Former BMW designer Henrik Fisker announced plans Tuesday to relaunch his electric vehicle efforts three years after a bankruptcy with his venture that made high-priced cars popular with celebrities.
Fisker's effort aims to revive his rivalry with Tesla, promising a premium, all-electric successor to his 2012 Fisker Karma with "a patented battery that will deliver a significantly longer life and range than any battery currently on the market," a statement from the reconstituted company Fisker Inc. said.
The relaunch comes after a high-profile bankruptcy by Fisker Automotive, which received $192 million in US government loans and left $139 million of that unpaid.
[...] In addition, Fisker is developing a "mass-market, affordable electric vehicle that will retail for less than its competitors, but will feature a longer electric range," it added.
Now that the bigger car companies are getting into the electric vehicle (EV) market, has Fisker missed its window?
Related Stories
The 161mph $129,000 Fisker EMotion:
Henrik Fisker's new electric car project is finally here, unveiled in full at this year's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Get past those show-stopping ingress points however, and you find something that'll give a certain electric car company something to chew on...
We must first discuss the looks. Henrik – famously responsible for the design of the Aston Martin Vantage and BMW Z8 – clearly hasn't lost his touch. There are elements of his former hybrid motor, the Karma, and everything has been sculpted in the name of the tech underneath.
It's built from carbon fibre and aluminium, and features elements designed around the LiDARs dotted at the front and rear of the car. The door handles are flush, operated via your smartphone. It's big, too: 5m in length and 1.4m in height, around the size of a BMW 5 Series. The wheels are similarly huge: 24s as standard, on low rolling-resistance Pirellis.
Sulky Dutch model not included with the base model.
Previously:
Fisker Relaunches Electric Car Effort
Fisker Automotive Comes Back Under New Name, Plans to Launch Electric Car
(Score: 4, Insightful) by andersjm on Friday October 07 2016, @03:31PM
If he truly has a patented super-battery, then he should be in the battery business, not the car business.
But I'm guessing that's not cool enough for him. He wants to be the guy making snazzy supercars. And so he'll fail again.
(Score: 5, Funny) by jummama on Friday October 07 2016, @03:42PM
Fisker's effort aims to revive his rivalry with Tesla
He should call the new company Edison, and make wild claims of having invented things that Tesla did first, and do demonstrations about how dangerous Tesla products are.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Friday October 07 2016, @04:29PM
Great, so after Regular/Plus/Premium/Diesel, we'll get car chargers with AC vs DC options... I'm sure the price will be 10 cents off and people will stand there for 5 minutes mumbling about whether they should try the other, against the recommendation of the manufacturer.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @05:45PM
My car already plays AC/DC all the time so I welcome this rivalry.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday October 07 2016, @05:24PM
Fisker ain't done 'till that elephant can't run?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by meustrus on Friday October 07 2016, @04:44PM
Why is it that government money is always mentioned in these stories about alternative energy? We never seem to hear about the Billions of $ that the government spends on the fossil fuel industry. It's incredibly unfair to criticize only one group for doing something that looks bad from a distance despite the fact that they are playing by exactly the same rules as everyone else.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @05:17PM
Not only that, we also don't hear about how:
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Friday October 07 2016, @05:27PM
Why is it that government money is always mentioned in these stories about alternative energy?
Well, we all know why. But, it's especially ironic considering that loan guarantee program earned a $5 billion dollar profit. [bloomberg.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @05:57PM
> Well, we all know why.
Because a shallow and cynical narrative is soothing like a warm blanket for the lazy-minded?
(Score: 3, Informative) by bob_super on Friday October 07 2016, @06:06PM
Because government is bad bad bad bad and cannot do anything right. Only the markets can do the VC job, get a positive return on investment, and only the markets can spur research and innovation. Nothing good ever comes out of the government oppressively expanding beyond its 18th-century definition.
Everyone working for the government (except for our brave soldiers) is also evil and wasteful and secretly plotting to change our perfect 18th-century-slavers' dream into a totalitarian state full of men dressed as little girls.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @07:13PM
Because typically when the government handouts handfuls of cash to business, it's seen as corruption regardless as to whether it is the alternative or fossil fuel companies.
But instead of wanting to end that type of crony capitalism, there is always some genius who figures their pet cause should deserve a turn at the spigot while railing against defense contractors and the like fleecing the taxpayer.
Bravo you.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by meustrus on Friday October 07 2016, @10:07PM
If the $21.6 billion in oil subsidies in 2013 is corruption, why isn't it part of every story about oil the same way these government loans - which as others here have pointed about has resulted in a $5 billion profit overall - are a part of every single story about renewable energy?
You may be forgiven for not noticing. A quick Google search for "US oil subsidies" turns up two [priceofoil.org] articles [oilprice.com] from obviously partisan sources and an article about why it's complicated [forbes.com]. There doesn't appear to be much moderate discussion of the subsidies at all. And yet we all know about Solyndra, which actually had a really cool product that was overshadowed by massive price cuts in more traditional solar panels coming out of China.
It's a double standard. People talk about the renewable energy loans because they want to make renewable energy look like a) government waste and b) failure after failure. It doesn't have to be true. Much like the double standards in our presidential election, being accused of scandal after scandal can ultimately be more damaging than actually committing crime after crime. Just be aware of the double standard so you don't fall prey to the partisans pretending to be objective.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @03:49AM
Show me the first person here arguing for fossil fuel subsidies, and you may have a point.
Since there is none, beat that strawman.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday October 07 2016, @07:51PM
Well if you default, that's sort of bad for the average tax payer, no?
If Fisker is going after more federal funds, I'm writing my congressman.
On the other hand if you payback those federal loans, even if slower than expected, I'm fine with that?
There is also a big difference between a LOAN and a Research GRANT. Grants aren't often expected to be repaid.
Fisker had loans, and he squandered it making cars nobody could afford.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @08:14PM
> If Fisker is going after more federal funds, I'm writing my congressman.
No you aren't. You are just another internet tough guy, all talk no action.
> There is also a big difference between a LOAN and a Research GRANT. Grants aren't often expected to be repaid.
If the government expects to get some of its money back it shouldn't get involved at all.
But if the government is giving the money away for free, then that's OK.
Frojack logic!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @08:14PM
Further, government research tends to be available to everyone.
To see people laud a government handout to a millionaire with the only return being playthings for the rich is the definition of limousine liberal.
But hey, look at that branding.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @10:36PM
> Further, government research tends to be available to everyone.
That's absolutely not true. Nearly every invention developed under government contract ends up with the ip rights assigned to the contractor, not the public.
(Score: 2) by Username on Friday October 07 2016, @09:36PM
He should focus on drop in electric replacement for light trucks. Be easy to install a toolbox like battery on a truck bed. Get electric motors with different bolt patterns to attach to the tranny. Hardest part would be ecu replacement/compatibility.