I only care that Elio meets the minimum 75 mpg required to qualify for the ATVM loan program.......anything higher is simply bonus mpgs. I'm thinking VW will bring a more affordable $68,000 base model XL1 to market if the Elio is wildly successful.What do you suggest Elio say? e.g. "Neither we, AIV or Altair Engineering, Cooper Tire understand automotive engineering, fluid dynamics and math well enough to design a vehicle that performs in a certain way.... so our vehicles fuel economy will be better than a '73 Pinto but worse than VW's XL1"?
Do you happen to have the drag coefficient, new engine burn rate, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseam? Stuff that is actually used to develop, then test vehicles? I know I don't. So I'll just exercise reason like I believe you are.
I see no reason the Elio could not easily get in the 84+mpg ball park, slice a Honda Insight in half lengthwise and you pretty much have an Elio.
-
Welcome to Elio Owners! Join today, registration is easy!
You can register using your Google, Facebook, or Twitter account, just click here.
Reading the ATVM document was interesting indeed. It's obvious that Elio qualifies for everything except maybe one. And that one is a booger.
What is says, or can be interpreted as "You can only have the loan, if you don't really need it!" Huh?. I think the actual intent of the rule is to not loan to a business that isn't viable on it's own. But it does also invoke that paradox. This could be what killed Aptera, and Aptera did in fact say that a new requirement killed them off. It was a catch 22, Aptera wasn't viable with out the loan. So they didn't get it, and so they failed.
Now for Elio, the question is, can they conduct on going business with out the loan? The ATVM doesn't give a hoot about the P5 or the crash testing, they only have a financial definition. Now on the other hand, other investors that could give Elio a minimal ongoing viablity, they DO care about the P5 and the crash testing.
Then all EM has to do is prove they have a business plan however minimal, which must, by definition "pays all future bills". Even if the plan is adjusted after the loan guarentee is fullfilled. EM doesn't even have to make much profit, they just have to prove they can pay all bills with no dead-ends in sight, including thier loans.
Anyway,like I said, very interesting. And yes, still confusing about meeting such demands.
6hours ago, there was 708k left to go, now it's 652,400. We still are making headway at about 5-10k an hour, while slow, it's still on-going. So maybe at most 130hours left to go? Or about 6days.
What is says, or can be interpreted as "You can only have the loan, if you don't really need it!" Huh?. I think the actual intent of the rule is to not loan to a business that isn't viable on it's own. But it does also invoke that paradox. This could be what killed Aptera, and Aptera did in fact say that a new requirement killed them off. It was a catch 22, Aptera wasn't viable with out the loan. So they didn't get it, and so they failed.
Now for Elio, the question is, can they conduct on going business with out the loan? The ATVM doesn't give a hoot about the P5 or the crash testing, they only have a financial definition. Now on the other hand, other investors that could give Elio a minimal ongoing viablity, they DO care about the P5 and the crash testing.
Then all EM has to do is prove they have a business plan however minimal, which must, by definition "pays all future bills". Even if the plan is adjusted after the loan guarentee is fullfilled. EM doesn't even have to make much profit, they just have to prove they can pay all bills with no dead-ends in sight, including thier loans.
Anyway,like I said, very interesting. And yes, still confusing about meeting such demands.
6hours ago, there was 708k left to go, now it's 652,400. We still are making headway at about 5-10k an hour, while slow, it's still on-going. So maybe at most 130hours left to go? Or about 6days.
Last edited:
Ekh
Elio Addict
The position might be stated this way: Elio has a definite plan how to make the business successful, but they need to get the doors open first. They have raised, assuming $20 out of $25 million from the SE campaign are legit, $90 million, plus an undisclosed amount from 506 Qualified investors. They have $290 million of pre-orders, and $18 million in reservations received. If they get the loan, they're in business. Without it, maybe not. But DOE has to take those numbers seriously. They were burned on Solera and Fisker. That's why they're gun-shy, and the paradoxical rule you point out is in there.
On the plus side, Elio was invited to apply -- they didn't go storming the gates. DOE told them they needed audited financials, and Elio complied, and the application was deemed complete and correct. So now, who knows what murky decision making process is going forward (or just spinning in circles, most likely).
DOE would rather stay in business paying everybody's salary than have the loan div. go out of business from another bad bet. Bureaucracies act first to protect themselves, second to serve the squeakiest wheels, and maybe eventually to get other work done. (This I do know about from years of dealing with gov't as a consultant). So I think they're waiting to see how the wind blows, and only then coming to a decision. That is why I think ongoing pressure is helpful. Especially from top-level politicians. And I don't think you can assume ANYTHING about the LA politicos wading in on Elio's behalf. They respond to pressure or grease, like all their breed.
Ekh
Elio Addict
Cute! Is that candy or plastic?
outsydthebox
Elio Addict
- Joined
- May 6, 2014
- Messages
- 1,747
- Reaction score
- 5,007
That one booger SHOULD be a stipulation to guarantee the most important requirement that the applicant has the ability and resources to repay the loan. EM has not shown the DOE that they have adequate resources to build the P5-30, let alone a tooled up manufacturing facility, and ready to work EM employees. Also, it's not a good sign for the DOE to see EM working under the pressure of the current Caddo Parrish contract extension that expires mid 2016.
It's not prudent for the DOE to hand over millions of low interest loan money without a production guarantee, that the P5 actually meets all the other DOE requirements, and EM has resources to repay the loan. Apparently the DOE was burned a couple times and learned a lesson. Obviously, we gambled our personal reservation deposits, many are willing to gamble even more with the crowdfunding investment interest, but do we seriously want the government gambling taxpayer funds? I don't. EM simply needs to meet the requirements. Apparently, EM not only needs to show the DOE the P5, but also needs to show the DOE some additional serious on the bank statement funding. Paul Elio may have to give up a little control by accepting some additional big private venture capital to make his/our dream a reality.
Last edited:
LillyMayPatterson #1685 & #5648
Elio Addict
Hey Guys, I asked my friend Rose to sign up for some interest shares last week. After seeing the email from elio I called her to check if it was done. She explained she had trouble. So, while talking on the phone, my friend tried to reserve shares and couldn't get pass the 'Are you a computer' test. It keeps sending her back to the the test. I send them a message from here. But, my friend has given up and went to feed her cows.