• macniel@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    2 months ago

    And all it took was scapegoating a reviewer kid. (Don’t look at the stock prices before that, please)

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        “The company is Fisker’s second automotive startup. His previous startup, Fisker Automotive, filed for bankruptcy protection in 2013. Fisker launched his second automotive company in 2016.”

        Actual picture of investors of the second company: 🤡

      • Zron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        2 months ago

        Marques is actually very balanced even in his critical reviews.

        Even with the Humane AI pin, he did commend them on their physical build quality, even if the rest of the device was practically useless, he never outright said that, just points out the flaws.

        Although I do wonder sometimes how much he tries to hard to be balanced, as some products, especially cars due to the price, don’t deserve kind treatment for noticeable faults.

          • lud@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            2 months ago

            I guess. But as long as it’s actually true and he actually believes that, I see no real issue with it.

      • teejay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 months ago

        It wasn’t. Fisker’s shitty response is what made it an even bigger deal.

      • pastabatman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I agree, but to be fair the title was a little clickbaity and was seen by a whole lot of people who didn’t watch the video and just scrolled past it.

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It wasn’t really. It certainly didn’t make me want to go spend $70k for one, but I wouldn’t have entirely dismissed the brand as a whole for one of their first forays into both auto engineering and EV production. If I got one for free, I’d drive it. By the time I need a new car, it would have been worth looking into again.

    • Fridgeratr@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah… if the car wasn’t shit, the review would have been more positive. It’s not the reviewer’s fault the car sucks lol

      • ours@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        In this case yes but as an example Linus Tech Tips has put companies in trouble by botching their reviews: using the wrong GPU with a prototype cooler (despite being provided the GPU…) and not removing the protective film on a gaming mouse.

      • macniel@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ask the Fisker technician who called the guy who rented out the EV to Browlee.

  • Yaztromo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    2 months ago

    Likely well deserved — but still unfortunate. The EV space only benefits from more options and more competition.

    • RupeThereItIs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      2 months ago

      Competition is great, a company that can’t produce a quality product and ships a CAR with beta level software that can’t update OTA is NOT competition.

      The auto industry is highly unfavorable to startups, the competition you want will come from the old ICE OEMs.

    • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      My wife was thinking between the Rivian s3 and the Fisker as our next vehicle.

      This makes me sad to hear.

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Rivian has been doing layoffs at their BloNo plant recently. I’m not sure if it’s just like everyone else in the tech sector or if demand is down.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          2 months ago

          Demand is down because these vehicles are pushing $100k and interest rates on car loans are 7-8%. They did recently announce some new, cheaper models in the near future so it may turn around for them.

          • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            You’re right. One interesting option right now is the mustang Mach E, dealers are dropping prices and Ford is giving 0% for 72mo. I just bought a California route 1 for 46k at 0%, and I wasn’t planning on electrifying at current prices until that came up.

  • Swordgeek@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fisker said it hired a Chief Restructuring Officer in the hopes of staving off bankruptcy.

    Ah yes. No better way to reduce costs than hiring another C*O.

  • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    2 months ago

    and then abruptly cut its price so it could quickly get rid of existing inventory.

    Why would anybody buy a new car that has no future of warranty or parts availability?

    • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can buy like 2-3 for the price of one. If you didn’t need to worry about software issues it would be a good purchase.

      If you’re looking for a good chassis and powertrain with no need for anything g else it might make sense.

      • essteeyou@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Someone will wait for them to go bankrupt first. Poach any staff they need, and leave the rest to unemployment.

        • just_another_person@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Well, they’ll certainly get bought for pennies for sure. My guess is that someone will offer BEFORE the bankruptcy, because nobody wants the extra admin overhead and cost of dealing with a subsidiary in bankruptcy. That’s why the company is putting out PR in the first place. Kind of like a “Make an offer now before it gets worse” kind of thing to any interested parties.

          • essteeyou@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            If you let them go bankrupt first then you can buy cheaper, and don’t need to let go of a bunch of surplus employees. I think it’ll be about the bottom line. I guess it all depends on the price and any likely competition for the purchase.

              • essteeyou@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                If they’ve gone bankrupt and sold their office space and laid off their staff then it’s definitely not going to cost the same.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    Surprise surprise. The CEO of a company I used to work for migrated to Fisker a good 10 years ago. By migrated I mean he injected a shit CEO who then ran down the company into bankruptcy and sold the pieces. This seems appropriate somehow. I mean the guy was alright, it’s just that the other junk CEO fucked up the company. Sort of like Google do no evil meets “hey you’re running out of the 15gb so I’m deleting your shit next month” CEO.

    • teejay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      116
      ·
      2 months ago

      Friend, I’ve read this three times and still have no idea wtf you’re trying to say.

    • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sounds like the same page as injected C-levels pushing Precision-Scheduled-Railroading at railroads with a massive boost to share value via slashed labor pools. 2 years later when labor can’t support operations and the company gets rekt, the new C-levels eject with a shiny parachute and dumped stocks.

  • 0x0@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Why isn’t adapting ICEs into EVs a thing? Why more lithium-based ewaste with build-int obsolescence?

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      lithium-based ewaste

      That’s propaganda. Lithium ion batteries can be well recycled. First second life as static energy storage, then broken down into materials and which are then reused. Around 98% of the materials can be recycled.

      with build-int obsolescence

      Batteries can be replaced. Nio makes it super easy, other manufacturers require one day at a repair garage. Overall way fewer parts suffer from degradion from use in EVs than ICE cars.

      • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        2 months ago

        Disposable vapes put more lithium into landfills than EVs. Everyone throws their vape in the trash, nobody throws their EV battery module in the trash

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Overall way fewer parts suffer from degradion from use in EVs than ICE cars.

        That’s only because an EV has less moving parts. And yes, there is built-in obsolescence in any modern car, ICE or otherwise.

    • Auk@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Adaptions are a thing. However paying someone to do it costs a lot of money (even doing it yourself is not cheap) and it’s not much more - possibly even less - of a stretch to one’s budget to get a whole new car built from the ground up as an EV, so commercial conversions tend to be a niche market focused on more interesting vehicles (e.g. what this Melbourne based conversion company converts).

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do you mean converting an ICE into an EV in your garage? There are hobbyists who do that, but it’s not a small project.

      Do you mean taking an existing ICE frame and making an EV version? It happens. The Mini Cooper EV is a Cooper S with the guts from the BMW i3 dropped in. They changed as little as they could get away with. They even left the hood scoop on.

      It makes for an EV that’s just OK, but not great.

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Do you mean taking an existing ICE frame and making an EV version? It happens. The Mini Cooper EV is a Cooper S with the guts from the BMW i3 dropped in. They changed as little as they could get away with. They even left the hood scoop on.

        Meaning it can be done. I don’t think there are that many engineering challenges to overcome. If the main obstacle is money, perhaps stopping the subsidies to Big Oil would help?

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          The main obstacle is that they aren’t very good. They’re a transitional step. We’re already moving past the point where it makes sense. The next Mini EV models coming out will be purpose built designs.

        • GreyBeard@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          It can be done, but it makes a worse product. EVs are built to fit batteries and motors in the most optimal place. Likewise with ICE cars with engines and transmissions. What you end up doing is shoving batteries in the engine compartment which is shaped wrong and you significantly change the balance of the car. You leave much of the expensive parts of the ICE car, while adding more expensive parts. It just doesn’t work well in practice. If you are going to spend time engineering, it is better to engineer a proper EV than try to shoehorn an EV into a size 6.

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Adapting is very labor intensive, so very expensive. Somewhere between $20.000 and $65.000 depending on the car. They do that for old timers where somebody is willing to pay for it for the love of the car to keep it running when the engine is busted. But with that price tag, you can just as well buy a second hand or even a new EV.

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So yay landfills? So caring for the environment is only important when it’s cheap?

        • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          Dude. You asked a question. People have been trying to answer it as best they can.

          Don’t use that as an excuse to complain about something else without at least acknowledging their willingness to put the effort in.

          Either that, or don’t ask questions, just make a rant comment

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          caring for the environment is only important when it’s cheap?

          Lots of people even pay ridiculous amounts of money to look manly and strong in a big truck and pay even more to roll coal with it instead of spending money to make things more environmental friendly.

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      The power train is the most expensive and largest part of an EV. So stuffing it info a vehicle that isn’t meant for it is pretty tricky. It’s easier if you sacrifice the truck or back seat for batteries, but it’s still hard.

        • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          The electric motors can be pretty tiny. The batteries are generally the packaging problem. They’re heavy and lumping them all where the engine would have been in a vehicle will have severe impacts on weight balance and handling. Distributing them is best, but requires space that vehicles need to be designed around. You can put some batteries in the engine compartment and some in the trunk to keep things neutral, but that still requires giving up storage space and requires running a high voltage line throughout the vehicle to connect the battery banks.