The 2e newsletter didn’t stop at claims about the resin: they also discussed how the vehicle was put together. They noted that the design of the vehicle as primarily two shell components, one top and one bottom, posed various quality and warranty problems. What they didn’t mention, and what my sources inform me, is that Chris Anthony, former head of Aptera’s composites operations, had already begun this transition before Paul’s team came onboard. The two-part shell was only done for prototyping, not production, as it was easier to produce. All of my sources who read the newsletter and commented on the issue were in agreement that this was Paul’s team taking credit for Chris’s ideas.
What happened to Chris? Shortly after the arrival of Paul’s team, Chris left the composite shop, which he had run since the company’s inception and which, under his leadership, had rapidly churned out Aptera prototypes on much lower budget and with significantly fewer staff. Sources are unclear over whether he was forced out of the position or left voluntarily.
One swirling controversy that the newsletter failed to mention was that of Laura Marion — Aptera’s CFO who was, in 2006, accused by the SEC of cooking the books at Delphi. Indeed, a source inside Aptera states that Paul was furious about who “leaked” information about Laura to the public — despite the availability of this information in public documents.
According to sources, shortly after this information became public, Paul organized a “pep talk” to boost sagging employee morale. He told employees that the Aptera Forum had been infiltrated by competitors such as “Tesla” and “Fisker”, and that from now on, anyone caught reading or posting on the forum — very popular among employees — would be “out” (fired). Ignoring issues of enforceability, it seems unlikely that Aptera’s employees would be unable to tell that some of the company’s harshest critics on the forum these days had been its biggest fans for years prior to the recent scandals.
With Aptera’s cash reserves dwindling, one might wonder why they didn’t pursue the approach Tesla is reported to be considering: a capital-raising IPO. In a traditional Initial Public Offering, founders and early investors cash out on their investment by offering shares of the company up for public investment. However, when large amounts of capital need to be raised in tight capital markets, a company that has the public eye can launch an IPO to raise money to instead expand operations. This leaves the investors with a smaller stake in a more valuable, growing company.
Why Aptera never pursued this approach is unclear, although most speculation is revolving around Laura Marion’s background. As time goes on, it increasingly appears that getting the ATVM loans is Aptera’s plan A, B, and C. But will the DOE really be interested in investing money in a business troubled by the same problems that are driving off private capital? Only time will tell.
Image credits: Senseless’s Photostream, Bisonblog’s Photostream
PDF 
Thanks for the second post.
The Aptera board should be ashamed of themselves. To me this looks like a money laundering operation.
Thanks for the second post.
The Aptera board should be ashamed of themselves. To me this looks like a money laundering operation.
Sigh…will we ever see enough Aptera 2e’s on the road for people to get used to them? Looking at the photo (at the top of page 3), you can see *everybody* is looking in rapt attention at the PP6.
Sincerely, Neil
Sigh…will we ever see enough Aptera 2e’s on the road for people to get used to them? Looking at the photo (at the top of page 3), you can see *everybody* is looking in rapt attention at the PP6.
Sincerely, Neil
Boom! Reading this is like watching an episode of the Sons Of Anarchy! You can’t wait for the next one. Karen, you nailed it. The truth will set you free. I believe that the original Aptera is such a good idea that the positive original aspects of the Aptera ideas will eventually surface.
Boom! Reading this is like watching an episode of the Sons Of Anarchy! You can’t wait for the next one. Karen, you nailed it. The truth will set you free. I believe that the original Aptera is such a good idea that the positive original aspects of the Aptera ideas will eventually surface.
Your sources have let you write a largely fictional, self-serving (your sources)piece that makes deity out of the founders who made plenty of mistakes including making the initial promise to get to market in 2008. You ascribe conspiracy to what may be nothing more than the real issues of getting a radically new product to market in a highly (thankfully) regulated market. Let’s all keep hope behind the folks working hard to get the 2e to market, they ARE the ones tasked to do so. I for one, hope they get it right, it’s too important to botch.
Play hard Aptera!
Your sources have let you write a largely fictional, self-serving (your sources)piece that makes deity out of the founders who made plenty of mistakes including making the initial promise to get to market in 2008. You ascribe conspiracy to what may be nothing more than the real issues of getting a radically new product to market in a highly (thankfully) regulated market. Let’s all keep hope behind the folks working hard to get the 2e to market, they ARE the ones tasked to do so. I for one, hope they get it right, it’s too important to botch.
Play hard Aptera!
R & D Coalition Overview:
Less than 20 car companies applied for $25 BILLION DOLLARS in taxpayer money managed by a certain group of people at DOE in order to get loans to make green cars for Americans’.
There was enough money to help every single one of the car companies that applied. The administrators applied their interpretations of the law in order to benefit the large lobby group-related firms and avoided every one of the “unconnected” companies.
The amount of lobby and influence money spent is in direct ratio to the amount of money awarded.
The smaller companies, due to lower overhead, could have dramatically more productive results with the money than the large burdened companies yet the money was given out based on political career advantages rather technology advantages.
All of the people that reviewed the applications had political and financial connections to GM, Ford, Chrysler and the large Detroit recipients.
Each of those smaller American companies had technology and resources that presented a strong economic threat, if they got the loans, to the large politically connected companies that did receive funds.
Some of the companies that have gotten money have backed out of making the electric cars they said they would make. But they still get to keep the money.
Some of the companies that got the money have already wasted more money than other companies applied for as their total request.
Most of the companies who got money were in dire financial situations
Some of the companies that got taxpayer loan money are not even American companies and/or are doing their manufacturing offshore with non-American employees.
The decision about who would get money was made in 2008 by a private group who then pretended there was a lengthy review throughout 2009 but in fact, the money was pre-wired for a select few.
All of the things that the rejected small companies (who did not pay lobby fees) were rejected for, were the same things that the insider big companies were doing.
——————-
We will continue to keep you updated.
R&D Team
R & D Coalition Overview:
Less than 20 car companies applied for $25 BILLION DOLLARS in taxpayer money managed by a certain group of people at DOE in order to get loans to make green cars for Americans’.
There was enough money to help every single one of the car companies that applied. The administrators applied their interpretations of the law in order to benefit the large lobby group-related firms and avoided every one of the “unconnected” companies.
The amount of lobby and influence money spent is in direct ratio to the amount of money awarded.
The smaller companies, due to lower overhead, could have dramatically more productive results with the money than the large burdened companies yet the money was given out based on political career advantages rather technology advantages.
All of the people that reviewed the applications had political and financial connections to GM, Ford, Chrysler and the large Detroit recipients.
Each of those smaller American companies had technology and resources that presented a strong economic threat, if they got the loans, to the large politically connected companies that did receive funds.
Some of the companies that have gotten money have backed out of making the electric cars they said they would make. But they still get to keep the money.
Some of the companies that got the money have already wasted more money than other companies applied for as their total request.
Most of the companies who got money were in dire financial situations
Some of the companies that got taxpayer loan money are not even American companies and/or are doing their manufacturing offshore with non-American employees.
The decision about who would get money was made in 2008 by a private group who then pretended there was a lengthy review throughout 2009 but in fact, the money was pre-wired for a select few.
All of the things that the rejected small companies (who did not pay lobby fees) were rejected for, were the same things that the insider big companies were doing.
——————-
We will continue to keep you updated.
R&D Team
As a former Aptera member I can tell you that the new CFO and financial consulting service they hired called Tatum LLC caused the ongoing issues and really screwed them up even further
As a former Aptera member I can tell you that the new CFO and financial consulting service they hired called Tatum LLC caused the ongoing issues and really screwed them up even further
Let it go. Even with a solid management team whose major accomplishments weren’t fraud and bankruptcy proceedings, this thing would never be any more marketable than the old DIY electric car or ultra-light plane kits. Why not put all of that investigative effort into finding out GM’s strategy for getting enough people to plunk down 2X the amount of a 4-door Kia for a Volt?
As for “rapt” attention, I would say it is more indicative of a “what is that?” or a “are they filming a movie?” kind of look than anything else. It is rather unlikely that anyone in that picture is thinking “where can I buy one of those?”
As for being “too important to botch”, that is of course true, but fortunately there are much better alternatives in terms of design and potential so that the world can indeed eventually move away from an oil-based economy without Aptera.
Let it go. Even with a solid management team whose major accomplishments weren’t fraud and bankruptcy proceedings, this thing would never be any more marketable than the old DIY electric car or ultra-light plane kits. Why not put all of that investigative effort into finding out GM’s strategy for getting enough people to plunk down 2X the amount of a 4-door Kia for a Volt?
As for “rapt” attention, I would say it is more indicative of a “what is that?” or a “are they filming a movie?” kind of look than anything else. It is rather unlikely that anyone in that picture is thinking “where can I buy one of those?”
As for being “too important to botch”, that is of course true, but fortunately there are much better alternatives in terms of design and potential so that the world can indeed eventually move away from an oil-based economy without Aptera.
Sounds like a case of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. How can a management team take a company that is so successful (strong design, strong fundraising, numerous customer reservations) and screw it up so badly (weaker design, no fundraising, losing customer reservations?
Is there any way the new management team could have more effectively sabotaged a company that was doing so well?
I’m not a big conspiracy theorists, but in the context of electric cars like the EV1, I have to wonder if there was a deliberate plan to run Aptera into the ground. You can run a company into the ground with incompetence, but the incompetent occasionally get something right, even if by nothing other than random chance. To screw up Aptera so thoroughly demonstrates a certain competence.
Sounds like a case of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. How can a management team take a company that is so successful (strong design, strong fundraising, numerous customer reservations) and screw it up so badly (weaker design, no fundraising, losing customer reservations?
Is there any way the new management team could have more effectively sabotaged a company that was doing so well?
I’m not a big conspiracy theorists, but in the context of electric cars like the EV1, I have to wonder if there was a deliberate plan to run Aptera into the ground. You can run a company into the ground with incompetence, but the incompetent occasionally get something right, even if by nothing other than random chance. To screw up Aptera so thoroughly demonstrates a certain competence.
The new team clearly has no passion for the original vision of the product, and have effectively killed it with their hubris.
The new team clearly has no passion for the original vision of the product, and have effectively killed it with their hubris.
I can easily imagine the new, auto-industry CEO deciding on epoxy resin, simply so consumers don’t see it as a cheap plastic car, but as having top quality fit and finish. He would say this is a marketing and positioning decision, not an engineering decision per se.
I can even see in his view this might outweigh the disadvantages of higher cost and slower manufacturing time. But in my view, it’s a bad call.
The Aptera 2e is a niche vehicle intended to prove the concept and raise revenues for the development of their 4-wheeled, next vehicle. That mass-market product should arguably have the higher-quality finish…but not this proof-of-concept vehicle. Especially given the first-to-market advantage they’ve now lost.
I don’t think they could have a successful IPO at this early stage even with the best possible CFO. They’ve got no sales, no product, nothing but a prototype and a (dwindling) list of reservation holders
CEO Wilbur’s anger that CFO Marion’s past was “discovered”, when it’s part of the public record, simply indicates that he sees her past as a serious liability. It’s bad, beyond just appearances, but for the sake of credibility. Did she sell herself as a cog in the wheel in that Delphi mess, or the angel who got stuck working with devils, and Aptera figured they could get a “yes” person on the cheap? Surely they knew of her past. Or did they (inconceivably) not know before they hired her?
Either way, bad for fundraising. Combined with expensive decisions about epoxy resin, bad for business.
I can easily imagine the new, auto-industry CEO deciding on epoxy resin, simply so consumers don’t see it as a cheap plastic car, but as having top quality fit and finish. He would say this is a marketing and positioning decision, not an engineering decision per se.
I can even see in his view this might outweigh the disadvantages of higher cost and slower manufacturing time. But in my view, it’s a bad call.
The Aptera 2e is a niche vehicle intended to prove the concept and raise revenues for the development of their 4-wheeled, next vehicle. That mass-market product should arguably have the higher-quality finish…but not this proof-of-concept vehicle. Especially given the first-to-market advantage they’ve now lost.
I don’t think they could have a successful IPO at this early stage even with the best possible CFO. They’ve got no sales, no product, nothing but a prototype and a (dwindling) list of reservation holders
CEO Wilbur’s anger that CFO Marion’s past was “discovered”, when it’s part of the public record, simply indicates that he sees her past as a serious liability. It’s bad, beyond just appearances, but for the sake of credibility. Did she sell herself as a cog in the wheel in that Delphi mess, or the angel who got stuck working with devils, and Aptera figured they could get a “yes” person on the cheap? Surely they knew of her past. Or did they (inconceivably) not know before they hired her?
Either way, bad for fundraising. Combined with expensive decisions about epoxy resin, bad for business.
Interesting read. Last year, when I heard the roll-down window excuse, I knew something very fishy was up. You are essentially describing a zombie company. They may not be officially dead, but nothing will ever come of it.
Interesting read. Last year, when I heard the roll-down window excuse, I knew something very fishy was up. You are essentially describing a zombie company. They may not be officially dead, but nothing will ever come of it.
It’s a shame that they have made so little head way.
I put a deposit on one but it looks like the Volt will come to the market first and I am in line for that one too.
It’s a shame that they have made so little head way.
I put a deposit on one but it looks like the Volt will come to the market first and I am in line for that one too.
I put a down payment and reserved an Aptera two years ago and one year ago I canceled my reservation because I saw then that the handwriting was on the wall. I suspected that Aptera would run short of funds and not be able to get the vehicles to customers in the time promised. I was correct in my assumption. I got my down payment back and am glad I did. I wonder how hard it is now for people to get their down payment returned. Why in hell didn’t Aptera start out selling a few vehicles at a time and build up their cash flow so they would have the money to build more vehicles and sell them as soon as they are built. Management had its head up its ass and now the company is trying to get federal funding. They will not get the money in time and Aptera will go bankrupt and all those who have a down payment with them will become creditors and will not get their money back because there is no money to be had. Thank you Aptera for messing up a beautiful vehicle that would have been welcomed and become very popular were management to have had the intelligence to have kept the financial situation of Aptera on track and hired a marketing person who knew how to bring the vehicle to market and attract a large following. It was up to the management team at Aptera to keep production and budget on track and they failed to do so and now all those employees who put in many hundreds of hours, some on their own time because they felt so good about the vehicle, are losing their jobs. Shame on you Aptera management for messing up on a product that would have taken off and made a lot of people happy and your company very profitable. You lost it and you will be very lucky if you can get it back on track again. You will have lost the backbone of the company, your loyal employees and customers who belived in you. I feel sad for those who are left holding onto hope that the federal loan will come through because the money won’t come through in time to save Aptera and every employee will be let go and whatever is left of Aptera will be sold at auction by the Trustee in Bankruptcy after Aptera files for bankruptcy which I suspect will happen sometime within the first six months of 2010. Bye bye Aptera. Sad to see you go.
Peter Marks
I put a down payment and reserved an Aptera two years ago and one year ago I canceled my reservation because I saw then that the handwriting was on the wall. I suspected that Aptera would run short of funds and not be able to get the vehicles to customers in the time promised. I was correct in my assumption. I got my down payment back and am glad I did. I wonder how hard it is now for people to get their down payment returned. Why in hell didn’t Aptera start out selling a few vehicles at a time and build up their cash flow so they would have the money to build more vehicles and sell them as soon as they are built. Management had its head up its ass and now the company is trying to get federal funding. They will not get the money in time and Aptera will go bankrupt and all those who have a down payment with them will become creditors and will not get their money back because there is no money to be had. Thank you Aptera for messing up a beautiful vehicle that would have been welcomed and become very popular were management to have had the intelligence to have kept the financial situation of Aptera on track and hired a marketing person who knew how to bring the vehicle to market and attract a large following. It was up to the management team at Aptera to keep production and budget on track and they failed to do so and now all those employees who put in many hundreds of hours, some on their own time because they felt so good about the vehicle, are losing their jobs. Shame on you Aptera management for messing up on a product that would have taken off and made a lot of people happy and your company very profitable. You lost it and you will be very lucky if you can get it back on track again. You will have lost the backbone of the company, your loyal employees and customers who belived in you. I feel sad for those who are left holding onto hope that the federal loan will come through because the money won’t come through in time to save Aptera and every employee will be let go and whatever is left of Aptera will be sold at auction by the Trustee in Bankruptcy after Aptera files for bankruptcy which I suspect will happen sometime within the first six months of 2010. Bye bye Aptera. Sad to see you go.
Peter Marks
Its ashame that they will be bankrupt soon, I really was looking foward to getting this car even though Im on the East Coast and would prob have to wait longer to get one. I thought this would be the car of the future, I liked how it didnt look like anything else on the road…to bad. Maybe after other companies get there EVs on the road over the next few years, someone else will get a similar EV produced.
Its ashame that they will be bankrupt soon, I really was looking foward to getting this car even though Im on the East Coast and would prob have to wait longer to get one. I thought this would be the car of the future, I liked how it didnt look like anything else on the road…to bad. Maybe after other companies get there EVs on the road over the next few years, someone else will get a similar EV produced.
Hi Karen Pease! I think at least one of these posts merits some followup: viz, the one signed “R&D Team” on 12/22. They make several claims:
1. 20 companies applied for 25 bill.
2. Sizes of grants was in direct “ratio” [sic] to lobbying dough.
3. Review board members all had “connections” (unspecified) to the Big Three.
4. Some grantees are keeping the money but not building the EV.
5. Who got grants was decided by a “private group” (unspecified).
6. The reasons for rejecting or accepting grant requests were identical.
This is a lot of noise without a scintilla of proof.
Would Gas 2.0 be interested in investigating this?. It would be a hell of a story.
Claims 1 – 4 and claim 6 are verifiable using public documents. Claim 5 is inflammatory, and would probably make a story in itself. You would do your readers a great service and *investigate them*. Not everybody is interested in EVs yet. But most folks are interested in proof of corruption. Thanks.
Hi Karen Pease! I think at least one of these posts merits some followup: viz, the one signed “R&D Team” on 12/22. They make several claims:
1. 20 companies applied for 25 bill.
2. Sizes of grants was in direct “ratio” [sic] to lobbying dough.
3. Review board members all had “connections” (unspecified) to the Big Three.
4. Some grantees are keeping the money but not building the EV.
5. Who got grants was decided by a “private group” (unspecified).
6. The reasons for rejecting or accepting grant requests were identical.
This is a lot of noise without a scintilla of proof.
Would Gas 2.0 be interested in investigating this?. It would be a hell of a story.
Claims 1 – 4 and claim 6 are verifiable using public documents. Claim 5 is inflammatory, and would probably make a story in itself. You would do your readers a great service and *investigate them*. Not everybody is interested in EVs yet. But most folks are interested in proof of corruption. Thanks.
So in the near future we get to watch ‘Who killed the Aptera 2e ?’
It’s strange. Looking at the aviation-industry there’s no reason why the Aptera would not be built.
Composites are the future in Aviation, so why not in electric-cars ?
Anyway, I hope in the near future the aptera does get a second chance and will come to the roads.
We, in Europe, are looking forward to it.
I have a small composite bicycle component company in the Silicon Valley of California. Given the amount of progress the Aptera team has made in producing the 2E I’m sure I could have completed vehicles in a matter of a few months. Perhaps Aptera needs some one in control that can organize them correctly….
So in the near future we get to watch ‘Who killed the Aptera 2e ?’
It’s strange. Looking at the aviation-industry there’s no reason why the Aptera would not be built.
Composites are the future in Aviation, so why not in electric-cars ?
Anyway, I hope in the near future the aptera does get a second chance and will come to the roads.
We, in Europe, are looking forward to it.
what a mess
what a mess
With reluctance I requested my two-year old deposit back today – I took a ride in one in February at a conference (TED) and thought they were close, I hope I am wrong and regret my decision to remove my name from a radical departure from the norm.
With reluctance I requested my two-year old deposit back today – I took a ride in one in February at a conference (TED) and thought they were close, I hope I am wrong and regret my decision to remove my name from a radical departure from the norm.
It would be best to look at what happened in the case of John DeLorean and DMC. Aptera could learn a thing or two, especially how they should be very cautious when getting in with the government (as John Delorean explains: youtube video UivDh-QA2ms).
It would be best to look at what happened in the case of John DeLorean and DMC. Aptera could learn a thing or two, especially how they should be very cautious when getting in with the government (as John Delorean explains: youtube video UivDh-QA2ms).