I received this message from an old friend at Fireman's Fund. Hearing stories like this make me immensely proud of what we achieved there.
_______________________________________________
Darryl,
It's been a little while since we've touched base. I rejoined FFIC last summer. Love it! Just had a town hall where Heritage was discussed. One of our grants directly saved a life and the family and EMT personnel attended. Very powerful and made me think of that night you called me with the idea for Heritage. The program passed $20M in grants in late 2008 and still going strong. Can't tell you how proud I am to say I had a very small role in bringing your idea to life. A lot of people try to take credit for Heritage but I know where it all started. Congratulations!
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
In Race to Market, Nissan's Electric Car Takes Shortcuts
Nissan, led by enthusiastic CEO Carlos Ghosn, has emerged as a surprise leader in the push toward electrification of the automobile. What is so remarkable about this is Nissan was not even part of the EV conversation two years ago. Now the company is poised to be the first major manufacturer to mass-produce electric vehicles.
The Nissan Leaf is slated to appear in a handful of test markets by the end of the year, putting the company neck-and-neck with General Motors and the Chevrolet Volt expected at about the same time. Nissan’s sudden change in focus was the result of Ghosn’s personal vision and his willingness to force it through his company from the top down. The impatient CEO recently told Bloomberg, “The engineers will always tell you, ‘Wait a little more,’ and if you keep playing this game, you never launch any product.”
Sheer force of will from a charismatic leader can accomplish great things when matched with a company that has a good reputation for execution. Cars, however, are complicated pieces of engineering, and an electric vehicle presents numerous fresh challenges to Nissan engineers. Intense pressure from the top may have created a sense of urgency, but it also appears to have driven the company to take some shortcuts.....
Read More at Wired.com...
The Nissan Leaf is slated to appear in a handful of test markets by the end of the year, putting the company neck-and-neck with General Motors and the Chevrolet Volt expected at about the same time. Nissan’s sudden change in focus was the result of Ghosn’s personal vision and his willingness to force it through his company from the top down. The impatient CEO recently told Bloomberg, “The engineers will always tell you, ‘Wait a little more,’ and if you keep playing this game, you never launch any product.”
Sheer force of will from a charismatic leader can accomplish great things when matched with a company that has a good reputation for execution. Cars, however, are complicated pieces of engineering, and an electric vehicle presents numerous fresh challenges to Nissan engineers. Intense pressure from the top may have created a sense of urgency, but it also appears to have driven the company to take some shortcuts.....
Read More at Wired.com...
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Loving Electric Cars in Spite of the Climate Debate
When I first learned about Tesla Motors in 2006, I wasn’t looking for an opportunity in cleantech. Having spent too much time working in the financial services industry, I decided it was time to pursue a career in something that I was passionate about: cars. Moving to Detroit was not an option, so I set out to see what automotive opportunities existed in the San Francisco Bay Area.
After seeing a story about Tesla in The New York Times, I was intrigued. I had lived in the Bay Area for nine years and had never been part of the tech start-up scene. The car itself seemed pretty hot and the advanced drivetrain technology was very interesting. At first, the notion of doing something to combat global warming was not really part of my consideration, although over time it became an important dimension.
The thing that intrigued me most about EV technology was its simplicity, the extraordinary torque of the motor that makes for an incredible driving experience and the fact there are no tailpipe emissions. Having the opportunity to drive a Tesla Roadster often, it always felt strange to get back behind the wheel of my Mitsubishi Evo, which felt like a bucking, wheezing bronco relative to the smooth power of the electric drivetrain.
These memories came back to me as I pondered the implications of “climategate,” the recent controversy regarding leaked emails from the climate researchers at East Anglia University in England. While the “right” predictably jumped on them as damning evidence that climate change is a fraud, the “left” was equally predictable in trying to smooth over the situation as if nothing could shake the absolute consensus that has been asserted that climate change is being driven by man-made factors.
At the risk of being dropped off some Christmas card lists, I might point out that the scientific evidence supporting climate change as a man-made phenomena is far from certain.
The efforts to correlate emissions of CO2 over recent history with global temperature trends and cycles at a geological scale have resulted in a model that asserts that there is a relationship between the two, but still has enough unexplained error that a lack of temperature increases over the recent twelve-year period is still consistent with the model. The hard science is much more nuanced than the soundbites that permeate the airwaves and the simplistic declarations of impending catastrophe. The problem lies with the strong political momentum around climate change that requires the science to be absolute. That political necessity is steamrolling even the most supportive researchers’ efforts to improve on our limited understanding of what is actually going on.
Read more at Wired.com...
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=98679cd0-8242-4c18-990b-3054b499b126)
After seeing a story about Tesla in The New York Times, I was intrigued. I had lived in the Bay Area for nine years and had never been part of the tech start-up scene. The car itself seemed pretty hot and the advanced drivetrain technology was very interesting. At first, the notion of doing something to combat global warming was not really part of my consideration, although over time it became an important dimension.
The thing that intrigued me most about EV technology was its simplicity, the extraordinary torque of the motor that makes for an incredible driving experience and the fact there are no tailpipe emissions. Having the opportunity to drive a Tesla Roadster often, it always felt strange to get back behind the wheel of my Mitsubishi Evo, which felt like a bucking, wheezing bronco relative to the smooth power of the electric drivetrain.
These memories came back to me as I pondered the implications of “climategate,” the recent controversy regarding leaked emails from the climate researchers at East Anglia University in England. While the “right” predictably jumped on them as damning evidence that climate change is a fraud, the “left” was equally predictable in trying to smooth over the situation as if nothing could shake the absolute consensus that has been asserted that climate change is being driven by man-made factors.
At the risk of being dropped off some Christmas card lists, I might point out that the scientific evidence supporting climate change as a man-made phenomena is far from certain.
The efforts to correlate emissions of CO2 over recent history with global temperature trends and cycles at a geological scale have resulted in a model that asserts that there is a relationship between the two, but still has enough unexplained error that a lack of temperature increases over the recent twelve-year period is still consistent with the model. The hard science is much more nuanced than the soundbites that permeate the airwaves and the simplistic declarations of impending catastrophe. The problem lies with the strong political momentum around climate change that requires the science to be absolute. That political necessity is steamrolling even the most supportive researchers’ efforts to improve on our limited understanding of what is actually going on.
Read more at Wired.com...
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
In Role as Kingmaker, the Energy Department Stifles Innovation [wired.com]
Of all of the Department of Energy programs intended to advance the green agenda while stimulating the economy, the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing incentive to spur the development of cleaner, greener automobiles is perhaps the most ambitious. But it has a downside.
The energy department has approved direct loans to Nissan, Ford, Tesla Motors and Fisker Automotive totaling about $8 billion out of a budget of $25 billion. The magnitude of this program dwarfs other DOE campaigns like the $2.4 billion given to battery and electric vehicle component manufacturers and the $4 billion disbursed for “smart grid” projects.
To the recipients the support is a vital and welcome boost. But this massive government intervention in private capital markets may have the unintended consequence of stifling innovation by reducing the flow of private capital into ventures that are not anointed by the DOE.
Read more at Wired.com...
The energy department has approved direct loans to Nissan, Ford, Tesla Motors and Fisker Automotive totaling about $8 billion out of a budget of $25 billion. The magnitude of this program dwarfs other DOE campaigns like the $2.4 billion given to battery and electric vehicle component manufacturers and the $4 billion disbursed for “smart grid” projects.
To the recipients the support is a vital and welcome boost. But this massive government intervention in private capital markets may have the unintended consequence of stifling innovation by reducing the flow of private capital into ventures that are not anointed by the DOE.
Read more at Wired.com...
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The problem with SharesPost.com
As I contemplated global warming while drinking my bottle of Fiji water flown by commercial airliner from the island of Fiji to my local BevMo, I saw an update from Sharespost.com in my inbox.
Sharespost is an online exchange for private equity that bills itself as "a low‐cost, efficient way to buy or sell private company shares." They made quite a splash when they debuted earlier this year, announcing that shares in Tesla had already changed hands at $10/share.
I think the usual rule of "caveat emptor" applies here, but the update today underlined what I see as a problem with Sharepost.com.
The June 16th report from NextUp Research (a snippet is pasted to the right--->), which was available when SharesPost launched and was provided to the media, valued Tesla at up to $822M, or $9 a share. This was based on 91,400,000 shares outstanding. The first Tesla shares supposedly traded at $10/share, giving Tesla an implied valuation of almost $1B! Many a headline was written to this effect.
Now look at the latest report, dated October 21, 2009. Apparently NextUp Research is even more bullish on Tesla, giving a valuation range of $1.05 to $1.24B. But the equivalent share price is only about $4 and change. What gives? In the new report, NextUp revised its estimate of shares outstanding to 222,900,000.
Bummer for those who bought shares at $9 on the basis of the original report! Adjusted for the new number of shares outstanding, they paid $9 for a share that apparently is now equivalent to $3.69 if you believe the new numbers. Ouch!
On their website, Sharepost says "At SharesPost, we set out to solve these problems while complying with the letter and spirit of the securities laws and protecting the interests of companies, investors and entrepreneurs. It’s a big problem and it requires us to balance some competing interests, but we think we’ve done it"
I'm not so sure about that...
Sharespost is an online exchange for private equity that bills itself as "a low‐cost, efficient way to buy or sell private company shares." They made quite a splash when they debuted earlier this year, announcing that shares in Tesla had already changed hands at $10/share.
I think the usual rule of "caveat emptor" applies here, but the update today underlined what I see as a problem with Sharepost.com.
The June 16th report from NextUp Research (a snippet is pasted to the right--->), which was available when SharesPost launched and was provided to the media, valued Tesla at up to $822M, or $9 a share. This was based on 91,400,000 shares outstanding. The first Tesla shares supposedly traded at $10/share, giving Tesla an implied valuation of almost $1B! Many a headline was written to this effect.
Now look at the latest report, dated October 21, 2009. Apparently NextUp Research is even more bullish on Tesla, giving a valuation range of $1.05 to $1.24B. But the equivalent share price is only about $4 and change. What gives? In the new report, NextUp revised its estimate of shares outstanding to 222,900,000.
Bummer for those who bought shares at $9 on the basis of the original report! Adjusted for the new number of shares outstanding, they paid $9 for a share that apparently is now equivalent to $3.69 if you believe the new numbers. Ouch!
On their website, Sharepost says "At SharesPost, we set out to solve these problems while complying with the letter and spirit of the securities laws and protecting the interests of companies, investors and entrepreneurs. It’s a big problem and it requires us to balance some competing interests, but we think we’ve done it"
I'm not so sure about that...
Monday, November 23, 2009
My new startup, Plato's Forms, announces a funding round
Over the past year I have been developing a startup that was in large part inspired by my experiences at Tesla Motors. Specifically, I thought that there had to be a better way to deal with the challenges of managing your message in the online media environment, which was a day to day challenge at Tesla.
I think the problems we are trying to address with Plato's Forms apply broadly to all communications professionals in all industries, but they are particularly challenging in the cleantech industry because it is so rapidly evolving and often deals with highly technical issues.
The announcement of our funding in TechCrunch is here.
The Plato's Forms blog is here.
I think the problems we are trying to address with Plato's Forms apply broadly to all communications professionals in all industries, but they are particularly challenging in the cleantech industry because it is so rapidly evolving and often deals with highly technical issues.
The announcement of our funding in TechCrunch is here.
The Plato's Forms blog is here.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Aptera Founders Ousted in Boardroom Showdown
Aptera Motors has ousted founders Steve Fambro and Chris Anthony, sources told Wired, painting a picture of a boardroom confrontation between the original founders and the auto industry veterans the company brought in last fall.
Rumors that Aptera Motors was letting them go and laying off an unknown number of people began swirling last week on the unofficial online Aptera Forum. The company says it simply elected to slow things down and minimize its burn rate while waiting for the Department of Energy to approve its loan application. It isn’t saying much about what happened to Fambro and Anthony, but claims the company’s relationship with them remains positive.
But the management shuffle and layoffs represent the Southern California startup’s latest challenge as it tries to bring the Aptera 2e, its extraordinarily efficient and unusual three-wheeled electric car, to market.
Read more at Wired.com
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Fisker makes a safe bet on distribution (wired.com)
Fisker Automotive promises a car with innovative powertrain technology, but it is sticking to the traditional playbook for distribution and sales by signing up established dealers in the United States and abroad. Tesla Motors on the other hand is building company-owned stores in a bid to revolutionize how cars are sold in addition to how they are powered. Each approach has advantages and pitfalls and may ultimately play a larger role than technology in determining which company dominates the premium EV market.
Read more at Wired.com...
Read more at Wired.com...
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Federal Loans to EV Startups: Foolish Bet or Wise Investment? (wired.com)
The Department of Energy has blessed Tesla Motors and Fisker Automotive with low-interest loans totaling nearly $1 billion, which is several times the size of the two companies’ balance sheets. That’s generating tremendous excitement among supporters of electrification and skepticism among industry observers.
Some would have you think the feds are recklessly writing checks in the hope something good comes of it down the road, but a close look at the “conditional commitment letters” between the DOE and the two startups reveals a much more conservative and guarded approach. Justified or not, it is the sheer magnitude of the loans with respect to the size of the recipients, the speculative nature of the investment and the possible role of political influence that has caused a stir among critics.
Read more at Wired.com...
Some would have you think the feds are recklessly writing checks in the hope something good comes of it down the road, but a close look at the “conditional commitment letters” between the DOE and the two startups reveals a much more conservative and guarded approach. Justified or not, it is the sheer magnitude of the loans with respect to the size of the recipients, the speculative nature of the investment and the possible role of political influence that has caused a stir among critics.
Read more at Wired.com...
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Secretive Startup EEStor Worth More Than $1.5 Billion (wired.com)
EEStor, the ultracapacitor company that has produced more obscure technology milestone announcements than evidence of a working energy storage unit, may have an implied market value of more than $1.5 billion.
Read more at Wired.com...
Read more at Wired.com...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
