I don’t really know why anyone would buy Fisker for their ‘tech’ (IP).
They are not doing anything special with the car that other manufacturers are not already doing.
They don’t have any substantial assets (e.g. an EV factory) anyone may want.
The main USP of the car is its range but that’s only really a function of its battery size and not anything special Fisker are doing.
Not sure on the Nissan comment either, they already share IP with Renault and have a decent EV platform.
You could probably argue that Fisker spent way too much money on gimmicky features like California mode, rotating screens and solar roofs which others could just copy.
They should perhaps have been concentrating on getting the cost down of their only product and shipping complete software so it didn’t sink the company.
People can forgive missing software features but the basics need to work.
They are not doing anything special with the car that other manufacturers are not already doing.
They don’t have any substantial assets (e.g. an EV factory) anyone may want.
The main USP of the car is its range but that’s only really a function of its battery size and not anything special Fisker are doing.
Not sure on the Nissan comment either, they already share IP with Renault and have a decent EV platform.
You could probably argue that Fisker spent way too much money on gimmicky features like California mode, rotating screens and solar roofs which others could just copy.
They should perhaps have been concentrating on getting the cost down of their only product and shipping complete software so it didn’t sink the company.
People can forgive missing software features but the basics need to work.