Hacker News Reader

Comment by taylodl | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand. Even in the world of ICE, you don't buy a car from an upstart car company unless you're willing and able to simply throw that money away.

Paradoxically, that's why such cars are almost always high-end performance cars that are very expensive. Why? Who wants to throw money away on something Ford or Toyota could have easily made?

But an exotic car from a now-defunct manufacturer? That has collector value.

That's what made the Tesla Roadster so special. It was a first-of-its-kind vehicle that delivered exceptional performance numbers.

Those are the kinds of vehicles you need to make to fund the operations needed to grow into the mass markets. Maybe the FIA Electric GT Championship, which starts in 2026, will help? Auto racing is how many of the ICE manufacturers got the funding they needed to expand their markets.

View on HN

Presumably people (guys? My guess is 100% guys) who bought Fiskers could afford to lose the money, OR they wanted to look like guys who could afford to lose the money - that's what conspicuous consumption is all about.

> Immediately, the vehicles were found to have serious build quality shortcomings

Reminds me of Tesla, whose CEO "knows more about manufacturing than anyone alive on planet Earth".

Fisker’s issues include false AEB activations, among other safety issues [0]. While Tesla build quality has always been questionable, Fisker’s issues have sometimes been showstoppers that leave owners in potentially life-threatening situations. Panel gaps won’t kill but, but faulty AEB will. I think the cybertruck faulty accelerator pedal is the only thing in recent memory with a major safety issue for Tesla.

[0]: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ev-sta...

The closest thing that comes to my mind are the false claims about the autopilot, that are currently under investigation in California. The autopilot is linked to at least 13 fatal crashes.

The fact that it can even be called that, or worse even "full self driving" is absolutely bonkers to me.

I drove a few older model s cars with AP2 and the emergency braking kicked in on the freeway several times. Never had it happen with AP1 (mobileeye). Don't know if current cars experience this.

These Elon digs whenever it is deemed remotely relevant are bizarre, at this point. It doesn't seem to be adding value to the discussion at best, and at worst it seems to violate the HN guidelines.

The first sentence of the wired article linked should help with understanding. There are concerns about the need for software updates and the lack of replacement parts/maintenance, meaning it goes from collectible to paperweight

> it goes from collectible to paperweight

That's what OP is confused about - why anyone would buy an experimental car without knowing it has potential to be worthless. The lack of parts on a novelty ice car has the same issue when the company folds.

A lot of people don't think about things like this before buying a car. Every car will end up worthless, it's just a question of how long it will take. If the buyer only tends to keep their car for a few years anyway, the risk of a new brand not being around anymore probably seems low.

I think that while a large majority of people do think about things like this when buying a car, those people tend to end up with toyotas or hondas or a car with a 10 year warranty, and not a rando new startup ev lol. Given the other options on the market, the fact they even considered a fisker means they're not prioritizing reliability/longevity as their #1 priority.

>Every car will end up worthless

Not all of them - my last two went up in value towards the end as collectables (ferrari 308, mk1 mazda mx5). They start getting a bit expensive to maintain after a while though.

A novelty ICE car can be used as an occasional fair weather driver or prepared for long term storage to be sold a few decades later. A novelty EV has little hope of being returned to operating condition 10+ years later.

My confusion is - unless i'm missing something I don't see anything about the owners being surprised or not knowing there's a potential to be worthless, it's about the effort they're going to in order to be able to keep using the car. the main guy in the article is the cto of some tech startup in europe lol it ends with him wanting to till drive the car still because this incomplete poorly reviewed barely functional mess is a "fantastic" car (now that I don't understand!). But nobody here seems to be shocked at the idea that a startup went backrupt or reliant on a fisker to get to work every day

I think the lack of understanding was why somebody who spent tens of thousands on what basically amounts to a kickstarter campaign for a new car is surprised when the new company folds and leaves their customers in a lurch.

This probably wouldn't be as big of a deal in decades past. Worst case, you just had to learn how to do car maintance yourself, or take your car to an expensive mechanic that worked on oddities. But now? When almost everything is software controlled, and the company that controls that software disappears and takes their keys with them? You're screwed.

Am I missing something about people being surprised or concerned about finances? The article seems to be about the owners being concerned about and working on finding ways to keep their cars running after the company is gone, honestly doesn't even seem mention financial costs as a burden for owners.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com