Exciting Times as ATVM Loan and ARRA Battery Grants Announced 54 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
The next few days are going to be a very exciting time in the energy storage and electric vehicle sectors because the Obama Administration is preparing to announce a series of major ATVM Loan and ARRA Battery Manufacturing Grant awards.
President Obama will be in Elkhart, Indiana where he will presumably announce an ATVM loan to Navistar (NAV) and may announce some additional ATVM loans or ARRA battery grants. Vice President Biden will be in Detroit where he is scheduled to announce one or more ARRA battery grants and perhaps some ATVM Loans. Secretary Chu will be in Charlotte, North Carolina where he will presumably announce an ARRA battery grant to the Celgard subsidiary of Polypore International (PPO) and may announce other ARRA battery grants or ATVM loans.
I've resisted the temptation to wade in and predict the likely winners of the ARRA Battery Grant contest because there are so many deserving companies and many of them are privately held. But since The Wall Street Journal is making predictions I guess there's no harm in handicapping the "Cell and Battery Pack Manufacturing Facilities" category which is expected to include 7 to 8 awards of $100 to $150 million each. My list of likely grand prize winners is:
1. A123 Systems;
2. Ener1 (HEV);
3. JCI/Saft, a joint venture between Johnson Controls (JCI) and France's Saft Batteries (SGPEF.PK);
4. General Electric (GE); and
5. Somebody from the lead-acid battery sector.
Trying to round out the top tier list with any more detail is almost impossible and while I have my personal favorites, my opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks (SBUX).
The original funding opportunity announcement broke the ARRA grants down into several categories as follows:
President Obama will be in Elkhart, Indiana where he will presumably announce an ATVM loan to Navistar (NAV) and may announce some additional ATVM loans or ARRA battery grants. Vice President Biden will be in Detroit where he is scheduled to announce one or more ARRA battery grants and perhaps some ATVM Loans. Secretary Chu will be in Charlotte, North Carolina where he will presumably announce an ARRA battery grant to the Celgard subsidiary of Polypore International (PPO) and may announce other ARRA battery grants or ATVM loans.
I've resisted the temptation to wade in and predict the likely winners of the ARRA Battery Grant contest because there are so many deserving companies and many of them are privately held. But since The Wall Street Journal is making predictions I guess there's no harm in handicapping the "Cell and Battery Pack Manufacturing Facilities" category which is expected to include 7 to 8 awards of $100 to $150 million each. My list of likely grand prize winners is:
1. A123 Systems;
2. Ener1 (HEV);
3. JCI/Saft, a joint venture between Johnson Controls (JCI) and France's Saft Batteries (SGPEF.PK);
4. General Electric (GE); and
5. Somebody from the lead-acid battery sector.
Trying to round out the top tier list with any more detail is almost impossible and while I have my personal favorites, my opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks (SBUX).
The original funding opportunity announcement broke the ARRA grants down into several categories as follows:
| Industry subsector | Total Funding | Awards | Award Size |
| Cell and Battery Pack Manufacturing Facilities | $1,200 million | 7 to 8 | $100 to $150 million |
| Advanced Battery Supplier Manufacturing Facilities | $275 million | 14 | $20 million |
| Advanced Lithium ion Battery Recycling Facilities | $25 million | 2 | $12.5 million |
| Electric Drive Component Manufacturing Facilities | $350 million | 3 to 5 | $80 million |
| Electric Drive Subcomponent Manufacturing Facilities | $150 million | 6 to 8 | $20 million |
I have a hard time imagining that the Administration will announce a total of 32 to 37 grants in just three events. Accordingly I expect the process to draw out at least into tomorrow and perhaps into next week. In any event, I suppose we'll know more this afternoon than we do this morning.
No Disclosure
No Disclosure
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 54 comments:
I'm not fond of grants that much as it's rarely productive. Start up
are better but by far better is orders!!
There are many advanced battery factories sitting around way under used. By far better would be bidding out EV conversion kits for popular cars like the Focus, Fit,, etc light, fairly aero cars would get EV's, plug in electrics and their EV drive, battery companies business and ramp up production.
The present market is rather slim with only as couple 1,000 EV, plug in Hybrids built next yr.
Another would be peak power and night time charged, peak time discharged battery systems that can be used in gov, military building to lower electric costs..
Either sales of these or energy savings would pay for them so little cost for the tax payer and get these industries, jobs started now instead of the 2 more yrs as the present plans are.
seekingalpha.com/artic...
If you look at current Federal funding for the battery industry and compare what the administration is doing to the plan outlined in the report, the similarities are striking.
The Cell, Battery and Materials manufacturing winners are:
JCI $299.2 million
A123 $249.1 million
Dow Kokam $161 million
Compact Power $151.4 million
EnerDel $118.5 million
General Motors $105.9 million
Saft America $105.9 million
Axion/Exide $34.3 million
East Penn $32.5 million
The complete list of awardees is at:
www1.eere.energy.gov/r...
www.reuters.com/articl...
I guess I lied way back in that I said then I would never again own Ener1 again. This morning @ 10:45 I picked up a thousand shares. The moment Obama started speaking I sold the shares for a quick $570 gain. It wasn't but 10 or 20 minutes later the stock dropped about 70 cents. I would have picked up more shares in the AM, but I was watching a host of batt stocks today, and they didn't seem to be affected by the upcoming announcement, so I piled into Blackstone and made some $'s there, too.
It was your guess about Ener1 getting some Obamabucks that I went with Ener1.
I should send you a commission, pal!
www1.eere.energy.gov/r...
Mayascribe, I'm a lot like a blind pig that finds the occasional truffle, I'd rather be lucky than smart . . .
On Aug 05 01:06 PM Mayascribe wrote:
> Thanks for the prompt list, John!
>
> I guess I lied way back in that I said then I would never again own
> Ener1 again. This morning @ 10:45 I picked up a thousand shares.
> The moment Obama started speaking I sold the shares for a quick $570
> gain. It wasn't but 10 or 20 minutes later the stock dropped about
> 70 cents. I would have picked up more shares in the AM, but I was
> watching a host of batt stocks today, and they didn't seem to be
> affected by the upcoming announcement, so I piled into Blackstone
> and made some $'s there, too.
>
> It was your guess about Ener1 getting some Obamabucks that I went
> with Ener1.
>
> I should send you a commission, pal!
I truly hope those who will be rewarded in the free market will be the ones who actually make a working battery product and won't be eclipsed by those (who with their freshly minted money) will grab the spotlight with a never-ending source of press releases?
Let's all give the winner's their 15 minutes of fame, but make sure they use the funds to truly make a quality battery product that will push the envelope and advance the EV's promise of reducing our dependence on foreign oil while producing jobs for Americans!
I do wish that the DOE would publish a complete list of ALL companies who submitted a proposal for these funds. It would only be fair to give the "loosers" a mention here as this was a Hurculean task for many of the smaller contenders.
Write your Senator or favorite news service and ask them to furnish a list so the small guys get some well deserved credit for even competing!
As an avid reader of everything battery orientated and an investor in Axion it has been interesting to note that your critics always get louder when the market prices are going down. You have correctly forecast the absolute need for lead acid batteries and have told everyone that the future market is going to grow by 300%. If they haven't listened yet and studied your value analysis of the companies then they probably will miss this entire run up. Thanks for the heads up on Axion and the other part of my battery portfolio.
I look forward to your new insights on power storage.
On Aug 05 03:43 PM Don Harmon wrote:
> Now that the much anticipated Battery Awards have been announced,
> we can all get on with our lives. Back to work as usual for those
> of us who didn't get thrown a bone from the Government, and the focus
> moving forward will be on which companies actually have a product
> to bring to market, and which do not.
>
On Aug 05 04:17 PM John Petersen wrote:
> Futurist, thanks for the kind words. I try to do a good job on these
> articles because it's ultimately a practice development tool to showcase
> my verbal and analytical skills while hopefully helping people be
> better investors. If I can accomplish all those goals, it's worth
> the effort.
Unfortunately this probably isn't part of their plan even though Obama promised "transparency" as one of his key campaing platforms?
I think the idea behind the plan obviously makes a lot of sense as the US needs to do something to create not just short term jobs, but a real future. If they can get this going and create good paying US jobs, that's a step in the right direction.
On Aug 05 04:55 PM Don Harmon wrote:
> Battman, thanks and I do believe you. Yes, we were one of 160 companies
> that no one will ever know about that spent many long hours putting
> together a Grant Proposal. However, the money goes to the biggest
> and the best who can afford to hire lobbyists and the small guys
> get bypassed which is what you often find in a Government run program.
> Please don't think we are "bitter" here, but we do think that the
> DOE owes all the small (and some not so small) companies who took
> a shot here to be recognized for their efforts.
>
> Unfortunately this probably isn't part of their plan even though
> Obama promised "transparency" as one of his key campaing platforms?
>
We aren't bitter here either (well, maybe I am a little, but that's my ultracompetative streak shining through). Now the race is on to see if any of the "big 9" come through. I see 4, maybe 5 names on that list that I have faith in. The others, not so much.
However, out of the $2 billion, we did seem to give ~$250 million back to ourselves, the taxpayers (awards to GM and Chrysler). So in a way we all won...
On Aug 05 04:55 PM Don Harmon wrote:
> Battman, thanks and I do believe you. Yes, we were one of 160 companies
> that no one will ever know about that spent many long hours putting
> together a Grant Proposal. However, the money goes to the biggest
> and the best who can afford to hire lobbyists and the small guys
> get bypassed which is what you often find in a Government run program.
> Please don't think we are "bitter" here, but we do think that the
> DOE owes all the small (and some not so small) companies who took
> a shot here to be recognized for their efforts.
>
> Unfortunately this probably isn't part of their plan even though
> Obama promised "transparency" as one of his key campaing platforms?
>
There isn't a single example of a "start-up" having been awarded one of these grants that I can see? At least in the Cell Manufacturing category, anyway.
Since this is where LiFeBATT is concerned, I find it a bit ironic that Obama actually told people in his town hall meetings talking to small business owners to "show us that you have a great new idea and this government will help you realize your goals to make it happen" (paraphrased).
Reality is more like show us how long you have failed to produce a great new idea and we will fund you to come up with one! In other words this whole program IMHO was rigged from the start in favor of the big players and the small start-ups really never had a shot. So much for "transparency" in this new administration.
Before you respond, look at the results of this exercise in spending $ 2.5 Billion dollars of our taxpayer dollars. Who are the real beneficiaries of these grants? What have they done lately to demonstrate that they have a viable product that far surpasses what the small start-ups also have?
Of course, many of you don't know what the small star-ups have because the government won't back them like they will a long-established BIG name with deep pockets and an army of lobbyists.
Better go now before I really start to go off my perch.....lol.
Don't sound so down. It's time to get it together and put up a secondary .... soon. These grants will draw the attention of the GS & MS crowd who will start analysis of those left behind.
I'm sorry for not spelling out, to clarify GS (Goldman Sachs, not so much the corp. but the clientele) and MS (Morgan Stanley). Both are big in the wealth management departments and though the trading desks won't pay much mind to the battery biz until either a major utility/OEM makes a big buy or the wealth departments demand in on the action from client interest. An uptick in sector revenues of 10% or better over, let's say, the next 2 or 3 quarters with the accompanying rise of the stocks to the $5-6 level (as thin as the share numbers are...I don't see that as a problem). Bingo. I'd better be close to marketable product & ready to rock & roll.
I know your company, but not in great detail. It's there but not on the radar screen, as "they" say. I see the short term winners as the ones that have the ability to ramp 100%- 200% in 24 months starting 2010 and the long term winners as those that not only ramp, but deliver a 5 year product yield in the 70% or greater range (kind of depends on who your customer is, industrial will want better, consumers have lower expectations).
DRich, Thanks I would have guessed wrong since my focus is not on investing but looking for investors! I guess the good thing is we are already close to a "plug & play" marketable product now with the ability to ramp up production 100% - 200% in 12 months. Our primary focus at the moment is establishing an excellent QC component and making our product truly "bulletproof" in it's intended application markets.
However, our cell production will now unfortunately have to stay in Asia since we didn't get the grant to build a pilot mfg. plant here in the U.S. Well so be it then, but we will still be doing all battery pack assembly and all sales and marketing here - so we are ready to rock & roll now!
Thanks for the encouragement.
This will be my last post on this since it's off topic. I don't want to appear rude to the site.
I wish you could find your way to be truly an American company, but I understand since my manufacturing is mostly in Asia also. I'm glad you feel ready. But I doubt it. Looking for investors? Ummmm, Not ready for primetime... you've heard the expression "Build a better mousetrap...etc.
I am a consumer of batteries, so I love this sector but it's still just a hobby category for investing. People with real money need to be made aware that power storage is good for something more than cellphones, starters and flashlight. Unfortunately, that is where the thought process is. Those that haven't published third party performance/durability data, carved out a profitable niche, drawn the attention of a deep pocketed benefactor or a brokerage analyst will face an uphill battle for growth. I'm delighted with these grants for the attention it will draw because the money is minuscule & inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.
Having been there, where units out the door suddenly go from 10K-100k to 2M to customers that expect better than 0.25% failure rates during years of service, is a leap. There's a place for all in this space so carve yours out and hold on. Good Luck
Ener1 (HEV) has almost no cash, and must raise half of the $118.5m. Of course they have their Russian oligarch owner, Boris Zingarevich, who could front them some dough (through his Virgin Island's based holding company). Boris has ties to Vladimir and Dmitry, so maybe he'll hit them up for some rubles! Nyet?
UQM (UQM) which I mentioned here on June 11 when it was under $2.50 per share, has filed a 15m share shelf offering. You guys have more than doubled your money now on my glowing recommend of them right? This could spell dilution to UQM holders, or it could cement a relationship with a big OEM. Remember that somebody has requested a 200,000 unit per year supply quote from them (their recent announcement with Coda was for only 20,000 over 2 years). Coda has Hank Paulson to work with their Chinese battery supplier (Lishen, one of the world's largest).
So it's the Russkies vs the Chinese Capitalist Party! Energy *independence* here we come! How ironic.
I won't think twice about continuing to hold my shares of EnerSys because nothing's changed, as far as they're concerned. They're a well run battery company with good products who have their niche(s). Though I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little disappointed, but their earnings report today was very strong, beating estimates by $0.08, so I'm happy. And frankly they may not have even submitted a proposal since their focus, at this point anyway, is not automotive batteries. Plus, I sincerely believe that this grant program will benefit the entire industry, and more so because of the publicity than the money. The reason I think the publicity is so important is not just about advertising, but because it will educate the public about how absolutely critical the battery industry will become as we journey forth into our now-future green tech revolution.
So now, as Don says, we can get back to the more pertinent grind where things really matter. But don't forget, Christmas comes again in, I believe, November when Uncle Sam doles out grants and loans for smart grid energy storage. I think EnerSys has a better shot at that, though no guarantees. What do you think, John? And I hope you will focus a few more of your articles on that topic.
Congratulations to all the companies, their associates and their investors, that were awarded grant money. Everyone involved in this industry will benefit from today. May the recipients spend it wisely.
But as a "regular guy", you would have to think the government is taking the approach that makes the most sense. First, give money to the people who have already established they can run a business in the desired sector, then with what's left over, give money to some really good ideas that have connections to people who can run the business, because in either case, you ultimately have to know how to run the business because the objective is to create a "home grown" industry that will create jobs for a generation.
The same can be said (and is said ad nauseum) by the li-ion fans when an OEM teams up with a battery company. All of a sudden that company has credbility, share price goes up, visibility goes up, just because of their new alliance. Why should the government be any different.
Not saying it is fair, but as a business owner, if I need something done, I generally call a company with a track record before I call a start up.
Having said that, like I said earlier, the government should have allocated maybe 100 - 200 mill or so for start ups. You can't tell me none of the start ups aren't worth giving a shot. Spread it out a bit more and increase the odds.
Question for you though, of the lithium guys who did get money, any thoughts?
On Aug 05 05:39 PM Don Harmon wrote:
> Battman, I know I said that and what I meant was the biggest companies
> (Axion is allied with Exide and East Penn) which are well known long
> time big companies. Just as JCI and SAFT are long time well established
> companies -
I'm just wondering if it is possible that some of the energy storage companies that did not receive grants today may yet be recipients in the future.
Actually marketquant, Ener1 will have to match the Gov. funds, so they need $118 M. of their own money or investors money to qualify for the grant.
On Aug 05 07:27 PM marketquant wrote:
> It will be interesting to see how the various grant recipients raise
> the capital they need for their 50% matching funds.
>
> Ener1 (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) has almost no cash, and
> must raise half of the $118.5m. Of course they have their Russian
> oligarch owner, Boris Zingarevich, who could front them some dough
> (through his Virgin Island's based holding company). Boris has ties
> to Vladimir and Dmitry, so maybe he'll hit them up for some rubles!
> Nyet?
>
> UQM (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) which I mentioned here on
> June 11 when it was under $2.50 per share, has filed a 15m share
> shelf offering. You guys have more than doubled your money now on
> my glowing recommend of them right? This could spell dilution to
> UQM holders, or it could cement a relationship with a big OEM. Remember
> that somebody has requested a 200,000 unit per year supply quote
> from them (their recent announcement with Coda was for only 20,000
> over 2 years). Coda has Hank Paulson to work with their Chinese battery
> supplier (Lishen, one of the world's largest).
>
> So it's the Russkies vs the Chinese Capitalist Party! Energy *independence*
> here we come! How ironic.
Of the lithium guys who got the money? Johnson Controls got the most (and they didn't need it) just go down the list and it's apparent from there:
A123 - big GE funding recipient.
Dow/ Kokam - Korean partnership.
Compact Power - Korean parntership.
EnerDel - Heavily tied into Nissan
SAFT - French partnership with JCI
That's where the lithium funding went since you asked..
On Aug 05 08:12 PM battman wrote:
> Don, of course you know I was joking about Axion being the biggest
> and best (at least as of right now).
>
> But as a "regular guy", you would have to think the government is
> taking the approach that makes the most sense. First, give money
> to the people who have already established they can run a business
> in the desired sector, then with what's left over, give money to
> some really good ideas that have connections to people who can run
> the business, because in either case, you ultimately have to know
> how to run the business because the objective is to create a "home
> grown" industry that will create jobs for a generation.
> The same can be said (and is said ad nauseum) by the li-ion fans
> when an OEM teams up with a battery company. All of a sudden that
> company has credbility, share price goes up, visibility goes up,
> just because of their new alliance. Why should the government be
> any different.
> Not saying it is fair, but as a business owner, if I need something
> done, I generally call a company with a track record before I call
> a start up.
> Having said that, like I said earlier, the government should have
> allocated maybe 100 - 200 mill or so for start ups. You can't tell
> me none of the start ups aren't worth giving a shot. Spread it out
> a bit more and increase the odds.
>
> Question for you though, of the lithium guys who did get money, any
> thoughts?
>
> On Aug 05 05:39 PM Don Harmon wrote:
I think I am right about this - today was the big bang. No more to be announced! At least for the Battery sector.
On Aug 05 08:41 PM D. McHattie wrote:
> Sorry if I missed this part but: was the entirety of the government's
> planned grants and loans to the battery industry doled out today?
>
>
> I'm just wondering if it is possible that some of the energy storage
> companies that did not receive grants today may yet be recipients
> in the future.
On Aug 05 07:25 PM DRich wrote:
> Don,
> This will be my last post on this since it's off topic. I don't want
> to appear rude to the site.
>
> I wish you could find your way to be truly an American company, but
> I understand since my manufacturing is mostly in Asia also. I'm glad
> you feel ready. But I doubt it. Looking for investors? Ummmm, Not
> ready for primetime... you've heard the expression "Build a better
> mousetrap...etc.
>
> I am a consumer of batteries, so I love this sector but it's still
> just a hobby category for investing. People with real money need
> to be made aware that power storage is good for something more than
> cellphones, starters and flashlight. Unfortunately, that is where
> the thought process is. Those that haven't published third party
> performance/durability data, carved out a profitable niche, drawn
> the attention of a deep pocketed benefactor or a brokerage analyst
> will face an uphill battle for growth. I'm delighted with these grants
> for the attention it will draw because the money is minuscule &
> inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.
>
> Having been there, where units out the door suddenly go from 10K-100k
> to 2M to customers that expect better than 0.25% failure rates during
> years of service, is a leap. There's a place for all in this space
> so carve yours out and hold on. Good Luck
On Aug 05 08:12 PM battman wrote:
> Question for you though, of the lithium guys who did get money, any
> thoughts?
>
> On Aug 05 05:39 PM Don Harmon wrote:
For over a year I've been pounding the table about the A123 IPO being a sea-change event and it will be. To lock down yesterday's grant award they'll have to increase their deal size by $250 million to cover the matching funds; so I have to imagine that the offering total will be well north of $500 million.In other words, A123 is going to be a big important deal.
Now let's set the way back machine to a different era. In August of 1995, there were no public internet companies when Netscape did its IPO. The predicted price was $14, the offering went off at $18 and the stock ran to $75 on the first day. From that day forward the rush was on and every investment banker and venture capitalist in the country was out beating the bushes for the next Netscape. I couldn't even begin to list the number of major companies that made their debuts over the next 18 months. Once the A123 offering goes off, I expect the same thing to happen in the energy storage sector. These things are never isolated events. They always come in waves.
One of the toughest things for any small company to do is develop the and organize the sheer mass of industry information, business plan materials and supporting data required for a grant application or financing. Once that work is done, however, it doesn't spoil or go stale and it's an excellent foundation document that can be sent out immediately whenever somebody asks "tell me about your company." I can guarantee that the wall street and venture capital leaders are already sending in FOA requests for the applications that were not accepted for this round of grants and the next tier of energy storage players are already being identified.
We live in an odd world, there is always far more money looking for a good home than there are good homes.
On Aug 05 11:44 PM Don Harmon wrote:
> MRTTF, SAFT is the highest of all in terms of price for what they
> offer which makes me wonder how they will fare in the EV world? Military
> and aerospace markets are not even close to the market these funds
> are supposed to help develop.
Sorry to read that the small guys missed out, it is from many blossoms (small companies) that fruit come, but government tends not to give money to small companies, they like large, grand, big picture stuff. I'm sure the application/ grant submission must have taken a lot of energy, cost, thought and hope.
However when the opportunity comes along (which is extremely rare) it's always the usual suspects who get the largesse. Funny how that works. I salute all the small guys who tried!
A 1 in 400 failure rate might be tolerated by on product in the end-user's hands close to design end-of-life, but bring that timeline in and I'll have to find a replacement customer quicker than I would want.
On Aug 07 11:51 AM Don Harmon wrote:
> From our perspective anything less than 1:10,000 would be an issue.
I have been told cell failure rates of 1:10,000 right up to 1:250,000 ! So our QC has to be very strict.
I meant no offense. My company ships battery control devices (some complete with multiple batt -packs installed) and over the years the failure rate once in end-users hands is probably 1:500k initial and 1:10k @ 3-5 years out. The overwhelming reason for end-user failure has been improper usage or extreme environmental condition, but I look at a warehouse filled with manufacturing line failures that probably pushes 1:1k as shipped by the factory.
My point to Don was that the ramp from small batch fabrication to, sometimes mind blowing, large batch fabrication is a great leap that I can only hope he is truly ready for. Scaling from pilot line to commercial production is a monumental task. The smaller the lot size the better the chance of perfection. Then comes compressed time lines, margin squeeze, tight spec tolerancing, material expediting and the headache list goes on.
On Aug 07 07:16 PM Don Harmon wrote:
>
> I have been told cell failure rates of 1:10,000 right up to 1:250,000
> ! So our QC has to be very strict.
MRTTF if the work to develop reliable cells in larger formats is successful, hopefully the QC job will get a bit easier. But as long as packs use hundreds of cells and each cell can be a potential failure point, ultra-tight QC will be essential.
I think that this will be the case for a substantial (5-10 years) period of time. By that point, the cell production should be on the order of the large 18650 producers (Sanyo, Panasonic, Sony, etc), i.e. 8 or 10 guys running a gigantic factory and producing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of cells daily.
On Aug 08 04:41 PM John Petersen wrote:
> MRTTF if the work to develop reliable cells in larger formats is
> successful, hopefully the QC job will get a bit easier. But as long
> as packs use hundreds of cells and each cell can be a potential failure
> point, ultra-tight QC will be essential.
I'll refrain from predicting whether the planned factories will result in profitable businesses, but the factories will be built and products will be brought to market.