Ordering a Fisker on lease - am I bonkers!?

[IJWS15]

Remember -Fiscar existence has no bearing (either way) on your contract with the lease co.

You can’t just hand it back because the manufacturer went under.

[130idvg]

Have done some more research - come to the conclusion that it is all a bit too trepadatious.

My thoughts were that there might be potential that if the car is unserviceable etc or stops working as it should and can't be rectified, there would be grounds for returning the car to the lease company as it is not fit for purpose. Likely that the lease company will do all they can to avoid this, so not worth the risk. Equally, a lot of the things that we want on the car are OTA updates, which are unlikely to make their way through.

A real shame as, having driven quite a few EVs, in my opinion the car represented way better value for money than lots of competitors in terms of quality, performance, range and options. I hope that the company continues as even if it just forces other manufacturers to up their game, it would be great. Not sure what all the hate for Fisker is about, unless I am missing something.

ETA - just seen that BMW i5 touring e40 m sport is not that much more than Enyaq. Now got another decision to make!

Edited by 130idvg on Wednesday 27th March 09:32

[Mezzanine]

Not sure it’s hate, just people being realistic about a start up manufacturer with a half-baked product plopped onto the market.

[skwdenyer]

130idvg said:

Have done some more research - come to the conclusion that it is all a bit too trepadatious.

My thoughts were that there might be potential that if the car is unserviceable etc or stops working as it should and can't be rectified, there would be grounds for returning the car to the lease company as it is not fit for purpose. Likely that the lease company will do all they can to avoid this, so not worth the risk. Equally, a lot of the things that we want on the car are OTA updates, which are unlikely to make their way through.

A real shame as, having driven quite a few EVs, in my opinion the car represented way better value for money than lots of competitors in terms of quality, performance, range and options. I hope that the company continues as even if it just forces other manufacturers to up their game, it would be great. Not sure what all the hate for Fisker is about, unless I am missing something.

ETA - just seen that BMW i5 touring e40 m sport is not that much more than Enyaq. Now got another decision to make!

Edited by 130idvg on Wednesday 27th March 09:32

Fisker’s big problem seemed to be “transformational” pricing coupled with contract manufacture. The prices were certainly attractive, but how did it all stack up?

From what has been revealed elsewhere, their financial problems stem in part from the Magna deal. They may have avoided spending money on a factory, but they seem to have been required to hold cash equivalent to Magna’s start-up costs and expected profit over the contract life in support of a bank guarantee.

So the only way this thing worked at all was if they had a smash hit on their hands from day one. Far from enjoying the flexibility of “asset light” operation, they’re stuck with piles of cash they simply can’t spend to get them over the initial hump.

I’d add also that whilst Magna are producing the cars, I believe Fisker are doing the software. I suspect the launch was locked in a long time ago, denying them flexibility to wait for software.

It is a shame. The vehicle looks very promising.

[Still Mulling]

Mezzanine said:

Not sure it’s hate, just people being realistic about a start up manufacturer with a half-baked product plopped onto the market.

No hate here. I would love them to still succeed! The Pear could be (have been?) a useful entry into the accessible end of the market.

[Otispunkmeyer]

skwdenyer said:

130idvg said:

Have done some more research - come to the conclusion that it is all a bit too trepadatious.

My thoughts were that there might be potential that if the car is unserviceable etc or stops working as it should and can't be rectified, there would be grounds for returning the car to the lease company as it is not fit for purpose. Likely that the lease company will do all they can to avoid this, so not worth the risk. Equally, a lot of the things that we want on the car are OTA updates, which are unlikely to make their way through.

A real shame as, having driven quite a few EVs, in my opinion the car represented way better value for money than lots of competitors in terms of quality, performance, range and options. I hope that the company continues as even if it just forces other manufacturers to up their game, it would be great. Not sure what all the hate for Fisker is about, unless I am missing something.

ETA - just seen that BMW i5 touring e40 m sport is not that much more than Enyaq. Now got another decision to make!

Edited by 130idvg on Wednesday 27th March 09:32

Fisker’s big problem seemed to be “transformational” pricing coupled with contract manufacture. The prices were certainly attractive, but how did it all stack up?

From what has been revealed elsewhere, their financial problems stem in part from the Magna deal. They may have avoided spending money on a factory, but they seem to have been required to hold cash equivalent to Magna’s start-up costs and expected profit over the contract life in support of a bank guarantee.

So the only way this thing worked at all was if they had a smash hit on their hands from day one. Far from enjoying the flexibility of “asset light” operation, they’re stuck with piles of cash they simply can’t spend to get them over the initial hump.

I’d add also that whilst Magna are producing the cars, I believe Fisker are doing the software. I suspect the launch was locked in a long time ago, denying them flexibility to wait for software.

It is a shame. The vehicle looks very promising.

https://fuzzypandaresearch.com/fisker-inc/

Yeah, their commitments to Magna seem quite the albatross: (from the link).

Fisker’s guarantees to Magna include:

• Fisker paying for Magna’s tooling costs.
• Magna’s manufacturing margins and direct manufacturing costs.
• Commits to set volume production levels.
• Fisker pays Magna for the volume commitments regardless of 3rd party supplier execution issues or low consumer demand for the ocean.
• Fisker’s has attempted to hide that the EV platform they are licensing was built for a Chinese EV. This reminds us of ELMS, another EV SPAC that tried to hide their vehicles Chinese origins. ELMS recently declared for bankruptcy.

Chinese platform that perhaps didn't come to fruition and then contracting out the build. I mean on the face of it, it doesn't look like a bad way to get started. But there you go.

I wonder if the the platform was the old Byton one? remember them? The chassis work was being done in the UK so even though it was a Chinese effort the chassis might have been pretty decent still. So not necessarily a bad thing that it was a chinese cast off.

[86]

Half price now

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/business-corpor...

[number2]

Looks like it's entered a death spiral, sadly.

Cheap today, worthless tomorrow.