Moia in Hamburg: Cheaper than taxis, faster than the subway – This is how the new mobility service from VW works

Mobility service Moia The buses of the VW mobility service provider Moia to drive purely electrically through Hamburg. (Photo: AP) Hamburg also lay workers arm-thick power cables on the site around the spacious former factory building, in the several golden yellow painted, battery-powered minibuses park. But in a month, exactly on 15 April, should from… Continue reading Moia in Hamburg: Cheaper than taxis, faster than the subway – This is how the new mobility service from VW works

BMW and Daimler seek 7 billion euros savings from shared platforms: reports

FRANKFURT (Reuters) – BMW and Daimler are in talks to cooperate in developing vehicle platforms for electric cars in a step that could save each carmaker at least 7 billion euros ($7.91 billion), Sueddeutsche Zeitung and Auto Bild said on Thursday. A BMW logo is displayed at the 89th Geneva International Motor Show in Geneva,… Continue reading BMW and Daimler seek 7 billion euros savings from shared platforms: reports

Mazda range-extended electric car may help the rotary live on

Follow Bengt

Mazda RX-Vision Fast and Furious livery
The Wankel rotary, the peculiar pistonless internal combustion engine design that Mazda built so much of its heritage around, may see a resurgence after all.

Earlier reports and remarks from Mazda executives have suggested that while the rotary will make a comeback, it will be relegated to what’s essentially an emergency generator—a range extender for a plug-in electric vehicle that’s expected for the U.S., among other markets. But a report from last week puts the rotary potentially on a higher stage in some versions or vehicles.

DON'T MISS: Mazda announces electric lineup, rotary range extender

Ichiro Hirose, Mazda’s managing executive officer for powertrain development, recently told Australia’s Drive that the project is no longer a single powertrain layout for one vehicle but a flexible platform that could be used to configure various levels of electrification around the globe for the smaller automaker, which has limited development resources compared to other big global automakers.

“What we intend to do is that with this combination you can vary the amount of battery and also the amount of fuel tank supply,” Hirose told Drive. “What that allows us to do is, depending on the ratio between the two, is that we can have a derivative that can work more like a plug-in hybrid.”

CHECK OUT: Will EV Range Extenders Give Rise to a Rotary Renaissance?

The executive said that Mazda has made a breakthrough with its rotary engine that may allow it to be used as more than just a range extender in the future. That includes new ways to curb the emissions involved in this challenging engine design’s startup conditions, and there’s a hint that the strategy could involve spinning the rotary up ahead of time, perhaps only operating it in a certain rev range.

Rotary engine

Hirose used the term XEV to refer to some combination of the rotary range extender and electric drive system. With flexibility built into the platform, some versions could have only a series-hybrid setup, perhaps with the rotary used solely as the range extender, somewhat like the BMW i3 REx. Others, he hinted, could be more like the system used in Toyota hybrids, mixing in parallel-hybrid operation and making the motor supplemental to the internal-combustion engine at higher speeds.

READ MORE: Mazda rotary engine may find new life in self-driving Toyota e-Palette project

In either case, the U.S. is almost certain to get a vehicle that places perhaps more emphasis on its charging port than its fuel tank. Masashi Otsuka, Mazda’s North American VP of R&D and design, confirmed to Green Car Reports recently that a significant amount of research and development work has been done in the U.S. on what he termed a range-extended drive system with the rotary.

Otsuka said that we’re likely to see the technology in a prototype vehicle, positioned for the U.S., before the end of the year. So we may not have to wait long before we can hear a new rotary run again—if only once in a while.

Love It Or Hate It, Tesla Online Sales Strategy Creates Plenty Of Controversy

InvestElectric CarsElectric Car BenefitsElectric Car SalesSolar Energy RocksRSSAdvertisePrivacy Policy
Cars Published on March 7th, 2019 | by Steve Hanley
Love It Or Hate It, Tesla Online Sales Strategy Creates Plenty Of ControversyTwitterLinkedInFacebookMarch 7th, 2019 by Steve Hanley

Tesla’s sudden announcement last week that it is closing most of its stores and transitioning to a 100% online sales model has created a firestorm of criticism and pushed the company’s stock price to a 5 month low. In the media, Forbes and Fortune have run stories this week decrying the move as wrongheaded and possibly dangerous to the company’s very existence.
The UpsideOne investment professional who is not concerned about Tesla’s new online sales strategy is ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood. According to Fortune, she told Bloomberg on March 4 that, even though the decision to close stores and go fully online was “abrupt,” she wasn’t as surprised as other investors. “We got the sense something was up because he is still competing against other auto manufacturers who have their costs screwed down, but at some point, his pricing is going to drop below theirs.” At 9%, Tesla represents the largest investment in the ARK Invest portfolio.
Wood tells CNBC she believes Tesla stock will soar to stunning new heights in the years ahead. The least favorable scenario will see the stock rise 146%. But the most favorable scenario sees it powering up a stunning 1,306% to more than $4,000 per share. “This is a five-year time horizon. Four thousand dollars is the bull case, $700 is the bear case. It’s rare for us to a have a stock that meets our minimum hurdle rate of return in the bear case, so it’s north of 15 percent compound annual rate of return to get to our bear case target.”
Wood added that Tesla is “scaling the electric vehicle market. We think the electric vehicle sales in 2023 will be in total globally 26 million units, up from 1.3 million last year, so that’s a 20-fold increase. We’re talking about exponential growth.”
What Wood is relying on is not Tesla selling bunches of cars but rather Tesla emerging as a significant force in autonomous driving and ride hailing. “The big story [for Tesla] is autonomous taxi platforms. We’re moving from a hardware-centric, low gross margin model which is 25, 30 percent to a transportation-as-a-service model. They’ll get a piece of every ride taken because they’ll own the platform that these fleet operators will be riding on, and that’s more of an 80 percent gross margin business,” she said.
Through the first two months of 2019, ARK Invest’s valuation is up 25% even after taking into account the recent slide in Tesla’s share price.

The DownsideOn the other side of the ledger, several recent articles in Forbes and Fortune question the wisdom of Tesla’s 100% online sales model. Let’s start with Jeremy Alicandri, writing for Forbes. He claims buyers are simply not ready or willing to give up the traditional car-buying experience. They want to be able to sit in the car they are about to purchase and take it for a test drive. Then there is the issue of correctly evaluating trade-ins, which he claims has to be done in person. Add to that the myriad of financing options and Alicandri says the online model just won’t work for many people. (Elon Musk has noted on Twitter some of this stuff will be done via delivery centers.)
Alicandri thinks Elon Musk’s assurances that people can simply return their new car for a full refund is naive. “As someone who oversaw an extended test drive program with the BMW 7 Series only a few years back, I can attest that these programs often cost more than they achieve, while also attracting chronic abuse from non-buyers,” Alicandri writes. “While Tesla will likely initiate safeguards to prevent abuse, such as requiring full payment upfront, it remains unclear how Model 3 customers can ‘test drive’ vehicles without undergoing major inconveniences if they wish to return them.
“Being responsible for sales tax (which is likely not refundable by state law) as well as the vehicle depreciation (as the vehicle is considered used once registered) are just two issues. It’s also uncertain how these customers will be able to purchase a different vehicle as their credit will be weakened before/during the refund process and likely weeks after.”
Alicandri also says that, while eliminating stores will save money in one area, it will increase costs in others. “There are obvious expenses, like extra call centers, shipping and logistics costs, and IT infrastructure. But there are also less obvious costs, like those related to providing support for vehicles damaged or having mechanical malfunctions at delivery, as well as educating new owners on their vehicles. Advertising and marketing efforts may need to be enhanced to counter the lack of physical presence.”
The Legal IssuesDuring his conference call with journalists last week, Elon Musk rather blithely swatted away any concern that franchise dealer groups and individual states could thwart the new online sales model. “I’m sure the franchise dealers will try to oppose us in some way, but to do so would be a fundamental restraint on interstate commerce and violate the Constitution. So, good luck with that,” he said.
Leonard Bellavia, an attorney and franchise law expert, disagrees with Musk’s legal opinion. He tells Forbes, “The statement by Musk that state dealer franchise laws prohibiting factory direct sales are unconstitutional is an overly simplistic and rather bald-faced generalization.” Expanding its service network is also fraught with legal issues, says Bellavia. “An online sale only model would require both a sales and service facility to satisfy state licensing authorities, which defeats the purpose of online sales.”
There are other legal concerns, including how so-called lemon laws, which vary from state to state, will apply to online sales. In some parts of the country, digital signatures are not enough to satisfy local laws, which often require a “wet signature” on all vehicle delivery paperwork. The devil is in the details and Musk’s rather casual insistence that the commerce clause will sweep aside all opposition to online sales seems rather simplistic. If nothing else, years of litigation will ensue before Elon gets his wish.
The Sudden Change In CourseForbes is focusing this week on the abruptness of the announcement and suggests Elon may not have thought the new strategy through. It reports on one stock analyst, Alex Chalekian, who heads Lake Avenue Financial in Pasadena, California. It manages more than $150 million in client assets but sold all its shares in Tesla for its advisory clients last Friday.
“This was a total 180-degree turn,” Chalekian says. “Tesla had been talking about expanding stores, and all of a sudden they are closing them. To me, this signals a huge financial concern and a possible cash-flow issue for Tesla.” In the fourth quarter of 2018, Tesla opened 27 new retail and service centers, the most in any quarter since the middle of 2017.
In its most recent 10-K filing with the SEC just a few weeks ago, it touted its brick and mortar strategy. “Our Tesla stores and galleries are highly visible, premium outlets in major metropolitan markets, some of which combine retail sales and service. Opening a service center in a new geographic area can increase demand. As a result, we have complemented our store strategy with sales facilities and personnel in service centers to more rapidly expand our retail footprint.”
Is Tesla Being Managed By Adults?For Alex Chelakian, the suddenness of Tesla’s reversal hints at a company that operates on the whims of its leader, rather than on sound business practices. Such erratic and — to an outsider — irrational changes in course are red flashing lights warning of danger ahead for investors. There has been dark muttering this week that it’s time for Elon Musk to step into a new role, one in which he continues to be chief engineer for the company while a professional management team takes over supervision of the company.
Musk’s treatment of employees is another concern. Despite impassioned emails extolling them for their hard work and dedication, Musk seems ready at a moment’s notice to toss them overboard when it suits his convenience. At the start of the year, he announced that 7% of Tesla’s workforce would be let go right after the company achieved its production goals for the Model 3. This latest announcement came via a private conference call with journalist (disclosure: CleanTechnica reporters were on the call) and it blindsided many of those working in the stores that will now be closed.
The message to employees is that you are all expendable on short notice, so keep your resume up to date and don’t make any life decisions based on the assumption you will have a job with Tesla tomorrow. If online sales are the wave of the future, job security is clearly a thing of the past.
Elon always has been and remains an enigma. To some, he is a real life Tony Stark. To others, he is given to wild mood swings that may or may not be associated with the use of Ambien, a drug that helps people deal with insomnia but has worrisome side effects, including impairment of judgement. People who use it are advised not to operate heavy machinery.
Musk is a polarizing person. His single-minded determination has already upended the global auto industry and is rapidly bringing sweeping changes to the energy storage market. On the other hand, his insistence on buying SolarCity is seen by many as a straight up bailout for his cousins. The heavily touted Solar Roof is missing in action and Gigafactory 2 in Buffalo, New York, is hardly ever mentioned in Tesla’s corporate communications. Closing Tesla’s stores will likely deal another blow to an already underperforming aspect of the company.
The Volvo ConnectionCredit: Polestar
Is Tesla in trouble or poised for another spurt of growth? The Model Y is set..

Tesla’s Kirkhorn takes over as CFO. Corporate Controller Taneja promoted to Chief Accounting Officer

Chief Financial Officer Zach Kirkhorn

Tesla made two senior appointments Wednesday, officially giving Zach Kirkhorn the job as CFO and promoting its Corporate Controller Vaibhav Taneja to Chief Accounting Officer.

Both moves, announced in a securities filing Thursday, solidify top leadership at a company that has seen a remarkable amount of turnover in its ranks.

Kirkhorn's promotion was announced in January when Deepak Ahuja, a long time Tesla executive, said he planned to retire. Ahuja had left the company in 2015 but in rejoined in 2017 to replace then-CFO Jason Wheeler.

Kirkhorn's pay package includes a stock option grant of $12 million and a restricted stock unit grant of $4 million, which will be granted and will vest over four years.

Taneja fills the gap created when former CAO Dave Morton left in September after just one month on the job. Morton had joined the company to replace Eric Branderiz, who left the company for “personal reasons” in March 2018. Ahuja and Taneja have shared Tesla's top accounting responsibilities since Branderiz's departure.

Taneja joined Tesla in 2017 following its acquisition of solar power company SolarCity, where he was Corporate Controller. Prior to that, Taneja worked at PricewaterhouseCoopers in India and the U.S. from July 1999 to March 2016, finishing his tenure there as a a Senior Manager in its Assurance practice.

Taneja will receive a stock option grant of $6 million and a restricted stock unit grant of $2 million, which will also vest over four years.

Audi seeks closer ties to Porsche in cost-cutting drive

INGOLSTADT (Reuters) – Audi will make greater use of vehicle platforms and technologies developed with Porsche and Volkswagen as it embarks on a 15 billion euro cost cutting and efficiency drive, Chief Executive Bram Schot said on Thursday. An Audi 55 e-tron is seen ahead of the company’s annual news conference at its headquarters in… Continue reading Audi seeks closer ties to Porsche in cost-cutting drive

Tesla Model Y: Elon Musk’s fifth electric car is a compact SUV

Here’s everything you need to know about the Tesla Model Y: a compact SUV, or crossover, that will serve as a companion vehicle to the Model 3. The car was first unveiled in 2019 and will begin production in late 2020. The Model Y shares about 75 percent of its parts with the Model 3,… Continue reading Tesla Model Y: Elon Musk’s fifth electric car is a compact SUV

China customs lifts suspension on Tesla Model 3 imports

FILE PHOTO: A Tesla Model 3 car leaves a cargo vessel at a port in Shanghai, China February 22, 2019. REUTERS/Stringer BEIJING (Reuters) – China’s customs authority has lifted its suspension on imports of Tesla’s Model 3, an official in the authority’s news department told Reuters on Thursday. “We can confirm that the warning notice… Continue reading China customs lifts suspension on Tesla Model 3 imports

Audi sees margin target hit by electric car investments

An Audi logo is displayed at the 89th Geneva International Motor Show in Geneva, Switzerland March 5, 2019. REUTERS/Pierre Albouy INGOLSTADT (Reuters) – Audi the premium brand owned by Volkswagen said it expects to deliver an operating return on sales between 7 percent and 8.5 percent, below its long-term target, as costs for developing electric… Continue reading Audi sees margin target hit by electric car investments

Elon Musk To SEC — That Is Not What We Agreed To

InvestElectric CarsElectric Car BenefitsElectric Car SalesSolar Energy RocksRSSAdvertisePrivacy Policy
Clean Power Published on March 12th, 2019 | by Maarten Vinkhuyzen
Elon Musk To SEC — That Is Not What We Agreed ToTwitterLinkedInFacebookMarch 12th, 2019 by Maarten Vinkhuyzen

The SEC is trying to get the court to hold Elon Musk in contempt. The SEC maintains that Musk violated the plea bargain they made after the infamous “funding secured” tweet, a plea bargain that was accepted by the court as its final judgement and thus has the power of a court order for Elon Musk and Tesla.
That is a lot of legalese in the first paragraph of an article. For us simple-minded non-lawyers, the important starting point is: there is a court order that Musk and Tesla have to obey.
The SEC says Musk did not. Musk (and his lawyers) say he did. In other words, we have a simple case of “he said, she said.” But when lawyers are concerned, it is never simple. Look at the 33 pages the lawyers needed in order to say: “Musk complied.”
In the court order, there were a number of provisions about independent directors, chairmanship, fines, oversight, and communications. This complaint from the SEC is about the communications and oversight provisions. Simply stated, these provisions say that: Tesla needs to have a policy and procedures about communicating material information and Musk has to comply with these.
Tesla did create policies and procedures, which is not disputed. According to Tesla and Musk, Musk complied with them. Normally, this would be “case closed.” The SEC, in its unlimited wisdom, however, thinks Musk did not comply with the policy and procedures.
Let’s rewind: What happened? On February 19, 2019, at 7:15pm, Elon Musk tweeted something immaterial (immaterial = it does not really matter). The fact that it was immaterial is not disputed by the SEC‼ Please, don’t discuss it in the comments.
The tweet was corrected, or clarified, 4 hours later. For some reason, someone at the SEC thought this could point to Musk not complying with the court order. The SEC asked Tesla what happened, Tesla answered, yet the SEC had a lot more questions (on a Sunday) and did not wait for the answers (the next Monday), instead filing a complaint that Musk violated the court order and should be held in contempt.

What is important is that the court order and the Tesla policy are about material information. For information to be material, there must be “a substantial likelihood that the disclosure … would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the total mix of information made available.”
Again, the SEC is not disputing the fact that the tweet was immaterial. It is basing its complaint on not seeking and receiving prior clearance for the tweet. But for immaterial tweets and communications, prior clearance is not needed. (Getting dizzy yet?)
Ah, says the SEC, but to determine that it is indeed immaterial, you need prior clearance. This sounds logical, until you start thinking. This is about all written communication. In effect, Musk needs prior clearance for any written communication, even internally. Musk can’t write anything about Tesla without prior clearance. And if he wants to repeat himself after more than two days, he again needs clearance. That is the consequence of the SEC interpretation.
After a lot of legal arguments, Musk’s lawyers state: “Musk never consented to and would not consent to such a sweeping gag order, and Tesla has not implemented any such policy.”
This is essential. The court order is based on an agreement between two parties, the SEC and Tesla/Musk. You can’t alter in a one-sided way such an agreement, as the SEC is trying to do here. And even if this had been in the order, it would not have been valid, because it violates the US Constitution.

That leaves the question, what was the SEC thinking when it rushed to file the complaint. It did not even wait for the answers to its own questions. It is very hard to prove there is “clear and convincing evidence that an unambiguous court order was violated,” especially when the people who wrote the Tesla “Senior Executives Communications Policy” and were charged with enforcing it say that the tweets were not in violation of the policy.
In a normal court proceeding, this would be the end of it. But in proceedings where the SEC is a party, courts operate differently. The defending party is no longer presumed innocent until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather, some believe the policy has become, in cases of the slightest doubt, the SEC is right.
If the result of this court case is that there is a significant difference of opinion, there is a huge problem. The basis of every argument is that “the clear and unambiguous terms of the Court’s Order” are indeed clear and unambiguous. In the Tesla rebuttal of the SEC arguments, the SEC is accused of altering the meaning of the settlement.
If the judge sides with the SEC and declares the SEC interpretation correct, the “Musk never consented to” argument throws the whole plea deal back to court. I can’t wait for the verdict.

About the AuthorMaarten Vinkhuyzen Grumpy old man. The best thing I did with my life was raising two kids. Only finished primary education, but when you don’t go to school, you have lots of time to read. I switched from accounting to software development and ended my career as system integrator and architect. My 2007 boss got two electric Lotus Elise cars to show policymakers the future direction of energy and transportation. And I have been looking to replace my diesel cars with electric vehicles ever since.

Back to Top ↑AdvertisementAdvertise with CleanTechnica to get your company in front of millions of monthly readers.
CleanTechnica Clothing & Cups Top News On CleanTechnica Join CleanTechnica Today!
AdvertisementAdvertisementFollow CleanTechnicaFollow @cleantechnica
Our Electric Car Driver Report Read & share our new report on “electric car drivers, what they desire, and what the demand.”The EV Safety Advantage

Read & share our free report on EV safety, “The EV Safety Advantage.”EV Charging Guidelines for Cities

Share our free report on EV charging guidelines for cities, “Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure: Guidelines For Cities.”30 Electric Car Benefits Our Electric Vehicle Reviews
Tesla News
Cleantech Press Releases Carbon Clean 200: The Companies Leading us to a Clean Energy Future Let Them Speak! Why The Solutions Project Is Funding Renewable Energy Innovation Led By Women & People Of Color | #CleanTechnica Exclusive New Research Shows That Only Two Large Petroleum Companies Have Meaningful Emission Reduction Targets38 Anti-Cleantech Myths Wind & Solar Prices Beat Fossils Cost of Solar Panels Collapses
© 2018 Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc.
InvestElectric CarsElectric Car BenefitsElectric Car SalesSolar Energy RocksRSSAdvertisePrivacy Policy

This site uses cookies: Find out more.Okay, thanks