Would-be American electric and extended-range electric vehicle manufacturer, Aptera, ended the week saying it has ceased operations and will liquidate after failing to raise sufficient capital.
Company CEO Paul Wilbur said Aptera had gotten so far as to receive conditional approval for a U.S. Energy Department loan for $150 million, but additional attempts to gain more fell through.
Wilbur, a former Chrysler brand manager and CEO of ASC Inc., said plans wavered for its first vehicle, a mid-sized electric sedan, because in his view the EV investment market is wavering.
“A couple years ago, there were a lot of people who thought the automotive industry is easy,” Wilbur said. “It isn’t.”
Wilbur said venture capital firms had initially led Aptera to believe they’d be willing to ante up funds if the federal government did first.
Although the government did what they asked, investors balked when it became apparent launching EVs can be more difficult than first anticipated, he said.
An American company
Like Fisker and Tesla, Aptera had positioned itself in California and aimed to build in the states – and the company intended to source 90 percent from domestic suppliers.
The Carlsbad-based startup was also discussing an agreement with GM that would allow it to use a former GM assembly plant in Moraine, Ohio, Wilbur said.
The first model – the aerodynamic and lightweight electric sedan – was to have an all-composite body, deliver 130 miles range, return as high as 190 miles per gallon equivalent, and its airplane-without-wings look definitely caught people’s attention.
An Aptera model had been a finalist in the competition for the Progressive Insurance X-Prize, and the company had attracted a fair amount of press, including a 2007 feature by Popular Mechanics.
The company had initially hoped to have vehicles in production in 2009, but those dreams were tempered by delays. Even back then HybridCars.com noted Wilbur’s earlier takeover after ousting company founders Steve Fambro and Chris Anthony over disputes about the company’s direction, and observed Aptera’s future looked rocky indeed.
According to the company’s far more bright-sounding marketing copy on its Web site, other vehicles to follow, would cost from the high-$20,000s to mid-$40,000s.
Planned powertrain options included extended-range electric and the company said it was pleased to design, engineer and manufacture in the U.S.A.
“Aptera embraces this American spirit through our Efficient Vehicle Design Formula,” Aptera wrote on its Web site. “It brings the practical notion of low energy consumption inline with the passion to drive and the freedom to go when and where we want. The result is a full complement of ultra-efficient passenger vehicles.”
Aptera had about 30 employees, and Wilbur said they have been let go. On the company’s Web site home page is a note thanking suppliers and supporters of the company’s efforts over the past five years.
This video is from December 2007. The fundamentals of the design were strong, but backing wasn’t.
Following is a letter from Paul Wilbur:
Dec. 2, 2011
After years of focused effort to bring our products to the market, Aptera Motors is closing its doors, effective today. This is a difficult time for everyone connected with our company because we have never been closer to realizing our vision. Unfortunately, though, we are out of resources.
It is especially disappointing since we were so close…
Aptera executives had been engaged in exhaustive due diligence with the Department of Energy (DOE) pertaining to an ATVM (Advance Technology Vehicle Manufacturing) loan. Our business plan was examined from top to bottom by internal agency representatives, independent consultants and experts in academia. They did an amazing job of vetting us and they tested every possible weakness in our plan. And after nearly two years of discussions, we had recently received a Conditional Commitment Letter for a $150 million loan.
The ATVM loan would have provided funding for the development and commercialization of a five-passenger, midsized sedan (similar to a Toyota Camry) that would be base priced at less than $30,000 and deliver more than a 190 mile per gallon equivalent. The concept of this vehicle had been in place since the very beginning of Aptera, and we had been wholly focused on its development for the last year. The last remaining hurdle was finding new funds to match the DOE loan.
We were so optimistic that the company would move forward that we were in discussions to reactivate a mothballed automotive plant in Moraine, Ohio. In the past months we had engaged with the labor union that operated that facility to discuss the hiring of 1,400 new job opportunities. These jobs would have reactivated talented workers who had been dismissed when the facility was closed.
During the same time, we continued development of our patent-pending composite manufacturing system that enables energy efficient vehicle production by drastically reducing vehicle weight (by as much as 30%) while tripling its strength. This same patent pending system allowed us to finish the surface of our composites without manual finishing and without the high capital cost of a typical automotive paint shop. In all, the process would save nearly $750-million versus a typical volume auto assembly plant start-up.
We were well on the way to satisfying the vision of efficiency on which the company was founded and we are confident that with time and capital we could still achieve our goal. The Aptera formula: aerodynamics plus light weight design (through composites) delivered efficiency of 206 EPA miles per gallon in tests at Argonne National Labs. That wasn’t a simulation; it was real measured performance. Despite that promise of efficiency, this challenged market – specifically large private investors – did not have an appetite to lead an investment for the perceived low volume return of our three-wheeled vehicle. So we reprioritized our product plan to four-door sedans, which also cost us time.
We remain confident, even as this chapter closes, that Aptera has contributed tech new technologies to build a future for more efficient driving. Through the dedicated staff at Aptera, our board and suppliers we have touched this future. All that remains is for someone to grab it. We still believe it will happen.
Paul Wilbur
President and CEO
Aptera Motors
Source: Automotive News
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
Dear GM-Volt Readers: We value everyone’s feedback on our daily stories, but – please – don’t post breaking news or other stories that we could be working on as a post here. Doing this will help ensure fresh daily discussions, and will be better for everyone. If you would instead, please e-mail story ideas to jcobb@verticalscope.com Thank you!
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 5:55 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+8
Dec 6th, 2011 (6:39 am)I am sad to see another American enterprise failure. I remember reading about previous automobile brands that didn’t last long due to competition from the Big Three and poor sales. The history of the American automobile has plenty of names and brands that started brightly and ended quickly (or were absorbed). The two that comes to mind are Tucker and DeLorean. At least the DeLorean was resurrected and now has an EV design in planning stages.
The American dream to start one’s own EV business is still alive, but the nightmare of the real business world is still killing those dreams. But at least we know that a few gems have risen among the rough pebbles of that hard road, including Tesla and Fisker. But the true diamond that is leading the new electrics is the Chevy Volt.
Keep the EVs coming to complete the electrification of American transportation!
+1
Dec 6th, 2011 (7:32 am)This car always reminds me of the ‘B.C.’ comic strip. They had a character called ‘Apteryx’ which is a ‘wingless bird with hairy feathers’.
Alas, extinct as well.
+2
Dec 6th, 2011 (7:41 am)While a lot of technical advancement and effort was placed in the Aptera, though it was to be marketed to a specific segment of commuter usage, there is only so much function that can follow form for the various kinds of motoring tasks and conditions that even a specific segment of public needs performed.
Lots of vehicles were built in the sixties and seventies where the engineers had the first call on the mechanisms, and, the designers followed up with designing appealing shapes and curves that the public would find desirable.
Later in the eighties and nineties, additional technical demands by consumers, regulation, and economics made the design tasks more difficult for OEM’s to include emissions and controlling electronics.
Here in the twenty first century, all technical advancements from just about all fields are being called into service by consumers. This is both good for consumer choice, but not as good for OEM’s to determine what really to include in any model in relation to the added retail cost. (Having available a most basic and as technology-free-model-version-as-possible to sell of any model nameplate to run down an assembly line is a very wise imperative.)
But you certainly have to give credit for the efforts that both start ups and well established OEM’s earn in these tasks in trying to figure what the public wants and needs in their transportation investments.
Investment looks to universality of anything necessary as a factor that cuts investment risk. Universality in fulfilling needs increases the likelihood of ROI.
+6
Dec 6th, 2011 (7:49 am)The problem is simply financial.
You have to have so much up front cash available to design, engineer, test and manufacture a test fleet before you ever get a single penny of income on customer ready cars for sale.
Plus you need a dealership model of some type to sell and service vehicles. And who would want to invest in a dealership where there are no cars to sell, and no track record of past performance to pull customers into the showroom.
GM invested over a billion dollars into the development of the Volt. And they already had the people available and physical plant space they could use. They also have the experience necessary to deal with all of the government agencies to bring a new car to life.
Even with all of that, GM still has the NHTSA problem to deal with. Could you imagine the impact if that agency came down upon a company the size of Aptera? They would be killed instantly.
Staring a new car manufacturing business is a massive undertaking. IMHO, the only way these small startups can survive is to be merged into an existing company. Take Tesla for example. After years in business they have only sold about 2,000 cars. If they get the backing or become a division of Toyota, they have a shot. If not, I can’t see that they will ever be more than a niche player, if they survive at all.
It is not the same as Jobs and Wozniak in their garage building the Apple 1….
C-5277
Dec 6th, 2011 (8:30 am)I think most of us saw this coming. That’s unfortunate to see them not make it. Not trying to rub salt in the wounds, but I could never see this car working in the more Northern snow states. It always seemed like a California or Florida car. Therefore, I always was suspicious of this company at surviving. Aside of the car being best suited for only the fair weather states, the Company was more anonymous than even Tesla. Few people outside of the green car webisites ever heard of this car. And the 2 founders were kicked out. And it missed it’s slated production date by a mile. And failed to win the X-Prize contest. Just way too many things working against them IMHO.
Dec 6th, 2011 (8:45 am)I don’t think we will even miss it. I feel sure any technology developed will not be lost but be incorporated in some other vehicle. Assuming there was any really new technology developed.
+3
Dec 6th, 2011 (8:46 am)It didn’t become successful because not enough people would buy these. I, for one, would not want to go on the major highway inside one . Too bad our government wasted all that money.
Dec 6th, 2011 (8:48 am)“We remain confident, even as this chapter closes, that Aptera has contributed tech new technologies to build a future for more efficient driving”
———–
Other than the 3-wheel carbon-fiber body shape, did they contribute anything else? Not being facetious, but I never followed Aptera that much (living in Michigan I knew it wouldn’t work for me).
+1
Dec 6th, 2011 (9:16 am)I really liked the idea, especially the three wheeled version that would be classified as a motorcycle in most states.
+2
Dec 6th, 2011 (9:17 am)I’m not surprised. Had they started with “a five-passenger midsized sedan (similar to a Toyota Camry) a real EV“ prototype, instead of a 3 wheeler, maybe they’d still be around.
NHTSA would have had a field day smashing and flipping that 3 wheeler.
NPNS!
Volt#671
Dec 6th, 2011 (9:20 am)The car is not practical. It’s more of a movie prop than something sellable to the mass market.
+2
Dec 6th, 2011 (10:39 am)That would have allowed it to avoid many safety regs and be lighter/effecient, but it would have also been less safe than the average car. No way most people would have put their kids in it, including me.
Dec 6th, 2011 (10:41 am)I think many people just don’t realize the enormous expense of concept, design, acquiring the right components, building, selling and servicing electric vehicles. Giving the consumer the power to choose with tax credits/rebates is necessary and the best tool to get quality EVs to market. Just getting an EV to market does not ensure success. Building the right product for the right price cannot be understated. I think the 3 wheel concept is what hurt them the most JMO.
Dec 6th, 2011 (10:47 am)It’s always sad to see an American dream die, especially at such a high cost. I only hope that they can sell their technology and maybe GM, Ford or whoever can enhance efficiency on current EVs or conventional ICE vehicles. Personally, I can never see myself owning one of these things in its current form.
#4386
-2
Dec 6th, 2011 (10:49 am)Maybe they SHOULD put wings on it and market it as an EV plane? (j/k… kinda)
-2
Dec 6th, 2011 (11:11 am)The car was wrong for the market beyond a handful of geeks and sci-fi dreamers.
With its driver’s position off-centered between the widely spaced front wheels, one would have to learn how to drive all over again just to be able to safely thread one’s way through tightly spaced traffic.
Bicyclists beware if an Aptera were to approach from the rear….. WHACKKK!!
Dec 6th, 2011 (11:40 am)I always thought this was an interesting concept, but was coming up as too expensive. Original design was rear wheel drive. I imagine the redesign for front wheel drive and some other things ate lots of time and money. For the projected price, I would have expected something more like an E-REV drive train. It was difficult to get too excited about a vehicle that availability on the East Coast wasn’t even projected yet. Oh well.
+2
Dec 6th, 2011 (12:23 pm)“and the company had attracted a fair amount of press” THE PRESS.. seems to only want to accentuate the negative…. while shunning innovation… seems our media has been bought.
+1
Dec 6th, 2011 (12:46 pm)There is only one good thing I can think of to say about that car/airplane/trike is:
They aren’t gonna build it.
Electric cars are already thought of as golf-carts… Lets not give them an example to point and laugh at.
-1
Dec 6th, 2011 (1:24 pm)Loboc,
The Apteryx is not extinct. It is better known as the Kiwi.
+5
Dec 6th, 2011 (1:46 pm)No federal government money was lost on this company. The DOE rejected the loans to Aptera due to insufficient private investment.
“On March 11, 2009, the federal government summarily denied loans to Aptera Motors under the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, due to wording which limited loans to four-wheeled vehicle research and production.[13] After a lobbying effort which changed the wording of the bill to allow high-mileage three-wheeled vehicles, Aptera Corp. reapplied for federal government loans from the Dept. of Energy as of October 30, 2009.[14] The amount requested was $184 million.[15]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors
Dec 6th, 2011 (2:29 pm)The one in the strip was the last of it’s kind.
+1
Dec 6th, 2011 (2:32 pm)I personally do think the Aptera was far ahead of its time.
Perhaps people would have thought it was a weird car if it had gotten on the road, BUT people would begin to accept more aerodynamic designs.
As far as the safety comments, Aptera was fundamentally a very safe vehicle. Its passenger compartment was designed like a race car.
I am disappointed the company has closed. I think the leadership was probably lacking.
While he seems like a nice enough guy, I almost wonder if the latest CEO really just got bought out or for some secondary motivation wanted to undermine the company. Or there really is far too much red tape that gets in the way of producing a car… (more likely).
Dec 6th, 2011 (3:35 pm)I thought that it was an elegant piece of design, and I would have been very tempted to buy one if the Volt had not materialized. But all of your comments are right on as to the difficulty of entry into the car market and the lack of mass appeal of the 3 wheeler. I mean, I’m the one who keeps saying that Tesla and Fisker aren’t long for this world, hehehe.
And when they brought in new management from Saleen (LOL) all of my scam warnings immediately maxed. I agree with Logical_Thinker that there was probably more going on than meets the eye. As in get the DOE loan money and beat feet for Brazil maybe, LOL?
+2
Dec 6th, 2011 (4:11 pm)Many technical folks here, i wonder whether GM can bring the Spark EV to go 100 miles? Hopefully by 2013 a little better & efficient battery pack and lighter weight of Spark could achieve this. Ocud drive the Spark for 2 days or so before recharge. May be wishful thinking on my part!
However, a 100+ mile range will be the first for an EV manufacturer and one more first for GM.
Dec 6th, 2011 (4:32 pm)100 miles in what conditions? With EV’s you need to give a range, such as 75 to 125 miles. Nissan claimed 100 miles for the LEAF but real world was 40 to 70 miles.
+2
Dec 6th, 2011 (4:51 pm)I would love to know if there are any unassembled Aptera vehicles; Chassis, Body, Motors, etc… that could be put together as a “Kit Car”. What would that cost? Inquiring minds want to know!
Dec 6th, 2011 (5:09 pm)There have got to be a number of fully-assembled Apteras around. Look at all the photos (Google).
Yeah, actually I would like to buy the rights to Aptera and produce it myself.
Problem is, I don’t have any cash. Hmm. Cash is the problem everywhere…
Dec 6th, 2011 (5:41 pm)Logical_Thinker,
CorvetteGuy,
Given the choice, I’d rather have a GM Rake. Both would just be fun summer toys.
Dec 6th, 2011 (8:08 pm)Keep some hot sauce handy, you may have to eat those words. High performance has a way of selling, despite the fact it may be more efficient
Dec 6th, 2011 (8:44 pm)Drive it behind a large wide van downhill at a constant speed for a hundred miles.
Raymond
Dec 6th, 2011 (9:41 pm)Seeing the Xprize contestants motoring around all together had a circus act kind of feel to it. Just sayin’.
Dec 6th, 2011 (10:21 pm)#25 pat Many technical folks here, I wonder whether GM can bring the Spark EV to go 100 miles? Hopefully by 2013 a little better & efficient battery pack and lighter weight of Spark could achieve this. I could drive the Spark for 2 days or so before recharge. May be wishful thinking on my part!
However, a 100+ mile range will be the first for an EV manufacturer and one more first for GM.
I would be happy with a 100 mile real world range; 150+ range BEV. I don’t think GM is planning to put that large of a battery in the Spark EV. I heard that KODA is lowering their price to 40K and it is supposed to have a 150 mile range. I would guess that with its 36kwh battery it should be able to go 100 miles real world range. Now if we could just get an American made EV with these stats. Please pleeease!
Dec 6th, 2011 (11:09 pm)If you thought $4/gal was bad, how about $400/gal?
I think we need to get some EV’s to Afgahanistan pronto and set up some solar cells.
U.S.’s Afghan Headache: $400-a-Gallon Gasoline
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204903804577080613427403928.html?fb_ref=wsj_share_fb
+1
Dec 7th, 2011 (12:27 am)Sorry they went out of business, i also feel they were a bit before their time. The car would have met my needs for the most part, but I’d still have to compromise – such as transporting the children, extra baggage, just going to the airport and being able to get back on one charge. To date, on the Volt as an electric car seems to work into my needs which are not that exceptional.
I would certainly have used the Aptera to commute to work (if it reliably goes 100 miles between charges), but otherwise, I cant see myself paying the same for a Volt as I would an Aptera where I don’t have the same flexibility.
Sorry guys, to niche for my uses.
Dec 7th, 2011 (3:18 am)Red tape…or red ink?
Dec 7th, 2011 (3:22 am)Hmmm…kind of like – Corvettes