Less Than $7,600, No Sooner Than 4th Qtr 2016

[Rickb]

As slinches says, no one outside the DoE really knows what criteria they will use. As far as I'm concerned, the financial situation of EM is pretty much what I expected it would be. There's no way the DoE could expect any different. You have a company putting out millions of dollars in development costs with no source of income. How could anyone possibly expect them to be financially solvent? For myself, the revealing of the financial statement hasn't changed much.

It has been stated that one of the DOE's criteria is that a company has to be in a financial position to repay the loan -- not just have the promise of future sales revenue. I don't know if that's true but it only makes good sense to me. It certainly is up to the DOE's Loan Approval Committee. I hope they do approve it, but now will be shocked if it happens. I hope to be shocked. PE says there are other avenues of funding, so all is good and even better when I see the P5.

Tesla Motors, as an established automaker with a proven source of sales reveue was financially solvent and repaid their ATVM loan early. Fisker Motors as a new startup with no sales revenue not so much. Lesson learned? I doubt it. In EM's own filing statements, "EM is a risky investment."

 

[Bilbo B]

I keep asking myself that if I did NOT have a vested interest in Elio, would I want my government investing my tax dollars in it? I haven't been able to come up with an answer. As noted by others, we really don't know what the DOE criteria is, what other recipients financial reports looked like when their applications were approved. I'm not as confident in Elio receiving the loan was I was a week ago. I'm really not confident in Elio getting to production without the loan. Unless there is a very generous Angel Investor out there.

 

[slinches]

Rickb, It's a little more complicated than that or they couldn't ever have made a loan to a pre-production start up. The applicant has to have a plan that is deemed both likely enough to succeed (assuming the loan is granted) and must include more than enough profit to repay the loan within an acceptable term length. If those conditions are met, the loan should be granted. The difficulty is in gauging whether Elio Motors meets those criteria in the eyes of the DOE.

 

[Ekh]

Rickb, It's a little more complicated than that or they couldn't ever have made a loan to a pre-production start up. The applicant has to have a plan that is deemed both likely enough to succeed (assuming the loan is granted) and must include more than enough profit to repay the loan within an acceptable term length. If those conditions are met, the loan should be granted. The difficulty is in gauging whether Elio Motors meets those criteria in the eyes of the DOE.

Don't forget the really important part: the innovation being financed must offer sufficient energy savings to be worth the investment.

 

[Rickb]

Rickb, It's a little more complicated than that or they couldn't ever have made a loan to a pre-production start up. The applicant has to have a plan that is deemed both likely enough to succeed (assuming the loan is granted) and must include more than enough profit to repay the loan within an acceptable term length. If those conditions are met, the loan should be granted. The difficulty is in gauging whether Elio Motors meets those criteria in the eyes of the DOE.

I understand the complications of the loan approval process and there are usually some collateral and income requirements to guarantee repayment. Yes, pre-production DOE ATVM loans were previously approved for startups that failed. The DOE took a verbal bashing, but not from me because overall the Energy Loan Program is profitable and a well managed investment portfolio. Those failures are likely to create more caution in making future startup loan approvals. I hope they are cautious with taxpayer venture capital funding. This is my most recent opinion so no need to agree on the ATVM Loan other than we all hope funding sources materialize along with our Elios.

Again, EM stated the Elio is a high risk investment in their filing document and I agree, will the DOE? I think EM will get the needed funding from whatever the source. People seem to be throwing money at them and I hope it continues.

 

[slinches]

Don't forget the really important part: the innovation being financed must offer sufficient energy savings to be worth the investment.

I thought that part was already covered now that Paul has said they have met the "technical" requirements.

 

[Rickb]

I thought that part was already covered now that Paul has said they have met the "technical" requirements.

I ass.u.me that those stated technical requirements will be verified by the P5 testing.

 

[John Painter]

It has been stated that one of the DOE's criteria is that a company has to be in a financial position to repay the loan -- not just have the promise of future sales revenue. I don't know if that's true but it only makes good sense to me. It certainly is up to the DOE's Loan Approval Committee. I hope they do approve it, but now will be shocked if it happens. I hope to be shocked. PE says there are other avenues of funding, so all is good and even better when I see the P5.

Tesla Motors, as an established automaker with a proven source of sales reveue was financially solvent and repaid their ATVM loan early. Fisker Motors as a new startup with no sales revenue not so much. Lesson learned? I doubt it. In EM's own filing statements, "EM is a risky investment."

Tesla was able to repay that loan within a record time because of their stock value, not because they sell a lot of cars and make a lot of money. I think the concept of "financially solvent" in auto manufacturing is akin to dark matter in physics, we know it's there but exactly how or why it works isn't clear. I think Elio Motors has as good a shot at ATVM as any.

 

[Rickb]

Tesla was able to repay that loan within a record time because of their stock value, not because they sell a lot of cars and make a lot of money. I think the concept of "financially solvent" in auto manufacturing is akin to dark matter in physics, we know it's there but exactly how or why it works isn't clear. I think Elio Motors has as good a shot at ATVM as any.

I know why Tesla was able to repay the loan 10 years early. My only point was Tesla had a product to sell at the time of the loan application, was currently building EVs, in a Tesla owned manufacturing facility, with Tesla owned equipment, and had a revenue stream to make loan payments, which is why they have stock value and qualified for the ATVM loan. Tesla could have chosen to continue using the Government's low interest loan money and investing it eslwhere at a much higher interest rate.

I thought Elio had a better than good shot at the ATVM loan immediately following the successful P5 Testing, but now feel that changed over the past week. I hope you are right and I am wrong. Regardless, I feel EM will get the needed funding only from other than government sources.

 

[TexasElio]

I think the Elio Vehicle is a great concept, but it certainly does not advance automobile technology, not a single engineering patents that I'm aware of.

The Tesla was a game changer, and holds hundreds of patents.

My point, comparing Tesla & Elio Motors is absurd on any level.

Elon Musk is a "World Class" entrepreneur with a proven track record.

Musk deserved the ATVM loan, he's a brilliant businessman, and was able to successfully execute his dream!