doom-and-gloom LA Times article about electric cars

[butter]

...granted, this article seems fairly negatively hyped; that is, the writer is definitely playing devil's advocate *against* the whole electric car wave. so brace yourselves for some annoying "journalism."

on the other hand, it's always nice to have some of that devil's advocating out there, just to keep us supporters on our toes and on top of things. you can never be too competent or informed.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-garage5apr05,1,3703506,full.story

[fritzponds]

Hopefully they didn't mention Aptera because they couldn't find any dirt about them. This article makes me more excited that I reserved a Typ-1. I think Aptera got it right, the simpler the better, for start-ups.

[KarenRei]

Yep. Pretty bad.

What he didn't mention was that Tesla's Roadster had arrived months behind schedule with an improvised transmission that reduced acceleration by 40%. Or that the San Carlos, Calif.-based company's visionary co-founder had been abruptly ousted months before. Or that Tesla plans to make fewer than 1,000 of the cars this year -- and sell them for $100,000 apiece.

* News flash -- new company delays first car by a mere six months! Even *GM* delays cars.
* The improvised transmission is for people who *choose* to get that in order to get their car a couple months sooner; they can get it replaced for free.
* And 1,000 $100,000 cars isn't a hundred million dollars, a small fortune, why?
* $100k is unusual for a low-volume sports car why?
* 1,000 is an unusual volume for a high performance sports car why?

Last week, California's top air regulator voted to reduce the number of all-electric vehicles it would require large automakers to market in the state in coming years. That, combined with the start-up industry's challenges, could further delay technological advances and shift momentum away from electric cars altogether.

The CARB vote wasn't nearly as bad as it was expected to be; there's still plenty of room for other EV makers than Tesla. The CARB rules are a bigger hit to other things that momentum might "shift" to, such as hydrogen vehicles.

"There are real questions about whether they can do this," said Chelsea Sexton, who worked with General Motors Corp. on electric cars in the 1990s and is now executive director of Plug In America, an advocacy group. "There's a lot of talk, but it's still vaporware."

* News Flash: Former GM worker questions whether small car companies can do something!
* The Tesla is not "vaporware". Plus, how fast do you expect people to develop these cars, for crying out loud? Three days? Look at the production schedule on the Volt.

Tesla, Phoenix Motorcars Inc., Fisker and Zap

Oh, great -- three luxury-priced cars and a company that's little better than a scam are the selection options.

(Cue complaints about Phoenix's bad battery selection choice, Zap being little better than a scam, Tesla having a six month delay, and Fisker's being... new?)

Delivery was delayed by about six months, however,

Has this person never covered a new VC firm before?

[G-Jet]

I thought the Tesla was well over a year in delay, and the 6 months was the last part of an already delayed introduction. Good article on the reality of car companies.

G

[KarenRei]

AFAIK (and also on Wikipedia, so if you have info to the contrary, please update the page), the Roadster was initially targetted for October 2007. It began rolling off the line on March 17th, so a six month delay.

By comparison, the Chevy Volt was initially saying release in 2010, but now they're saying it may be as late as 2011 before anyone can get one. So, even this early in the production, GM is getting the public ready for a delay (that, and a price hike).

It just seems silly to act like a six month delay in a car production, especially in the first model from a new VC, is somehow a big deal. Even if it was more than a six month delay, I wouldn't find a year or more delay that unusual. Even the Volt by GM could end up with that kind of delay.