Fisker Loses $560k On Every Car Sold!!!

  • Thread starter RDF97
  • 49 comments
  • 4,086 views
RDF97

RDF97

688
Australia
Sydney
I've never been a real big fan of Fisker's but I found on "Top Speed" that part of their filing for bankruptcy is part of their poor marketing, blah, blah, blah.
Basically they sell their cars, the Karma, for $100,000 each and they cost about $660,000 to make each car.

Shame they've only been around for a few years and they looked promising but they're filing for bankruptcy, how could they possibly sell a car for less than a 1/6 of its actual value???

Here is the article I found off Top Speed.com

"When we went out for a test drive in the Fisker Karma last year, we thought that it felt a little more high-tech than the $100,000 price tag led us to believe. Everything operated smoothly, the interior was plush, the performance was admirable and its look was downright stunning. With all of this technology and design comes a hefty price, and boy did Fisker feel its belt tightening with each and every Karma it produced.

With its bankruptcy proceedings pretty mu inevitable, PrivCo dug up all the public record s it could to have a look at Fisker’s financial goings on, and it found that the each Karma produced cost a total of $660,000 but sold for only about $100k – that’s just bad business, folks. Now, we’re not saying that each car it built literally cost $660k, what this means is that when you take all of the research and development cost, advertising costs and the other costs associated with the car and divided it by the number of Karma’s sold, you get roughly $660k.

At that rate, there was no way Fisker could have survived anyways, but the fact that it was the victim of management that would likely make Lotus’ former management look good just accelerated things. In fact, PrivCo has released a detailed review of Fisker $1.3 billion debacle, which really opens our eyes to just how promising the model was and outlines exactly where things completely fell apart. You can see this study here.

The fortunate thing is that Fisker’s advanced EVer system will likely be bought out during the bankruptcy process, so even though we will not see another Karma on the road, it may live on in spirit through future models using this awesome drive system."

What do you think of this?

Just stupidity or do you feel sorry for them?

search


search


RDF97
 
Last edited:
The Stig Farmer
O_O

That's a shame, I was starting to like Fiskers :indiff:
Click to expand...
Shame yeah, like I said but I do respect it and I do personally think how stupid they are. For more info on this, look up Top Speed.com and go through the pages, it'll be pushed back by the time you read this.

Cost $660, sell for $100
 
Luminis
How on earth are Fisker's cars $ 660,000 to make in the first place?!
Click to expand...

Well, for example the wood in the interior is from naturally fallen trees, so they actually have to go out and find it rather than have it delivered in a cheap, artificially-felled block. The whole car is made of ecofriendly materials.
 
Last edited:
They could make money by taking the Hybrid stuff out and put a LS7 or LS1 or LS3. That would make them have money, and the Fisker Karma would be so much better.
 
TheKitten
They could make money by taking the Hybrid stuff out and put a LS7 or LS1 or LS3. That would make them have money, and the Fisker Karma would be so much better.
Click to expand...

Someone did actually :sly: Bob Lutz himself I believe.
 
The Stig Farmer
Well, for example the wood in the interior is from naturally fallen trees, so they actually have to go out and find it rather than have it delivered in a cheap, artifically-felled block. The whole car is made of ecofriendly materials.
Click to expand...
Ecofools, the lot of 'em.
 
The Stig Farmer
Someone did actually :sly: Bob Lutz himself I believe.
Click to expand...

And then he ruined it by giving it a 6 speed manual with an optional 4 speed automatic.

I don't feel sorry for Fisker at all. They should've seen this coming.
 
I would suspect that the cost per unit will include the engineering research costs, tooling set up, factory set up etc etc... probably not the full costs, but whatever proportion of those costs were amortised in to their current fiscal year.

Shame as the Fisker really looked like one of the more interesting alternative propulsion cars... hopefully a big manufacturer will pick up the technollogy and find a way to mass produce at in more cost effective way.
 
Stotty
I would suspect that the cost per unit will include the engineering research costs, tooling set up, factory set up etc etc... probably not the full costs, but whatever proportion of those costs were amortised in to their current fiscal year.
Click to expand...

You would be correct, as stated in the OP.

RDF97
Now, we’re not saying that each car it built literally cost $660k, what this means is that when you take all of the research and development cost, advertising costs and the other costs associated with the car and divided it by the number of Karma’s sold, you get roughly $660k.
Click to expand...

Shame as the Fisker really looked like one of the more interesting alternative propulsion cars... hopefully a big manufacturer will pick up the technollogy and find a way to mass produce at in more cost effective way.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Another failed "green" company, shocker.

On a lighter note, does the front grill on the Karma remind anyone else of the Pringles guy's mustache?

Or is it just me...
 
Large start-up irreversible investments divided by production numbers way shorter than expected. Any failed start up with large fixed costs could be made to look this way.
 
Sort of misleading, bordering on sensationalist. All cars cost more than the sticker price on their first production run. Then the numbers swing positive after they've sold a lot of them.

The large up-front costs were a given, either way. There is no way to pay off the research and development costs of an entirely new chassis on just a single product line.

Perhaps what's important is that Fisker didn't bring the car to market fast enough and didn't sell enough of them before the accounting fell through. As with Tesla, if you deliver the product within a reasonable period of time and sell enough of it, you can survive the initial losses.
 
I always thought Fisker should have merged with Tesla. Fisker body with Tesla running gear sounds sweet. Especially since the Tesla doesn't look that good at all. But of course Tesla wouldn't touch that.
 
niky
Sort of misleading, bordering on sensationalist. All cars cost more than the sticker price on their first production run. Then the numbers swing positive after they've sold a lot of them.

The large up-front costs were a given, either way. There is no way to pay off the research and development costs of an entirely new chassis on just a single product line.

Perhaps what's important is that Fisker didn't bring the car to market fast enough and didn't sell enough of them before the accounting fell through. As with Tesla, if you deliver the product within a reasonable period of time and sell enough of it, you can survive the initial losses.
Click to expand...

+1, this is just a case of small production levels. Fisker obviously planned to sell many times the car they actually sold, which would have brought down the unit price dramatically and eventually made the car profitable after breaking even. Some stupid businessman at Fisker though.

Prime example of why starting a car company is virtually impossible now a days, unlike the dawn of car manufacturing when virtually every town had its own manufacturer.
 
niky
Sort of misleading, bordering on sensationalist. All cars cost more than the sticker price on their first production run. Then the numbers swing positive after they've sold a lot of them.

The large up-front costs were a given, either way. There is no way to pay off the research and development costs of an entirely new chassis on just a single product line.

Perhaps what's important is that Fisker didn't bring the car to market fast enough and didn't sell enough of them before the accounting fell through. As with Tesla, if you deliver the product within a reasonable period of time and sell enough of it, you can survive the initial losses.
Click to expand...

Thank you for coming in here and saying this. Trying to explain this to people who buy into number fudging like that is a bit tedious.
 
niky
Sort of misleading, bordering on sensationalist. All cars cost more than the sticker price on their first production run. Then the numbers swing positive after they've sold a lot of them.
Click to expand...

Example: There was nothing really expensive about the Pontiac Aztek. Already existing drivetrain on an already existing platform, subtracted out to Mexico to actually build. They needed to sell 30k a year to make any money on it, because of the fixed costs related to production and transportation (it cost pretty close to the same to make and ship 15,000 vehicles as it does 30,000). They never even got close, so they lost tons of money on each one anyway because the plants were working way under capacity and the distribution network wasn't shipping near the numbers expected.





Meanwhile, the platform mate the Buick Rendezvous cost the same to make and shared a lot of stuff with the Aztek (including production line), but even though GM needed the same amount of sales to break even as the Aztek, the Buick handily outsold those projections and GM made a killing on them.
 
niky
Sort of misleading, bordering on sensationalist. All cars cost more than the sticker price on their first production run. Then the numbers swing positive after they've sold a lot of them.
Click to expand...
Ugh, and here I thought they were talking about variable costs per unit :ouch: That's why I was baffled at the cost of the Karma. With the fixed costs included, it's pretty obvious, I guess...
 
Pretty much. Fisker could have shortened the time by playing up the exclusivity of the Karma and charging more. But he didn't. The need to stay relatively faithful to the idea of making "affordable" EVs makes the venture a perilous one.

"Exclusive" supercar makers fall by the wayside all the time, even though the price-per-unit factor should make them money-makers. Now try to build something like that and sell it for less... That is perhaps what the article is alluding to, but unless they separate variable costs from fixed costs, they've failed to make that connection.
 
Luminis
How on earth are Fisker's cars $ 660,000 to make in the first place?!
Click to expand...
They put a lot of attention to detail into the cars

TheKitten
They could make money by taking the Hybrid stuff out and put a LS7 or LS1 or LS3. That would make them have money, and the Fisker Karma would be so much better.
Click to expand...
Then fuel prices become so expensive that no one would think of buying a massive V8 and the fact that they going because they idiotically sold the car with a massive loss.

Adamgp
Another failed "green" company, shocker.

On a lighter note, does the front grill on the Karma remind anyone else of the Pringles guy's mustache?

Or is it just me...
Click to expand...
How is that relevant???
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest Posts

Back