VentureBeat

Brian Fields said:

Obviously Matt Marshall has no clue about motorcycles and cars! You take a taxi everywhere don’t you Matt??? The Venture One is in no way a glorified scooter nor does it deserve that description! It is what is being refered to in the automotive industry as a man wide car. However the government will classify it as a motor cycle due to the three wheel design. The catagories for todays automobile are out of date! The Venture One is in a catagory by itself and in my humble opinion offers a unique driving experiance that is unmatched in the American auto market! The UK’s Carver One a car that shares the same DVC tilting technology has gotten rave reviews by almost every car guy out there that has test drove it. Jeremy Clarkson of top gear compared it to the Vauxhaul saying “the vauxhaul is the most fun you can have in a car…this is the most fun you can have!” Refering to the Carver One he was sitting in. Now the carver does’t have near the exceleration of the Venture One Yet it is still getting that kind of praise. You know maybe they shouldn’t leave writing articles about cars to someone who doesn’t appreciate cars! This vehicle will revolutionize the auto industry! Count on it!

Roger Wildermuth said:

Since surveys show that most (some say 90%+) driving in the US has only 1 or 2 occupants, it would seem that a 2-place enclosed fuel efficient vehicle like the Venture Vehicle V-1, is just what is needed for a ‘primary commuter’ vehicle (not replace the family van). With its DVC ’tilting’ control, ABS, traction control, rollcage, airbags, etc. it will be safer than a motorcycle (much less a ‘SCOOTER’) and outperform most passenger vehicles, while giving better than TWICE the fuel economy. If Venture Vehicles can produce the V-1 and keep it in the $20k range (not the $45k of the European Carver One), then they will have a WINNER. I’ll be at the head of the line to get one! I believe the above reporter is ‘way off base’, and not in touch with the current market.

Donald Leonard said:

I find this guy’s perspective laughable. Who is this expert in all things automotive and marketing? He is like so many movie critics I don’t bother to utilize. I disagree with all of his negative statements as being uninformed, biased and bottom line, irrevelant to current needs and public acceptance. I too will be at or near the head of the line for one of the first off the production line - and I seldom jump on the early supporters band wagon.

Donald

Joe Uridil said:

Matt is only interested in making a name for himself as a self-styled venture capitalist expert. His comments on other new vehicle types he “reviews” is evidently skewed to the extreem performance normally valued by the “hip” types that read his crap. He is not interested in any of the vehicles only to put his “two cents” in print on why the companies are wasting their time. He has no more interest in the V1 than to tear it down.

Rick Deckard said:

I am with the peeps above me. This in my opinion is of the same caliberI am with the peeps above me. This article is of the same caliber as most movie reviews and about as helpful. The Venture One will defiantly be one cool ride and it is a motorcycle not a scooter or golf cart or low end garage built electric scooter. I am amazed how someone can mention all the cool features that Venture will be putting into this two-seater and try to slam it out of the other side of their mouth.

So long shot… I guess we will see who will be eating their words.

By the way check out (Google) the Carver, and the PHIARO P67b ETERNITY ( a redesigned Carver) which have a similar design (Venture has licensed the DVC tilting technology). Read up on the Venture One and check out the video’s that you can find on Youtube… Then decide for yourself instead of letting this guy tell you what to think

Sean King said:

“The classification should lower the cost somewhat, but at $20,000, its still in the region where it competes with more standard hybrid-electric cars that will have more mass appeal.”

If anyone can name me a standard hybrid-electric car that I can purchase for $20k I will give them a dollar!

All the author has done is tell us that the V1, a “scooter” by his definition, “will have things like a steel roll cage, collapsible steering columns, side impact rails, driver’s air bag and a rear bumper.”

Oh and it can out-accelerate a Porsche Boxster, and get 100 miles to the gallon.

But it really is a long shot… everyone would rather pay $50,000 for a hybrid Lexus SUV, right? Anyone?

Eli Green said:

Guys, as both a member of the press and a member of the VentureOne forum, I’ve got to say, go easy on the poor guy.

Sure, he may not know what he’s talking about as far as market appeal or classification goes, but at least he has his specs straight.

The fact that he calls it a “glorified motor-scooter” is a bit of a different story. It’s simply foolish.

His assumption that the VentureOne is a long shot is also foolish. It certainly has a better chance on the market than something like the Aptera. On design alone, the VentureOne wins out because the design would be that much easier for the market to accept. Long shot indeed.

Eric Eldon said:

Surely at least some fact-based criticism of a concept car/motorcycle is reasonable?

Or maybe not, and we should change the title of the post to:

“Venture Vehicles, maker of the JesusCar, gets backing”

Thomas Jones said:

Over all, this article is fine. The author has provided details about both the product and the manufacturer. He has also covered the actual news event, the funding; however it is painfully obvious that the author has limited vision. This might also explain the limited vocabulary. The venture one price seems similar in comparison to current motor cycles, but not a motor scooter. There is definitely a difference in price between scooters and cycles, but to even call the venture a scooter in the first place is a demonstration of naivety at best. It is pretty obvious just from looking at the drawing, that this vehicle is something from the future. If accepted by the public, it could alter the course of the automotive industry. This just happens to be what the industry needs and what is actually happening now for one obvious reason. Fuel economy, or lack there of, is killing America. It is draining the wallets of consumers, which in turn is upsetting their spending habits in all other sectors. It will not be long before a tipping point is reached, and the consumer makes a radical move in the auto market place. This happened a few decades ago with the switch from larger American made cars to the smaller foreign made cars. When a “switch” happens again, I would expect companies such as venture vehicles to do quite nicely for themselves. On a different note, let’s not forget Apple computer. They were considered a long shot around the time of their beginnings. Could anyone have foreseen how it would have turned out for them now? Let’s all hope Venture Vehicles will have a similar outcome. The world needs it!

Roger Wildermuth said:

Yes, I agree, “Fact-Based” criticism is reasonable and needed, but the author’s bias is evident by his use of terms like ‘glorified motor-scooter’. He then goes on to list features of this vehicle that clearly are not present on any ‘motor-scooter’ on this planet. His ‘over priced for a 3-wheeler, does not account for the European Carver One (that is selling for TWICE the price, with poorer performance and economy figures). Also there are no current Plug-in Hybrids in this price range, and the Hybrid-Electrics (non-Plug-in) on the market get HALF the mileage projected for the V-1.
Perhaps a ‘Valid’ criticism, would be IF/WHEN Venture Vehicles can produce this vehicle, and IF it can meet all expectations, NOT that it is over priced.

Rick Deckard said:

By the way (Like Sean King was saying )how many Electric or Hybrid vehicles are available that are around 20Grand that aren’t golf carts, Electric Scooters,LSV’S(LowSpeedVehicles)/NEV(Neighbourhood Electric Vehicles) with top speeds in the 30-40mph range?

Josh Trutt said:

It’s hard for me to understand how a vehicle that goes 0-60 in under 5 seconds and tops out at at least 100mph is a motor scooter. Add in that it is far safer than a motorcycle and gets 100mpg and I can’t imagine anyone who wouldn’t at least give it a look. How one can dismiss such a potential game-changer out of hand is difficult for me to understand. The Prius (version 2) came out in early 2004, and as of the 2008 models there are still no realistic options that do better than 50mpg with car-like safety. (Not sure about Volkswagen TDI diesel, but no gas-powered options.) Now here comes the V-1, not only at 100mpg but more fun than any vehicle on the road, and at under 25K. (A Harley costs 35K, or so I hear, and for some mysterious reason, thousands of people buy them.) Frankly, I don’t see how the V-1 can fail.

Uben sukinkok said:

The problem with this article is that it’s incongruous. He clearly states facts about the V1 that would make anyone’s mouth water and then make’s the opposite conclusion. It’s like Matt has a learning disability or something. Matt- did you take the little bus to work?

Matt Marshall said:

This is quite a campaign, apparently organized.

http://flytheroad.com/blog/forums/topic.php?id=345

Rick Deckard said:

And it tilts… an important fun feature that also helps in stability.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6vx98DjcVc

I guess that makes a point that a bunch of people not related to the manufacture, in other words consumers must think it is more than a long shot.

Yo Matt I would say the truth hurts. ;-)

Brian Fields said:

Well Matt are you will to reconsider you stand point and rewrite an article about V1 that is actually based on the facts and not smeared with bias and slamming comments? I mean come on a vehicle that will out accelerate a Porshe for less then $20,000 and gets 100MPG, you think is a long shot??!!! Seriously????!!!All I can say is that if you do still think that then you are not a person who should be allowed behind the wheel of one of those pedal toy cars much less one with a motor! I mean I just asked my daughter and even she won’t let you drive her Barbie Jeep! LMAO

Jonathan Blair said:

Hmm, how can you criticize something that doesn’t exist yet? Other than to say, “It doesn’t exist yet”? That’s like saying that man will never fly, go to the moon, transmit pictures through the air, or talk to people around the world as if they were right next to you.
Wait, we did all that, and Venture Vehicles will build this vehicle.

Torvald said:

“His assumption that the VentureOne is a long shot is also foolish. It certainly has a better chance on the market than something like the Aptera. On design alone, the VentureOne wins out because the design would be that much easier for the market to accept. Long shot indeed.”

Better than the Aptera? How? The Aptera is not a penalty vehicle and you can sit side by side. You don’t have to sit tandem like in an experimental airplane. I don’t see how it’s better at all.

http://www.aptera.com

Rick Deckard said:

Hard to say much about a website with a fuzzy animation. I had seen some vagury about it when the site was up and I did read some stuff on autobloggreen about the Aptera…
Jetson looking composite diesel hybrid motorcycle. But no mention of any type of safety features. And you still have to deal with 3 wheel stability issues vs change of CG on a tilting vehicle.
I wish them good luck because anything that can stick it in the face of the big auto makers that say “Electric vehicles and Hybrids won’t sell.” is at least going in the right direction.

E Tobarsalas said:

Matt…are you kidding?!?! Automakers have you brainwashed to believe that cars can’t be topped or matched. Are you telling us that the V1 won’t make it? Just scroll down your own page and see just how many others are enthusiastic about the V1’s future. 100 MPG! Are you really that comfortable in your suburban based mind that you think fuel will last forever? It shouldn’t take 4000 lbs of metal, plastic and glass to get you to work. BTW- your one-line comment says little about your character. Try a different approach.

Roger Wildermuth said:

“This is quite a campaign, apparently organized.”
Perhaps, but by people who researched the subject and are not getting paid a ‘red cent’, for their time or effort. As opposed is to an over-paid, biased ‘reporter’, who writes ‘opinions/conclusions’ contrary to the few facts he provides.
Then when challenged, his retort is ‘they’re all out to get ME’, instead of providing FACTS and DATA to support his contentions.

JC said:

Matt - looks like you got the the tin-foil hat crowd riled up. I love the way they’re patting each other on the back on their site, reminds me of grade school.

If this car takes off, great. If it doesn’t, I look forward to the tin-foil hats’ conspiracy theories.

Howard Levine said:

Matt……I am the one of the founders of Venture Vehicles. I am sincerely moved by the support of the Venture Vehicles community and inspired by their passion. I can assure you that this “campaign” was not orchestrated by the company. Your allegation is incorrect and most inappropriate.

Brian Fields said:

Thank you howard!!! For your uninformed information Matt I am the one who let everyone know about your foolish comments! I am not nor ever have been paid a single penny by Venture Vehicles. I am just tired of big oil and the automotive big three in detroit deciding what is best for the public! The remarks by the GM CEO about the people don’t know what they want and we will keep building SUV’s is what really set me off almost a year ago I think! I also don’t think that it takes a 4000lb steel sled to get me to work! I am 100% behind Venture Vehicles and any other vehicle that goes against the the Big Three in detroit w/ a vehicle that represents what the people really want! I hope the Aptera also does well but due to it’s George Jetson appearance I don’t think it will. I also happen to like the Ale’ from vapor fuel technologies. All of these cars point in the direction of the future of the automotive industry and not to the ego of some lard butt sitting in his office getting rich on whatever he wishes to put out because no one has offered a better alternative! V1 in my opinion is by far the best alternative being offered to date. As for the Aptera and the Ale’ I hope they do well too but I will be in the front of the line when the V1 goes on sale and if you had half a brain I would highly suggest you be there too. After all 100MPG is an awesome step towards reducing our dependance on foreign oil. But then again maybe you like supporting terrorists. But To continue the support of Mr. Levine’s statement I actually live in Arizona(not LA) and I work as a police dispatcher while I am going to school for my nursing degree. No connection to V1 at all other then I am a fan!

Hey Howard, tell ian and the rest of the guys to keep up the awesome work and that we are all behind him.

Matt- to you I would highly suggest doing some research first! After reading you column I went looking to see what others are saying and no one else has made such slamming comments. Everyone else is all gung ho! For your sake I hope you do more research on anything else you consider writing about. Otherwise I don’t see you publication lasting long enough to see the release of the V1 late next year!

Ian Bruce said:

“The company has orchestrated a campaign to criticize this article”.

Matt… the first note in that orchestra was sounded when Howard Levine phoned me to alert me to this article, and to your comments.

BTW: I’m Ian Bruce… the other founder of Venture Vehicles, and up to 30 minutes ago, I’d never heard of you.

I post on the forums in my own name, and if you’d bothered to check, you’d see that I haven’t been able to post anything there in over a week — since our kick-off meeting with our strategic partners last Monday and Tuesday.

The VentureWire announcement was the trigger for ending our brief “radio silence”, issuing our own press releases, and updating our forum members on the developments at Vv.

I’m a bit pissed off, but being the guy I am, you’re welcome to come down anytime for a test drive of our 120 MPH Carver One “glorified motor-scooter” prototype. It’s your call.

– Ian Bruce

Brian Fields said:

BTW JC have you ever watched a profesional football game??? If you had then you would have seen whenever a guy slams someone to the ground, He is patted on the back by several members of his team! Grade school??? It is obvious you never went to high school cause that kind of stuff happens there more then it does in grade school. But hey your intelligence was shown when you made the tin foil hats comment. I don’t think I even have any tin foil in my house right now! If I did it would probably be used on some fish for the grill. Myself I where a Chicago Bears hat which is a damn site better then the dunce cap you currently have on!

Pamela Turner said:

Matt- It’s very unfortunate that you’re not well informed about your environment. You’re clearly oblivious to the facts that center on the v1. Obviously you failed to read about the features on v1, or perhaps you read through it while intoxicated or perhaps your memory is distorted. Who knows what propels you to critizise a vehicle that would feed the needs of many people across the globe.

Do you think all Americans are rich? Are you cognizant of the rift between the rich and the poor in this country?

Do you know the actual cost of gas? perhaps you use public transport.

Do you know why gas cost so much?

Do you even know if petroleum is one of American’s natural resources? I bet you don’t even know that America imports petroleum from other countries. What do you think would happen if eventually these countries refuse to export petroleum to America?

You’re so ignorant to realize that v1 isn’t just another vehicle, rather it’s a car that would not only give people what they want but also give them what they need. V1 posseses all the safety feature requires of a car, it’s affordable by price for all, it’s fuel efficient, it gives you an alternative to electricity when you’re driving around town or when gas becomes too expensive, it emits very low pollution to our environment, which should be of great concern to the world at the moment, it’s fun to drive and gives the driver the pleasure of driving both a motorcycle and a car integrated into one, in addition the size would eliminate parking problems in many cities around the globe that have very narrow roads and less parking lots.

I feel sorry for you because you lack extensive information on the world around you.
A little advice for you– Instead of watching an adult channel, spend time watching programs that would educate you on your environment so that the next time you’re allowed to write on a product you would write with deductive and logical analysis of available facts.

V1 WOULD BE A REVOLUTION IN THE AUTO INDUSTRY! THAT’S A GIVEN! DON’T LET YOUR IGNORANCE BECLOUD YOUR THOUGHTS!

Brian Fields said:

I do have to add one more thing Matt, I don’t know maybe this will make you feel better. I have to say Thank you for thinking I was part of Venture Vehicles! In my opinion that is the highest honor I could recieve! To have my name associated with VV is just to cool for words! I truely wish I was a part of their organization, I mean can you imagine what it would be like to be at Ground Zero for an automotive revolution! I could only dream of playing that big of a roll in the future! All and all, coming from an uninformed and seriously deluted individual I still smile at the idea but thank you!ROTFLMAO

laurence timms said:

Wow, will you all listen to yourselves? Arguing the toss over whether it’s a motor scooter or a real car is irrelevant. It’s got three wheels. Not four, three. And one person sits behind the other. And you sit down pretty low in it, decreasing visibility from both the drivers viewpoint and from the viewpoint of other drivers on the road. That limits the marketplace. You can bleat all you want about Matt Marshall’s article but there’s sod all you can do if Mr and Mrs Potential Buyer take a look at the VentureOne and say to each other ‘Look, it’s only got three wheels. Is it some kind of motor scooter?’

Oh, and Brian (yes, you who accused Matt of having no idea about cars) - it’s Vauxhall, not Vauxhaul. Just thought I’d point that out.

tom said:

I saw a prototype of this vehicle at a show at Stanford. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Kudos to the investors for sponsoring a giant R&D project that may pave the way for others 20 years down the road.

Riding around on roads with other vehicles (i’m sure it’s great for mpg tests alone on a test track) in a vehicle like this would be suicidal- your head is about door-handle height, or maybe just high enough to see over the semi-wheel next to you.

At least motorcycles have a decent elevated view to make up for the fact that no one in cars or SUVs see them.

In an accident you’d be run right over or knocked into so many pieces it wouldn’t really matter what kind of airbag or rollbar you had.

Josh Trutt said:

I doubt there will be any trouble seeing this. It’s going to attract attention everywhere it goes. Part of the design, which has been much discussed in the forums, is to insure that the pattern of lights seen at night is clearly visible from all sides and also clearly indicates the width of the car so it is not confused with a motorcycle. There is a good chance there will be some sort of LED lights on the roof as well.

But secondly, as an ER doctor, I have to say it’s time to put the myth that SUVs are safer, to rest. SUVs roll over– easily. You’ll never get one of these to roll over.
http://www.citizen.org/autosafety/suvsafety/

Cultural anthropologist, G. Clotaire Rapaille, whose speciality is getting beyond the rational—what he calls “cortex”—impressions of consumers and tapping into their deeper, “reptilian” responses. What Rapaille concluded from countless, intensive sessions with car buyers was that when S.U.V. buyers thought about safety they were thinking about something that reached into their deepest unconscious. “The No. 1 feeling is that everything surrounding you should be round and soft, and should give,” Rapaille told me. “There should be air bags everywhere. Then there’s this notion that you need to be up high. That’s a contradiction, because the people who buy these S.U.V.s know at the cortex level that if you are high there is more chance of a rollover. But at the reptilian level they think that if I am bigger and taller I’m safer. You feel secure because you are higher and dominate and look down. That you can look down is psychologically a very powerful notion. And what was the key element of safety when you were a child? It was that your mother fed you, and there was warm liquid. That’s why cupholders are absolutely crucial for safety. If there is a car that has no cupholder, it is not safe. If I can put my coffee there, if I can have my food, if everything is round, if it’s soft, and if I’m high, then I feel safe. It’s amazing that intelligent, educated women will look at a car and the first thing they will look at is how many cupholders it has. ” During the design of Chrysler’s PT Cruiser, one of the things Rapaille learned was that car buyers felt unsafe when they thought that an outsider could easily see inside their vehicles. So Chrysler made the back window of the PT Cruiser smaller. Of course, making windows smaller—and thereby reducing visibility—makes driving more dangerous, not less so. But that’s the puzzle of what has happened to the automobile world: feeling safe has become more important than actually being safe.

Matt Marshall said:

Howard, thanks for the clarification about Venture Vehicles’ affiliation with this group.

Jester said:

Gosh, all this hubbub actually got me to research his vehicle and I have to say I can’t imagine why anybody would pay $20K for a *very* low three wheeler — I think anybody in in Miata would be looking down inside this vehicle on the road so I can’t imagine trying to position the trike in the right lane during a congested situation — when you could pay $22K for a hybrid Civic or Prius.

Ian Bruce said:

Seriously, Matt. Next time you’re in LA, come over for a test drive. — Ian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovjfIG3LUEY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apE89XPVRqA

Ian Bruce said:

To Jester, and others who’ve mentioned this: The driver’s eyeline on the vehicle is 1.3 meters, which is pretty typical in a standard sedan. By contrast, the eyeline in a Porsche 911 or a Miata is 1.1 meters.

Brian Fields said:

to the vauxhall comment thanks for catching that I did know but simply miss spelled it due to how they pronounce it in england. I was in a rush when I wrote it. Good catch I completely over looked it! Thanks

Sean King said:

Thanks for clearing that up Ian.
If research into the VentureOne had been done by any of the detractors posting here they would have found that out.
I would also like to mention that the dimensions of the V1 are along the same height and length lines of a Mini Cooper. I do not remember hearing about thousands of dead Mini drivers who lost the battle on todays highways.

For all who see the fans of the V1 as nothing more than tin-foil hat wearing fools, that may be. I will gladly don my tin-fiol hat, or helmet - it is classified as a motorcycle, to know that for a resonable price I can be driving a vehicle that will lower my carbon footprint, lower my dependency on oil, and get me to work with blistering performance.

Oh, and let’s not forget… IT TILTS!

I don’t care who you are… that is COOL!

Roger Wildermuth said:

Jester, just to keep the FACTS straight, both the MSRPs for the Hybrid Civic and Prius base models start ABOVE $22k. The V-1 is scheduled to come in 3 models; e50=$18k, Q100=$20k, EV(all electric)=$22k. Prices may change (up or down) as production nears.
p.s. I presently have a Miata and am planing on getting a Q100 as soon as they are released, don’t want or need a non-plug-in Prius or Civic.

Rick Deckard said:

Quoted from a Press release- which sums up a lot of my feelings on the matter
“We think the Venture Vehicles team, combined with this unique and innovative technology from Carver will provide a solution that will enable the proliferation of cost effective electric power vehicles that consumers will want to buy,” says NGEN’s Steve Parry. “The vehicle’s lighter weight allows conventional battery technology to power the vehicle over distances and at speeds that fit the real-world needs of the consumer. But without question, it is the absolutely extraordinary nature of the driving experience that ultimately will sell the product. There is simply nothing like it on the road, as we learned from Carver owners in Europe.”

Rick Deckard said:

A press release that sums up a lot of my feelings on the V-1
“We think the Venture Vehicles team, combined with this unique and innovative technology from Carver will provide a solution that will enable the proliferation of cost effective electric power vehicles that consumers will want to buy,” says NGEN’s Steve Parry. “The vehicle’s lighter weight allows conventional battery technology to power the vehicle over distances and at speeds that fit the real-world needs of the consumer. But without question, it is the absolutely extraordinary nature of the driving experience that ultimately will sell the product. There is simply nothing like it on the road, as we learned from Carver owners in Europe.”

Sean King said:

Great stuff Rick.

I would also like to add…
Venture Vehicles Mission Statement:

Venture Vehicles is dedicated to changing the world of personal transportation by creating a revolutionary new class of vehicles that is ultra-clean & efficient, safe and exhilarating to drive.

Sean King said:

Good stuff Rick.
I would also like to add Venture Vehicle’s Mission Statement:

Venture Vehicles is dedicated to changing the world of personal transportation by creating a revolutionary new class of vehicles that is ultra-clean & efficient, safe and exhilarating to drive.

Roger Wildermuth said:

I truly hope that Matt takes Ian Bruce up on his offer for a briefing and test ride in the Carver (testbed for the V-1), and that Matt will revisit his opinions and share the experience with the reading public.

Michael Rubin, Arment Dietrich said:

As I was reading the original post, I noted the criticisms and then went over to the flytheroad.com site to check out the vehicle for myself. I have to admit, I was truly impressed. I live in a highly urban environment (Chicago), so this would be a fantastic replacement for me for a car.

I was about to send a link to all my friends and colleagues (most of whom are in the same predicament as I am) when I saw all the postings on this thread. Then I saw the flytheroad forum urging people to “slam” the reporter who wrote a disparaging article. I am thoroughly disgusted by the mob mentality being orchestrated here. I worked as the #2 employee at the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA), so I know all about customer evangelism and how you can whip up your passionate fans to advocate for your business. But this is reprehensible.

Think, people! Just because the V1 has been written about poorly doesn’t give you the right to launch a fervent attack on the original source. Criticize the merits of the article all you want, but leave the personal attacks out of it.

Mob mentality is not evangelism. It’s vigiliantism. Plain and simple.

Either way, this group has lost a potential advocate today. Sending a link to friends and colleagues would be condoning this action, and I don’t want to even be remotely connected to it.

…Michael

—-
Michael E. Rubin
Arment Dietrich, Inc.

Call me — 312-787-7249 x212
Tell a friend — fight destructive spin! http:///www.spinsucks.com
See what I’m up to — http://twitter.com/merubin
See a picture of an orangutan — http://tinyurl.com/yosceb

tom said:

Following up on my comment above and specifically Josh Trutt’s response.

Again, no one will see this vehicle even during the day - and lights will have nothing to do with it. It is too low to the ground so it will not ‘play well’ with other vehicles.

Secondly, 3 wheeled vehicles are inherently unstable. Simple physics. There is a reason that 3-wheeled ATVs are no longer manufactured for sale in the United States. They were incredibly unsafe and caused countless deaths and ER visits.

Thirdly, I do not advocate, nor am I fan of unnecessary ownership and driving of SUVS, and I am usually the one telling others how unsafe they are (single occupant crashes particularly) but the simple fact remains that they exist on the roads and are a threat to small cars, let alone near-submerged vehicles like this. This thing will submarine under cars and trucks in accidents, which won’t be a pretty sight in the ER.

Again, love the quest for fuel efficiency, but this vehicle will only find specialty niche uses and is a liberal/green cocktail party investment for the VCs in question. Intra-campus transport perhaps?

Kenneth J White said:

I would like to just point out one other item, the statement was made that this vehicle (V1) is very low, and has the possiblity of not being seen. FACT the V1 has a height of 53″, thats 4″ taller then my 1995 corvette. The new C6 vett is 49.1″ height and I can’t think of anyone that said, “I didn’t see it, because it was too LOW”. Before you speak, now what you are talking about. Almost every hi-end sport car is lower then the V1.

Leah Hagood said:

Reply to Tom:

If you had done even the smallest bit of research instead of dismissing something different out of hand, you would have found out that the Venture addresses the issue of stability by having the front of the vehicle tilt up to 45 degrees (like a motorcycle). They are using technology that has been in place about 10 years in the production of the Carver.

It has already been pointed out that the height of the Venture is higher than the Porsche or the Miata (about same as Mini), so visibility will not play as big a part as you imply.

I am one of the many from the Venture forum who can’t wait to be in line to purchase one of my own — They can’t build it fast enough for me!

Rick Deckard said:

“The problem with three-wheel vehicles with a symmetrical wheel layout is the tipping moment when cornering, which cannot be controlled at speed if the vehicle has a short wheelbase. To solve this problem the vehicle’s center of gravity can be moved towards the center of the corner, for example by angling the complete vehicle using the same concept as when a motorcycle corners.

This results in a force vector from centrifugal force in the Y direction and the weight force in the Z direction, which ideally runs through the wheel contact point of the single wheel and the center point between the contact points of the parallel wheels.

This is the solution that is adopted by “tilting three wheelers” (TTW), although there are different technical methods of achieving it:

1. Change the camber of the two parallel wheels (front or rear) with or without tilting the vehicle

2. Angle the vehicle around a pivot relative to the axis of the two parallel wheels

Both concepts can be achieved with and without active chassis controls, and whilst the parallel wheels for concept 1 can be either at the front (for example MB F300) or rear (for example Honda Gyro), for concept 2 they can only be at the rear.

Vehicles that use concept 1 have been around since the forties (for example Ernst Neumann-Neander 1948) and this method has regularly been used for concept cars (Mercedes Benz F300 “Life Jet” 1997).

Almost every well-known manufacturer has developed working prototypes of scooter-type vehicles.

Vehicles that use concept 2 include, for example, the “GM Lean Machine” dating from 1983, the “Carver” from Vandenbrink and various scooter-type vehicles from Honda, including the Honda Gyro / Honda Stream dating from 1984. There has been a BMW concept on this basis in the BMW Museum in Munich since 1991.”

This is some direct quotes from the University of Bath, Department of Mechanical Engineering.

Ian Bruce said:

Tom: We already established that the vehicle is not low to the ground (1.3 vs. 1.1 meters). Adding to the comments already posted here, we agree that 3 wheelers are inherently unstable — and so are 2-wheelers (and don’t get me started on unicycles… hoo boy!) The difference here is an active leaning system that automatically leans in to turns, making the vehicle stable in turns over a full G. Very little on the road is as stable as the vehicle we’re creating. In fact, many SUV are happy to roll over in turns as little as .6G.

Josh Trutt said:

Ian– What?? You say a vehicle with FOUR WHEELS can be less stable than one with THREE?? IMPOSSIBLE I SAY! MADNESS!

I certainly agree with Tom on the ATV thing… very dangerous, many ER visits. Thankfully, that’s irrelevant to this discussion.

Would I say that this is as safe as an SUV? Hard to say. Absolutely, far less likely to roll over. However if I were to run dead-on into a truck from behind, would I prefer to be in an SUV or a V1? Umm… Probably would prefer to be in a cement truck. We should all drive cement trucks, then we’d all be safer. Oh no wait that would cancel out the safety, wouldn’t it..? Hmm… maybe we should all drive LIGHTER, SMALLER vehicles so we can all be more safe AND stop wasting gas! That’s the ticket! I’ll start with my V-1…

Thomas Jones said:

Wow! This has been some of the most intense commentary i have read in a while on any web page. Good stuff. Right, wrong, or indifferent, its been entertaining, and i imagine that is all the author was ever really after in the first place; Right, Matt?

tom said:

The points about 3 wheels with canting systems are interesting for laboratory environments but again not highly relevant. Canting or leaning is great for stability through a predictable curve but useless for a sudden impact with a truck, an sudden swerve and so on.

As for the height points, OK fine, it’s taller than a corvette - which is also hard to see. However, it’s not as wide as a corvettte. I don’t know the data on which factor dominates (H or W) more and I am sure no one here does either. Common sense and having seen this vehicle tells me this is not much bigger than a motorcycle so it only slightly more visible. Enough said.

Common sense also tells me that no matter how cool from an engineering perspective and eco-green this thing is, it won’t sell and Detroit will as always work to ensure regulations don’t favor it. Take the technologies developed in this and apply what is valuable to cars if you really want to make in impact in the world.

Agree that if we all drove these that’d be great for both population control and the environment.

This IS quite an orchestrated campaign, or there are just a lot of 3-wheeled electric vehicle lovers out there. Did you all own Corbin Sparrows or something? I’ve driven one of those around if that buys me any street cred.

tom said:

Oh, and the Segway was going to revolutionize the world too… or stuff Doerr’s pocketbook some more or something like that.

They’re slowly finding their niche. If this trike is lucky, it will too! ;-)

Kenneth J White said:

Tom, I beleive you should simply go search for the CARVER ONE, and view the videos, you will see for yourself. We can explain it until the cows come home and you will simply not get it. Go, Go ahead search and review. Since this technology was developed my the creators of the Carver One, you should start there. As for safe, I’d say it is safer then a 35K Hardley motorcycle. Also checkout the BMW crash test they created one as well. As for an impact I really do not beleive being in a MINI, would be much safer.

But what I really beleive, is it is not for everybody… nothing is. But it should still be judge fairly..\

Dale Freeman said:

Those who made statements about the “small” size of the Venture One probably got that idea from the image at the top of this article and on the Venture Vehicles’ home web page. Well, NEWS FLASH… That is just an artist rendering of the concept, and IT IS NOT TO SCALE! For some older drawings that are more to scale and closer to what the Venture One will look like, see the links below. Comments have been made on how misleading that image is and strong suggestions have been made to get it replaced with a more realistic drawing, but they are apparently waiting on a more finalized version of the vehicle before replacing it, even though it causes confusion such as that above.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/ventureone-and-carver-three-wheelers/162151/

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/ventureone-and-carver-three-wheelers/162150/

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/ventureone-and-carver-three-wheelers/162149/

Rick Deckard said:

I’m sorry Tom (and Matt)but no one told me what to say or how to respond. I was made aware of the article and posted my opinions based upon facts, information I researched as well as my own experiences, background and schooling. So, using a cheap cop-out like “it’s an orchestrated campaign” means that your response is based on nothing but hormones. And no one will be able to direct you to information because ‘You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink.’

Dean Kamen said:

Can anyone say: Ginger?

Brian Fields said:

Stuff I have never seen on any glorified scooter.
let us start with safety features!
1.)front capture collar
2.)Steel roll-cage frame
3.)collapsible steering column
4.)side impact rails
5.)drivers airbag
6.)three point seat belts
7.)engine shield
8.)break-away engine mount
9.)traction control,ABS brakes
10.)rear bumper
ok that covers safety!
now just some other stuff.
1.)completely enclosed (no cold weather issues)
2.)100MPG @ 100MPH
3.)plug in recharging
4.)0-60 in about five seconds (depending on model)

now lets see if I have this right, at a price comparable to more standard hybrids? so for half the mileage and $5000.00 dollars more you can get a prius. Let’s see, for $8000 more you could go for the Camry. No Not a Toyota, Maybe a Honda? an accord hybrid is $13,000 more… Let’s see, well half the MPG and $5000 more you could get the civic. Nope not that one either. at an astonishing 34 MPG and $8000 dollars more you can get the ford escape! the prices here are on base models found on the home pages of each manufacturer! Now look at the base model V1 still $5000.00 cheaper then any hybrid on the market! Maybe for some of you $5000.00 difference is no big deal. But it is for many people and some people have a hard time paying for more then $15,000! I know, I use to work at a dealership!

Brian Fields said:

one retraction is ABS and Traction control are now on a couple of glorified scooters.

Brian Fields said:

well it doesn’t seem to be going through so I will try again.

one retraction is that there are some glorified scooters that have ABS and Traction control.

Brian Fields said:

Since when has holding someone accoutable for the comments and actions “Gangster” the simple fact is he has based this whole story on bias unfounded accusations! If he really was a reporter he should have done some investigating first! I for one am still waiting on a retraction or atleast a formal written apology to the founders of v1 for writing such a slanted article.

Jennifer Rogers said:

I have read both the original article and its subsequent comments with great interest. I thought I was reading an editorial piece about the VentureOne when I first came across it. Imagine my surprise at discovering this was to be a serious piece of journalism! I read many different papers- Wall Street Journal, USA Today, local papers- and I find that the authors of those articles do not offer their own opinions when writing about thier subjects. That is called unbiased journalism. Upon re-reading the above article, I discovered the reason I mistook this piece for an editorial: “This is a long shot, in our view.”
Those words indicate an opinion. The comments responding to this article are those one would find when one reads the comments on an editorial page.

My suggestion to the author: If you do not want people voicing their own opinions in reaction to what you write, don’t put YOUR OPINION in the article. Use research to back your claims, keep the piece unbiased and be willing to admit that what you have printed is nothing more than a hack job meant to discourage people from having interest in a reliable, inexpensive alternative to the inefficient cars the Big Three keep manufacturing yearly.

Your article is a fine example of ‘yellow journalism’, which is meant to inflame and not to inform. If you don’t like this vehicle, that is your right, but to make statements with no basis in fact and to present an opinion in the guise of an ‘unbiased article’ is a gross misuse of your position as a journalist and raises many questions about your ethics.

Eli Green said:

As to the “campaign” Mr. Marshall refers to, I can see it as being considered organized, though not by VV, as Howard and Ian have both mentioned, but by us, the forum users.

We’re passionate about the vehicle and what it stands for, though I’m sure many of us have different reasons as to why.

All I can say is that a comment like mine, though only one of many, was meant to be both criticizing and saying that you have the right to an opinion, just like the rest of us.

This has certainly turned into quite the conversation.

Mark said:

Kenneth is right, go look at the videos of the Carver in action. Alot of people I showed the initial pictures to thought the thing would be too small, but when you actually see video of the Carver in traffic you realize that it’ll be just as easily seen as any car. (I especially liked the brief shot on youtube of the Carver doing a 180 in a parking lot, only a few moments of video but massively cool.)

Brian Fields said:

Matt as you can see several people Disagree strongly with what you have wrote yet you offer no facts to back up your claims. I am left with to reasons for your silence.

1.) You can’t back anything you have said because there are no facts to back it with.
or
2.) you are taking the time to print a retraction.

you may think we went overboard but we all think you went overboard as well. Please show me you have more charcter then your first impression shows and print a proper colunm about Venture Vehicles! Ian Bruce himself has invited you to have a look personally and I would highly suggest it! Please do us all a favor and stick to journalistic princples, write an article based on facts from an objective view and don’t put slanted bias comment in it. I think by writing articles in that way, you will avoid an further embarassment.

tom said:

Since when is VentureBeat an unbiased source of news? Who believes in unbiased news reporting anyway? If you do, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you.

Let’s log-in to this page in 5 years and see how many of these vehicles have been sold. Any predictions? Can we place a bet on Betfair without getting dragged away by the men in black suits? I say 10k would be a smash hit in 5 years time.

Fun debate, and for the record I’d love to be wrong and see these kinds of vehicles take off. I’ve been arguing with my head and not my heart though…

Mark said:

I think this has been overlooked: people will buy the V1 because it is green and FUNl not because it is inexpensive. Go see the videos!

Dave said:

Clearly all the facts support the V1, from safety to performance to fuel efficiency. I applaud Venture Vehicles for the vision they are showing by meeting needs the public has now regarding transportation, needs that will only increase with time.

Understanding that oil is a finite resource that is likely to peak in production very soon (don’t take my word for it, check out the latest report from the IEA - http://energybulletin.net/31865.html) America and the world will need solutions such as this.

I also don’t buy the arguments that this vehicle is less safe. The most important and valuable tool in avoiding an accident is driver awareness. The extraordinary visibility that will enhance a driver’s awareness combined with all the safety features and the nimble nature of the vehicle, I’d choose the V1 anyday.

I won’t argue that there may be a general stigma towards this type of new vehicle — it just means the marketing of the V1 will need to be top notch to achieve success but I suspect the founders are fully aware of this.

John said:

Glorified Scooter? It sits 1 inch taller than my ‘02 Maxima. Basically the same length of a Mini Cooper, the same ground clearance of a lot of other vehicles on the road. My wife who does not like motorcycles, likes the idea of the Venture Vehicles V1 and has actually laid claims the the first one we get. So yes I will be in for two of them. Visibility, except for the roll cage there will be no blind spots and if you think about it you can and should turn your head before changing lanes so there would be no actual blind spots. IMHO the Automotive industry needs a kick in this direction and I think that Venture Vehicles will be and is the best one to do this. Climb on board and enjoy the ride, I know I will.

JOSEPH said:

I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE V-1 FOR THE LAST YEAR
IT I BELIEVE THAT IT IS A GOOD VEHICLE. LIVING HERE I NORMAN, OK HOME OF THE SOONERS FOOTBALL
I HAVE TALK WITH MANY GUYS AND A LOT MORE GIRLS
ABOUT THE V-1. THEY LIKE ME ARE NOT TO SURE ABOUT BUYING A MOTORCYCLE BECAUSE OF SAFTY ISSUES. BUT WITH THE V-1 IT LOOKS FUN AND SAFE AND AT LEAST 40 STUDENTS HERE AT OU WOULD BUY THE V-1. WE WOULD LIKE ARE V-1 IN RED AND WHITE COLORS. SO WHEN ARE THEY HITTING THE MARKED.

THANKS FOR ALL OF YOUR TIME
JOE

Brian Fields said:

Joseph- you can find out all the information you need at http://www.flytheroad.com . Be sure to join the forum we would love to have more people join in and give their opinions of new developements.

David Thomas said:

Matt - I’m an engineer that works on Hybrid Vehicles and finding and following companies like VV and A123Systems has become my hobby. The technology for this vehicle is already here, with the possible exception of the battery. But, companies like GM are betting on A123Systems for their batteries saying it is just a matter of engineering, not a breakthrough! VV plans to use A123Systems batteries just like GM. VV’s other partners are first class engineering firms and automotive suppliers. I like what I see from an engineering standpoint and I think that a “different” hybrid will sell better (Example: the Prius versus the Camry hybrid or the Civic Hybrid). Please tell me what makes you think this is a long shot?

Ron Clyburn said:

The only things I don’t like about the V1 is having to wait for it and not seeing timely updates on the status of its development. That is why I and others jump on any bit of new information.
I can understand why a “reporter” would predict failure based on the percentage of failure of other new vehicles from independent companies. He is simply betting on the odds. If the V1 comes to market within a reasonable time, with the promised features and price, it will be a big success.

Nikolaj Pontoppidan said:

i would just like to say to the guys of Venture Vehicles. It’s an absolute awesome car that you have there, espicially the picture in the article, i think it looks amazin!. I really hope i will be driving a V1 one day, so when will it come to Denmark, haha.

Nikolaj Pontoppidan said:

I have seen some video’s on the carver and i love it, but the V1’s looks are so much more breathtaking, i would go so far as to say that it’s the best looking vehicle i’ve ever seen, and it would be an absolute dream come true if i ever got one. To Venture vehicles, i hope this car becomes a smash hit, and sells beyond all expectations, good luck!. One question, when will it come to Denmark, haha.

Derwin Beushausen said:

Mr. Marshall, I would think that a man of your caliber would do at least a little bit of research BEFORE writing an article like this. It is called “Journalism 101″, and maybe you need a refresher course.

I am VERY surprised by this article, and, I must say, a bit dissapointed that you would have such a lapse in judgment and due dilligence.

Anyway, I hope you have learned from this experience and do your work before misinforming people that read your articles. This kind of shoddy work not only smears who you are writing about, but it also puts a black mark against YOUR good name.

By the way, I hope you took Ian up on his invitation!

Josh said:

What a cool blog, I found it by accident but am glad I did

John said:

Matt, Have you been down to take the ride that Ian offered? You might want to and then do another more informed article with an actual source of information. Who knows you might be one of the first owners also. I know I plan on it.

E Tiffany said:

Man… I been posting the wrong slant in several other forums… specifically, a VentureOne supportive roll. NOW if I had only said some outrageous and totally off-the-wall, blatantly incorrect and mistaken, not to mention, erroneous… views about the VentureOne, maybe Ian Bruce, VentureOne co-founder, would have offered me an early free test-ride, too. (SIGH!)

BUT… at least by posting here I get to belong to an “organized campaign.” And that, certainly, at least, is way cool.

AS I was reading through, above… just about all I was going to be saying… was seen to be said… like the size being comparable to a Mini-Cooper…. which is not really all that mini. Yep… taller than a Vette… too. It’s not a way down low machine. Nope. It’s not. The driver clearly sits on a seat… fairly up-right.

As for the prospective stability in relation to a four-wheel car, I saw how one person got poundingly put down for claiming the VentureOne should be more stable on a turn than a four-wheeled vehicle. Well, look at it this way. A four-wheel vehicle leans on a turn… the wrong way! That’s right. The WRONG way. And that is a fundamentally unstable situation. Carver and the VentureOne trikes automatically, perfectly, lean into a turn… and as this occurs… the center of gravity automatically lowers. What could be better than that… apart from being on-rails?

Seth Hill said:

I’ve wanted to buy a Venture One for at least a year now, but the release date keeps getting pushed back another year. I would love to see one actually driving around on the street somewhere. So far we are all arguing about pie in the sky. Does the vehicle actually exist, or is it just some nicely rendered drawings? Is it possibly just a money-raising scheme with no actual vehicle planned?

Mark Tomlinson said:

It’s been six months and the debate continues. Apparently the author struck a nerve.

Where I take issue with the article is that this is a blog for venture capitalists who are reading it for advice. But the opinion given is poorly researched - the author only visited the web site and did not contact either Ian Bruce (founder) nor Howard Levine (co-founder). Additionally, he compares it unfavorably to vehicles with poorer performance at a higher price. But the clincher for me is that faced with over-whelming support for the vehicle, the author does not back down on his assertion that the vehicle is a unsaleable long shot.

If I were a venture capitalist, I would seriously reconsider this man’s advice after having read this post and comments.

Derek Versteegen said:

It is even more obvious today just how wrong, misguided and uninformed Matt Marshall is. Dow Jones’ Company has labeled VentureVehicles as one of the “Top 45 Companies to Watch in 2008″. This comes directly out of the VentureOne Summit held just under two weeks ago.

re:
http://flytheroad.com/blog/forums/topic.php?id=606
http://ventureonesummit.dowjones.com/Default.aspx?pageid=519

John said:

Matt, you still have not taken Ian up on the free test ride? Have you done any research into the vehicle as of yet? Wish you the best…

Devin said:

It is even more obvious today just how wrong, misguided and uninformed Matt Marshall is. Dow Jones’ Company has labeled VentureVehicles as one of the “Top 45 Companies to Watch in 2008″. This comes directly out of the VentureOne Summit held just under two weeks ago.

re:
http://flytheroad.com/blog/forums/topic.php?id=606
http://ventureonesummit.dowjones.com/Default.aspx?pageid=519

Derek T. Versteegen said:

It is even more obvious today just how wrong, misguided and uninformed Matt Marshall is. Dow Jones’ Company has labeled VentureVehicles as one of the “Top 45 Companies to Watch in 2008″. This comes directly out of the VentureOne Summit held just under two weeks ago.

re:
http://flytheroad.com/blog/forums/topic.php?id=606
http://ventureonesummit.dowjones.com/Default.aspx?pageid=519

Dave said:

Hey Matt did you hear, Venture Vehicles has been selected by Dow Jones’ Company as one of the “Top 45 Companies to Watch in 2008”. According to Dow Jones, the venture-backed start-up companies on this list represent “the most interesting and most promising companies in the market today.”

How about a update to your article?

Jacques said:

Perhaps Matt no longer works/writes for this blog. Either that or he has self-exiled himself to a remote island near the Bermuda Triangle. In any case, he should have written an addendum to his article.

Jacques said:

Nobody has mentioned that Matt wrote “This is a long shot, in our view.” OUR view not MY view. Who is this group of folks that expressed this opinion if it wasn’t Mr. Marshall’s personal opinion?

Jacques said:

Oops! I guess he still does “write” for this blog.

http://venturebeat.com/author/matt-marshall/

Brian Fields said:

Well Matt, It has been seven months since you wrote this article and Venture Vehicles has made tons of progress! As previously mentioned they were chosen by Dow Jones as a top 45 company to watch! They have made appearances on Discovery channel as well as several news networks, most notably for their recent deal at the 2008 New York Auto Show where they were showcased among other competition for the Progressive Auto X prize. Yet, through all of this, you have still refused to write a retraction or even just admit you may have been wrong about the article!

I find it slightly humorous that even now seven months later you still are getting hits on this article, and they are still making fun your pathetic attempt at journalism. For the record I am still waiting for an apology or a retraction!

melissa said:

Ok seems like there’s a lot of frustration going on here. Safety-wise… it doesn’t seem that it would be anyless safe than a motorcycle or very small car. The driver would just have to be ultra aware of how small the vehicle is and drive acordingly. I agree with not calling it a scooter perhaps a motorcyle/car crossover?? I have seen something similar in type on the streets some time ago and it drew attention so I think this is a concept that is well worth putting into production. but that’s my opinion.

Electric Scooters | Mobility Scooters | Power Chairs said:

Cool scooter! I’d buy one!
Thanks for sharing this information! I believe that scooters are one answer to the growing problem of pollution and global warming! They are perfect for commuting within a city, or for any short trip. I also have a website about scooters that you may wish to check out. Feel free to visit at: http://www.electricscooteroutlet.com Thanks again!

Scott said:

I don’t care what you call it….I would buy one in a heartbeat. My motorcyle doesn’t get 100 mpg and I ride only about 8 months of the year because the weather starts to get bad. I would definitely use it daily to commute to work and would love to take it on weekend get aways. Hurry this vehicle to market!

Ivan said:

I would like to say that I’ve watched all the videos and the Carver is impressive. Does anyone know how long the batteries last and the cost of replacing them? I’ve been researching the Smart Car due out this year but the drawback is the mileage is not that good for a vehicle of that size and weight. The Smart Car has air bags front and side and it has a small amount of storage behind the seat, oh and a/c. If Venture One came with a gas engine and priced lower between $12,000 and $17,000 comparable to the Smart I think they would sell more units. There are still a lot of people out here that are not comfortable with batteries yet. Build a gas model price it a little less and I’ll buy one.

Larry Lindsey said:

As a motorcycle entusiast for most of my life, and owner of a $20,000 Honda Gold Wing touring bike (my 6th Gold Wing with a total of more than 500,000 miles accumulated on Wings alone), I can assure you that if you guys make it to the head of the line, you will have to beat me to it. $20k for a vehicle like this is completely reasonable and the added safety and comfort of the Venture One, plus the retention of the thrill of driving a motorcycle makes this vehicle a sure bet for success. I want one!

alex said:

this thing sucks balls

Bill Taysom said:

Kudos to Venture Vehicles for creating a performance machine that is affordable, looks cool (read: ‘not like a bubble, cracker box, or moon car’) and manages to maintain the fun-factor. The V1 would be fun to drive whether it’s environmental or not and that’s why it will be successful. It’s a true market solution– NO GUILT REQUIRED.

This is the only low-priced EV/hybrid that I’ve ever had any interest in. It reminds me of the motorcycles in ‘Tron’ and it’s a nice alternative to forking out $100k for a Tesla. Marketed and managed correctly, this has the potential to be the new iPod of the motor world. I hope the final version looks as good as the rendering– don’t screw up the industrial design! Talk to the guys at Apple if you get lost.

By the way, am I really part of an ‘orchestrated campaign’? Wow, who knew?!

Bill

P.S. I have a devilishly long commute– so hurry up on production already!!

Bill Taysom said:

By the way, how do I get on the list?