Canoo electric truck

[HaulingAss]

Your own citation made your statement false.

-Crissa

I'm not following your logic. The article basically says Canoo had grand plans that allowed them to raise $630 million from investors recently. Now that they raised the money they are saying they are not going to do all those things they said.

Sponsored

 

[Crissa]

I'm not following your logic.

I'm not following yours.

There is a vehicle.

Several, actually. It is modular.


They'd planned on selling this to other companies. That plan fell through.

They planned to raise more capital. That hasn't gone to plan.

Of course they're going to have to change plans. That doesn't make it a scam. Companies don't always work out.

Saying something is a scam, means that you can prove that they are violating the law. There's no evidence for that in your article. (And no, SEC investigations are not evidence of violations of law. They're allegations, not evidence.)

-Crissa

 

[rr6013]

I'm not following yours.

There is a vehicle.

Several, actually. It is modular.


They'd planned on selling this to other companies. That plan fell through.

They planned to raise more capital. That hasn't gone to plan.

Of course they're going to have to change plans. That doesn't make it a scam. Companies don't always work out.

Saying something is a scam, means that you can prove that they are violating the law. There's no evidence for that in your article. (And no, SEC investigations are not evidence of violations of law. They're allegations, not evidence.)

-Crissa

You’re right @Crissa it‘s not an upfront fraud-type scam.

The immediate turn of events after the $630M IPO resembles more of a pump and dump scheme. The unbelievable circumstances of dumping Canoo business case when it possessed design, prototypes, business plans and market strategy liquidates the $630M to cover the startup costs. Investors are holding paper.

Intentions notwithstanding, why is Canoo bowing out of its primary business case without lofting a single trial? Pilot? This is what looks like a waddle. Calling it a duck is just what a scam looks like.

 

[HaulingAss]

I'm not following yours.

There is a vehicle.

Several, actually. It is modular.


They'd planned on selling this to other companies. That plan fell through.

They planned to raise more capital. That hasn't gone to plan.

Of course they're going to have to change plans. That doesn't make it a scam. Companies don't always work out.

Saying something is a scam, means that you can prove that they are violating the law. There's no evidence for that in your article. (And no, SEC investigations are not evidence of violations of law. They're allegations, not evidence.)

-Crissa

I already called it a scam that I couldn't prove because they are going through all the motions of a legitimate company. When someone cqlls something a "scam" without offering proof, I think the proper way to interpret that is that person thinks it's a scam. Eventually, future events may strengthen or weaken that analysis but we may never know with certainty. What defines the difference between a scam and a real effort is that the scam is all about appearances and the real company is all about making the company financially viable and sustainable. I see more of the former than the latter. I hope I'm wrong but the odds are not looking good to my experienced eye.

When Tesla went public in 2012, I paid close attention and had them firmly pegged in the "real" category. Even then I couldn't invest at that point in time because my analysis was that there were many ways to fail and only a narrow path to success. I decided to watch them closely and not invest until and unless I thought the risk/reward was favorable. That didn't happen for me until until 2018/early 2019. But my analysis of Canoo is different. I don't think even the principles see a path to success unless that is narrowlly defined as their personal financial success.

I thought it was rather odd the way co-founder Richard Kim answered one of Jay Leno's questions. Jay was gesturing with his hands about the shape of the vehicle and flat shape the front of the vehicle presents to the airflow and asking about whether that shape was aerodynamically efficient. Kim responded, "For it's shape, the aerodynamics performs quite well".

Huh? I've got news for founder Kim. I don't work for a car company, nor did I start one, but I can tell you on no uncertain terms, that every vehicle, "for it's shape", performs neither well or poor but exactly as that particular shape performs. In other words, the exact shape defines the aerodynamic performance. Period. It doesn't matter how much the vehicle weighs, or what color it is, the exact shape defines the aerodynamic performance. It's non-sensical to say that "for it's shape, it performs quite well." But none of this is new, the VW transporter had a lower Cd than many people assumed. And yet, somewhere around normal freeway speeds, a large, low-pressure bubble would form behind the vehicle which meant the power requirements to maintain that speed were rather high, just as one might expect. Which is why I imagine Canoo principles present it as a city car, not an adventure vehicle.

The Jay Leno video did make clear that we don't have long to wait to see whether their plans are realistic or merely thrown out there just for fund-raising purposes. Because the Canoo should be available sometime this year, right?

Sponsored