9k for their carcycle is mucho loco.

 

[James Anders]

Not one of these so-called Tesla-Killers (including the current BEV manufacturers) have done anything competitive with Tesla's Supercharger network.

Note to press/media...

Until a company unveils something close to the scope of Tesla's Superchargers you are prohibited from calling them a "Tesla Killer".

OK?

 

[green1]

The funny part about "Tesla killers" is that there is no such thing. GM didn't kill Ford, Ford didn't kill Mercedes, there are many cars on the road from a bunch of different auto makers, people need to realise the EV market is exactly like that, having another player won't kill the first one.

 

[Thumper]

I won't say Faraday can't be successful, but they will be buying their factory and presses at retail, not the bargain prices TM was lucky enough to get.

 

[RobStark]

I won't say Faraday can't be successful, but they will be buying their factory and presses at retail, not the bargain prices TM was lucky enough to get.

But FF will not launch in the middle of the global financial crisis.

FF's angle investor has much deeper pockets that Elon at the time of launch, ~$7B vs $180M.

It will get a custom factory and equipment or least purchased for the task at hand vs repurposed.

It will probably have Nevada wages and rules on taxes, workers comp etc not California rules.

A lot of the heavy lifting has already been done by Tesla like removing the misconception that all BEVs are glorified golf carts and can't replace an ICEv.

There are lots of advantages to being first mover then there are also advantages to drafting behind the first mover too.

 

[tftf]

The funny part about "Tesla killers" is that there is no such thing. GM didn't kill Ford, Ford didn't kill Mercedes, there are many cars on the road from a bunch of different auto makers, people need to realise the EV market is exactly like that, having another player won't kill the first one.

"Killer" competitors in financial articles usually don't refer to Tesla going out of business - although that can be a scenario. But usually it means Tesla coming back to Earth:

The more (future) competitors there are, the more margins will be compressed. EVs and batteries will become a commodity within 5-10 years imho - margins won't be higher than for current ICE cars. That's the "problem" for TSLA shareholders given its valuation.

But I'm doubtful FF can stick to its plan. This sounds more like a "before 2020" than a "2017" car - but I think the 2017 goal was from older interviews. At least they didn't reiterate this goal, sounds unrealistic to me.

 

[green1]

"Killer" competitors in financial articles usually don't refer to Tesla going out of business

And yet the media loves to portray it that way, in fact, as near as I can tell, the only people who use the term "Tesla Killer" are also arguing that Tesla will go out of business (or at the very least be relegated to a handful of cars a year)

The more (future) competitors there are, the more margins will be compressed. EVs and batteries will become a commodity within 5-10 years imho - margins won't be higher than for current ICE cars. That's the "problem" for TSLA shareholders given its valuation.

The same people that use the term "Tesla killer" usually also believe that Tesla has negative margins right now (of course that's completely false). Additionally, Tesla themselves WANT EVs to be a commodity as soon as possible, this is planned for, it's not a problem for things to go according to plan.

But I'm doubtful FF can stick to its plan. This sounds more like a "before 2020" than a "2017" car - but I think the 2017 goal was from older interviews. At least they didn't reiterate this goal, sounds unrealistic to me.

Maybe FF is also copying it's timelines from Tesla...