Is Elio Still Saying Mid 2016 To Start Production?

[Rickb]

Did you read what Ekh reported back from the show at Detroit? They are on track and doing everything humanly possible for go into production Q4 of this year 2016 and that they will meet it. This comes directly from the people at Elio Motors; not some rumor, hunch, gut feeling and hearsay. So your assumption of March 2017 or Q4 2017 is incorrect.

Alrighty then. I read that statement as we are pretty confident and might slip a few weeks. I was going with EM's own production schedule in the SEC Filing Document. I think it seems more realistic. It wasn't my assumption, rumor, hunch, gut feeling, or hearsay, but EM's own production schedule, however, I'm ready to take an earlier than anticipated delivery.

 

[Gizmo]

Expect the worst and hope fer the best!

 

[BADBOY]

I decided to sign on a two year lease for a new 2015 Nissan Sentra 6 speed. $200 down 200 per month which should carry me through to a delivery date. I can afford that even if the Elio arrives before lease expires. I do hope to say "nana poo poo" to those I know who say Elio will never happen.

 

[Thomas Malkin]

I haven't visited the site in a while. Is Elio still staying with mid 2016, or has it been pushed back again?

Elio isn't pushing or pulliing. Production starts if and when the DOE finally grants them the loan they need to start production. That loan, expected last September, didn't arrive; instead the DOE came back with more requirements to even consider the loan.

The major new requirement was complete engineering testing of actual autocars, complete with crash tests. That led to the Startengine stock sale to raise the money they need to produce the testing prototypes the DOE demanded last summer-fall. So now we see them building the new prototypes as fast as they can to test to DOE's requirements. After THAT, the DOE has promised nothing.

And we have an election coming up, which may sink such alternative energy loans anyway. Many factors in play.

So, Elio can't choose an actual date, because they are not in control of the loan process. They can't even talk about the loan process, as the DOE has made it plain they don't want to be lobbied by us. So, they peg a guess. Then they have to change the guess when told to.
Outside angel investors aren't interested, but if they were, they'd take control and tank the company before Paul Elio could sneeze, and Elio knows that. In the end, we may have to boot the company up ourselves, by paying a larger deposit up front. It might be the only way.

 

[John Painter]

Elio isn't pushing or pulliing. Production starts if and when the DOE finally grants them the loan they need to start production. That loan, expected last September, didn't arrive; instead the DOE came back with more requirements to even consider the loan.

The major new requirement was complete engineering testing of actual autocars, complete with crash tests. That led to the Startengine stock sale to raise the money they need to produce the testing prototypes the DOE demanded last summer-fall. So now we see them building the new prototypes as fast as they can to test to DOE's requirements. After THAT, the DOE has promised nothing.

And we have an election coming up, which may sink such alternative energy loans anyway. Many factors in play.

So, Elio can't choose an actual date, because they are not in control of the loan process. They can't even talk about the loan process, as the DOE has made it plain they don't want to be lobbied by us. So, they peg a guess. Then they have to change the guess when told to.
Outside angel investors aren't interested, but if they were, they'd take control and tank the company before Paul Elio could sneeze, and Elio knows that. In the end, we may have to boot the company up ourselves, by paying a larger deposit up front. It might be the only way.

Some interesting assertions. I don't agree with most though.

Why do you think Elio Motors was supposed to get the ATVM loan last September, or for that matter why do you think DOE demanded prototypes? If anything EM seems concerned DOE is as interested, if not more, in their ability to raise funds as they commented in the SEC filing. I'm not sure what you consider an "angle investor" but Elio Motors has certainly attracted them if you look at their Board, though Stu Licher is probably the best known and biggest,

 

[Coss]

Elio isn't pushing or pulliing. Production starts if and when the DOE finally grants them the loan they need to start production. That loan, expected last September, didn't arrive; instead the DOE came back with more requirements to even consider the loan.

The major new requirement was complete engineering testing of actual autocars, complete with crash tests. That led to the Startengine stock sale to raise the money they need to produce the testing prototypes the DOE demanded last summer-fall. So now we see them building the new prototypes as fast as they can to test to DOE's requirements. After THAT, the DOE has promised nothing.

And we have an election coming up, which may sink such alternative energy loans anyway. Many factors in play.

So, Elio can't choose an actual date, because they are not in control of the loan process. They can't even talk about the loan process, as the DOE has made it plain they don't want to be lobbied by us. So, they peg a guess. Then they have to change the guess when told to.
Outside angel investors aren't interested, but if they were, they'd take control and tank the company before Paul Elio could sneeze, and Elio knows that. In the end, we may have to boot the company up ourselves, by paying a larger deposit up front. It might be the only way.

I'd like to know when paying up front became an option. I had never heard that one before; is there some type of inside information you came across?

 

[imageon]

MK

 

[floydv]

Anyone know how they arrived at 84 MPG.... I'm doing good to get upper 50s my 500cc motorcycle ?

There's a school of thought that 84 mpg reflects a couple things. First, 84 is three times the average mileage being achieved by typical 20-yr old beater cars that a lot of people still use, particularly lower income folks (remember this is supposed to be Elio's ultimate target market). This, in turn, forms the basis for EM's unique financing proposal: with an EM-issued credit card, each gasoline purchase would be charged triple, with a third going to pay for the gas and the other two-thirds toward paying down one's Elio purchase (the idea being that one can "buy" a new Elio and run it for about the same cost as simply buying the gas for an inefficient used car).

Second, EM's business model, at least what we know of it, relies in part on obtaining a low interest ATVM loan from the Dept. of Energy. The part of the ATVM loan program that applies to ultra efficient vehicles requires such vehicles to achieve a min. of 75 mpg. Because the early EM prototype was likely being designed to be a high mileage vehicle in that range, EM probably figured the 84 mpg goal was within reach with some lightweighting, aerodynamics tweaking, and a bespoke engine optimized for highway driving.

Of course, that was probably all fine on paper but the reality of achieving 84 mpg is likely proving to be challenging (the maxim that the last 20% of the target taking up 80% of the effort probably applies).

 

[Sethodine]

Keep in mind that the MPG rating system the DOE uses is vastly different from the EPA rating system. Elio's projected 84 MPG is based on the EPA system of measurement, which more closely compares to real-world use. Going by the DOE system, the Elio would get closer to 95 MPG(!)

 

[Thomas Malkin]

Some interesting assertions. I don't agree with most though.

Why do you think Elio Motors was supposed to get the ATVM loan last September, or for that matter why do you think DOE demanded prototypes? If anything EM seems concerned DOE is as interested, if not more, in their ability to raise funds as they commented in the SEC filing. I'm not sure what you consider an "angle investor" but Elio Motors has certainly attracted them if you look at their Board, though Stu Licher is probably the best known and biggest,

Fair enough. Here's why.

Why ATVM loan expected last September? Because the Elio team mentioned somewhere around the middle of last year that, although they didn't know exactly when, they were on track and hoping to hear an approval by around September. That much I recall clearly.

Last September, I noted, the StartEngine thing popped up, I noticed specifically to produce 25 prototypes. No mention of loan approval, oddly, but an eagle-eyed elioowners poster noted that in the SEC filing there was a mention that the ATVM people had made a requirement that they produce and test full production prototyes before the loan process could continue. Odd, that that happened when we were hoping for loan approval at any moment, and certainly the Elio people were saying that was the case. But instead, they needed immediate funding for prototypes they'd never said they needed before. Production was expected as a next step, not crash prototypes without production. So, conclusion, the DOE people had invented an unexpected step and tossed it at Elio rather than the loan approval.

The Elio team also said that the ATVM people politely requested that we not lobby them for approval, so the team passed that along as a request to us. It implied, and the news from the Elio team seems to reflect this, that the process was not open to the public and that talking openly about it was not productive for them. So, they can't talk about the banana peel the DOE tossed under them.

DOE concerned about ability to raise funds, couple of things. Paul Elio mentioned in one of the many interviews that he had spent a year talking to angel investors (2014-2015) and found that VC people were not interested in a startup with such a long payback period and such low returns. He said that they wanted major cash in months, not years. He said further that it had been, my phrase, a waste of a year, and he'd given up on the VC people.

Another point about investors, my own: Aptera. What happened there was that they brought in an outside manager - a former auto executive - who promptly fired the two founders and designers of the vehicle, and at the point they'd been ready to begin production stopped everything and redesigned the vehicle, wasting a at least a year and producing a bloated mess that popped a door during a public exhibition. There is more, but bottom line is don't let outsiders gain control of your company. Their goals aren't yours.

Paul Elio has stated (I've been told but not heard from his own interviews) that some of the investors that *are* interested want too much control. He's a former executive, and I trust him on that judgement and what it implies. Those he has already I assume he trusts.