Comments on: Fisker Keeps Accumulating Venture Capital

By: Benjamin

Benjamin — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 02:26:00 +0000

@IV - Recall 1 was a problem with A123 System batteries. These still are great chemistry. Fisker thought it was sourcing the best, but got a bad batch. Not its fault. Recall 2 was a fan problem that could be a fire risk. Not a fundamental design flaw. The owner of that car bought another one and invested his and his wife's own money back into Fisker as one of the VCs who are signing on.

The story says Fisker knows it has detractors. It also says the public only knows what it knows. Your repeating the headlines and then slurring about fire sounds a lot like the Volt haters.

You know how many ICE cars catch fire every year? How many majors have had recalls? You want to scrap this environmentally oriented company why again? Next up is Atlantic, then lower priced cars for the rest of us.

The article already basically had your number covered, but you had to go and offer your (not worth) two cents anyway, didn't you? Looks like you prove its point more than you debunked a thing.

By: Roy_H

Roy_H — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 00:39:18 +0000

If you believe Fisker will survive as a company, then you might think this is a good time to buy stock at a low price.

If you have already invested heavily in Fisker, then there would be a lot of incentive to see the company succeed. Buying more stock would certainly help them.

So the question is, has almost all the new stock been purchased by previous Fisker stock owners or not?

By: john iv

john iv — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:03:09 +0000

". . . minor recall . . ." ?? They have had two major recalls and the car is only a year old. Please venture captialist invest in the other companies who are actually putting cars on the road that don't catch fire.