I think, Steve, you should sign on with "Hello everyone, this is Steve- but my momma calls me 'Slick'- with Aptera Owners Club...". And btw, should/could 'Owners' have an apostrophe? Somewhere? I mean we're not Aptera owners yet, but it IS our club....just wondering. (Which is just another word for 'retired.')
If Aptera underwent the WSJ scrutiny and this article was the worst they had to say about them...that seems pretty good to me. "Praising by faint damnation"?
I mean Lucid is still fairly successful. Not nearly to the extent of Tesla, but they're not a total failure. They're revenue does continue to slowly tick up. But I will say Lucid has always been kicked around since it launched likely because of it's more direct comparison to things like Tesla which it came after. Lucid only launched their first vehicle in 2021, they're way newer than most realize. Rivian for example always was in a totally different market as Tesla had no pickups or SUVs, but Tesla has 2 sedans of their own already and they're not a scrappy startup. Hell there's still many that think Rivian is going to flop when they're sales are incredible.
@@Skylancer727 Yeah, I think Lucid still has a chance to convert Saudi money into something more useful than Neom, so maybe I should have put more thought into my selection of examples. How about Lordstown? Canoo? Nikola? Is Aptera's crowd funding model inherently any more risky than the SPAC method that the "professional" investors came up with?
@@robertkirchner7981 I wouldn't say it's any more risky than those ventures, but normally people don't take part in that risky investments. I say it can be a good way of showing wallstreet there is interest in this risky looking venture.
Maybe the influence of the WSJ’s ethically challenged owner Rupert Murdoch at play. Great journalism, an "exposé" on crowdfunding with a sample of TWO 😀😂😀
Exactly. $250K is not extravagant. The median house price in San Diego is 3X and the cost of living is 50% greater than my area (in Florida). I think it's naive to expect CEOs to take a vow of poverty for sake of "the project", especially if they have families to support. In fact, I would rather the CEO had a reasonable salary so they can fully concentrate on their job and not worry about supplementing their meager income in other ways. This would also reduce the temptation/need to "make up the difference" though less tranparent means.
I agree, $250k is a very reasonable co-CEO salary. I am sure they could go anywhere and make that. This gives them the motivation to see Aptera to the finish line where they will get a bigger payday. Look at the Canoo CEO, he expensed double their annual revenue in private flights. I feel much better about Aptera than I do Canoo, I do have stock in both.
To give context to people who don't live in California, I'm a teacher in San Francisco, CA and I make 100k per year. I can pay for living expenses without worrying too much, but I have to budget in order to save. 200k for engineering founders with families and mortgages is very very reasonable.
Great video Steve! Speaking for myself, I don't think the majority of the aptera investors invested thinking they were going to make their own lives better, but to make the world a better place. A $1000 investment would have to make a 20x (or more) gain to appreciably change someone's life, and it might have to be a 50x-100+x to be a huge game changer for someone, considering the amount of time for the return on investment. I personally want to be part of a story that makes the world a better place. I want to support people I believe in (everyone at Aptera, that I've ever come across was awesome). I don't design vehicles, I don't engineer vehicles, I don't manufacturer vehicles, I don't know much about solar technology, but I can invest something to support those that do those things to hopefully become successful.
As accelerator investors we invested MORE than we EVER have in any single company by a factor of 4. Can we afford to lose it?? Yes, but it WILL sting a little. Are we foolish and dumb?? Maybe,, but there are times that in order to help bring about things to help the world in a meaningful way you HAVE to invest in things that are bold and are beyond and bigger than yourself. Even Aptera if fails we might’ve have helped to start the solar mobility transition for Future generations.
While I am a huge Aptera Fan, calling their Social Media promotions "sleek" is one of the most generous uses of the word sleek I have seen. Edit: I am not saying this in a bad way. I would be worried if they had sleek social media. A good comms team (which Aptera has) is better then a sleek social media team. This is not a product for tweens.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. I’ve known really good, healthy companies, and they have terrible social media; Aptera seems to be in same territory.
I was disappointed in WSJ for doing this, and lumping Aptera with Boxabl. I’m invested in both and now feel cheated by Boxabl but still have great belief in Aptera. Back in 2021, I was interviewed by WSJ about Tesla and Elon Musk and at the end of the interview I told the reporter about Aptera. She ended up doing a lovely story about Aptera and was one of Aptera’s first major newspaper mentions. I don’t think that reporter is with WSJ anymore.
Thank you Steve for this thoughtful commentary. I am proud to be an @apteramotors investor and accelator. I am not doing so because I think I will make huge returns and am willing to lose it all, but because I believe in Aptera's vision to transform transportation. I have never bought a new vehicle and I prefer bicycle commuting to driving ( and none of my family's bikes were bought new either). I don't think that Aptera is the only solution, as we also need less people to drive and more investment in greenways, bike/pedestrian infrastructure and public transit, but is an important step towards transforming transportation, and one that the US, the Wall Street Journal, and its investment class are not interested in supporting. Without Crowdfunding @Apteramotors would not exist, and those investing in Aptera are investing in a better future for our planet.
It's good that you're prepared to lose everything you invested because you will. Unfortunately it isn't now and never was a good faith attempt to build a vehicle.
@@cingkole7893 if I am then it's hardly a laughing matter, I'd need some sort of counselling I imagine. The good news is that I I'm not mad and the Aptera trike is never going into production - it would be a waste of money to even try, and that money is earmarked for the founder's 'well earned' retirement.
WSJ actually has a relevant point and you Steve in this video highlighted exactly why.... Aptera have struggled to find an investor willing to hand over a large sum of money. For those of you 'invested', be warned. IF Aptera decide to undermine your current share values by discounting a huge amount of shares to a priority shareholder or decide to increase the amount of total shares in an offering THEN....you will see your initial invest values evaporate.
I would also add that I was at boxable this last May for a tour there and the first thing I noticed was the fancy Rolls-Royce that was sitting out front additionally, during the tour we heard this loud engine sound and was told that that was the owner playing around with his race car that he has in the parking lot?
Well yeah it benefits their investment into Goodyear and BP for people to burn through tires faster and use bigger ones a shot. Bigger things can benefit their other investments directly. Of course I'm more joking than anything, but hey, never let it past the bean counters.
I agree that 250k in SD isnt fleecing people from their money, but it’s absolutely more than comfortable. I’m sure their net worth is pretty decent considering they have multiple start ups in the past
There's a REASON that Aptera has had one of the most successful crowd funding efforts in history, a lot of it due to thier forthright and honest methods of information dissemination.
At first, I was a bit annoyed at the nonsense of the 'big expose', however, it's positive actually - for two reasons. 1. If APTERA wasn't visible to the media, it wouldn't have been mentioned. APTERA is visible and that is good. More news is good news. 2. If more questions pop up to challenge APTERA, as a result of it being mentioned next to a bad actor, that is good as well as it gives the great APTERA team an opportunity to overcome the negative enquiry as well as promote the car and company. All good. All in my personal, humble opinion. Thanks Steve
I object to being called a rookie, too. I passed the Series 7. Never did anything with it, but it's not like I don't understand the concepts, or the massive risk involved in an automotive startup.
Speaking as a mere reservation holder, I think that to the Aptera faithful, it is a shared vision. I don't mean it negatively, but it it still has the two guys, who aren't going to give up, developing it in their garage, going to change the world feel to it. I think that any future deep pocket investors in Aptera are likely going to be believers in the vision, and it really doesn't matter what the WSJ thinks.
I've been through 2 of my own startups and they never really got to take off and I lost tens of thousands of dollars. Doesn't make me any less enthusiastic when I back other start ups because I like the idea of what the people are trying to do.
I find the c level salaries very reasonable. These guys are no longer I their 30's and have to travel the world to pitch to wealthy people. It's awkward and distracting if you're in a position where you have to be super mindful of what you are spending personally. They need to be focused on the mission, without going overboard while being cash strapped. They struck a good balance.
It's from the perspective of Wall Street brokers, bankers, and investment banks. Wall Street doesn't like the competition of crowd funding. They would much prefer that the working class rabble stay in their place and invest in mutual funds to enrich Wall Street through their 401k and IRA plans. Thank you very much. As in the Texas, Bless your heart. ;)
Aptera could potentially be a great investment long term but it is important to realize failure for a startup is always an option. Investors need to weigh the risks and odds of further investment keeping the wheels on the bus until profitability. With Aptera many investors also have skin in the game because they want to ensure that the company succeeds and delivers the unique vehicle that we all want but I don't see it as a charity but it is a risk. If production scales and people realize that an efficient 2 seater makes sense for them (seniors, students, or a vehicle of 2 for a couple) then Aptera could do very well financially.
True, and the comfortable (but certainly not opulent) income that they are paying themselves allows them to focus on Aptera rather than worrying about paying their bills at home.
The Roadster II was actually announced in 2011. I have had a lot of experience with EV startups, including the Ford Pivco Th(i)nk, the Corbin Sparrow -(both of which I was a supplier for), and startups such as Elio Motors, which my due diligence identified as a fraud back in the day. Aptera Motors is certainly doing better than Tesla was during the same length of time after startup. There is no reason for someone to invest in Aptera for pure financial reasons at this point as far as I can see. However, the world needs a product like Aptera along with many other more efficient ways of living. Business as usual will continue to steal from our children's future. As always, thanks for letting us know your continued due diligence.
Get a new tape dude. Your constant reference to Tesla is tiring and shows a fixation that is not helping. How hard is it for your to understand, what Tesla did or did not do has no bearing on what Aptera has or has not done. The logic you are using is typical of people so invested into a product they have no ability to think rationally.
@@andromedach Just because you have not had any personal experience doesn't mean that you can't learn from others who have. I have personally met and talked with both Tesla and Aptera engineers and seen their prototypes and discussed their reasons behind things they have done. I doubt from your comments that you have any personal experience with either one. Open yourself to actual information.
@@andromedach "Get a new tape dude." Hey "dude" you getting your info on mail-order videotape? Regardless, your ‘logic’ of dismissing info & experience from the most dominant (& successful) EV company ever escapes me. BTW needn’t reply as I’ve reached my days’ quota for entertainment 😀
@@n.brucenelson5920 Sorry I have to agree with @andromedach that Tesla experience, especially outdated experience is not relevant to the current Aptera environment. (Different economic era, way different capital market conditions, WAY different engineering and production concepts, Different auto and EV market conditions, and different government conditions. Certainly an "Apples and Oranges" comparison. This statement based on 50+ and CURRENT, active, EV R&D experience. Making a comparison with Tesa in its early days will be way misleading. You are not a mechanical engineer or Auto R&D person so I would suggest you not be critical of @andromedach's using your visits as a basis for your statement.
Oh , the article isnt telling us something we don't know . Of course we don't know much , be we know something and the company keeps us informed . Yes it's a risk but California thought enough of them to get a big matching fund .
Of course I could be wrong but honestly I feel really good about aptera. There surely are some things I see quite critically and things i'd do differently. Of course I wish progress would be faster and I feel that we have to make it to some big milestones soon. But overall I trust the team at aptera to get this thing into production. I also do not think that Aptera is trying to overhype their product on social media. In fact I believe that they could do way more to spread their vision.
"No cars in sight" ... can we all say red herring? Let's cast doubt on Aptera's intentions. Who does that help? Is Elon funding this article? Peter Lynch suggested that we find companies that provide great service and/or products and invest in them. Agreed, Aptera is stretch due to no finished product. However, Aptera's roadmap looks like it's taking more time than advertised, but they are following the roadmap and making progress. I am biased. I believe Aptera intends to execute on their promise if they can.
Glad to see the article. Seems like any sensible mind would look into Aptera and find that it holds muster quite well. The idea is great. I personally have some issues on design aspects but that doesn't change the fact of their transparency, the integrity and desire to achieve the goal. I think the article will give a positive spin. Free advertising baby!
Isn't WSJ lying right off the bat? The headline says they're raising "billions" implying that each "risky" startup is raising billions, then we immediately find out it is in the millions. The article seems to be designed specifically to create bad vibes, and to influence people who only read the headline -- which is most people. It seems like this is a hit piece designed to go after low-information investors in order to damage Aptera, probably on behalf of people with a significant stake in something that could be harmed by Aptera. Things like this get quoted without detail and context by the MSM, thus amplifying those bad vibes. Edit: Also note the unfair linking of Boxabl with Aptera.
Sleek social media campaigns does not match what I see from Aptera. They don’t have a huge marketing department or budget. What they release in terms of social media does not resemble what I consider to be a sophisticated, calculated campaign. My impression is their emphasis is the engineering and marketing.
So, they are, but they aren't criticizing aptera. They are putting them in an article that is critical of crowdfunding, but they aren't saying anything particularly bad about aptera. BUT they are linking the 2 together. Talk about being slick. Doesn't surprise me given that WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, owner of FOX Talk which is part of extreme right. The WSJ has not been the respectable newspaper that it once was a long time ago now. As for Chris and Steve's salary, it is fine considering how much work they are doing and how much of their own money they have put into the company to restart it.
Following the money on media is absolutely essential nowadays. To consider the validity, the spin and biases. I think a lot of these pieces are written are to help spin the mainstream media consumers thoughts. And it's quite obvious to me. If you follow the money you can see that they wouldn't want someone like aptera to have positive brand recognition or success. Bunch of haters because they are only successful due to dirty money, greed and power and they can't stand to see people doing it "correctly".
Thanks for covering this story and putting it in perspective. We all knew investing in a startup company has a lot of risk. I still believe they have a great new product that I am excited to support. Go Aptera!!!! $SUNA
I support good journalism, but having read this piece, it fell far short. Lumping the two companies together and making generalizations about them was sloppy at best. Making vague insinuations suggesting that Aptera as a company is somehow bad, while offering exactly zero evidence to support that premise, is inexcusable.
I agree that crowdfunding is the threat to VC, hedge fund and private fund. It is like democracy replacing royalty. This democracy in investing will grow more mature and create an industry of crowdfunding financial advisors. But to improve, Aptera should be more open and direct with their supporters. A better IR is a good place to start.
Murdoch - the propaganda arm of modern conservative politics, has a vested interest in not seeing Aptera succeed. Nothing will challenge fossil fuel companies more than this! Let’s all make sure that it succeeds!! The world needs it!
$250k is absolutely reasonable for a CEO in a high cost of living area like San Diego. There are companies that are publicly traded, not performing well, but paying their CEOs much, much more. Well why would anyone be okay with that?
“Maybe I’m not the best judge of character”. I read a study that suggests that those who say that they are a good judge of character are more likely to be sociopaths or psychopaths. So for now Steve, you are safe 😅. Keep the content rolling!
Slick Steve, old Wall Street types called the investment bankers, and institutional investors the smart money, all others became dumb money by default. In fact, information is everywhere, and smart "slick" folks how to use the information, and understand how interpret said information. Smart money doesn't play games, and day trading is a recipe for bankruptcy. However, long term investments of leading edge technology usually have been rewarded. Aptera fits that, but it's definitely different, and money shys away from stuff that is not normal! Aptera is different. Thanks Slick! Your the social media influencer, sooner Sarah Hardwick will offer you a job!
Dumb money describes me so perfectly. The $@!t smart money does leaves me feeling pretty darn sick. I'm proud to be dumb ☺️. I'm happy Aptera wants my dumb money. I feel honored to be counted among all the Aptera investors cuz so far I find them all really kind. Thank you 🙏, Steve.
I think Steve's right, this WSJ piece is great for the contrast between the two companies. With that said did anyone notice Sandy Munro did a video with Boxabl?
Does this article surprise anyone? I worked with the reporter while at the Dallas Morning News. I’d tell him I’m an accelerator, but I dont care and I’m sure he wouldn’t either. Everyone has their priorities. He HAS to produce a large volume of articles that I’m sure are directed towards the vision they want to push. Facts can be made to look any way they want to push an agenda. BTW, I remember that Sarah Hardwick was making $100k more that both CEO’s.
They started paying their ceo's a lot because they're a wayyyyyy bigger company trying to solve the housing crisis for the world, which is a huge market, and they've been able to raise a bunch of money.. I don't love the move, but the pay is proportionate to their business..
Also, part of their marketing is doing awesome things, not being conservative. That's kinda why I love them and think they're going to be successful. They are cranking out units and they're pretty open. I think they'll be great.
@@stephensullivan1011 Are they currently profitable? …how much net revenue? I’d say everything mentioned, $$ invested, units produced, market size, etc. don’t justify huge bonus on top of huge salaries until success is achieved assuring longevity of its worthy mission.
One thought I have about Chris's and Steve's salaries. I'm guessing if they paid themselves any less, they'd have a hard time attracting investors. Real companies have succession plans. They need to make Aptera attractive to new CEOs.
In Aptera's case, this is typical mainstream criticism of independent success, particularly with products or companies who have real potential for positive impact. Misconstrued information, exaggerations, or actual lies rather than facts or truth! Little to no credibility in the source.
You missed the absolute worst thing Boxabl leaders did which was sell shares amidst a share offering. That was despicable. We would all like to believe Chris and Steve will do their best to take care of the crowdfunders, but it only takes once questionable decision to undo all the goodwill. Credit to them that they have been at this for years and seem to have been managing their finances, stretching their investments, and making progress (albeit slower than anticipated) without any significant questionable activity along the way. It will be very important to see how the US Capital terms play out as they go for private money. In one fell swoop, they could wipe us out with advantageous terms to make the dream come alive. I sincerely hope Steve and Chris have taken advantage of the crowdfunding to leverage a good deal for the crowdfunders. Otherwise, this will be a case study for dumb money suckers with crowdfunding rather than a success story.
Like you said, startup investments are ALWAYS risky. If you cannot afford to burn the money you are investing in a startup, you shouldn't be investing. Aptera does not appear to be wasting the money that has been invested so far. Delays are part of startups. Whether or not Aptera has enough money to make it past another delay is difficult to say at this point but we will know by October if they don't have the money to keep the lights on. Whether it is crowdfunding or investments via US Capital Global, confidence or perception that Aptera is going to succeed is critical. While I know this sounds presumptuous but if Chris and Steve would defer half or more of their income from Aptera until production vehicles start shipping, that would be a big sign that they are personally putting their money on the line. At this point, perception is extremely important. Each of them likely have other companies where income is coming in. $200K/year in San Diego really is not much money at all. $200K in Van Wert, OH would be considered a very good income.
I do not agree with the overall premise of this WSJ article regarding Aptera. There are legitimate facts about Aptera but the conclusions from these facts are not accurate or fair. We already know it’s a high risk just like any investment. Aptera has been very transparent with all their information as compared to any company that I have seen or invested in.
I found the speculation and observations about Steve’s & Chris’s compensation over-the-top and distasteful. Their combination of vision, energy, openness and talent is invaluable and irreplaceable.
Microsoft: "If you don't like how we sell our OS, then make your own." *makes Linux* "No, not like that!" Wall Street: If you don't like how we run investing, then make your own. *makes Wall Street Bets* "No, not like that!" Venture Capitalists: "If you don't like start-up culture then start your own" *starts equity crowdfunding* "No, not like that!"
Thank you for this. I have been looking into investing into Aptera. As dumb money I understand that I will be able to turn my $1000 into $100 million 😂
Hey Slick, those two guys in Carlsbad are just a couple of uppity Californian west coasters out to make a big show and fleece the entire world. The Wall Street Journal is completely disinterested, of course, they can see things we can't, like Big Oil. I only wish I had more money to invest in Aptera.
@@barnabasseadog7660 Agreed! Capital Markets base their investment decisions on proprietary due diligence processes not on an article from the Wall Street Journal who are most interested in selling advertising
Smart Money folk are just full of themselves. I know, I have an MBA from University of Chicago! I am supposed to be one of them. The cleverest of them all, Warren Buffett, told everyone that much. He said you are better off investing in the S&P 500 than in a managed fund because the stock pickers for those funds have zero smart. I invested about $3,000 in Aptera because I love their idea. For the same reason I invested in Everydae (big fail), and Rizome and StorEn. I call it my 'play money'. Just like Steve said, I am lucky that if I loose all this money, there will still be bread on the table.
Impatient people get a platform and make assumptions. That's all I get out of the article. Considering bias, who's paying for this article, who is trying to benefit from Aptera's disinterest? It seems like a company or industry that stands to lose invented this piece.
For Aptera, most invested in the idea of an efficient designed vehicle. Most chipped in whatever change was lying around in the drawers. AND YES...we all want Aptera. We know we will pay actual window price for the vehicle when it comes out. For Boxabl, it was more of a social support idea that drover the investment. 50k home on a 30k small plot, would work all day any US geography in creating more homeowners and reduce poverty driven by rental businesses. AND most important address homelessness too.
About the article, clearly seems unreserved. Surprised someone was paid to do such low level of effort for a write-up. Remember when Aptera listed for crowd funding, there was a company listed on the same crowdfunding platform who had collected $100 million or something in business of selling land in virtual world. Yes not even on moon or mars, it was land in metaverse or some virtual world.
Nice review of two companies using Crowdfunding. Boxable definitely has signs if a money siphon, whereas Aptera is not, based on founder salaries & bonuses. Surely the SEC could reduce scams by imposing limits of CEO compensation. Average living expenses, exclusion of bonuses, or at least production based milestone bonuses (like Tesla) could go a long way to prevent ripoffs. The fact this does not exist means the SEC doesn’t really care.
I think a lot of investors are former collegiate solar car team members who remember how these things cost like 10 mil and took 4+ years to make one. I think a lot of us know that it sucks to make a solar car, and that's why we invest. It might not work out, the two other solar car companies are already bankrupt, but isn't that going to be a great experience for those engineers lucky enough to work on this? And if they pull it off isn't it going to be sick as hell.
Another way to tremendously increase credibility: Offer each reservation owner a sales invoice contract of price and performance with a late delivery discount penalty. I bet Aptera won't do it!
Aptera's pay is good. The CEOs need 100% of their focus to be on the company. If they got paid any less living where they are they would have to worry about other things and less than 100% focus would be on the company.
I wonder if many Capital Global employees read Wallstreet Journal? It's this simple: No confirmation of miles/kWh, kWh/day, price, cooling, etc. Then comes schedule failures.
I found a very early video of Steve Fambro saying he got obsessed with the design ( this is way way back pre X-prize days ( 2006?)....that is something very typical of scientists, obsession can be a positive thing and often is what is needed to get results in the long term. Especially in science/technology. There is a down side too, if your going down a path that is not going to be successful you have to, at some stage, pull the plug. If your obsessed its almost impossible to pull the plug. I have nothing but admiration for what they have achieved so far, I really hope they have success in getting the vehicle into production. There are a few issues: 1.honesty in interviews........100% honesty is required not avoiding questions 2. tricky issue: at what point should they give up is success is not going to happen? Since there have been production dates being given going back 16 years or so, which have never materialised , is there a point at which they should say "we tried hard but its just not going to happen". This is the dilemma. Is it a rabbit hole ( money pit) with no end?
The 2 things they did to themselves are not likely to be overcome. First was the poor design decision of not doing a global design, as in they should have kept the width under 2 meters. That devalued the execution by at least 50% as it killed the metro application as well. The 2nd is that crowdfunders don’t automatically become product development people or manufacturers. The cupboard is bare at Aptera on that front. No mules and missing every significant opportunity to reduce this to practice over the last 18 months has manifested itself as you’re seeing now. So, no matter the obsession, THEY are going to be the victim of these two mistakes. The world is not going to fund their flat learning curve forever. Their weaknesses are overcoming them now. This was actually an achievable thing, but they are throwing it away. In my opinion…
The WSJ did a hit piece and I consider this to be lazy journalism. They could have made this a compare & contrast article - presented just like you did, summing up the article with the likelihood of any startup actually succeeding.
I have nothing invested in Aptera beyond a $100 reservation, so my opinion is worth even less, but here it is anyway. The company seems as reputable as an EV startup promising a very exotic vehicle with bleeding-edge technology can be, but I have questions. After raising $120M from crowd funding, why does Aptera need to raise the last $65M to produce the vehicle from venture capitalists through a capital management firm? How do the terms offered to venture capitalists differ from the terms accepted by investors in the Accelerator program? Is $65M really enough? How much has U.S. Capital raised thus far? How much of the capital raised does U.S. Capital keep? Why hasn't some Saudi prince or another big investor provided the production capital yet? That seemed to be the goal before Aptera announced the services of U.S. Capital. Frankly, I won't believe that Aptera will deliver vehicles until I see early recipients review their vehicles on UA-cam, preferably on this channel.
Great questions re: US-C and why no one w/ really deep pockets hasn’t invested. Many business-savvy billionaires spout concern over climate change… gives me pause as in what’re they seeing that I’m not. The typical answer falls short of me… "control".
$3.7 mil still left on the offering with 10 days left. Between this, self-directed IRA & crypto options, if they spent half as much time working on the product as they do whoring the concept, maybe we could finally see what this thing can do. One thing through all of this is that you really want a fully fleshed-out quality product coming to you @ delivery. There is so, so much work to be done. I hope, in the coming months, the updates show an unprecedented focus on all of the parts coming in, the PI’s reviewed in detail, the tests underway and calibrations, the results, the independent feedback, all of it. Definitive needs to replace vague. Fingers crossed! It’s going to come down to, after all of this and what’s to come, “Is the product worth owning?”. Assuming $40K, IF performance, tuning, and build quality can match a Tesla, or Can-AM, it’s unique enough where they just might make it. If they put the manufacturing effort behind the self-promotion, as they have been doing, it will stay an also-ran. Interesting as hell.
I think the article is miss leading, like the corporate world doesn’t want Aptera to succeed when all started ups are a risk and they nothing about the auto industry
I looked up "confirmation bias" and "falsification bias". The first one is the congnetive bias that involves favoring information that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs. The second one is the congnetive bias which actively seeks out evidence that disproves one's belief. I think this article is trying to present something in between the two of these biases. It is trying to put a wedge between one's beliefs and what the WSJ presents. Frankly, I do not think this article is doing a good job at it as far as Aptera. The article has no teeth when it come to presenting anything the points to something that needs more investigation IMO.
Read it. Shame that the journalist can't see the huge value of crowd funding. Before CF the only way to launch a complicated product was by trying to convince a big bank to give you a couple of hundred thousand. Want to borrow a couple of million to launch a slightly more complex product? Forget it.
(fwiw, we're still hoping both Aptera and Boxabl successfully deliver products that we want; and can afford. If we also manage to get a return on our investment -- that would be wonderful... personally, I look forward to walking out of my boxabl, getting into my aptera, and with the sun's assistance, driving to the market to invest my earnings into another great product idea, or some fantastic coffee. Here's to -- that -- "someday".)
If one is going to refute a perspective it should be done like this, i.e., without any of the ad hominem iterations. The only thing that would reassure me *at this point* are production vehicles rolling off the supply line.
"Slick social media" They're talking about you, Steve! They're talking about YOU! Gonna have to start calling you "Slick."
Lol 🤣
Yea, but they mentioned him third of the trio. Why? Certainly, AOC is the oldest of the three, if not the most viewed.
He IS slick,, but in a good way! Keep being slick Steve ;-)
I think, Steve, you should sign on with "Hello everyone, this is Steve- but my momma calls me 'Slick'- with Aptera Owners Club...".
And btw, should/could 'Owners' have an apostrophe? Somewhere? I mean we're not Aptera owners yet, but it IS our club....just wondering. (Which is just another word for 'retired.')
If Aptera underwent the WSJ scrutiny and this article was the worst they had to say about them...that seems pretty good to me. "Praising by faint damnation"?
I was thinking the same
Meanwhile, the "smart money" invested in Fisker, Lucid, and Faraway Future.
I know right
I made money on Lucid stock!
I mean Lucid is still fairly successful. Not nearly to the extent of Tesla, but they're not a total failure. They're revenue does continue to slowly tick up. But I will say Lucid has always been kicked around since it launched likely because of it's more direct comparison to things like Tesla which it came after. Lucid only launched their first vehicle in 2021, they're way newer than most realize.
Rivian for example always was in a totally different market as Tesla had no pickups or SUVs, but Tesla has 2 sedans of their own already and they're not a scrappy startup. Hell there's still many that think Rivian is going to flop when they're sales are incredible.
@@Skylancer727 Yeah, I think Lucid still has a chance to convert Saudi money into something more useful than Neom, so maybe I should have put more thought into my selection of examples. How about Lordstown? Canoo? Nikola?
Is Aptera's crowd funding model inherently any more risky than the SPAC method that the "professional" investors came up with?
@@robertkirchner7981 I wouldn't say it's any more risky than those ventures, but normally people don't take part in that risky investments. I say it can be a good way of showing wallstreet there is interest in this risky looking venture.
If the wall street journal hates it that alone is reason for me to invest... i'm in!
I kinda feel that way myself.
Me too. I can't even read any of their article because they are behind a pay wall. Greedy greedy. Haven't they heard of online advertising?
Maybe the influence of the WSJ’s ethically challenged owner Rupert Murdoch at play. Great journalism, an "exposé" on crowdfunding with a sample of TWO 😀😂😀
To me $250 k is very reasonable for a CEO types. Even more so considering their location. As an engineer I was making $130k.
If I had to move to San Diego, even with $250k, I'd need to downgrade my current lifestyle.
Exactly. $250K is not extravagant. The median house price in San Diego is 3X and the cost of living is 50% greater than my area (in Florida). I think it's naive to expect CEOs to take a vow of poverty for sake of "the project", especially if they have families to support.
In fact, I would rather the CEO had a reasonable salary so they can fully concentrate on their job and not worry about supplementing their meager income in other ways. This would also reduce the temptation/need to "make up the difference" though less tranparent means.
I agree, $250k is a very reasonable co-CEO salary. I am sure they could go anywhere and make that. This gives them the motivation to see Aptera to the finish line where they will get a bigger payday. Look at the Canoo CEO, he expensed double their annual revenue in private flights. I feel much better about Aptera than I do Canoo, I do have stock in both.
They are the owners and the equity given to Aptera goes in their pocket. If they were being paid by the owner, that would be different.
I invested in Aptera as I do want the vehicle. I hope to make money but getting the vehicle comes first. I sense Steve and Chris feel the same way.
To give context to people who don't live in California, I'm a teacher in San Francisco, CA and I make 100k per year. I can pay for living expenses without worrying too much, but I have to budget in order to save. 200k for engineering founders with families and mortgages is very very reasonable.
Great video Steve! Speaking for myself, I don't think the majority of the aptera investors invested thinking they were going to make their own lives better, but to make the world a better place. A $1000 investment would have to make a 20x (or more) gain to appreciably change someone's life, and it might have to be a 50x-100+x to be a huge game changer for someone, considering the amount of time for the return on investment.
I personally want to be part of a story that makes the world a better place. I want to support people I believe in (everyone at Aptera, that I've ever come across was awesome). I don't design vehicles, I don't engineer vehicles, I don't manufacturer vehicles, I don't know much about solar technology, but I can invest something to support those that do those things to hopefully become successful.
As accelerator investors we invested MORE than we EVER have in any single company by a factor of 4. Can we afford to lose it?? Yes, but it WILL sting a little. Are we foolish and dumb??
Maybe,, but there are times that in order to help bring about things to help the world in a meaningful way you HAVE to invest in things that are bold and are beyond and bigger than yourself. Even Aptera if fails we might’ve have helped to start the solar mobility transition for Future generations.
While I am a huge Aptera Fan, calling their Social Media promotions "sleek" is one of the most generous uses of the word sleek I have seen. Edit: I am not saying this in a bad way. I would be worried if they had sleek social media. A good comms team (which Aptera has) is better then a sleek social media team. This is not a product for tweens.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. I’ve known really good, healthy companies, and they have terrible social media; Aptera seems to be in same territory.
A lot of smart money went into Lordstown.
I was disappointed in WSJ for doing this, and lumping Aptera with Boxabl. I’m invested in both and now feel cheated by Boxabl but still have great belief in Aptera.
Back in 2021, I was interviewed by WSJ about Tesla and Elon Musk and at the end of the interview I told the reporter about Aptera. She ended up doing a lovely story about Aptera and was one of Aptera’s first major newspaper mentions. I don’t think that reporter is with WSJ anymore.
Thank you Steve for this thoughtful commentary. I am proud to be an @apteramotors investor and accelator. I am not doing so because I think I will make huge returns and am willing to lose it all, but because I believe in Aptera's vision to transform transportation. I have never bought a new vehicle and I prefer bicycle commuting to driving ( and none of my family's bikes were bought new either). I don't think that Aptera is the only solution, as we also need less people to drive and more investment in greenways, bike/pedestrian infrastructure and public transit, but is an important step towards transforming transportation, and one that the US, the Wall Street Journal, and its investment class are not interested in supporting. Without Crowdfunding @Apteramotors would not exist, and those investing in Aptera are investing in a better future for our planet.
Sooooo so well said!
It's good that you're prepared to lose everything you invested because you will. Unfortunately it isn't now and never was a good faith attempt to build a vehicle.
@@bluetoad2668 ur mad LOL
THANK YOU SIR!!!
@@cingkole7893 if I am then it's hardly a laughing matter, I'd need some sort of counselling I imagine. The good news is that I I'm not mad and the Aptera trike is never going into production - it would be a waste of money to even try, and that money is earmarked for the founder's 'well earned' retirement.
WSJ actually has a relevant point and you Steve in this video highlighted exactly why.... Aptera have struggled to find an investor willing to hand over a large sum of money.
For those of you 'invested', be warned. IF Aptera decide to undermine your current share values by discounting a huge amount of shares to a priority shareholder or decide to increase the amount of total shares in an offering THEN....you will see your initial invest values evaporate.
I would also add that I was at boxable this last May for a tour there and the first thing I noticed was the fancy Rolls-Royce that was sitting out front additionally, during the tour we heard this loud engine sound and was told that that was the owner playing around with his race car that he has in the parking lot?
An efficient electric solar car may just scare the bejeezus out of the powers that be.
Well yeah it benefits their investment into Goodyear and BP for people to burn through tires faster and use bigger ones a shot. Bigger things can benefit their other investments directly.
Of course I'm more joking than anything, but hey, never let it past the bean counters.
They would rather have vehicle owners that are dependent on oil companies or electric companies for the rest of their lives.
I agree that 250k in SD isnt fleecing people from their money, but it’s absolutely more than comfortable. I’m sure their net worth is pretty decent considering they have multiple start ups in the past
There's a REASON that Aptera has had one of the most successful crowd funding efforts in history, a lot of it due to thier forthright and honest methods of information dissemination.
At first, I was a bit annoyed at the nonsense of the 'big expose', however, it's positive actually - for two reasons. 1. If APTERA wasn't visible to the media, it wouldn't have been mentioned. APTERA is visible and that is good. More news is good news. 2. If more questions pop up to challenge APTERA, as a result of it being mentioned next to a bad actor, that is good as well as it gives the great APTERA team an opportunity to overcome the negative enquiry as well as promote the car and company. All good. All in my personal, humble opinion. Thanks Steve
sorta funny first they ignore u then they laugh at u then they fight u then u win
I object to being called a rookie, too. I passed the Series 7. Never did anything with it, but it's not like I don't understand the concepts, or the massive risk involved in an automotive startup.
Speaking as a mere reservation holder, I think that to the Aptera faithful, it is a shared vision. I don't mean it negatively, but it it still has the two guys, who aren't going to give up, developing it in their garage, going to change the world feel to it. I think that any future deep pocket investors in Aptera are likely going to be believers in the vision, and it really doesn't matter what the WSJ thinks.
I've been through 2 of my own startups and they never really got to take off and I lost tens of thousands of dollars. Doesn't make me any less enthusiastic when I back other start ups because I like the idea of what the people are trying to do.
I find the c level salaries very reasonable. These guys are no longer I their 30's and have to travel the world to pitch to wealthy people. It's awkward and distracting if you're in a position where you have to be super mindful of what you are spending personally. They need to be focused on the mission, without going overboard while being cash strapped. They struck a good balance.
It's from the perspective of Wall Street brokers, bankers, and investment banks. Wall Street doesn't like the competition of crowd funding. They would much prefer that the working class rabble stay in their place and invest in mutual funds to enrich Wall Street through their 401k and IRA plans. Thank you very much. As in the Texas, Bless your heart. ;)
Well said
Aptera could potentially be a great investment long term but it is important to realize failure for a startup is always an option. Investors need to weigh the risks and odds of further investment keeping the wheels on the bus until profitability. With Aptera many investors also have skin in the game because they want to ensure that the company succeeds and delivers the unique vehicle that we all want but I don't see it as a charity but it is a risk. If production scales and people realize that an efficient 2 seater makes sense for them (seniors, students, or a vehicle of 2 for a couple) then Aptera could do very well financially.
They have also brought a number of companies up from nothing multiple times.
How many hours a year do you think Steve and Chris are putting in for Aptera? Tons!!!
True, and the comfortable (but certainly not opulent) income that they are paying themselves allows them to focus on Aptera rather than worrying about paying their bills at home.
And how many years were they working on this for next to nothing.
Same answer: Full speed ahead on the PI’s.
Get the product to speak for itself and you don’t have to listen to anything else.
The Roadster II was actually announced in 2011. I have had a lot of experience with EV startups, including the Ford Pivco Th(i)nk, the Corbin Sparrow -(both of which I was a supplier for), and startups such as Elio Motors, which my due diligence identified as a fraud back in the day.
Aptera Motors is certainly doing better than Tesla was during the same length of time after startup.
There is no reason for someone to invest in Aptera for pure financial reasons at this point as far as I can see. However, the world needs a product like Aptera along with many other more efficient ways of living. Business as usual will continue to steal from our children's future.
As always, thanks for letting us know your continued due diligence.
Right there with you Bruce!
Get a new tape dude. Your constant reference to Tesla is tiring and shows a fixation that is not helping.
How hard is it for your to understand, what Tesla did or did not do has no bearing on what Aptera has or has not done. The logic you are using is typical of people so invested into a product they have no ability to think rationally.
@@andromedach Just because you have not had any personal experience doesn't mean that you can't learn from others who have.
I have personally met and talked with both Tesla and Aptera engineers and seen their prototypes and discussed their reasons behind things they have done. I doubt from your comments that you have any personal experience with either one.
Open yourself to actual information.
@@andromedach "Get a new tape dude." Hey "dude" you getting your info on mail-order videotape? Regardless, your ‘logic’ of dismissing info & experience from the most dominant (& successful) EV company ever escapes me. BTW needn’t reply as I’ve reached my days’ quota for entertainment 😀
@@n.brucenelson5920 Sorry I have to agree with @andromedach that Tesla experience, especially outdated experience is not relevant to the current Aptera environment. (Different economic era, way different capital market conditions, WAY different engineering and production concepts, Different auto and EV market conditions, and different government conditions. Certainly an "Apples and Oranges" comparison. This statement based on 50+ and CURRENT, active, EV R&D experience. Making a comparison with Tesa in its early days will be way misleading. You are not a mechanical engineer or Auto R&D person so I would suggest you not be critical of @andromedach's using your visits as a basis for your statement.
Oh , the article isnt telling us something we don't know . Of course we don't know much , be we know something and the company keeps us informed . Yes it's a risk but California thought enough of them to get a big matching fund .
Of course I could be wrong but honestly I feel really good about aptera. There surely are some things I see quite critically and things i'd do differently. Of course I wish progress would be faster and I feel that we have to make it to some big milestones soon. But overall I trust the team at aptera to get this thing into production. I also do not think that Aptera is trying to overhype their product on social media. In fact I believe that they could do way more to spread their vision.
"No cars in sight" ... can we all say red herring? Let's cast doubt on Aptera's intentions. Who does that help? Is Elon funding this article? Peter Lynch suggested that we find companies that provide great service and/or products and invest in them. Agreed, Aptera is stretch due to no finished product. However, Aptera's roadmap looks like it's taking more time than advertised, but they are following the roadmap and making progress. I am biased. I believe Aptera intends to execute on their promise if they can.
Glad to see the article. Seems like any sensible mind would look into Aptera and find that it holds muster quite well. The idea is great. I personally have some issues on design aspects but that doesn't change the fact of their transparency, the integrity and desire to achieve the goal. I think the article will give a positive spin. Free advertising baby!
Isn't WSJ lying right off the bat? The headline says they're raising "billions" implying that each "risky" startup is raising billions, then we immediately find out it is in the millions.
The article seems to be designed specifically to create bad vibes, and to influence people who only read the headline -- which is most people. It seems like this is a hit piece designed to go after low-information investors in order to damage Aptera, probably on behalf of people with a significant stake in something that could be harmed by Aptera. Things like this get quoted without detail and context by the MSM, thus amplifying those bad vibes.
Edit: Also note the unfair linking of Boxabl with Aptera.
They might get the billions by adding up all of the numbers of all startups in this category.
Sleek social media campaigns does not match what I see from Aptera. They don’t have a huge marketing department or budget. What they release in terms of social media does not resemble what I consider to be a sophisticated, calculated campaign. My impression is their emphasis is the engineering and marketing.
So, they are, but they aren't criticizing aptera. They are putting them in an article that is critical of crowdfunding, but they aren't saying anything particularly bad about aptera. BUT they are linking the 2 together. Talk about being slick. Doesn't surprise me given that WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, owner of FOX Talk which is part of extreme right. The WSJ has not been the respectable newspaper that it once was a long time ago now. As for Chris and Steve's salary, it is fine considering how much work they are doing and how much of their own money they have put into the company to restart it.
Politics aside, any newspaper is little more than birdcage liner any more. Big journalism is dead.
Following the money on media is absolutely essential nowadays. To consider the validity, the spin and biases. I think a lot of these pieces are written are to help spin the mainstream media consumers thoughts. And it's quite obvious to me. If you follow the money you can see that they wouldn't want someone like aptera to have positive brand recognition or success. Bunch of haters because they are only successful due to dirty money, greed and power and they can't stand to see people doing it "correctly".
Thanks for covering this story and putting it in perspective. We all knew investing in a startup company has a lot of risk. I still believe they have a great new product that I am excited to support. Go Aptera!!!! $SUNA
I support good journalism, but having read this piece, it fell far short. Lumping the two companies together and making generalizations about them was sloppy at best. Making vague insinuations suggesting that Aptera as a company is somehow bad, while offering exactly zero evidence to support that premise, is inexcusable.
I agree that crowdfunding is the threat to VC, hedge fund and private fund. It is like democracy replacing royalty.
This democracy in investing will grow more mature and create an industry of crowdfunding financial advisors.
But to improve, Aptera should be more open and direct with their supporters. A better IR is a good place to start.
Murdoch - the propaganda arm of modern conservative politics, has a vested interest in not seeing Aptera succeed. Nothing will challenge fossil fuel companies more than this! Let’s all make sure that it succeeds!! The world needs it!
$250k is absolutely reasonable for a CEO in a high cost of living area like San Diego.
There are companies that are publicly traded, not performing well, but paying their CEOs much, much more. Well why would anyone be okay with that?
Very fair and insightful thoughts Steve, thank you for your time.
“Maybe I’m not the best judge of character”. I read a study that suggests that those who say that they are a good judge of character are more likely to be sociopaths or psychopaths. So for now Steve, you are safe 😅. Keep the content rolling!
Slick Steve, old Wall Street types called the investment bankers, and institutional investors the smart money, all others became dumb money by default. In fact, information is everywhere, and smart "slick" folks how to use the information, and understand how interpret said information. Smart money doesn't play games, and day trading is a recipe for bankruptcy. However, long term investments of leading edge technology usually have been rewarded. Aptera fits that, but it's definitely different, and money shys away from stuff that is not normal! Aptera is different. Thanks Slick! Your the social media influencer, sooner Sarah Hardwick will offer you a job!
Is it "Dumb" to make a Profit? I Bet ("Invested") Money that I could Afford to lose, for an Effort that I hold to be Admirable. I want this to Happen!
Dumb money describes me so perfectly. The $@!t smart money does leaves me feeling pretty darn sick. I'm proud to be dumb ☺️. I'm happy Aptera wants my dumb money. I feel honored to be counted among all the Aptera investors cuz so far I find them all really kind. Thank you 🙏, Steve.
What you said 👍🌞
@@stix2yousooooo true
You will lose your money.
@@montanaerdoc "So certain are we."
Rivian is losing over a billion dollars every quarter, all of that is 'smart money'.
The Aptera CEO salaries are probably justified based on their prior pay
Lucid's pay to Peter Rowlinson makes all this CEO pay irrelevant by comparison.
Legacy investors hate retail investors. The Wall Street Journal is written for legacy investors
Any press is good press. Seemed like part of the wsj issue was that Apteras vehicles were unrealistically efficient...it's tough being disruptive. ;)
I think Steve's right, this WSJ piece is great for the contrast between the two companies. With that said did anyone notice Sandy Munro did a video with Boxabl?
Sandy Munro did do a video while he toured the Boxable factory! I watched it!
Using Boxable as a stalking horse is a gift to Aptera!
Aptera has a sleek vehicle design and is a rookie company IN A ROOKIE INDUSTRY.
Does this article surprise anyone? I worked with the reporter while at the Dallas Morning News. I’d tell him I’m an accelerator, but I dont care and I’m sure he wouldn’t either. Everyone has their priorities. He HAS to produce a large volume of articles that I’m sure are directed towards the vision they want to push. Facts can be made to look any way they want to push an agenda. BTW, I remember that Sarah Hardwick was making $100k more that both CEO’s.
"struggle to generate sales" ...with 47 THOUSAND pre-orders. 🤣
$100 fully refundable isn't a pre-order.
Woah. Did not expect these two worlds to collide.. Love Boxabl!!!!!! ❤
They started paying their ceo's a lot because they're a wayyyyyy bigger company trying to solve the housing crisis for the world, which is a huge market, and they've been able to raise a bunch of money..
I don't love the move, but the pay is proportionate to their business..
Also, part of their marketing is doing awesome things, not being conservative. That's kinda why I love them and think they're going to be successful.
They are cranking out units and they're pretty open. I think they'll be great.
@@stephensullivan1011 Are they currently profitable? …how much net revenue? I’d say everything mentioned, $$ invested, units produced, market size, etc. don’t justify huge bonus on top of huge salaries until success is achieved assuring longevity of its worthy mission.
Good for Aptera. Every publicity, as the saying goes, is good publicity.
Soooooo soooo MANY good comments here! Kudos to ALL of you here!
One thought I have about Chris's and Steve's salaries. I'm guessing if they paid themselves any less, they'd have a hard time attracting investors. Real companies have succession plans. They need to make Aptera attractive to new CEOs.
May I point out that they have had a hard time of attracting investors.
@@johnmalcom9159 Are you asking permission?
In Aptera's case, this is typical mainstream criticism of independent success, particularly with products or companies who have real potential for positive impact. Misconstrued information, exaggerations, or actual lies rather than facts or truth! Little to no credibility in the source.
The roadster wasn't supposed to come out in 2022, it was called the Roadster 2020 back in 2017, they quite literally called it that.
You missed the absolute worst thing Boxabl leaders did which was sell shares amidst a share offering. That was despicable. We would all like to believe Chris and Steve will do their best to take care of the crowdfunders, but it only takes once questionable decision to undo all the goodwill. Credit to them that they have been at this for years and seem to have been managing their finances, stretching their investments, and making progress (albeit slower than anticipated) without any significant questionable activity along the way. It will be very important to see how the US Capital terms play out as they go for private money. In one fell swoop, they could wipe us out with advantageous terms to make the dream come alive. I sincerely hope Steve and Chris have taken advantage of the crowdfunding to leverage a good deal for the crowdfunders. Otherwise, this will be a case study for dumb money suckers with crowdfunding rather than a success story.
WSJ just happens to pick on smaller cars and homes--the two things that will most reduce fossil fuel usage. Their Ed Board will never hurt fossil.
Like you said, startup investments are ALWAYS risky. If you cannot afford to burn the money you are investing in a startup, you shouldn't be investing. Aptera does not appear to be wasting the money that has been invested so far. Delays are part of startups. Whether or not Aptera has enough money to make it past another delay is difficult to say at this point but we will know by October if they don't have the money to keep the lights on. Whether it is crowdfunding or investments via US Capital Global, confidence or perception that Aptera is going to succeed is critical.
While I know this sounds presumptuous but if Chris and Steve would defer half or more of their income from Aptera until production vehicles start shipping, that would be a big sign that they are personally putting their money on the line. At this point, perception is extremely important. Each of them likely have other companies where income is coming in. $200K/year in San Diego really is not much money at all. $200K in Van Wert, OH would be considered a very good income.
I'm surprised there was no mention of the 'Elio' here !
I do not agree with the overall premise of this WSJ article regarding Aptera. There are legitimate facts about Aptera but the conclusions from these facts are not accurate or fair. We already know it’s a high risk just like any investment. Aptera has been very transparent with all their information as compared to any company that I have seen or invested in.
I found the speculation and observations about Steve’s & Chris’s compensation over-the-top and distasteful. Their combination of vision, energy, openness and talent is invaluable and irreplaceable.
The article is actually clickbait.
Microsoft: "If you don't like how we sell our OS, then make your own." *makes Linux* "No, not like that!" Wall Street: If you don't like how we run investing, then make your own. *makes Wall Street Bets* "No, not like that!" Venture Capitalists: "If you don't like start-up culture then start your own" *starts equity crowdfunding* "No, not like that!"
Id like to see them release a pre production version for test purposes do you know how micj a chrysler turbine var would go for today? And a tucker?
Agree but that ship has sailed.
Thank you for this. I have been looking into investing into Aptera. As dumb money I understand that I will be able to turn my $1000 into $100 million 😂
Hey Slick, those two guys in Carlsbad are just a couple of uppity Californian west coasters out to make a big show and fleece the entire world. The Wall Street Journal is completely disinterested, of course, they can see things we can't, like Big Oil. I only wish I had more money to invest in Aptera.
Because "smart money" is doing such a good job 🤣 please.
Warranted or not, this article is definitely going to make Aptera's road to production much, much more difficult!
I doubt it. The goal is already hard enough and the WSJ is an eastern fish wrapper. Aptera is legit and they breakthrough next year.
@@barnabasseadog7660 hope you're right.
@@barnabasseadog7660 Agreed! Capital Markets base their investment decisions on proprietary due diligence processes not on an article from the
Wall Street Journal who are most interested in selling advertising
Smart Money folk are just full of themselves. I know, I have an MBA from University of Chicago! I am supposed to be one of them. The cleverest of them all, Warren Buffett, told everyone that much. He said you are better off investing in the S&P 500 than in a managed fund because the stock pickers for those funds have zero smart. I invested about $3,000 in Aptera because I love their idea. For the same reason I invested in Everydae (big fail), and Rizome and StorEn. I call it my 'play money'. Just like Steve said, I am lucky that if I loose all this money, there will still be bread on the table.
Impatient people get a platform and make assumptions. That's all I get out of the article.
Considering bias, who's paying for this article, who is trying to benefit from Aptera's disinterest? It seems like a company or industry that stands to lose invented this piece.
For Aptera, most invested in the idea of an efficient designed vehicle. Most chipped in whatever change was lying around in the drawers. AND YES...we all want Aptera. We know we will pay actual window price for the vehicle when it comes out.
For Boxabl, it was more of a social support idea that drover the investment. 50k home on a 30k small plot, would work all day any US geography in creating more homeowners and reduce poverty driven by rental businesses. AND most important address homelessness too.
About the article, clearly seems unreserved. Surprised someone was paid to do such low level of effort for a write-up. Remember when Aptera listed for crowd funding, there was a company listed on the same crowdfunding platform who had collected $100 million or something in business of selling land in virtual world. Yes not even on moon or mars, it was land in metaverse or some virtual world.
Nice review of two companies using Crowdfunding. Boxable definitely has signs if a money siphon, whereas Aptera is not, based on founder salaries & bonuses. Surely the SEC could reduce scams by imposing limits of CEO compensation. Average living expenses, exclusion of bonuses, or at least production based milestone bonuses (like Tesla) could go a long way to prevent ripoffs. The fact this does not exist means the SEC doesn’t really care.
I would change the question to: if Aptera does well, will the crowdfunding crowd share fairly in the winnings?
17:00 I feel the same Steve
I think a lot of investors are former collegiate solar car team members who remember how these things cost like 10 mil and took 4+ years to make one. I think a lot of us know that it sucks to make a solar car, and that's why we invest. It might not work out, the two other solar car companies are already bankrupt, but isn't that going to be a great experience for those engineers lucky enough to work on this? And if they pull it off isn't it going to be sick as hell.
Another way to tremendously increase credibility: Offer each reservation owner a sales invoice contract of price and performance with a late delivery discount penalty. I bet Aptera won't do it!
Aptera's pay is good. The CEOs need 100% of their focus to be on the company. If they got paid any less living where they are they would have to worry about other things and less than 100% focus would be on the company.
They literally own other companies that need their attention.
I wonder if many Capital Global employees read Wallstreet Journal? It's this simple: No confirmation of miles/kWh, kWh/day, price, cooling, etc. Then comes schedule failures.
I found a very early video of Steve Fambro saying he got obsessed with the design ( this is way way back pre X-prize days ( 2006?)....that is something very typical of scientists, obsession can be a positive thing and often is what is needed to get results in the long term. Especially in science/technology.
There is a down side too, if your going down a path that is not going to be successful you have to, at some stage, pull the plug. If your obsessed its almost impossible to pull the plug.
I have nothing but admiration for what they have achieved so far, I really hope they have success in getting the vehicle into production.
There are a few issues:
1.honesty in interviews........100% honesty is required not avoiding questions
2. tricky issue: at what point should they give up is success is not going to happen?
Since there have been production dates being given going back 16 years or so, which have never materialised , is there a point at which they should say "we tried hard but its just not going to happen".
This is the dilemma. Is it a rabbit hole ( money pit) with no end?
The 2 things they did to themselves are not likely to be overcome. First was the poor design decision of not doing a global design, as in they should have kept the width under 2 meters. That devalued the execution by at least 50% as it killed the metro application as well. The 2nd is that crowdfunders don’t automatically become product development people or manufacturers. The cupboard is bare at Aptera on that front. No mules and missing every significant opportunity to reduce this to practice over the last 18 months has manifested itself as you’re seeing now.
So, no matter the obsession, THEY are going to be the victim of these two mistakes.
The world is not going to fund their flat learning curve forever. Their weaknesses are overcoming them now.
This was actually an achievable thing, but they are throwing it away.
In my opinion…
The WSJ did a hit piece and I consider this to be lazy journalism. They could have made this a compare & contrast article - presented just like you did, summing up the article with the likelihood of any startup actually succeeding.
I have nothing invested in Aptera beyond a $100 reservation, so my opinion is worth even less, but here it is anyway. The company seems as reputable as an EV startup promising a very exotic vehicle with bleeding-edge technology can be, but I have questions.
After raising $120M from crowd funding, why does Aptera need to raise the last $65M to produce the vehicle from venture capitalists through a capital management firm? How do the terms offered to venture capitalists differ from the terms accepted by investors in the Accelerator program? Is $65M really enough? How much has U.S. Capital raised thus far? How much of the capital raised does U.S. Capital keep? Why hasn't some Saudi prince or another big investor provided the production capital yet? That seemed to be the goal before Aptera announced the services of U.S. Capital.
Frankly, I won't believe that Aptera will deliver vehicles until I see early recipients review their vehicles on UA-cam, preferably on this channel.
Great questions re: US-C and why no one w/ really deep pockets hasn’t invested. Many business-savvy billionaires spout concern over climate change… gives me pause as in what’re they seeing that I’m not. The typical answer falls short of me… "control".
The $100 is fully refundable so you haven't invested anything.
$3.7 mil still left on the offering with 10 days left.
Between this, self-directed IRA & crypto options, if they spent half as much time working on the product as they do whoring the concept, maybe we could finally see what this thing can do.
One thing through all of this is that you really want a fully fleshed-out quality product coming to you @ delivery. There is so, so much work to be done.
I hope, in the coming months, the updates show an unprecedented focus on all of the parts coming in, the PI’s reviewed in detail, the tests underway and calibrations, the results, the independent feedback, all of it.
Definitive needs to replace vague.
Fingers crossed!
It’s going to come down to, after all of this and what’s to come, “Is the product worth owning?”.
Assuming $40K, IF performance, tuning, and build quality can match a Tesla, or Can-AM, it’s unique enough where they just might make it.
If they put the manufacturing effort behind the self-promotion, as they have been doing, it will stay an also-ran.
Interesting as hell.
I think the article is miss leading, like the corporate world doesn’t want Aptera to succeed when all started ups are a risk and they nothing about the auto industry
UA-cam investor consultant Kevin Paffrath really laid into them over a whole litney of problems with Boxable.
I looked up "confirmation bias" and "falsification bias". The first one is the congnetive bias that involves favoring information that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs. The second one is the congnetive bias which actively seeks out evidence that disproves one's belief. I think this article is trying to present something in between the two of these biases. It is trying to put a wedge between one's beliefs and what the WSJ presents. Frankly, I do not think this article is doing a good job at it as far as Aptera. The article has no teeth when it come to presenting anything the points to something that needs more investigation IMO.
Read it. Shame that the journalist can't see the huge value of crowd funding. Before CF the only way to launch a complicated product was by trying to convince a big bank to give you a couple of hundred thousand. Want to borrow a couple of million to launch a slightly more complex product? Forget it.
😊
(fwiw, we're still hoping both Aptera and Boxabl successfully deliver products that we want; and can afford. If we also manage to get a return on our investment -- that would be wonderful... personally, I look forward to walking out of my boxabl, getting into my aptera, and with the sun's assistance, driving to the market to invest my earnings into another great product idea, or some fantastic coffee. Here's to -- that -- "someday".)
crowdfunding isn't the same as investing.
The “January 6th” article against Aptera.
If one is going to refute a perspective it should be done like this, i.e., without any of the ad hominem iterations.
The only thing that would reassure me *at this point* are production vehicles rolling off the supply line.
WSJ is scared LMAO
It is mine😂