I have never understood why SPACs aren't illegal. Even when someone knowledgeable in finance describes it to me on the surface, in layman's terms, it appears sketchy. A SPAC is basically a way for investors to dump a company with no real business model, yet, onto the unsuspecting public. It relies heavily on pump and dump strategies to raise funds before its special opportunity time runs out. While you can't time the market this seems like a vehicle designed to do exactly that. Its just odd.
This applies to all SPACs not just EV SPACs. In the traditional IPO route the underwriting firm will have performed some due diligence - from a reputational risk standpoint. Without that element, SPACs were always going to be attractive to firms that had zero substance.
Rivian actually had a really good quarter. They're still losing $32K per vehicle but this number has been coming down substantially every quarter so the margins are improving and they're almost at a break-even. Nikola secured a grant from California Transportation Commission for $42M recently. This one was very shocking because they were basically a scam company a couple of years ago.
For an EV manufacturer to truly succeed, it's not just about making electric cars. They also need to heavily focus on the recharging network and infrastructure. The car is just one piece of the puzzle. The real challenge? I think is setting up a dependable recharging network cover the entire region/country.
Seems to me that the EV car market is going produce very few winners. Possibly killing off the old guard completely.<p>Tesla is a given. The Chinese manufacturers (like MG) seem to be quite successful. The old European and US car makers are however failing quite badly. What they produce is hot garbage at a huge loss per car.
To anyone else who is not north-american: SPAC has nothing to do with PAC, the political tool/org/whatever it is. My brain for some reason confused the two.