Suppliers And Iav

[Gas-Powered Awesome]

Please do not harass Elio's future suppliers.

For most of them Elio is small potatoes, and very few people within any of them will have a clue what Elio is. So you are just asking them meaningless questions and wasting their time.

 

[Rickb]

Automotive manufacturing parts suppliers have no interest, motivation, or anything to gain by speaking on behalf of EM and won't even if/when production begins. IAV was not involved with EM's Tech Talks. It's not what they do. EM Marketing is responsible for their own fluff.

 

[WilliamH]

So if they have the 'development funds'.... where are the "
25 prototypes are under construction in Detroit as the company enters into the product testing phase. “
-- http://redriverradio.org/post/elio-motors-engineering-centric-phase-says-founder -- (Sep 2013)

So you're taking a story that is at least 18 months old and assuming that all factors and financing have remained static after the 11 of the 12 Caddo Parish Commissioners voted to move ahead and the one rogue commissioner filed suit to stop the GM plant deal.
If someone filed suit against you would all of your plans remain the same?
No. You'd hold back some of that money you were going to spend on a trip to Hawaii to cover all the things that might happen.
That doesn't sound very bright.

 

[Past Fanatic]

Still it is WHAT THEY SAID, and never 'retracted', 'modified', or 'clarified' it. IT NEVER HAPPENED! You would think that a company with 'transparency' as their "Core Value", would want to be perfectly CLEAR. The 'legal suit' was a non-issue, and was settled in less than a month,..... but was 'BLAMED' for a 9 month 'slip' in production date,.... when they could not USE the factory. In fact they are still only using it for STORAGE, 18 months later!

 

[John Painter]

Still it is WHAT THEY SAID, and never 'retracted', 'modified', or 'clarified' it. IT NEVER HAPPENED! You would think that a company with 'transparency' as their "Core Value", would want to be perfectly CLEAR. The 'legal suit' was a non-issue, and was settled in less than a month,..... but was 'BLAMED' for a 9 month 'slip' in production date,.... when they could not USE the factory. In fact they are still only using it for STORAGE, 18 months later!

Yup I noticed a comment from Branden Carey some time ago too about 25 prototypes. For all we know there might be 25 engineless prototypes sitting in storage somewhere. Personally I think it makes sense if they had the money upfront, and already had the P4 jig to just crank out a few more. It sucks to be on the public side NDA's.

 

[Rickb]

Elio has no funds beyond those covering day to day operations until they sell the equipment, which there may be no market for whatsoever. I don't blame the one Caddo Parrish Commissioner that wasn't 100% certain Elio had his share of funding to do what he said to justify the Caddo Parrish to upfront $7.5 Million in public funding support of Elio Motors. Reading the Commission minutes and the lawsuit is very interesting and typical politics.

 

[JNR]

Still it is WHAT THEY SAID, and never 'retracted', 'modified', or 'clarified' it. IT NEVER HAPPENED! You would think that a company with 'transparency' as their "Core Value", would want to be perfectly CLEAR. The 'legal suit' was a non-issue, and was settled in less than a month,..... but was 'BLAMED' for a 9 month 'slip' in production date,.... when they could not USE the factory. In fact they are still only using it for STORAGE, 18 months later!

Rog, get over it, things clearly haven't gone so well, are you looking for an apology?

 

[Rickb]

Yup I noticed a comment from Branden Carey some time ago too about 25 prototypes. For all we know there might be 25 engineless prototypes sitting in storage somewhere. Personally I think it makes sense if they had the money upfront, and already had the P4 jig to just crank out a few more. It sucks to be on the public side NDA's.

There was no money to build prototypes and I don't believe the engineering specs had been finalized at that point in time, and may not be finalized until the IAV engine is tested and or running.

 

[John Painter]

There was no money to build prototypes and I don't believe the engineering specs had been finalized at that point in time, and may not be finalized until the IAV engine is tested and or running.

No money at that time according to whom?

 

[WilliamH]

Still it is WHAT THEY SAID, and never 'retracted', 'modified', or 'clarified' it. IT NEVER HAPPENED! You would think that a company with 'transparency' as their "Core Value", would want to be perfectly CLEAR. The 'legal suit' was a non-issue, and was settled in less than a month,..... but was 'BLAMED' for a 9 month 'slip' in production date,.... when they could not USE the factory. In fact they are still only using it for STORAGE, 18 months later!

By the standard you espouse in your first sentence, that would make all politicians "flat, lyin' cur dogs".
Especially, those who claim transparency.