TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Fisker, Tesla, and their DOE loans

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by ckessel, Jul 13, 2012.

  1. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
    Not according to Elon. Elon has said in interviews before that they didn't need the DOE loan, but that having it meant they could accelerate other developments.
     
  2. Fisker, Tesla, and American Auto Innovation | Department of Energy
     
  3. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
    Nice article, though I'm not sure why you quoted my statement in relation to it. There's nothing in it about Tesla needing the DOE to survive.

    Barring some hard evidence, I'll take Elon's word for it that they would have made it without the loan (he did say though having the loan improved the IPO).
     
  4. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    I, too, am unsure why my post was added as quote in relation to the loan. What's the point being made? Also, moving these posts out to the loans thread.
     
  5. The factory etc was all purchased with the DOE loans..It was also repeated in revenge of the electric car. You think that Tesla could have completed Model S development, and attracted the private funds necessary to procure & tool a factory, expanded their store network etc with the 50 million from Diamler?
     
  6. Fisker’s production schedule was delayed by regulatory issues that were outside of its control, point is know one knows exactly why.
     
  7. Citizen-T

    Citizen-T Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,442
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    One of the stipulations of the loan was that applicants had to prove that their businesses were viable without the loan money. This is why GM and Chrysler did not get loans. The Roadster is profitable so Tesla could have survived just fine selling Roadsters.

    It was the investment from Daimler and Elon putting in the last of his personal fortune that saved Tesla, and not the DoE. In fact, the DoE funds are explicitly for development of Model S and auditors ensure that the are only spent on costs related to Model S.

    Thank Elon and Daimler for saving Tesla, and thank Toyota and the DoE for the fact that the Model S isn't still 2 years away, and and thank the stock market for Model X.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
     
  8. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
    So, in short you're saying Elon is wrong about Tesla's abilities without the DOE loan and you are right?
     
  9. I thought Chrysler & GM withdrew their DOE loan and did not get rejected?

    The main point of the roadster was to show proof of concept and attract investment, not have it be a profit center.
     
  10. No I am saying no one really knows that answer since the DOE Loan was given to Tesla and immediately used by them...Its all speculation regardless of what Elon or anyone else may say. In this climate it would be foolhardy for Elon to come out and say that the DOE loan was required, in order for Tesla to be solvent. What do you expect the guy to say?
     
  11. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    Again, do I know for sure? No. But I disagree. I think that's the BS reason they gave (and some karma owners agree). I don' t think the car was ready -- even after the EPA gave the green light karmas did not begin deliveries for another 3 months (note, tesla got crash testing and EPA ratings on time and were able to begin deliveries as scheduled). Even then, the cars were plagued with issues indicative of a last minute rollout. Had they really been sitting on their hands waiting for regulatory approvals since April, one would assume most of those issues would not have existed when the car began deliveries in December.
     
  12. Citizen-T

    Citizen-T Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,442
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    Elon has said on many occasions they could have done it, it just would have taken more time.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
     
  13. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
  14. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
    You seemed to think you knew about 20 minutes ago. Your quote was pretty definitive. You're approaching troll territory here...
     

  15. The regulatory issues were for the Nina not the Karma...I doubt the DOE would be giving BS excuses and covering for DOE loan receivers.
     
  16. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    Wait what? When you said:

    I assume we were talking the Karma delay (where they kept blaming the EPA). Now you're talking about the Atlantic? What regulatory issues held up the Atlantic? It's sort of hard to hold up a car that's basically a rolling prototype? Also doesn't excuse the poor performance in rolling out the Karma.
     
  17. Dude this is all in the link I posted....

    Fisker’s loan has two parts. In the first part, Fisker used $169 million to support the engineers who developed the tools, equipment and manufacturing processes for Fisker’s first vehicle, the Fisker Karma.

    That loan is now dispersed and being paid back by Fisker....everything else is now Fiskers future cars


    The larger portion of the loan -- $359 million – is supporting the production of Fisker’s Nina vehicles. Fisker is using this funding to bring a shuttered General Motors plant in Delaware back to life and employing more than 2,500 workers. Fisker was attracted to this site in part by the opportunity to rehire some of the trained, dedicated workers who lost their jobs when that plant closed.

    Fisker’s production schedule was delayed by regulatory issues that were outside of its control,

    The Nina's schedule is now delayed due "regulatory issues" Nina aka Atlantic was supposed to be out in late 2012. That is why the second half of the loan was pulled because the production schedule for the Nina was not on track, due to regulatory issues.
     
  18. Yes I believe that Tesla would be in bankruptcy if it were not for the DOE loan. I believe the DOE loan was the main catalyst for major investment in Tesla, the loan is what funded the tooling and purchase of the Nummi factory and Model S as well as new store development.

    You believe that they would still be ok without the DOE loan.

    Neither you nor I know the real answer since they were given the DOE loan. Tell me how it is possible for you to know for sure about this alternate reality? Are you some sort of choose your own adventure buff? Think about it bud, its all speculation

    Please tell me how this is "troll territory"
     
  19. ElSupreme

    ElSupreme Model S 03182

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    4,279
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Ahh. Yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle. I imagine that Tesla would look a lot different than it currently does without the loan. Maybe it would be a supercar company like Keven Sharpe wants.
     
  20. doug

    doug Administrator / Head Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    15,914
    Location:
    Stanford, California
    Please leave it to mods to discuss what is troll territory. We can disagree without being disagreeable. :smile:
     

Share This Page