Good to see some positive announcements, although this has been 'in the works' for a long while. “Major Step”.... They have been saying that they 'planned' to get rid of un-needed equipment for the past year and a half. “The unusual step of selling the surplus equipment”? That is just 'standard practice' for a productive company.... what is so “unusual”? Back in "BusinessWire · Feb. 10, 2014 , it was stated that Elio Motors would use Comau's 'After Sales team' to conduct plant health assessments in order to optimize re-utilization of assets, and determine what machines could not be used, and should be sold. Seems like they finally concluded this task. NOW...... they just have to find some BUYERS!
"Come on"...... questioning my intelligence because I report and document items that have actually HAPPENED, but you, on the other hand, go with 'could a, should a, might of,' "they are moving it now because they have a buyer or buyers". Going from a statement that Elio Motors has finally decided (with the help of the Comau team over the last 7 months) what equipment they don't need..... to they already have BUYERS..... is not an INTELLIGENT or accurate statement, IMO. Since they stated when they purchased the equipment in the plant (over a year and half ago) that they would use what they needed, and sell the rest; the logical conclusion, is that it took them this LONG to figure out what they did not need, and could sell.
You claim that you only report documented items:
This was the last line of your initial comment:
NOW...... they just have to find some BUYERS!
Where is your documentation to back this up? Without documentation this is merely speculation and not documented fact.
The last line of your second comment:
Since they stated when they purchased the equipment in the plant (over a year and half ago) that they would use what they needed, and sell the rest; the logical conclusion, is that it took them this LONG to figure out what they did not need, and could sell.
By your own admission this is a conclusion your drew, otherwise known as speculation, as you would not have to draw a conclusion if you had based this statement on documented facts.
Then you continue your 'factual' reporting by writing this"
When they purchased the GM equipment (in early 2013), they had an inventory of the items. The Lawyers and Politicians had 'no effect' in their ability to evaluate what they could use and what they should sell. They could have SOLD the equipment, even BEFORE they signed a lease on the factory, but they needed Comau to evaluate it (started Feb 2014) and make their recommendations (recently completed).
Wow is that a bunch of speculation for someone who only reports documented things that happened. First I see more than one 'could' in there and even several complete speculative statements. Do you have an evidence to back up your assertion that lawyers and politicians had 'no effect' on their evaluation plans? How about any evidence to support your speculation that they could have sold the equipment earlier but the reason why it did not happen was due to Comau not starting yet?
You are trying to claim a date of February 2014 as the start date of EM working with Comau and I am guessing you are basing this on the date of the press release. Well the date of a press release really does not tell us much as it only announces their relationship publicly. We have actual documented evidence of EM working with Comau much earlier as there is a youtube video from way back in May 2013 where Gino Raffin, Elio Motors Vice President of Manufacturing and Product Launch mentions EM working with Comau. Oh yea, Gino was only announced officially just a few months back himself but the same video shows us he has also been working with EM much longer just like Comau has.
As we can all see see you have claimed to report documented things that have happened but in fact all you have been doing is speculating the same as anyone else. I do have to question your intelligence as you apparently don't know the difference between speculation and fact. Essentially you are trying to claim anything you say must be fact even if you can't back it up however anything anyone else says can't be true unless they can. Without evidence to back up your statements they are no more factual than those of anyone else on here.