4 ms·

Fisker Automotive lays off majority of employees

34 points by peterjancelis 14y ago

lifeisstillgood 14y ago
Two things stand out: said about 150 employees had been fired while about 50 senior managers and executives had been retained. If that is true, it says a lot about the internal culture. And it ain't good. April 22 deadline to repay a portion of a $193 million low-interest loan from the United States Department of Energy. Although Fisker was originally granted a $528.7 million loan in late 2009, that money was frozen after Fisker fell short of its production targets. Look, if the government loans you 1/2 billion of soft loans, its really really important to cheat and lie about how those production targets are going. Oh, and now that the US taxpayer has funded a 500m dollar investment into developing electric cars, European and Chinese manufacturers are sniffing around to pick it up at pennies on the dollar. Come on guys! Pick free market or protectionism. And if you must mix the two, do it the right way round !
- tptacek 14y ago
  They didn't get 500MM from the USG, did they?
  - pmorici 14y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisker_Automotive#U.S._government_loan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisker_Automotive#U.S._governme... They spent $193 million from the $500 million before the US government cut them off. The "loan" was part of a 25 billion dollar DOE program.
- hkmurakami 14y ago
  > said about 150 employees had been fired while about 50 senior managers and executives had been retained. If that is true, it says a lot about the internal culture. And it ain't good. IMO they aren't going to try to get the company afloat again; they're just shoring up the edges to sell themselves to someone for their IP and other assets. (at least I'd hope so, since only retaining execs/mgmt if you're a tech/manufacturing company with the intent to somehow turn this thing around and stay in business is just insanity)
jasongill 14y ago
My father was laid off last February when Fisker did their first round of layoffs on the east coast. What a terribly run company, which is sad, because the car really did look good (from some angles...)
- tptacek 14y ago
  I know nothing at all about them. What made them terribly run? Thanks!
  - pmorici 14y ago
    For starters their vehicles had a reputation for spontaneously combusting... http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/19/fisker-karma-cooling-fan-fire-voluntary-recall/ http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/19/fisker-karma-cooling-fan-...
    - hkmurakami 14y ago
      Well don't Ferraris have that reputation too? :P
  - jasongill 14y ago
    They wanted to be a fresh and new car company, but ended up just hiring industry insiders with the same lumbering mindset of General Motors. Add more managers and executives to make things better, not more people who actually know what their doing. My father was head of distribution with 30+ years of experience under his belt taking cars from foreign countries and seeing them all the way through to the dealers. He was one of the first to be let go last year, which left them with no one who knew how to do customs forms, how to get cars off the boat and then prepare them for ground transport and sale, etc. If you can't move your product around (or even get it in to the country), you won't have much success. Hurricane Sandy slammed the port where hundreds of Fisker Karmas, some of which were already sold to customers, were trapped due to no one knowing how to get them moved or out of customs. 320 were destroyed in the resulting fires due to salt water getting in to the high voltage system. Simply having someone who was even mildly familiar with the process of getting cars handled at the port and on to truck or rail could have prevented that, but instead, the cars just sat for months after my father was let go. Obviously my story is just a personal one, but from what I've heard from other ex-Fisker employees, basically every department was ruined this way, too.
ricardobeat 14y ago
They left 320 $100k+ cars out in the open without insurance?
- djt 14y ago
  "act of god"
  - jonknee 14y ago
    Many thousands of people had their cars replaced by insurance companies from the same storm. If Fisker didn't have the proper coverage that's simply their fault.
jweir 14y ago
The company didn't have insurance on it shipment of cars lost from Sandy? That doesn't sound right.
- whatgoodisaroad 14y ago
  They did, sort of. http://green.autoblog.com/2012/12/29/fisker-sues-insurance-company-over-karmas-damaged-in-hurricane-s/ http://green.autoblog.com/2012/12/29/fisker-sues-insurance-c...
briandear 14y ago
Another wasted 'investment' by the government in so-called green energy. Between the billions of dollars wasted on Solyndra, Fiskar and that cohort, we could have cut taxes and made it easier for successful companies to grow and expand. Instead we subsidize losing products while increasing the regulatory and tax burden on small businesses making it an exceptionally difficult growth environment. Electric cars might be nice in theory but their environmental impact is far worse than the normal cars we have today. The components in the batteries for instance produce far more pollutants in ther manufacture than a gasoline car produces in 5 years. Yet, electric cars "feel" good despite the irony that they do nothing to improve the environment.
- tstactplsignore 14y ago
  Wow, this is the most uninformed post I have ever read on HN. 1. Government investments in alternative energy have been extraordinarily successful: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10165 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10165 To quote: "the report examines 17 R&D programs in energy efficiency and 22 programs in fossil energy funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). These programs yielded economic returns of an estimated $40 billion from an investment of $13 billion." B. The Department of Energy's loan program has been an overwhelming success; failure rates have been lower than expected. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/21/1038907/-Solyndra-accounts-for-less-than-2-of-the-DOE-s-successful-Loan-Program http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/21/1038907/-Solyndra-a... C. Electric cars have an overall lower carbon footprint than gasoline vehicles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicle#Air_pollution_and_greenhouse_gas_emissions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicle#Air_po... And, you are missing the whole point. As the grid becomes completely generated by renewable, then the carbon footprint of electric vehicles will be drastically reduced.
  - yekko 14y ago
    No, it is proven a total waste of taxpayer money. It did however made a few insider super rich.
    - 14y ago
rdl 14y ago
What happens if you picked wrong and bought a Karma instead of a Model S a few years ago? Is an orphaned Karma still a viable car, or will it drop in price rapidly (or go up, as a collector's item?) I guess most people buying $100k cars can afford another one, though.
- MikeCapone 14y ago
  Leonardo DiCaprio bought one iirc. But Fisker failing probably just makes it even more collectible now.
  - zalew 14y ago
    bought? such high profile celebs usually are given or lease at ridiculous discounts. di caprio is actually a face of the company (brand ambassador), he didn't pay a dime, rather was paid to show publically with it.
  - rdl 14y ago
    A high profile HN person has one, too (I've seen it, it's sexy, but too heavy by about 1200 pounds).
MRSallee 14y ago
I had a bad feeing about these guys when Car and Driver published a review in which the green Fisker got 24 miles of range on a charge and, after that, retuned just 24 mpg on gasoline. Overweight, overwrought. Further shows how impressive it is Tesla makes compelling electric cars -- no other "start up" has come close.
jaebrown 14y ago
After reading the story on Fisker and their founder, I wonder if this is "Karma"?

34 points by peterjancelis 14y ago

Two things stand out: said about 150 employees had been fired while about 50 senior managers and executives had been retained. If that is true, it says a lot about the internal culture. And it ain't good. April 22 deadline to repay a portion of a $193 million low-interest loan from the United States Department of Energy. Although Fisker was originally granted a $528.7 million loan in late 2009, that money was frozen after Fisker fell short of its production targets. Look, if the government loans you 1/2 billion of soft loans, its really really important to cheat and lie about how those production targets are going. Oh, and now that the US taxpayer has funded a 500m dollar investment into developing electric cars, European and Chinese manufacturers are sniffing around to pick it up at pennies on the dollar. Come on guys! Pick free market or protectionism. And if you must mix the two, do it the right way round !

tptacek 14y ago
They didn't get 500MM from the USG, did they?
- pmorici 14y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisker_Automotive#U.S._government_loan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisker_Automotive#U.S._governme... They spent $193 million from the $500 million before the US government cut them off. The "loan" was part of a 25 billion dollar DOE program.
hkmurakami 14y ago
> said about 150 employees had been fired while about 50 senior managers and executives had been retained. If that is true, it says a lot about the internal culture. And it ain't good. IMO they aren't going to try to get the company afloat again; they're just shoring up the edges to sell themselves to someone for their IP and other assets. (at least I'd hope so, since only retaining execs/mgmt if you're a tech/manufacturing company with the intent to somehow turn this thing around and stay in business is just insanity)

jasongill 14y ago

My father was laid off last February when Fisker did their first round of layoffs on the east coast. What a terribly run company, which is sad, because the car really did look good (from some angles...)

tptacek 14y ago
I know nothing at all about them. What made them terribly run? Thanks!
- pmorici 14y ago
  For starters their vehicles had a reputation for spontaneously combusting... http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/19/fisker-karma-cooling-fan-fire-voluntary-recall/ http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/19/fisker-karma-cooling-fan-...
  - hkmurakami 14y ago
    Well don't Ferraris have that reputation too? :P
- jasongill 14y ago
  They wanted to be a fresh and new car company, but ended up just hiring industry insiders with the same lumbering mindset of General Motors. Add more managers and executives to make things better, not more people who actually know what their doing. My father was head of distribution with 30+ years of experience under his belt taking cars from foreign countries and seeing them all the way through to the dealers. He was one of the first to be let go last year, which left them with no one who knew how to do customs forms, how to get cars off the boat and then prepare them for ground transport and sale, etc. If you can't move your product around (or even get it in to the country), you won't have much success. Hurricane Sandy slammed the port where hundreds of Fisker Karmas, some of which were already sold to customers, were trapped due to no one knowing how to get them moved or out of customs. 320 were destroyed in the resulting fires due to salt water getting in to the high voltage system. Simply having someone who was even mildly familiar with the process of getting cars handled at the port and on to truck or rail could have prevented that, but instead, the cars just sat for months after my father was let go. Obviously my story is just a personal one, but from what I've heard from other ex-Fisker employees, basically every department was ruined this way, too.

ricardobeat 14y ago

They left 320 $100k+ cars out in the open without insurance?

djt 14y ago
"act of god"
- jonknee 14y ago
  Many thousands of people had their cars replaced by insurance companies from the same storm. If Fisker didn't have the proper coverage that's simply their fault.

jweir 14y ago

The company didn't have insurance on it shipment of cars lost from Sandy? That doesn't sound right.

whatgoodisaroad 14y ago
They did, sort of. http://green.autoblog.com/2012/12/29/fisker-sues-insurance-company-over-karmas-damaged-in-hurricane-s/ http://green.autoblog.com/2012/12/29/fisker-sues-insurance-c...

briandear 14y ago

Another wasted 'investment' by the government in so-called green energy. Between the billions of dollars wasted on Solyndra, Fiskar and that cohort, we could have cut taxes and made it easier for successful companies to grow and expand. Instead we subsidize losing products while increasing the regulatory and tax burden on small businesses making it an exceptionally difficult growth environment. Electric cars might be nice in theory but their environmental impact is far worse than the normal cars we have today. The components in the batteries for instance produce far more pollutants in ther manufacture than a gasoline car produces in 5 years. Yet, electric cars "feel" good despite the irony that they do nothing to improve the environment.

tstactplsignore 14y ago
Wow, this is the most uninformed post I have ever read on HN. 1. Government investments in alternative energy have been extraordinarily successful: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10165 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10165 To quote: "the report examines 17 R&D programs in energy efficiency and 22 programs in fossil energy funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). These programs yielded economic returns of an estimated $40 billion from an investment of $13 billion." B. The Department of Energy's loan program has been an overwhelming success; failure rates have been lower than expected. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/21/1038907/-Solyndra-accounts-for-less-than-2-of-the-DOE-s-successful-Loan-Program http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/21/1038907/-Solyndra-a... C. Electric cars have an overall lower carbon footprint than gasoline vehicles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicle#Air_pollution_and_greenhouse_gas_emissions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicle#Air_po... And, you are missing the whole point. As the grid becomes completely generated by renewable, then the carbon footprint of electric vehicles will be drastically reduced.
- yekko 14y ago
  No, it is proven a total waste of taxpayer money. It did however made a few insider super rich.
  - 14y ago

rdl 14y ago

What happens if you picked wrong and bought a Karma instead of a Model S a few years ago? Is an orphaned Karma still a viable car, or will it drop in price rapidly (or go up, as a collector's item?) I guess most people buying $100k cars can afford another one, though.

MikeCapone 14y ago
Leonardo DiCaprio bought one iirc. But Fisker failing probably just makes it even more collectible now.
- zalew 14y ago
  bought? such high profile celebs usually are given or lease at ridiculous discounts. di caprio is actually a face of the company (brand ambassador), he didn't pay a dime, rather was paid to show publically with it.
- rdl 14y ago
  A high profile HN person has one, too (I've seen it, it's sexy, but too heavy by about 1200 pounds).

MRSallee 14y ago

I had a bad feeing about these guys when Car and Driver published a review in which the green Fisker got 24 miles of range on a charge and, after that, retuned just 24 mpg on gasoline. Overweight, overwrought. Further shows how impressive it is Tesla makes compelling electric cars -- no other "start up" has come close.

jaebrown 14y ago

After reading the story on Fisker and their founder, I wonder if this is "Karma"?