
Elio Motors is crowdfunding its entire $25M investment round - prostoalex
https://www.startengine.com/startup/elio-motors
======
goatforce5
I think it's a little sneaky that they only time they use to word 'car' on
their materials is in a quote from a newspaper.

Technically it's a motorcycle very similar to the Spyder -
[http://www.brp.ca/spyder/](http://www.brp.ca/spyder/) \- and (as of 12 months
ago) some states would require you to wear a helmet and/or take a motorcycle
test for you to legally be able to drive this thing.

[https://eliomotors.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/lets-talk-
about-...](https://eliomotors.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/lets-talk-about-
laws-5-16-14/)

(I have no idea what progress they made on getting those laws changed in the
past 12 months.)

~~~
thrownaway2424
Yep, pretty much every relevant state (representing nearly the entire US
population) will require you to have a motorcycle license, and to wear a
helmet. That's why Elio has been vaporware for nearly a decade and why they
are trying to take their investor scam mainstream. They will never get to
production.

~~~
capex
According to their website, there's no helmet needed[0] in 45 states as of
now.

[0] [http://www.eliomotors.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/02/helmetl...](http://www.eliomotors.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/02/helmetlaws.pdf)

------
tptacek
Completely public crowd-investment in startups is a bad idea. Crowdfunding is
(mostly) great, but people invest money expecting a return, and startups do
not generate returns the way the stock market does. Crowdfunding as a public
investment vehicle is going to hurt a lot of people.

~~~
mangeletti
When I read this comment I thought, this is exactly the kind of comment that
people will link to in 2021, as a "can you believe this guy" comment, just as
crowdfunding (and what it evolves into) begins to replace all other forms of
investing.

Everything seems like a bad idea when you first start. That's the very nature
of the new idea; it's something nobody else ever thought was a good idea... or
else it wouldn't be a new idea. But this doesn't matter. We, almost all of us,
simply cannot break outside of a paradigm. It has to be broken for us. The few
that can break their paradigm are the same folks we read about on Forbes and
Fast Company.

~~~
manigandham
What is so new and special about crowdfunding? This is basically the stock
market (which already gets its share of ruining amateur players who don't know
enough) but taking away all the rules required to participate.

There's no oversight, no required disclosures, no stock/ownership, no
liquidity, no insurance, no fallback protection, no guarantee of product, etc.

And this is supposed to replace all other forms of investing? I'm sorry but
that just seems very naive.

~~~
mangeletti
You answered your own question so eloquently that I'm affraid I cannot offer
too much more.

Airbnb removed all the expensive rules and oversight intrinsic of the
hospitality industry and opened the market, leading to new gains in market
efficiency that are tough to compete with.

Uber did the same for personal transportation.

Crowd funding does this for investing. The real gains will be seen when the
intelligence and agility of emergent, fast-moving fund pools are able to out-
pace and out-perform traditional funds, indexes, and VC. That will change a
lot of things.

FTR, I am talking about investing, not just preorders, but this may not mean
that you get stock certificates in all cases.

~~~
tptacek
It's not just about the lack of oversight. If that's all it was, I wouldn't
bring the concern up; it'd be banal.

The problem is that startup investing is nothing at all like investing in
public company stocks.

Venture capitalists don't back a single company. The majority of startups
fail. Pushing all your chips in on a single startup is like going all in on a
queen high hand. Instead, VCs invest in whole portfolios of companies.

But that's not the only difference. Because most companies fail, there's a
theme to VC investment theses. And it's not obvious, because it drives
founders (who are atypically savvy about startups) batshit. It's this: the
winners have to pay for the losers. A decent shot at a 2x return sounds like a
no-brainer, but it isn't. The returns on the wins have to be so good that they
make up for all the failures.

Then there's dealflow. Good VCs get _preferred access to the good startups_.
Most startups that raise money --- and all the startups that fit the "win will
pay for other losers" mold --- plan on taking more money. If your first round
is low 7 figures, your second round is going to be 8 figures, and probably not
crowd-based! If you know you're going back to PE/VC for money, you care about
who take money from this time. So if you can take money from Sequoia, you do.
Sequoia gets the best deals, and crowd-funders get adversely selected into
crappier deals.

Most VC funds lose money. Those are funds whose investments come with control
--- something no crowdfunding investor gets. They can fire the CEO. They get
bespoke due diligence, not to mention the VC's network of other firms to
syndicate with on future investments. And when they close a deal, they tend to
get preferences built in. Despite all those advantages, they still lose money.
Crowd-investors get none of those things. Why would they do better?

This is before we get into how comically subordinate common shareholders of
private companies are. Startups routinely do things that would generate
shareholder lawsuits in public companies. They get to do those things because
they are taking money from people who know the game. Consenting adults. The
crowdfunding public can't do that.

And finally, why do we grant the premise that normal people are capable of
selecting startups to invest in? They're not even able to do that with public
companies. In 2015, companies listed on the major stock markets have proven an
ability to drive revenue. We know where their money comes from. Venture
capitalists have to prognosticate about that. How are normal people supposed
to compete with them?

It's just a bad idea.

~~~
dylanjermiah
As opposed to what? Forcibly stopping them from doing what they please with
their own money because they're 'normal' people?

------
nawitus
84 mpg is a rather low number. Volkswagen Lupo 3L was about 78 mpg, but that
was 15 years ago, and fuel efficient tech has advanced considerably in that
time. And the Lupo was a normal 4-wheel car with a lot more space than the
Elio. The Lupo 3L is probably slightly more safer, too.

The Elio does beat the Lupo in price, though, but $6800 is of course an
estimate.

~~~
bagels
European mpg is not the same rating as the United States mpg mostly because a
gallon is not the same size everywhere, as ridiculous as that fact is.

[http://jalopnik.com/5981938/why-do-european-cars-get-
better-...](http://jalopnik.com/5981938/why-do-european-cars-get-better-mpg-
than-us-cars)

Using your number of 78mpg imperial for the Lupo, this is only about 64mpg us.

~~~
nawitus
It's 78 miles per US gallon:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Lupo#Lupo_3L](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Lupo#Lupo_3L)

------
bane
I drive an old, small car. I'm about to get in the market for a new car once
this one bites the dust. In 12 years, I've put more than 2 people in my car
exactly 3 times. I'm interested in reasonable price, fuel efficiency and most
of all reliability.

I admit I'm a little extreme in my car buying habits, but here's what I think
whenever I buy cars:

\- Does this make model of car have extremely good reliability? I honestly can
think of few things I hate more than servicing my car. I want it to be
appliance-level reliable. My current car has been in the shop (outside of
normal maintenance) maybe under 5 times...mostly as the vehicle has gotten
old. How do I determine reliability? Years and years of compiled reliability
surveys: Consumer Reports, True Delta, etc. I expect any car I buy to have
been part of a legacy of at least 5 years of continuously high reliability.
This immediately downselects and eliminates about 95% of the market.

\- If it breaks, how expensive is it to fix? To return to a reliable operating
condition, I don't want to have to rebalance my entire finances.

\- What's the car cost to operate per mile? My current car runs around
$.20-.25 per mile, fully burdened (repairs, tolls, etc.). I don't want to
spend much more than that and this car _could_ easily hit that mark if it's
reliable and cheap to fix.

\- Is it safe? I want top safety ratings all around. Period. I'm not going to
fool with that stuff. As it turns out, makers that make reliable cars tend to
also make very safe cars.

\- Do I like how it looks/drives/etc? It may seem weird to lots of people that
this is the last thing on my list. But I've already prevented any sort of
decision paralysis by getting rid of 95+% of the market. At this point I'm
down to just a handful of cars, and now I just pick the one I like. Now I know
I'll at least not mind driving it, and it won't piss me off by being in the
shop constantly. I don't really care much about the image I'm projecting, I'm
not trying to fit into some kind of clique or club or express myself. I just
want to get to work as cheaply as possible and with a minimum of hassle. I'll
enjoy the clique I'm in when I retire with all the extra money I've saved not
buying image cars.

Can the Elio support this? Maybe and it looks promising. I'd buy it if it met
all the criteria. The price looks awesome. But I'm going to have to be patient
for 4 or 5 years of general availability to see.

~~~
maaaats
Could an electric bicycle be something? For commutes etc. it's cheap, single
person, faster than standing still in traffic, can be exercise (or not). How
safe depends on where you live.

~~~
bane
If I lived in a different area, it would absolutely be something I'd consider.

------
toephu2
This is not the car of the future. Still using gas? ICE (internal combustion
engine)? 3 wheels? This has been tried before and did not work. This is a step
backwards. Also who the heck names their company after themselves anymore?
Talk about ego.

~~~
barney54
Why is the internal combustion engine a step backwards? Electric cars have
some benefits, but they have had those benefits for more than 125 years. For
more than a 100 years the problem has been cost and range and that hasn't been
solved yet.

------
ealexhudson
A three-wheeler! Unfortunately in the UK this is almost certainly no-go; we've
had our fill of the Sinclair / Reliant / etc.

I'm really unsure about this whole 'equity crowdfunding' thing. Risky ventures
are for a certain class of investor; you need a certain amount of information
too. I'm all about getting public access into these things, but you really
can't evaluate it on the information presented...

~~~
mastax
Two front, one back is much better than two back one front.

~~~
notahacker
That may be true, but the image problem of 3 wheelers wasn't down to any
specific handling issue.

And this is an image problem in a country which pays twice as much for fuel,
prefers hatchbacks to pickups, and has the original Mini as a national icon.

~~~
ams6110
Right, they just look ridiculous. Worse than the Smart car, and I didn't think
that was possible outside of a circus.

~~~
protomyth
I will say this about the Smart car, my friend who is a part-time bouncer sat
in one comfortably with a lot of room. I was pretty amazed with the interior
size.

------
trothamel
Is there any reason to think this attempt at a three-wheeled motorcycle/car
would be more successful than previous iterations? It's been tried a lot in
the past, but it doesn't seem to have ever really caught on.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Three-
wheeled_motor_v...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Three-
wheeled_motor_vehicles)

~~~
joshuapants
It does seem likely that this could end up being Aptera Part II.

~~~
ndonnellan
I was wondering when someone would bring that up:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors)

"As of January 2010, the number of unique deposits tracked at the unofficial
Aptera forum surpassed 5000."

~~~
obstinate
Maybe. It looks like that vehicle never even reached production. Very
difficult to tell how such a vehicle would have fared in the market given that
it was never tested. I mean, "could be an Aptera 3e situation" is an
accusation that could be leveled at almost any first-vehicle from a company.
The fact that they're both trikes is barely relevant.

------
usaphp
I wonder how it will handle a crash test, for some reason I think it will be
as unsafe as regular motorcycle.

So you basically getting all the downsides of a motorcycle: safety, limited
space, no passengers ,wearing a helmet (some states), without getting any
upsides: beating traffic by skipping between lines (I know its illegal but
most of the motorcycles do this), finding a parking easier, looking cool...The
only thing it shares with a car is having a roof and easier driving.

Imho it's better to get a $3K cheaper honda bike:
[http://powersports.honda.com/2015/rebel.aspx](http://powersports.honda.com/2015/rebel.aspx)

~~~
obstinate
> So you basically getting all the downsides of a motorcycle

Assuming your guess is correct, you capture the safety downside. But that is
only a guess on your part. To me, it seems like a silly guess -- I'd expect
that this will be less safe than a subcompact, but still a good deal safer
than a motorcycle.

There are still a few downsides you don't get. You get AC in this vehicle. You
don't have to wear leathers because you can't fall. You have a sealed cabin,
so road noise, while likely worse than a normal car, will be much better than
a motorcycle. A trike is a lot more stable than a bike.

> without getting any upsides

Price? Fuel efficiency? Parking in such a small vehicle will be much easier
than the smallest car, even if it's not quite as easy as a bike.

------
burger_moon
At $6800 this will make for a good transplant of a poor mans t-rex[1]. Swap in
a zx14r motor and you've got yourself an animal.

[1] [https://www.campagnamotors.com](https://www.campagnamotors.com)

------
skeuomorf
Hmm, so I wasn't able to find any technical information at all about the
vehicle (engine specs, suspension, electronics...etc) neither on the linked
page nor on their official website.

~~~
alganet
There is some info in their PDF ([http://www.eliomotors.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/06/Elio_33...](http://www.eliomotors.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/06/Elio_3399_One_Page_Sell_Sheet_v8_HR.pdf)). Link is
available on their website.

~~~
skeuomorf
Ah, this appears to have a little more information, thanks.

------
HeyImAlex
> Today, there’s a new trailblazer working tirelessly to alter the course of
> history. His name is Paul Elio. He is gearing up to become the next Henry
> Ford and this is the public’s first opportunity to invest in Elio Motors at
> the ground level. You can be a part of the $52 billion U.S. personal
> transportation industry and own a part of the next new U.S. vehicle
> manufacturer. But you have to act now!

That reads like an infomercial. Kind of makes you worried about crowd-
investment...

------
nodesocket
Interesting idea with the front/back seating, but honestly I can't image it
actually drives well at all. The front with the pushed out wheels is super
fugly as well.

------
hammerzeit
But... why? I don't understand why an entrepreneur would prefer crowdfunded
money to venture capital. And if he can't raise venture capital with the glut
of money in venture right now, that's doubly worrying.

The only thing that makes any sense to me at least is a marketing angle -- by
getting lots of people as "shareholders" you now have a base of evangelists to
advocate for your car.

------
Splendor
As of right now 5,365 people have registered their (non-binding) interest in
$21,462,675 worth of shares -- making the average reservation ~$4k.

------
jasonmcalacanis
Not so fast.... these numbers are not confirmed in any way and can be gamed
easily. I expand on it here.

[https://www.launchticker.com/story/automotive-co-
eliomotors-...](https://www.launchticker.com/story/automotive-co-eliomotors-
crowdfunding-campaign-commitments-unsubstantiated-currently-displays-22m-in)

this is really bad for crowdfunding....

------
PhrosTT
I would be terrified of getting trapped in the backseat of that.

------
smitherfield
Translation - no institutional investors were stupid enough to give us [any
more of] their money, but we think you are!

------
beatpanda
One great thing about crowdfunding is that it will enable companies to raise
money without having to move to the Bay Area.

~~~
notahacker
I'd prefer it if companies were not significantly disadvantaged in fundraising
outside the Bay Area because VCs had some of the ability to think outside the
box they are supposedly blessed with...

------
rory096
Slightly related: does anybody know how Terrafugia's Wefunder round went?

------
krisweston
the thing i dont like about this is the misleading way they put a picture of
the earth on the car and say 'environmentally friendly!' \- its not obviously,
it still uses fossil fuels. shouldnt we have already got past those by now,
seeing as we are all going to die if we dont ? :) yeah you can vote it down
oil loving motherfucker, but you still going to die if we dont get rid of this
oil shit.

