GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,085 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Per the contract between Fisker and Tesla, all disputes are to be resolved through arbitration in Orange County, CA. Tesla filed suit against Fisker in San Mateo, so now this case will be quickly resolved through arbitration in Orange County.

Link

Basically, Tesla asked Fisker to design a BEV. Later, Fisker partnered with Quantum Tech, alternative propulsion supplier to the major automakers, to produce a REEV - a configuration which then CEO Martin Eberhard refused to consider, until months after GM and Fisker announced their REEV's, and only a couple months prior to his ouster.

Tesla was trying to cram 56 kWh's of batteries in a vehicle, while GM and Fisker are only cramming 16 kWh's of batteries and a 70 hp engine in theirs. This difference alone is significant in the design proportions of a vehicle, and will lead to drastically different designs. If Tesla is not satisfied with their BEV design, compared with Fisker's REEV design, then they have Martin Eberhard to thank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
You gathered all that from the article? Eberhard, from what I understand anyhow, is willing to accept EREVs now. If you are correct, Fisker will kick the crap out of Tesla in arbitration. Wonder if there are any counterclaims going in the other direction against Tesla? Wonder if there are any attorney fee-shifting provisions if one party loses at arbitration...ouch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,085 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
You gathered all that from the article? Eberhard, from what I understand anyhow, is willing to accept EREVs now. If you are correct, Fisker will kick the crap out of Tesla in arbitration. Wonder if there are any counterclaims going in the other direction against Tesla? Wonder if there are any attorney fee-shifting provisions if one party loses at arbitration...ouch.
Martin Eberhard had a death-bed conversion, hoping to keep his job, but his subsequent presentations have been about BEV's only.

The counter-suit was the one in which Fisker just received a ruling for arbitration in Orange County.

I can understand Tesla wanting to tie up Fisker and besmirtch his good name, since they are competitors, but arbitration is the only place this issue should have gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Only in America. Silly. Two wannabe car companies beating each other up in court before either company is actually producing much or worth anything. This gives us an insight into what kind of people are actually running these companies. They are more concerned about property rights that they can sell later than they are about just building cars. If these guys were just in it to build EVs they would recognize this as a big waste of time and resources that could be better spent on R&D, but I don't think they are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,085 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Only in America. Silly. Two wannabe car companies beating each other up in court before either company is actually producing much or worth anything. This gives us an insight into what kind of people are actually running these companies. They are more concerned about property rights that they can sell later than they are about just building cars. If these guys were just in it to build EVs they would recognize this as a big waste of time and resources that could be better spent on R&D, but I don't think they are.
I think it was more an attempt by Tesla Motors to throw a wrench in the works for Fisker, as Fisker is using Tier 1 suppliers and contract manufacturing to rapidly catch up to Tesla Motors. I believe it is also an attempt by Tesla Motors to get Fisker to reveal their specific system configurations through a lawsuit, which Tesla Motors wouldn't otherwise learn until the Karma actually shipped.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top