CONCERN: RIVN have enough cash to to go beyond 2025 and launch R2?

[hbkdinobot]

Maybe the AMC/Gamestop people can jump on the Rivian train?

To the moon.

Sponsored

 

[Red Shirt Wookie]

I'll dollar cost average again... right... now!

 

[Biturbowned]

I bought more, what the hell

 

[Eric9610]

So something very interesting this am wen looking at options for target price above $30 in 18months and no takers. This tells me that the market is confident in rebound otherwise my order would have been picked up asap.

 

[Tahoe Man]

I never said there was a guarantee, but they are far from going under. Starting a car manufacturer from scratch is not easy, as Fisker, Lucid and the other's performance support - but Rivian is still doing the best of the bunch. Time will tell what happens. Them getting bought out is much more likely then them going under IMO.

Totally agree they won't go under, because they'll be purchased before that happens.

Honestly, Rivian had the wind at their backs since inception and all I write this, their stock is nearing single digits. Retail buyers, fleet managers, etc will take note of this and reconsider purchases.

 

[Tahoe Man]

Speaking of losing all credibility...the best of times? Their launch was delayed multiple times by a global pandemic which then cascaded into the most challenging manufacturing environment in a century. This was followed by massive inflation which caused their costs to rise significantly and then by the highest interest rates in decades.

It was the best of times? It was the worst of times.

Lol, the pandemic era flooded the market with easy money, provided a continuation of ZIRP which brought on EV investment speculation allowing for a ridiculous IPO valuation which the pubic bought hook line and sinker. If anything the pandemic was a benefit to Rivian. The "inflation" part was a green light for all car makers especially the EV makers to mark up prices and make hey out of it.

If the only way RJ can operate and execute his EV entity without failing is with ZIRP, a booming economy and most of all a highly speculative EV market whereas buyers are jumping over each other to get their Rivian, he's in the wrong business because the real world doesn't work like that.

 

[Zoidz]

You do realize Tesla start selling cars in 2009…

I stand by my math as the company data came from Barron’s something you probably don’t have access to.

also the model X compete directly in the R1 class. I don’t know anyone that picks an X over R1.

Yeah, but..... That was the Roadster. Tesla didn't build most of the car, it was essentially a Lotus Elise with a Tesla drivetrain. Over 4 years they built only 2,450 of them. That's a custom shop type of product, not a production line product. No one considers that vehicle a "production car" from a manufacturing perspective so it's a bit of Apples and Oranges when comparing to Rivian.

 

[ThatOneGuy]

Yeah, but..... That was the Roadster. Tesla didn't build most of the car, it was essentially a Lotus Elise with a Tesla drivetrain. Over 4 years they built only 2,450 of them. That's a custom shop type of product, not a production line product. No one considers that vehicle a "production car" from a manufacturing perspective so it's a bit of Apples and Oranges when comparing to Rivian.

Okay, what about the Model S? First delivery in the first half of 2012.

 

[Zoidz]

Okay, what about the Model S? First delivery in the first half of 2012.

Yep, IMO that's when Tesla became a real production car company. Prior to that they were a customizer like Rousch, Shelby, Alpina, etc.

 

[kshivark]

I don't understand the obsession with comparing Tesla and Rivian with respect their company lifecycle as to to who could mass produce and deliver faster. It is not just apples to oranges comparison it is more like apple to spinach comparison. 1) Tesla created the market from EV's from scratch (Rivian got it ready made) 2) Tesla had to develop a whole charging infra before it could sell cars (Rivian has just started with RAN but nobody is buying cars assuming they will charge at RAN) 3) Tesla has to build the supply chain for EV components including batteries and drive trains (Rivian could launch leveraging the global supply chain of these components). Rivian has a very good product in R1, but constant comparison with Tesla saying how Rivian is better is not fair and logical. This is akin to saying Motorola/Nokia took 15 years to launch a mobile phone while a chinese company like vivo can launch one is 2 months and hence the new company has a better performance as compared to Motorola/Nokia. They both are very different while Tesla had to create the market as a 1st mover and Rivian has very different challenges of dealing with competition as a 2nd mover in the market. Lets hope Rivian can pass through the current demand + profitability + liquidity crisis in the next couple of quarters.

 

[Eric9610]

Yep, IMO that's when Tesla became a real production car company. Prior to that they were a customizer like Rousch, Shelby, Alpina, etc.

I know the definition of production car and its 150 units annually...

I think you are mistaken on the roadster... While it looked like an Elise it was 80% built by Tesla. All the body panels were made of CF not fiberglass like the lotus. Also, they purchased the seats and tub from lotus everything elese was made by Tesla for use in the roadster only. I know because I owned a lotus and a friend owned the Roadster.

 

[Eric9610]

I don't understand the obsession with comparing Tesla and Rivian with respect their company lifecycle as to to who could mass produce and deliver faster. It is not just apples to oranges comparison it is more like apple to spinach comparison. 1) Tesla created the market from EV's from scratch (Rivian got it ready made) 2) Tesla had to develop a whole charging infra before it could sell cars (Rivian has just started with RAN but nobody is buying cars assuming they will charge at RAN) 3) Tesla has to build the supply chain for EV components including batteries and drive trains (Rivian could launch leveraging the global supply chain of these components). Rivian has a very good product in R1, but constant comparison with Tesla saying how RIvian is better is not fair and logical. They both are very different while Tesla had to create the market as a 1st mover and Rivian has very different challenges of dealing with competition as a 2nd mover in the market. Lets hope Rivian can pass through the current demand + profitability + liquidity crisis in the next couple of quarters.

You should add in Tesla was 100% funded by the US taxpayer with Tarp funds... something Rivian did not get the advantage of. Boy we forget the significant subsidies Tesla was handed... It is a fair comparison since Rivian is actually in a better place at the same time in company history. And even to this day if you remove the carbon credit sales Tesla gets, I don't think they are profitable on cars...

 

[SANZC02]

I'll dollar cost average again... right... now!

Shaved $8 off my average this morning….

 

[defcon888]

I would say the larger question is can any specialty car manufacturer survive on relatively low volume? Rivian is domestic do they need to be selling around the world and how can you do that without a global manufacturing footprint. I have had 5 teslas (S, 3P, YP, 2Xs) and one Fisker and an RT1 quad w large pack and by far the RT1 is my favorite. I have a founders edition Cybertruck coming and I am really excited to compare with RT1 - I'll be shocked if I like the Cyber as much as the RT1. But no they don't have enough cash to shut down production in the 2nd quarter, and build a new plant in Georgia, and continue investing in research and development. Zero hope for Fisker and Lucid unless someone merges all three together to make a Tesla competitor - call it United EV of America! one note to ponder: Tesla gets about 10,000,000 miles of driving data per day from the cars they have built and are on the road - who can duplicate that??? Who can catch up to that??? Elon needs to be kind and buy these guys. Again I love the RT1 w 835 hp and 347 mile cruising range.

This might sound dumb, but here goes:

Say a hamburger restaurant hires 20 people to make a hamburger. After a few weeks, they let 5 people go because 15 can make the hamburger because of the training and processes put in place. After a few more months or weeks, they let another 5 go because they are getting better at the process.

I don't think it is a WARNING with laying off people, I think they are looking at demand, COGS and overhead that can be reduced. Instead of 2 people getting a stapler, 2 people can share 1 stapler.

Just my take!

 

[Yellow5]

What a strange week. The question of survival to R2 is a valid one. At present, I still believe the company has the ability to do it. This isn't the first make it or break it moment, and it certainly could be the last, but I don't think so.

Cost reduction efforts are hugely important right now, it could mean the difference between 6 quarters of cash and 10 quarters of cash. I think that when they get to the other side of the crunch we will have something pretty special to purchase (R2), and I think it will be mostly unique in the market as an actually available and actually affordable non-car EV.

There is so much power in the press, and so much negative sentiment these days. There are very strong market forces making big efforts to ensure EVs are not considered a wise purchase, it amazes me. As a country, the US will either move forward and replant itself as a world leader in this new market, or it won't. Tesla can't be the one and only volume producer, and the legacy car makers want to avoid the costs of meaningful transitions to EV as long as possible. Clearly, a window for success continues to exist for Rivian.

That all said, Rivian needs to be lazer focused on production, costs, and R2. It has the branding already, no need to push that until there is something different to sell. I don't particularly care about their other aspirations unless they help the primary cause. I care very much for the environment, and I'd rather have a Rivian produce EVs in volume over risking that future for less impactful things like charging networks, software stacks, not really autonomous driving, etc. I'd be fine with a 25% reduction in staff, and would try my best to get losses per vehicle to zero by Q3 reporting. The last thing this company wants is to keep high dollar low impact staff and look good until they go bankrupt.

Sponsored