Fambro and Anthony ousted

[10.5]

www.wired.com/autopia/2009/11/aptera-founders-ousted-in-boardroom-showdown/

Aptera Motors has ousted founders Steve Fambro and Chris Anthony, sources told Wired, painting a picture of a boardroom confrontation between the original founders and the auto industry veterans the company brought in last fall.

Rumors that Aptera Motors was letting them go and laying off an unknown number of people began swirling last week on the unofficial online Aptera Forum. The company says it simply elected to slow things down and minimize its burn rate while waiting for the Department of Energy to approve its loan application. It isn’t saying much about what happened to Fambro and Anthony, but claims the company’s relationship with them remains positive.

green.autoblog.com/2009/11/16/more-on-the-trouble-at-aptera-cash-may-be-running-out/


When auto industry veterans like Paul Wilbur were brought in to help bring the 2e to fruition, they realized that the constraints put on the vehicle by the original designers would make it much more difficult to sell beyond the cadre of early adopters. The design changes that were pushed through delayed production by over a year and, with it, any revenues from sales.

At the same time all of this was happening, the ability to raise further cash from the capital markets had evaporated and, while new legislation passed last month makes companies like Aptera eligible for ATVM loans, that money has yet to be approved or disbursed. As we all know by now, regardless of what the energy source is, the auto industry runs on cubic miles of cash.


(my first post, please don't kill me if I've done something wrong)

[NeilBlanchard]

Hi,

That article was already linked on this forum:

http://www.apteraforum.com/showthread.php?t=3529

[eyeh8pollution]

I read the whole article. If they are indeed fired, I will pull out and get my refund back. To much uncertainty and soap opera BS for me to stay confident if so.

[10.5]

Hi,

That article was already linked on this forum:



Oops, added another article anyway.

I read the whole article. If they are indeed fired, I will pull out and get my refund back. To much uncertainty and soap opera BS for me to stay confident if so.

I hope all this 'soap opera BS' won't do anything too bad to the Aptera.

[KarenRei]

they realized that the constraints put on the vehicle by the original designers would make it much more difficult to sell beyond the cadre of early adopters.

Let's just assume for a minute that nobody "warms" to the design of the 2e/2h. 4,000 early adopters, California-only (with a small handful of proxy buyers), $500 deposit, for a vehicle that won't be out for a year or so (as far as they knew), from a company that had never produced anything before.

Just dealing with the initial purchases, this would be equivalent to a nationwide market of ~15,000 early adopters, $500 deposit, for a vehicle that won't be out for a year or so, from a company that had never produced anything before. Probably ~30,000 worldwide.

Now, what's the multiplier for sales for there being no waiting list? I'd think probably at least 1.5x. So 45,000. What about the multiplier for the company having a solid history of deliveries? I'd probably say at least 4x. So ~180,000. Assuming nobody warms to the design over time as they see them on the roads.

What company wouldn't consider that a stunning success for a first-gen vehicle by a startup? That'd probably be ~300m profit.

Even if my numbers are *way* off, that *still* wouldn't justify refusing to sell to those 4,000 early adopters, and then changing the next release of the vehicle to make it more "mass market". I can understand refusing to sell an unsafe or unreliable vehicle, but a vehicle with split windows (and stronger doors and a more aerodynamic profile) or without Big Gulp cupholders? Come on. Just sell us the dang cars and brand your "improved" version as the new model. And then you'll have sales on your ledger, and perhaps you'd actually be able to raise money. :P

[aptera1213]

yes, it is strange...i always thought they should have went ahead with sales and then come out with version 2, then version 3 etc etc...just like any car company.

did the prius change in size and abilities? yep. did toyota wait for version 2 to start selling prius'? nope.

heck, make aptera vehicle version 1, sell 4 thousand, make aptera vehicle version 2 and sell both models for a while...then either keep selling those two models or faze out the model that doesn't sell as well....then make version 3 (hybrid model or 4 wheel model or whatever...but keep having an actual car to sell).

the thing is you can't make the 2e mainstream...it is don quixote tilting at windmills. you will never sell 100,000 apteras. at least not in the next 10 years or more...and probably much much longer. but you can sell 3 to 5 thousand a year. and that can let the company grow and make some changes while the public also makes some mental changes about what they consider a car and what they need from it.

the thing is the general public doesn't want EVs yet...maybe 10 percent will think of one and maybe one percent would actually get one...but that's ok...one percent can start the change.

so aptera getting those 3000 or so cars out on the street is/was very important. people need to see them driving day in and day out. talking to the owners about them, about no gas, about how well they work day in and day out.

and then, slowly, that 1 percent will grow.

and then batteries get better, infrastructure gets better, pricing gets better...and the market grows more and more...

BUT NONE OF THAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T SELL ANY ELECTRIC CARS!!

which is why i was an early adopter. which is why i have always said that i like the aptera the best, but will get the first reliable electric car that is offered in my area. because i believe it has to start and start now.

and i love the look of the aptera (especially the pp6), and i love how economical it is, and i love the start up adventurism of it...

that said, for me and most EV people, there is little difference between the leaf and iMIEV and aptera (other than number of seats and looks and such)....70 miles vs 100 miles is nothing to me...both 70 and 100 miles is "all or nothing." 98 plus percent of the time i drive less than 50 miles a day...the once every other month i drive farther, it is always more than 100 miles....so 98 percent of the days i can drive a leaf or an iMIEV or an aptera...but those 2 percent days i can't drive any of them..."all or nothing."

at this point all EVs are commuter cars...and that's cool...

now 5 or 10 years from now it will be different...


or at least i hope it will...but without any EVs...or any real serious push to EV, well we keep pushing back and back how quickly they will be accepted and advanced...which is a shame...

aptera will be niche, but they had a good niche...they were going to be 1) unique and 2) affordable (for an EV) and 3) they were going to be first...they needed to be all those things to succeed in the hard world of selling cars.

currently i fear they are trying to compromise away the first, maybe the second and they have almost guaranteed that the third won't happen.

aptera needs to forget about selling 100,000 cars and start thinking about selling those first 3000

selling 3 to 5 thousand a year is about where aptera will be if they want to...they just have to decide if that is enough sales to move forward

[DonC]

Even if my numbers are *way* off, that *still* wouldn't justify refusing to sell to those 4,000 early adopters, and then changing the next release of the vehicle to make it more "mass market". I can understand refusing to sell an unsafe or unreliable vehicle, but a vehicle with split windows (and stronger doors and a more aerodynamic profile) or without Big Gulp cupholders? Come on. Just sell us the dang cars and brand your "improved" version as the new model. And then you'll have sales on your ledger, and perhaps you'd actually be able to raise money. :P
You need parts to assemble a car, and the fewer parts you buy the more you pay for each part. They could order just enough parts to build 4000 cars but the price for each part would be very high, and, as a result, the price of those cars would be way way way north of $30k. Even GM, which should know something about the expense of parts, underestimated its costs for parts needed for the Volt by 50%. EV parts are highly specialized and, until there is sufficient demand so that there is a good stable of parts suppliers, the parts are going to be expensive. Basically we need an eco-system of EV parts suppliers because, without that, it will be virtually impossible for companies both large and small to release affordable EVs.

CommuterCars has the same problem with its Tango. What does it sell for -- $80k or something? This is what the guy from IdeaLab was talking about in the interview he gave early this year or late last year. Being a car manufacturer requires a lot of money.

Aptera needs a couple hundred million bucks to roll out and until they get something near that it's unlikely we'll see production.

[KarenRei]

What parts change when they make a change to the shell? Certainly not the motor, inverter, brakes, charger, etc. Probably not the battery pack, wheels, seats, etc.

[randyd]

What company wouldn't consider that a stunning success for a first-gen vehicle by a startup? That'd probably be ~300m profit.

We don't know enough about the profitability of the first 4000 or 15000, 30000, or 180000 units. If the first 4000 units cost more to build and sell than the revenue they make Aptera, the company would faceplant before any profits are made. That is the most difficult and critical stage for a startup. Any speculation about the profitability of Aptera is just that: speculation.

What parts change when they make a change to the shell? Certainly not the motor, inverter, brakes, charger, etc. Probably not the battery pack, wheels, seats, etc.

They would have to redesign/engineer virtually all manufacturing molds, jigs and fixtures. To build a vehicle like this in a high-quality and repeatable way, jigs, frames, fixtures, masks, molds, and the like are used. Change the shape of the body slightly and you also have to change, for example, the molds used to make the front windshields, side windows, back windows, headlight lenses, etc. Assuming you can make the changes perfectly and you don't have to adjust the molds because the fit isn't quite right, that is still a huge expense. And the risk of having to adjust the molds at additional expense is real.

So, to all of you saying, "Just sell me the PP6 and let the design evolve.", I say, "The costs of doing so may well kill the company." I would love to buy a PP6 too, but I don't expect it to make financial sense to Aptera, the company.

[ward00]

Good luck getting your deposit back - I dare you turkeys that thought this big white whale was ever going to go into production to try - bawahahaha - bak to the unemployment line for you Fambro

[KarenRei]

They would have to redesign/engineer virtually all manufacturing molds, jigs and fixtures. To build a vehicle like this in a high-quality and repeatable way, jigs, frames, fixtures, masks, molds, and the like are used. Change the shape of the body slightly and you also have to change, for example, the molds used to make the front windshields, side windows, back windows, headlight lenses, etc. Assuming you can make the changes perfectly and you don't have to adjust the molds because the fit isn't quite right, that is still a huge expense. And the risk of having to adjust the molds at additional expense is real.

You're talking about all in-house stuff (with the exception of glass, which may or may not need to be re-engineered, depending on the change). The other outside suppliers' products don't need to change.

We're not talking about a huge amount of tooling that would need to change because we're not talking about huge volume. Crawl, walk, run.

[aptera1213]

So, to all of you saying, "Just sell me the PP6 and let the design evolve.", I say, "The costs of doing so may well kill the company." I would love to buy a PP6 too, but I don't expect it to make financial sense to Aptera, the company.

you have to have actually sales at some point...the prius didn't start with version 2, it started with version 1 and "evolved".

but saying the aptera can't sell as is is a doomsday call...if the pp6 can't sell enough to get started and allow aptera to grow and evolve, well the roll down window version isn't going to sell any better...

the aptera 2e is limited in any form...it could sell 3 to 5 thousand a year...but it is not a 100,000 seller...it is 2 door, it is 2 seats, it is an EV with limited range...it is a commuter car only and a second car only for just about anybody who buys one...

but it is apteras trademark and it's start...it needs to be on the road in peoples hands so aptera can grow and make a hybrid and make a four door and even make a 4 wheel car maybe...

but it has to start sometime as no car company succeeds without selling a single car...

[afikoman]

When they delayed prod by a year last year and started hiring failed Detroit execs, I bought a Prius and wrote them an impassioned letter together with cancelling my deposit.
I warned them that the Detroit mentality would kill their baby and that there is a reason that Silicon Valley is not run by Detroit/Wall Street types.
I don't think this is a conspiracy but simply Detroit style incompetence and play-it-safe stupidity.
How could we expect anything different from auto industry insiders?

Note - Fambro was repeatedly clear that they could be profitable with small production runs. At an early stage in a new tech market, it is important to get the product out. If there were needed upgrades, they could have made these updates available to early adopters.

[10.5]

I hope Wilbur doesn't turn the Aptera into some sort of ugly Reliant Robin-esque thing for the sake of mass production.