raptor213
Elio Addict
Most of us understand that the monies received by refundable reservationists have been and are presently being held in escrow (PayPal?) so that Elio Motors cannot access those funds, rendering the total sum truly inaccessible by the Company and, in fact, liquid liabilities able to be released on-demand to requesting reservationists. But -- perhaps there would be additional legal protections in place to protect that large sum of money in the event Elio Motors faces bankruptcy, receivership, or similar undoing. That piece didn't strike me as that outlandish.
I recall reading original ArkLaTex local news stories months ago concerning the rescheduling of the hearing, and I was under the impression that the Louisiana Motor Vehicle Commission's interest in the matter was piqued last August when Elio Motors offered the brief option of binding commitments to lock-in a purchase price of $7,000 and obligate said reservationists to follow through with a final vehicle purchase if and when that opportunity presented itself. Has a final sales contract been signed? Have all applicable standard features and optional upgrades been selected and chosen? Is there a verifiable bill of sale concerning a sales transaction? No. No. No. But unlike the broad and vague stance of selling spots in line that can be walked away from without penalty or recourse, these binding commitments themselves represented a written commitment to purchase a final production vehicle.
So now the rising tally of what capital is required to start includes $300.5 million estimated, plus approx $76 million in Supplier commitments to the project. Thank you for a half-million dollar fine, State of Louisiana.
Let's assume, as an optimist and a realist, that Elio Motors does eventually bring Shreveport-assembled production vehicles to market, but it's not until early 2019. It's only mid-2017 -- why impose a 60-day deadline for securing the licenses? What is gained by that?
And how does Elio Motors move forward while complying with the State laws concerning direct consumer sales by manufacturers versus utilizing a for-profit franchised dealer network arrangement? Could they remain within the confines of the law while perhaps identifying ADESA partner locations as dealers? Or would they be forced to open a minimum number of traditional dealerships (Joe Schmo Elio), rendering the already weak-positioned business plan even more crippled (think ATVM loan, CAFE credits, PepBoys as authorized service centers, etc)?
Plus, this fight wouldn't stop with Louisiana; other States have similar laws on the books, many of which have been recently enacted as anti-Tesla Motors initiatives spearheaded by dealer associations and lobbying groups around the country.
Joel Sheltrown in those short video clips sure appeared exhausted and defeated in the boardroom (see: http://www.ksla.com/story/35843911/...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer). I sincerely hope positive news arrives no later than July 31st ...
I recall reading original ArkLaTex local news stories months ago concerning the rescheduling of the hearing, and I was under the impression that the Louisiana Motor Vehicle Commission's interest in the matter was piqued last August when Elio Motors offered the brief option of binding commitments to lock-in a purchase price of $7,000 and obligate said reservationists to follow through with a final vehicle purchase if and when that opportunity presented itself. Has a final sales contract been signed? Have all applicable standard features and optional upgrades been selected and chosen? Is there a verifiable bill of sale concerning a sales transaction? No. No. No. But unlike the broad and vague stance of selling spots in line that can be walked away from without penalty or recourse, these binding commitments themselves represented a written commitment to purchase a final production vehicle.
So now the rising tally of what capital is required to start includes $300.5 million estimated, plus approx $76 million in Supplier commitments to the project. Thank you for a half-million dollar fine, State of Louisiana.
Let's assume, as an optimist and a realist, that Elio Motors does eventually bring Shreveport-assembled production vehicles to market, but it's not until early 2019. It's only mid-2017 -- why impose a 60-day deadline for securing the licenses? What is gained by that?
And how does Elio Motors move forward while complying with the State laws concerning direct consumer sales by manufacturers versus utilizing a for-profit franchised dealer network arrangement? Could they remain within the confines of the law while perhaps identifying ADESA partner locations as dealers? Or would they be forced to open a minimum number of traditional dealerships (Joe Schmo Elio), rendering the already weak-positioned business plan even more crippled (think ATVM loan, CAFE credits, PepBoys as authorized service centers, etc)?
Plus, this fight wouldn't stop with Louisiana; other States have similar laws on the books, many of which have been recently enacted as anti-Tesla Motors initiatives spearheaded by dealer associations and lobbying groups around the country.
Joel Sheltrown in those short video clips sure appeared exhausted and defeated in the boardroom (see: http://www.ksla.com/story/35843911/...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer). I sincerely hope positive news arrives no later than July 31st ...
