If they are selling so few vehicles, their losses must be very high. Add in the charge they are taking for downsizing costs (severance, I guess) and development costs for their SUV version (which will not lead to actual sales anytime soon), the Saudi investors are going to have to dig deep for the next while. That said, those investors have very deep pockets. Whether they have the patience to match, we'll see.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
All discussion of Lucid Motors
- Thread starter Right_Said_Fred
- Start date
The problem with small manufacturers with long lead times is that by the time it comes to market it contains old technology...Whereas Tesla can have a Cybertruck on their design table for many years but by the time they actually manufacture it, they will have slipped in the very latest drivetrain and technology
RobStark
Well-Known Member
SEC officially closes investigation into Lucid-Churchill merger and recommends no law enforcement action. LCID up ~4% as of right now.
investorplace.com
LCID Stock Alert: Lucid Motors Shakes Off SEC Investigation
The SEC has closed its investigation into Lucid concerning its future projections and statements. LCID stock is in the green today.
investorplace.com
Lucid doesn't fail to disappoint. They are losing ~$250k per vehicle delivered. (It costs them ~$356k to make/deliver a vehicle. 
)
Cash down ~$800k, and they say to expect that to be a sustained burn rate for at least another 5 quarters. (Meaning they have ~1.25 years of cash left.)
I don't see how they are going to get things turned around without another huge cash infusion...
Sure, the Lucid Gravity is coming soon, but do we expect it to be any more profitable than the Lucid Air? (Maybe if they use the same assembly line they can spread out the fixed costs some?)
)Cash down ~$800k, and they say to expect that to be a sustained burn rate for at least another 5 quarters. (Meaning they have ~1.25 years of cash left.)
I don't see how they are going to get things turned around without another huge cash infusion...
Sure, the Lucid Gravity is coming soon, but do we expect it to be any more profitable than the Lucid Air? (Maybe if they use the same assembly line they can spread out the fixed costs some?)
Doggydogworld
Active Member
You can't get within a year of death in this business with this kind of burn rate. Especially with growth stalled out. And what's the extra 0.7b of liquidity beyond their 3.4b in cash + investments?
EVNow
Well-Known Member
IIRC, Tesla made money with just S&X only in one quarter - with no competition. I don't see independent existence for Lucid. After all most luxury ICE manufacturers are part of a group too.
I agree with the underlying sentiment, but I wonder if the $250K loss per vehicle is necessarily representative of their long term prospects. Is that amount in part the product of amortizing their up-front capital costs spread across the few vehicles so far made and sold? If so, a figure like that would apply to any start-up and does not necessarily represent the long-term cost per unit once production and sales ramp up. Still though, it is a problem in that for Lucid there does not appear to be an immediate path to that ramp up and a big risk that, for them, there will be no 'long term'.Lucid doesn't fail to disappoint. They are losing ~$250k per vehicle delivered. (It costs them ~$356k to make/deliver a vehicle.
Cash down ~$800k, and they say to expect that to be a sustained burn rate for at least another 5 quarters. (Meaning they have ~1.25 years of cash left.)
I don't see how they are going to get things turned around without another huge cash infusion...
Sure, the Lucid Gravity is coming soon, but do we expect it to be any more profitable than the Lucid Air? (Maybe if they use the same assembly line they can spread out the fixed costs some?)
Agreed. I remember reading some hit pieces like that in Seeking Lies (and even in some MSM) when Model S was first delivered.
It is the gross loss, so it does include fixed costs over the low volume they are doing. But capital costs should be amortized over the expected life of those investments, so that isn't the problem.
Tesla had a gross profit on the Roadster and Model S basically from the start, even with low production volume...
Lucid would have to have an insane volume to spread the $250k/vehicle loss out on if the only issue was volume to becoming gross profitable. Just for example if they delivered 6k at the same ASP, ~$106k, with only an incremental cost, for parts, of $50k for the vehicles delivered past 1,406, they would still have had a gross loss of ~$15k per vehicle. (That incremental cost is not achievable, it is just an example of how screwed they are.)
Of course they are only planning to produce ~10k vehicles this year. So they aren't going to be increasing volume this year at all.
But they don't share enough information with us to know where the problem is. is the majority of their ~$356k cost per vehicle parts? labor? rework?
RobStark
Well-Known Member
mltv
Member
RobStark
Well-Known Member
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Other interesting observations from that video:
- He couldn't charge at a Kempower CCS charger, Lucid seems to be incompatible with it.
- He couldn't get more than 144kW from any of the 350kW Ionity CCS chargers. (They don't do power sharing, so that isn't an issue.)
- The Model S LR is slightly more efficient at 90 km/h: 157Wh/km vs. 161Wh/km
- But that changes at 120km/h: 216Wh/km vs. 198Wh/km
- Note: it was colder for the Model S test, so the Model S might do even better in the same weather as the Lucid was tested.
I wish he would have had time to do his 1000km challenge with it.
I had Sottozero 3 winter tires on my old S85D and has Nokian R5 on my newer Model S Plaid. The R5 are very soft Nordic winter tires while the Sottozero 3 are high performance European winter tires. So the Sottozero are a lot stiffer, hence I would guess easily 2% maybe 5 % better range with the Sottozero. Add in the temperature difference and it seems the Lucid is the same or slightly worse efficiency than the Model S LR. Which is pretty decent for Lucid.
The bigger problem the way I see it is the issues with charging it had...
RobStark
Well-Known Member
There is the range and efficiency. And if you get the "Range" instead of the Performance version there is more range. And better efficiency.
A spare tire fits in the sub-frunk.
Premium materials including leather in the cabin.
Turn signal stalks, manual controls for volume, temperature, fan speed, and air vents.
It is a rare vehicle. Even in my hometown of Los Angeles.
I just wish there was a sunshade, grab handles for the front passenger, and a liftback.
The cherry on top would be auto open/close doors. I chauffer my 96 year old father usually once a week. I think he would really like that feature.
Last edited:
So the guy responsible for plasma TV still work there?Panasonic investor slide.
Lucid and Panasonic signed a cell supply agreement.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing
- Locked
- Marketplace listing