VWVortex.com - Spartan Buys Fisker for $2.9 Billion
Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    The Car Lounge
    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
    Results 1 to 25 of 37

    Thread: Spartan Buys Fisker for $2.9 Billion

    1. Senior Member 2.0T_Convert's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 23rd, 2009
      Location
      NYC
      Posts
      22,067
      Vehicles
      Two fake rich sedans & one non-Prius hybrid
      07-13-2020 12:59 PM #1
      Link

      Spartan Energy Acquisition is buying California-based electric-vehicle maker Fisker, in a deal valuing the startup at $2.9 billion—another billion-dollar valuation for the ultrahot alternative-fuel space.

      Spartan’s (ticker: SPAQ) market value crossed the billion-dollar threshold last week when the stock jumped 55% on news of the potential combination. The transaction will bring more than $1 billion in fresh capital to the Fisker, the target company, fully funding the development of Fisker’s electric SUV called Ocean.

      Fisker believes the Ocean is the world’s most sustainable all-electric SUV because it is manufactured using recycled materials.

      Spartan, the buyer, is a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, founded for the purpose of finding the next big thing. Spartan is controlled by private-equity giant Apollo Global Management (APO).
      “We are excited to work with Fisker to help achieve its vision of attainable electric transportation,” Geoffrey Strong, chairman and CEO of Spartan, said in a news release. “Henrik [Fisker] has an unparalleled and world-renowned design track record and is supported by an expert management team with storied careers in the automotive industry. The right team, combined with deep financial resources provided by this transaction, further position the company to succeed in a rapidly growing industry.” Strong is also senior partner, co-head of infrastructure and natural resources at Apollo.

      Indeed, the EV industry is growing rapidly, thanks in large part to Tesla (TSLA), whose sales are expected to jump more than 40% in 2021 from 2020. EV stock prices are growing even more rapidly. Tesla shares are up almost 270% year to date, making the EV pioneer the world’s most valuable car company.

      Telsa isn’t the only stock soaring. Shares of U.S. listed Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) have also gained about 270% year to date. Stock in EV commercial-van company Workhorse (WKHS) is up almost 400%. EV trucking companies Nikola (NKLA) and Tortoise Acquisition (SHLL) are up roughly 425% and 170%, respectively.

      Nikola, like Fisker, went public via a SPAC acquisition. Tortoise is buying EV truck maker Hyliion in a similar type of SPAC transaction.
      Crazy how EV companies keep booming despite the pandemic!
      Last edited by 2.0T_Convert; 07-13-2020 at 01:01 PM.

    2. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    3. Member NotFast's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 20th, 2002
      Location
      Chicago area, IL
      Posts
      2,668
      07-13-2020 01:06 PM #2
      Quote Originally Posted by 2.0T_Convert View Post
      Link

      Crazy how EV companies keep booming despite the pandemic!
      ... all that private equity money has to go somewhere....!

    4. Member vwpiloto's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 26th, 2006
      Location
      Orange County, CA
      Posts
      12,279
      Vehicles
      1987 944 S, 2003 S2000, 2011 E90 M3, 2013 Mazda 3, 2014 4Runner Trail
      07-13-2020 01:09 PM #3
      Good for Henrik Fisker. I don't know if he's a good guy or a douche, have no clue. But I was feeling he was going to have bad timing and bad luck again, as he did back in 2007 or so, the first time around with Fisker and the great recession. Seems like it worked out for him. Hopefully the buyout sees him leave with enough cash to retire. No clue as to what their debts were.

    5. Banned Ducman69's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 13th, 2010
      Posts
      642
      Vehicles
      Ram, Vette, 500
      07-13-2020 01:23 PM #4
      Quote Originally Posted by 2.0T_Convert View Post
      Crazy how EV companies keep booming despite the pandemic!
      COVID aint stopping those government subsidies, and the wealthy that are the target demo for fancy brand new electrics are rarely affected by economic turmoil like us plebs.


    6. Senior Member 2.0T_Convert's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 23rd, 2009
      Location
      NYC
      Posts
      22,067
      Vehicles
      Two fake rich sedans & one non-Prius hybrid
      07-13-2020 01:29 PM #5
      Quote Originally Posted by NotFast View Post
      ... all that private equity money has to go somewhere....!
      This might explain why NKLA is so highly valued.

    7. Member vwpiloto's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 26th, 2006
      Location
      Orange County, CA
      Posts
      12,279
      Vehicles
      1987 944 S, 2003 S2000, 2011 E90 M3, 2013 Mazda 3, 2014 4Runner Trail
      07-13-2020 01:38 PM #6
      Spartan Energy Acquisition Corp. is a special purpose acquisition entity focused on the energy value-chain in North America and was formed for the purpose of entering into a merger, amalgamation, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses. We are sponsored by Spartan Energy Acquisition Sponsor, LLC, which is owned by a private investment fund managed by an affiliate of Apollo Global Management, Inc. (“Apollo”).
      Apollo is led by its managing partners, Leon Black, Joshua Harris and Marc Rowan, who have worked together for more than 29 years and lead a team of 1,421 employees, including 472 investment professionals (as of December 31, 2019), in New York, California, Houston, Bethesda, London, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Madrid, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, Tokyo, Delhi, Mumbai and Powai.


      This is going to be good! I love Leon.

    8. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-13-2020 04:29 PM #7
      Quote Originally Posted by NotFast View Post
      ... all that private equity money has to go somewhere....!
      It's true... Spartan was created a couple years ago to make acquisitions in etc energy market, and they were down to their last month to get a deal done or they would have to unwind the Special Purpose company (aka the "blank check company"). So literally, they had $550 million burning a hole in their pocket.

      BTW, here is the Investor Presentation that was filed with the SEC in the overall deal announcement filing today.

      Fisker - Spartan Investor presentation
      Last edited by Dave_Car_Guy; 07-13-2020 at 05:27 PM.

    9. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-18-2020 10:16 PM #8
      Some of my friends appear confused about how the merger with SPAQ will work. In case any of you are wondering, here’s a short summary of why this, in my humble opinion, is a good thing for Fisker, and how this is different than a traditional IPO.

      In a traditional IPO, a privately held company hires an Investment Bank to create the legal documents to issue new shares. They spend weeks marketing to investment funds (a “road show”) to put together a book of buyers that will buy the shares at an agreed upon price. Once they have completely filled the book (making sure they have additional demand at the agreed price), they issue the shares and then they open it all for public trading. That’s the first day the public can buy what the funds just bought (and the funds may support the price since they had some amount of unmet demand when they allocated shares in the deal). That’s generally when you get that “first day pop” in price.

      In a blank check deal, the acquiring company already has the cash to buy shares of the private company, and all the legal documents to create the public equity shares already exist and they already are trading, in this case, as SPAQ. SPAQ raised that $500+ million in cash 2 years ago and promised their investors they’d buy something with it (that’s the “blank check”). The cash was put in trust. They had a deadline to spend it, or send the $10 per share back, and that deadline is August 2020. So now SPAQ agrees to pay Fisker $1.9 Billion in newly issued shares at $10 per share and contribute their $500+ million for shares also, and they have a group of investors already committed for another $500 Million in a PIPE (private investment in public equity) at the close of the deal. All of this is done at $10 per share. So the private investors committing hundreds of millions get to buy at $10, and you get to buy at whatever the market is currently trading SPAQ. That’s not unusual, as the private guys can’t always sell right away, and have other reasons that a private share is cheaper than a public share (“liquidity discount”, etc). Hopefully you see how this is different than the traditional IPO. You don’t have to wait to buy on that first day after the deal. But if you buy now, you take the risk that the deal never closes.

      So when the merger closes, SPAQ changes its Ticker symbol and all shares of SPAQ become Fisker shares (Fisker is the surviving entity in the deal). The company immediately has $1Billion in cash to pursue its business plan, and if you previously owned a share of SPAQ, you now own a share of Fisker. No road show, no Wall Street banks and funds controlling the pricing (except that SPAQ has negotiated it with Fisker and investors). The company will have about 294 million shares outstanding, and at $10 a share, that implies a company valuation of $2.9 billion (including cash of $1 billion). If the stock price is trading at $15 a share, valuation will be roughly $4.5 billion. (Compare that to NKLA today at roughly $19 billion). The day the deal closes, sometime in a few months, that’s when most people will look to buy shares. For now, you can buy it as SPAQ. All this is in the company’s investor presentation filed with the SEC.

      Consider what happens if the merger doesn’t occur for some reason, then SPAQ has to return $10 a share to shareholders. So if things don’t work, you get your $10 back on a stock now trading at $15. But if “the market” gives this a $9 billion valuation, half of NKLA?...the stock goes to $30, you’ve doubled your money. What it is worth and where it will trade will be the collective opinion of everyone in the market. Anyway, you get the idea. Right now, EVs are hot. Everyone wants the next TSLA. But of course, markets change.

      This is NOT, NOT, NOT investment advice, just one guy’s very, very basic explanation of the deal structure.

      And yes, I have my deposit on an Ocean. Hope it all goes according to plan.

    10. Member rich!'s Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 18th, 1999
      Location
      SoFLA
      Posts
      10,380
      Vehicles
      '17 CarTruck, '17 Alltrack
      07-19-2020 06:43 AM #9
      water is warm, i'm sure it is fine.



      Last edited by rich!; 07-19-2020 at 06:46 AM.

    11. Member 3WheelGTi's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 29th, 2001
      Location
      Huntington Woods, MI occasionally
      Posts
      7,238
      Vehicles
      2003 Porsche 911 C4S, 2020 Ford Mustang GT, 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 1982 VW Rabbit
      07-19-2020 07:26 AM #10
      Quote Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
      COVID aint stopping those government subsidies, and the wealthy that are the target demo for fancy brand new electrics are rarely affected by economic turmoil like us plebs.

      Golfy, you are way off on this one.

      This has nothing to do with the company’s product or something crazy like revenue. Investors want a Tesla 2.0 at a cheaper share price. Thus, every “EV” company (with the exception of the China EV players) is on fire right now. It’s called over exuberance.

    12. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-19-2020 09:48 AM #11
      Also, headline is misleading. They paid $1.9 billion for Fisker and are adding $1 Billion in cash, so the combined final entity will be worth $2.9 billion “post money”.

    13. Member rlfletch's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 11th, 2000
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      3,958
      Vehicles
      2018 Tesla Model 3, 1988 BMW M5
      07-19-2020 06:17 PM #12
      But Fisker doesn't have any tech IP? He is looking to make his design on a VW platform? Just another EV Cute Ute. Where is the value in this AT ALL?
      Quote Originally Posted by Fritz27 View Post
      Mercedes typically makes awful manual transmissions and fantastic auto transmissions. Choosing the stick would be like saying, "Y'know, that Natalie Portman is pretty hot, but if she grew some hair on her legs and had a dong, she'd be just right."
      Quote Originally Posted by jnm2.0t View Post
      Was it parked on the curb on garbage day?

    14. Member are you listening's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 30th, 2008
      Location
      CO
      Posts
      1,012
      Vehicles
      18 JKU, 04 100 LC, 06 LR3, 08 XC70
      07-19-2020 09:48 PM #13
      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      Also, headline is misleading. They paid $1.9 billion for Fisker and are adding $1 Billion in cash, so the combined final entity will be worth $2.9 billion “post money”.
      Dave, didn't your fund have money with Fisker at some point?

      (Bloomberg and WSJ on how SPACs work for finance nerds.)

    15. Senior Member JustinCSVT's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 3rd, 2004
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      21,726
      Vehicles
      '17 GTI Sport
      07-19-2020 09:59 PM #14
      Quote Originally Posted by are you listening View Post
      Dave, didn't your fund have money with Fisker at some point?

      (Bloomberg and WSJ on how SPACs work for finance nerds.)
      This is actually very interesting. Funny how this structure went relatively unused until recently. Seems custom made for markets with a ton of liquidity.

    16. Senior Member JustinCSVT's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 3rd, 2004
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      21,726
      Vehicles
      '17 GTI Sport
      07-19-2020 10:08 PM #15
      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      Also, headline is misleading. They paid $1.9 billion for Fisker and are adding $1 Billion in cash, so the combined final entity will be worth $2.9 billion “post money”.
      Question on the SPAC's, it seems extremely difficult to setup a company, generate deal flow, and get far enough down the road to deploy that capital within 2 years. What is the success rate of actually getting a deal closed within that timeframe?

    17. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-20-2020 12:49 AM #16
      Quote Originally Posted by are you listening View Post
      Dave, didn't your fund have money with Fisker at some point?
      The original Fisker Automotive, which no longer exists. Back in 2008-ish.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    18. Member 4th Branch's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 5th, 2007
      Location
      NorCal
      Posts
      557
      Vehicles
      Minivan
      07-20-2020 02:45 AM #17
      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      Some of my friends appear confused about how the merger with SPAQ will work. In case any of you are wondering, here’s a short summary of why this, in my humble opinion, is a good thing for Fisker, and how this is different than a traditional IPO.
      Draftkings (DKNG) went IPO in the same manner back in April, I can't recall what the stock ticker was prior but I picked it up just over $17 the day the ticker changed to DKNG (and foolishly sold in the $20's). There have been a number of other IPO's that have gone the blank check route post Covid and have done very well

    19. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-20-2020 03:10 AM #18
      Quote Originally Posted by rlfletch View Post
      But Fisker doesn't have any tech IP? He is looking to make his design on a VW platform? Just another EV Cute Ute. Where is the value in this AT ALL?
      As a Tesla owner, I think you might be able to recognize that a unique business model is an advantage as well. And it isn't like you just draw a car on top of VW platform and say "there's my car!, now go build it". There are manufacturing partnerships that are included in what Fisker is doing, along with supplier partnerships, systems integration, and lots of things that go into designing a car. That's why it takes most existing car companies several years to fully design and develop a car for manufacturing. The IP is also the business plan itself, not all of which you may yet be privy to. But the Flexible Lease, the subscription model, the relationship with the banking partner for the lease program, the sales plan, as well as the potential VW relationship for the platform and batteries are all things that not just anyone can put together easily. Of course, the VW strategy is to be the underlying platform for many car makers, and that's ok, too. Fisker isn't trying to differentiate its offering based on the underlying tech or the battery. Imagine a VW platform that is like "Intel Inside"... the underlying tech is all there and it gives many other companies the ability to build all kinds of different vehicles on top of that evolving platform while reaping the benefits of economies of scale.

      It is hard to be a profitable car company when you make everything yourself. Every car company in the world uses others to make many components of their cars, which they design and assemble. Fisker is taking that too the next logical step. I think others will follow suit, but being a first mover has its advantages (as your Tesla experience will tell you). Being a company that can design a compelling product, outsource many of the components, and bring that product to market is a proven strategy. Think of it this way as well: when virtually any and every car can have a 6-cylinder turbo ICE engine generating 300Hp, then is there really any tech advantage to having your own engine? In the end, cars get bought based on performance, quality, design, and perceived utility/value. I can buy any car with a 300 HP V6 or a 400 HP V8. Why buy a Mercedes over a Cadillac? Is it truly because Mercedes has some magic engine that is significantly different than the Caddy? Perceived quality and performance may differ, but they do essentially the same thing. So why spend billions creating something that someone else can do faster, better, cheaper. Might we consider that battery and EV powertrains will get commoditized over time, and although one company might decide to pursue a strategy of having their own tech IP, another might garner customers through lower cost, better reliability, more standardized charging infrastructure, etc. Elon Musk has advocated for a world with more EVs, but the reality is that he only wants that if all those EVs are Tesla. he hates competition. Whenever Tesla people poo-poo a newer EV company, they sound just like the Tesla haters of old, and worse, sound like Elon, who thinks nobody is right about EV strategy unless it's just like his. Shouldn't all EV lovers cheer on more EV options? I know I do.

    20. Member rich!'s Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 18th, 1999
      Location
      SoFLA
      Posts
      10,380
      Vehicles
      '17 CarTruck, '17 Alltrack
      07-20-2020 08:40 AM #19
      Quote Originally Posted by 4th Branch View Post
      Draftkings (DKNG) went IPO in the same manner back in April, I can't recall what the stock ticker was prior but I picked it up just over $17 the day the ticker changed to DKNG (and foolishly sold in the $20's). There have been a number of other IPO's that have gone the blank check route post Covid and have done very well
      Diamond Eagle Acquisition Corp + SBTech

      spac vs rmt in last few years.

      jp had a white paper out a few years ago talking about ramping up spacs, they nailed it.

      "MARCH 19, 2018#SPACs #Financing #M&A Where will the $11bn of available SPAC capital be deployed in the next one to two years?The rising number Special Purpose Acquisition Company (“SPAC”) IPOs has caught the eye of the market. SPACs have represented ~15% of the IPO market year-to-date and ~19% in 2017. With about 39 existing SPACs actively looking for acquisitions in the market today and expiry dates in the next one to two years, a significant amount of capital is expected to be deployed towards acquisitions of small to mid-sized private or public companies."

    21. Member BlakeV's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 24th, 2015
      Location
      Original join 1999
      Posts
      2,220
      Vehicles
      2019 Audi S5 Sportback
      07-20-2020 09:06 AM #20
      I wonder of this company has ever done a profit two years consecutively.

    22. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-20-2020 05:09 PM #21
      Quote Originally Posted by BlakeV View Post
      I wonder of this company has ever done a profit two years consecutively.
      Is my sarcasm filter broken or are you from the future?

      How exactly do you expect a start-up car company to already have profits if they haven’t yet built a car?

      Btw, Tesla has only had three consecutive QUARTERS of profits. Two years is still in the works. 2020 looks to be the first full year of positive earnings. And while they have had over $2 billion in operating cash flow in each of the last two years, they have also invested over $8 billion in cash over the last three years.

      It’s a business that requires lots of cash if you’re going to build everything yourself. That hasn’t held TSLA back from now having a market value now over $280 billion.

      Pretty sure Warren Buffett wouldn’t buy any of these!! So if you’re looking for 2 years of profits, buy CSIQ instead, because their solar panels and solar farms will be in demand regardless of which EV wins, and they have 5 consistent years of profits while trading at a P/E of just 5x. They had higher quarterly earnings per share than TSLA last quarter, but the stock is $24 vs TSLA $1600.

    23. Member rlfletch's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 11th, 2000
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      3,958
      Vehicles
      2018 Tesla Model 3, 1988 BMW M5
      07-20-2020 07:38 PM #22
      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      As a Tesla owner, I think you might be able to recognize that a unique business model is an advantage as well. And it isn't like you just draw a car on top of VW platform and say "there's my car!, now go build it". There are manufacturing partnerships that are included in what Fisker is doing, along with supplier partnerships, systems integration, and lots of things that go into designing a car. That's why it takes most existing car companies several years to fully design and develop a car for manufacturing. The IP is also the business plan itself, not all of which you may yet be privy to. But the Flexible Lease, the subscription model, the relationship with the banking partner for the lease program, the sales plan, as well as the potential VW relationship for the platform and batteries are all things that not just anyone can put together easily. Of course, the VW strategy is to be the underlying platform for many car makers, and that's ok, too. Fisker isn't trying to differentiate its offering based on the underlying tech or the battery. Imagine a VW platform that is like "Intel Inside"... the underlying tech is all there and it gives many other companies the ability to build all kinds of different vehicles on top of that evolving platform while reaping the benefits of economies of scale.

      It is hard to be a profitable car company when you make everything yourself. Every car company in the world uses others to make many components of their cars, which they design and assemble. Fisker is taking that too the next logical step. I think others will follow suit, but being a first mover has its advantages (as your Tesla experience will tell you). Being a company that can design a compelling product, outsource many of the components, and bring that product to market is a proven strategy. Think of it this way as well: when virtually any and every car can have a 6-cylinder turbo ICE engine generating 300Hp, then is there really any tech advantage to having your own engine? In the end, cars get bought based on performance, quality, design, and perceived utility/value. I can buy any car with a 300 HP V6 or a 400 HP V8. Why buy a Mercedes over a Cadillac? Is it truly because Mercedes has some magic engine that is significantly different than the Caddy? Perceived quality and performance may differ, but they do essentially the same thing. So why spend billions creating something that someone else can do faster, better, cheaper. Might we consider that battery and EV powertrains will get commoditized over time, and although one company might decide to pursue a strategy of having their own tech IP, another might garner customers through lower cost, better reliability, more standardized charging infrastructure, etc. Elon Musk has advocated for a world with more EVs, but the reality is that he only wants that if all those EVs are Tesla. he hates competition. Whenever Tesla people poo-poo a newer EV company, they sound just like the Tesla haters of old, and worse, sound like Elon, who thinks nobody is right about EV strategy unless it's just like his. Shouldn't all EV lovers cheer on more EV options? I know I do.
      Look, I'm happy to have more ev's out there. Competition will force invention. I like the design of this thing as well, unlike many of his more recent products. To value what this is at almost 3 billion dollars is insane though, especially given his track record with previous forays into building his "Own" cars. Tesla, although highly over valued currently, brought earthshaking new ideas to the automotive world that have still not been caught up to. This thing is a re-bodied VW with no distribution, charging, or service network. Fisker is a car stylist, which is fine, but in no way should he be mistaken for being an entrepreneurial genius worth investing on those merits alone.
      Quote Originally Posted by Fritz27 View Post
      Mercedes typically makes awful manual transmissions and fantastic auto transmissions. Choosing the stick would be like saying, "Y'know, that Natalie Portman is pretty hot, but if she grew some hair on her legs and had a dong, she'd be just right."
      Quote Originally Posted by jnm2.0t View Post
      Was it parked on the curb on garbage day?

    24. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      3,223
      Vehicles
      The NATO garage: 3 British, 2 German, 2 American.
      07-21-2020 02:33 PM #23
      Quote Originally Posted by rlfletch View Post
      Look, I'm happy to have more ev's out there. Competition will force invention. I like the design of this thing as well, unlike many of his more recent products. To value what this is at almost 3 billion dollars is insane though, especially given his track record with previous forays into building his "Own" cars. Tesla, although highly over valued currently, brought earthshaking new ideas to the automotive world that have still not been caught up to. This thing is a re-bodied VW with no distribution, charging, or service network. Fisker is a car stylist, which is fine, but in no way should he be mistaken for being an entrepreneurial genius worth investing on those merits alone.
      You are absolutely entitled to that opinion, for sure. But you clearly don't want more EVs if you crap on every one that isn't a Tesla. It's exactly what Elon has been doing for years. You may recall the film "Who Killed the Electric Car?". It's people who constantly crap on any new ideas or attempts.

      But first off, it's a valuation of $1.9 billion pre-money. Plus the $1 billion in cash. It is misleading to imply that Spartan bought them for $3 billion. If I paid you $10 for your company and then added $1 billion to it, would you say that I paid $1 billion for your company? Of course not. So now we can argue whether it's worth 1.9 Billion. They've developed the Fisker E-motion also, which is a unique and completely new car. They want to build that after they have done the lower-market Ocean on the VW platform. So it isn't just a rebooted VW. It is a company with lots of existing design, development, partnerships, experience, and plans. You aren't familiar enough with what goes into these partnerships and car development, if you think this stuff is simple. Also, they have a proposed service network partnership with Cox and their 78 US locations, so maybe you haven't looked at the company's presentation at this point. Here is the link: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...rtanenergy.htm

      And I will argue ALL day long about what you cal his "own" cars. I am an original owner of a Fisker Karma, going on 9 years old and the most reliable car I have ever owned. Never a problem. Never left me stranded. I know that many people like to crap on Fisker for the Karma, but it was revolutionary in 2010 and unique and extremely good. And before you tell me they had some issues, there were exactly THREE cars that caught one fire. THREE. The company's problem was NOT the car itself. They were massively underfunded and had to do some things to get money and when the US government pulled their loan, they had no choice but to go BK and sell off assets. They beat Tesla to the market because they had to. They were running out of money and they rushed the car to market because it was a CONDITION of the loan from the US Government. The loan said they had to sell at least 10,000 cars a year or they'd be in default. Furthermore, they were required by the loan to build a US factory to build the smaller Fisker Atlantic, because the Feds didn't want to be seen as loaning money to build a $100K car for rich guys at a factory in Finland (the Karma). So their money and time was being pulled in a direction they didn't want to pursue for several years later, after perfecting the Karma.

      IF they had gone public first, like Tesla, and had Billions of dollars of equity to take their time, things might be different. Moreover, when Elon Musk filed a lawsuit in the summer of 2008 against Fisker, it was solely to slow down out crash the Fisker Series C and D funding which would have taken Fisker closer to production. When Elon did that, he knew very well he was wrong. He lost the suit and even had to pay damages to Fisker for a frivolous lawsuit. But it ended in September 2008 and by then the market crashed. No Series D funding was coming, and then the company had to look at the government for a loan.

      And I have nothing but respect for what Tesla has accomplished. Amazing new tech, fantastic new business model. But that doesn't mean there isn't room for other plans and other business models. So please, I don't mean to squash appropriate discourse, but you really are talking about things you seem to know little about. I guarantee I have more information about this situation than most people, so please imagine for a moment... just a moment, that the guys who are about to pour $1 Billion into this company might have, just might have, looked a tad harder at this company than you have. Give it a chance and cheer it on. The more EVs, the better for you and your early-adopter-Tesla.
      Last edited by Dave_Car_Guy; 07-21-2020 at 04:51 PM.

    25. Member vwpiloto's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 26th, 2006
      Location
      Orange County, CA
      Posts
      12,279
      Vehicles
      1987 944 S, 2003 S2000, 2011 E90 M3, 2013 Mazda 3, 2014 4Runner Trail
      07-21-2020 02:46 PM #24
      Sounds like the Fisker Ocean may just be the arrival of what's to come in a world of EVs, where the platform and powertrain will be ubiquitous, and the USP will be everything else which makes up the vehicle, including form, UX, styling, sharing or other "ownership" methods, brand, lifestyle, etc.

      That's already been talked about for years now, but this could be one of the first examples where a small brand and startup can suddenly compete with the established OEMs in their specific market/niche. I realize there's a long way to go still, but it's not hard to imagine that with the relative simplicity of a rolling EV platform, non automotive brands can soon be building vehicles, with the legacy OEMs taking more of a platform development role, and partnering with various brands to sell such platform too.

      So I suspect a good chunk of the valuation will be attributed to that concept, and how Fisker can then monetize that further. Perhaps they introduce more vehicles under their own brad as the SEC presentation Dave linked to suggested, or they also provide development services to other lifestyle brands wanting to enter this segment.

    26. Member rlfletch's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 11th, 2000
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      3,958
      Vehicles
      2018 Tesla Model 3, 1988 BMW M5
      07-21-2020 05:44 PM #25
      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      You are absolutely entitled to that opinion, for sure. But you clearly don't want more EVs if you crap on every one that isn't a Tesla. It's exactly what Elon has been doing for years. You may recall the film "Who Killed the Electric Car?". It's people who constantly crap on any new ideas or attempts.
      I crap on all that isn't Tesla? I own an E-Golf and an Electric Focus before that. We will most likely replace it with a Volvo XC-40 Recharge. The Mach-E is a heat seeking missile aimed right at the Model Y and I love me some Porsche Taycan if only I could afford it. That is neither here nor there. I would say, based on your response, you are the one a bit beholden to Fisker as opposed to me and Tesla.

      It's great your experience with your Karma has been good. The market was not so effusive. From a design stand point it has poor packaging and polarizing styling that spoke to performance it didn't have. From a technology stand point it offered nothing new and did not live up to the hype. Quality, not unlike Tesla, was spotty. It was a very niche product that was unsustainable in the marketplace. Not an idea to invest billions in. Are they on their second or third bankruptcy?

      The Ocean is a nice design with a few innovative features. I giant leap forward from the rich playthings Fisker has produced in the past. But it must be called what it is at this point: A re-bodied VW. Not a bad thing at all, but worth 3 Billion dollars of investment? I think not. I suspect the investors are hoping for another Tesla style valuation rocket ride without understanding the product or its market. The stock market has turned into a giant casino with most investors chasing trends without due diligence. I invested in Tesla back in the day after riding in a Model S and identifying it for its unique qualities and having faith that the Space X guy knows a thing or two about new technologies. I also got real lucky. It is currently is wildly overvalued but part of that is from the lack of innovation from its competitors even after years of development.

      The EV market doesn't need more over hyped and ludicrously valued companies to draw attention away from real progress. Let's reward product innovation not just product marketing.
      Quote Originally Posted by Fritz27 View Post
      Mercedes typically makes awful manual transmissions and fantastic auto transmissions. Choosing the stick would be like saying, "Y'know, that Natalie Portman is pretty hot, but if she grew some hair on her legs and had a dong, she'd be just right."
      Quote Originally Posted by jnm2.0t View Post
      Was it parked on the curb on garbage day?

    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •  
    vwvortex.com is an independent Volkswagen enthusiast website owned and operated by VerticalScope Inc. Content on vwvortex.com is generated by its users. vwvortex.com is not in any way affiliated with Volkswagen AG.