Rivian EV

[chassis]

Originally Posted by Clark_Kent

In most instances I would agree; however, RIVN is also backed by AMZN (at least 20% stake) and it appears they're all in. With anti-EV sentiment, especially on this forum, I think people want these EV manufacturers to fail. I think it's too early to call it. If anyone would fail, it would be LCID, but they're backed by MBS. It could lose a material amount of money for a decade or more and they have the capacity to continue funding it without flinching.

It's just (a growth) business. Capital is the fuel RIVN needs, specifically capex for factories and equipment, R&D and working capital (inventory and payables). This applies to any growing business, not unique to RIVN. The unique challenge for RIVN is the highly competitive business they are engaged in. RIVN is burning cash, an unsustainable scenario. This means AMZN and other investors need to keep shoveling cash into RIVN until the business turns cash flow positive. If it turns cash flow positive.

And then competition. Ford, for example, will not concede the pickup truck market to anyone. Others like Chevy, Ram and Toyota will additionally make RIVN's business life miserable because of competition.

And then dealers. What more needs to be said about the dealership model that hasn't been said already on this site? RIVN needs to built out sales, parts, service and charging channels to be successful. They can jump on the charging system bandwagon with other manufacturers, but creating a sales/parts/service channel will be their burden to bear.

It's not about wanting, or not wanting, any company to succeed or fail. It's objectively clear that RIVN has a tall, steep climb ahead, and it will be interesting to see how it works out for them.

[Clark_Kent]

Originally Posted by chassis

It's just (a growth) business. Capital is the fuel RIVN needs, specifically capex for factories and equipment, R&D and working capital (inventory and payables). This applies to any growing business, not unique to RIVN. The unique challenge for RIVN is the highly competitive business they are engaged in. RIVN is burning cash, an unsustainable scenario. This means AMZN and other investors need to keep shoveling cash into RIVN until the business turns cash flow positive. If it turns cash flow positive.

And then competition. Ford, for example, will not concede the pickup truck market to anyone. Others like Chevy, Ram and Toyota will additionally make RIVN's business life miserable because of competition.

And then dealers. What more needs to be said about the dealership model that hasn't been said already on this site? RIVN needs to built out sales, parts, service and charging channels to be successful. They can jump on the charging system bandwagon with other manufacturers, but creating a sales/parts/service channel will be their burden to bear.

It's not about wanting, or not wanting, any company to succeed or fail. It's objectively clear that RIVN has a tall, steep climb ahead, and it will be interesting to see how it works out for them.

It absolutely is about wanting or not wanting a company to fail on BP. There's a strong undertone of anti-EV sentiment on this site. I know you know that. There was a wildly popular thread on this site created several years ago that claimed TSLA wouldn't be a going concern in short order. I wonder where that thread is now.

And no need to break down the economics and order of operations of what needs to happen, when, and how. I'm well versed in how this all works. And what RIVN is set out to do can be done just as TSLA did it. The primary difference, for better or worse, is TSLA was a first mover. TSLA was largely free cash flow negative until sometime in 2018. It took over eight years to get to that point. A primary cog, not the only one, in the success wheel for RIVN is a function of the availability of capital and investors willingness to keep funding the business. The investors know what they're in for. This is the proverbial long game. RIVN will not be consistently free cash flow positive for many years. I'll say this to the folks who seem to know more than everyone else with respect to RIVN's fate: Take a six or seven figure short position in RIVN. Do it.

Look, I think we're generally aligned on this. I also am very interested to see how this works out. In the interest of full disclosure, I'm not a material investor in RIVN.

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by chassis

On a 150 mile tow, he had to stop twice to charge. Not my cuppa but it's not a Rivian thing, but rather an EV thing.

Awful.

[chassis]

Originally Posted by Clark_Kent

It absolutely is about wanting or not wanting a company to fail on BP. There's a strong undertone of anti-EV sentiment on this site. I know you know that. There was a wildly popular thread on this site created several years ago that claimed TSLA wouldn't be a going concern in short order. I wonder where that thread is now.

And no need to break down the economics and order of operations of what needs to happen, when, and how. I'm well versed in how this all works. And what RIVN is set out to do can be done just as TSLA did it. The primary difference, for better or worse, is TSLA was a first mover. TSLA was largely free cash flow negative until sometime in 2018. It took over eight years to get to that point. A primary cog, not the only one, in the success wheel for RIVN is a function of the availability of capital and investors willingness to keep funding the business. The investors know what they're in for. This is the proverbial long game. RIVN will not be consistently free cash flow positive for many years. I'll say this to the folks who seem to know more than everyone else with respect to RIVN's fate: Take a six or seven figure short position in RIVN. Do it.

Look, I think we're generally aligned on this. I also am very interested to see how this works out. In the interest of full disclosure, I'm not a material investor in RIVN.

Yes we seem to be generally aligned.

I don't care who thinks what about RIVN or its products.

This is an interesting exercise in capitalism and Business 101. That's all. I make no predictions on RIVN's fate, only that they are on a large, steep climb.

I own no RIVN shares, and I don't own their products. Under the current circumstances, I have no intention of investing or buying their products in the foreseeable future. If conditions change, I may or may not change my position.

[x622]

Originally Posted by Autoaddict

Is there anyone here who own a Rivian SUV or pickup? Curious to know your thoughts on it. It looks amazing.

The build quality is hot dogshit and that is putting the most polite spin on it. At the PPF shop where I get my cars done, I pop in from time to time for a quick wash/clean up and I get to see what they're working on. I get to look at the Rivian SUV's and trucks before they're delivered to people and the panel fit and finish is truly awful.

I don't have pictures, but I've seen entire door frames bent (at the top), and sitting crooked, trim pieces at strange angles, entire front ends with over 1/2" gaps from the headlights on one side and tight on the other, horribly misaligned fenders meeting the front door causing 1/2" or larger gaps randomly to open up.

I am not the kind of guy who has to have everything be perfect and check panel gaps with a feeler gauge, but they're egregiously bad. Tesla is somehow leagues ahead of Rivian, and their fitment is terrible too. Lucid (Based here in AZ I think) is even worse. Overspray over the whole car bad on multiple cars, including a sapphire I've seen causing huge issues for the new owners. Some refusing to take delivery and all that jazz.

I'd also venture to say that rivians look terrible in the front. It looks like a character from Big Hero 6, my nephews favorite movie.

[P1]

That front end is just an immediate no-go for me. Looks like an anime character.

[Housekeeping]

I have one on order, the SUV, will likely cancel if I can convince my wife. Less and less a fan, rather a Model X or even a Polstar. Those headlights are awful and I’m hearing 6k mile tire replacements as common.

[x622]

Originally Posted by Sy1616

I have one on order, the SUV, will likely cancel if I can convince my wife. Less and less a fan, rather a Model X or even a Polstar. Those headlights are awful and I’m hearing 6k mile tire replacements as common.

Plaid X with the non-stupid steering wheel seems like a great daily SUV/Egg thing. I'm legitimately considering one and doing a BBK and full suspension on it... It might look like crap but it'll turn and brake I think (hope)

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by sspade

Off road / on trail performance has been proven to be laughable... Probably be alright if you keep it in the city where it belongs.

Rivian R1S Braves The Rubicon Trail, First Production EV To Accomplish The Feat

Completely stock R1S quad motor.


https://insideevs.com/news/681888/ri...rubicon-trail/

[M-technik-3]

Originally Posted by Autoaddict

That’s crazy! From all that torque

Think more of a weight/tq issue.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by M-technik-3

Think more of a weight/tq issue.

It is from conserve mode. R1T/R1S can decouple its rear motors to be more efficient. Power is reduced in conserve mode, but that still means people are ripping around putting 418hp to just the front tires. Civic Type R's have been known to go through front tires in less than 10k miles, they are a lot lighter and have 100+ less hp.

[Sedoy]

I was getting about 220-230 miles of highway driving at 70-80 MPH. This is pretty bad considering the massive 135 kWh battery. The vampire drain issue was due to the air suspension constantly adjusting the level even while parked. It's possible that they have already fixed that. Another problem is that the phone key was way too sensitive. As I walked around the house and got closer, it would unlock the car, triggering the air suspension to level, the software to load etc... eating up that battery. Overall it's like a baby Hummer EV too heavy for its own good...

Originally Posted by Clark_Kent

Thanks for this. Can you provide more perspective and/or data on the efficiency? Also shocked to read about the vampire/phantom drain you experienced. Is the car "asleep"? Is it constantly "waking up"? Do you know the cause?

[sspade]

More praise from the auto journalists

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?s...ibextid=cr9u03

[sspade]

According to the CFO, the company will begin turning a profit in the fourth quarter of 2024.

For a company founded in 2009, is that considered acceptable? Tough to imagine investing in a company like that.

[Clark_Kent]

Originally Posted by sspade

According to the CFO, the company will begin turning a profit in the fourth quarter of 2024.

For a company founded in 2009, is that considered acceptable? Tough to imagine investing in a company like that.

There's nothing out of the ordinary about this in the automotive industry where the barriers to entry are incredibly high. Starting an automotive company, especially an EV company, is capital-intensive. I'm certain the COVID-19 pandemic set them back a bit as well.