backtop


Print 81 comment(s) - last by nofranchise.. on Nov 3 at 11:32 AM


Fisker Karma  (Source: Motor Authority)

The Fisker Karma makes an appearance in California.   (Source: Ethermax)
Apparently Fisker has several new models planned...

Fox News' previous commentary about Fisker Automotive may have been a bit skewed and inaccurate (Fox show hosts tried to claim Fisker was not a U.S. firm -- blatantly wrong), but Fox's latest take of Fisker is not only much more accurate, but also caught a humorous and significant gaff.  Apparently Vice President Joe Biden accidentally revealed Fisker's entire upcoming lineup -- including unannounced vehicles that Fisker indicates it wasn't exactly planning to reveal quite yet.

VP Biden tipped Fisker's hand at the official announcement ceremony for Fisker's new Delaware plant, an old GM factory which was shut down and sold through GM's bankruptcy holding.  Speaking to reporters, Fox News notes that Biden said, "Imagine when this factory, when the floor we’re standing on right now is making 100,000 plug-in hybrid sedans, coupes and crossovers every single year."

The only problem was that the coupes and crossovers were supposed to be a surprise announcement for a later date.  However, good secrets seldom seem to be able to be kept and the Vice President unwittingly let the cat out of the bag.  Interviewed after the announcement, company founder and CEO Henrik Fisker commented, "[Laughter] He definitely told what our product plans are."

Aside from the leak, plenty more juicy details were revealed officially in the interview session following the announcements.  Fisker revealed that the first vehicles to come from the plant will be the previously announced sedan, which is dubbed Nina.  Fisker is targeting a price of
$40,000 for the vehicle after state and federal tax credits are taken into account, similar to the expected sticker for the 2011 Chevy Volt.  Production will start in 2012, and the vehicle will recycle the sporty powertrain from Fisker's flagship electric sports sedan, Karma.

Reportedly, the stylings of the Nina, named after the ship Christopher Columbus used in his triumphant return to Europe, are very attractive for a mass-market EV.  Government officials were briefed on the design and apparently were impressed, something that helped them reach the decision to grant the company a $528.7M USD DOE loan to buy and retool the shuttered plant.

Describes Mr. Fisker, "
It’s going to have a very exciting radical design.  We actually just showed it to the vice president of the United States of America and he said ‘it looks like a four-door Ferrari, I can’t believe it’s only going to be $40,000.’" 

The Karma will begin production next year at Valmet in Finland and will be imported into the U.S. and sold for approximately $80,000 after tax credits.  Then in 2016 a second generation Karma will be launched, and production will shift to the retooled Delaware plant, according to Mr. Fisker.  Mr. Fisker confirmed that the first generation Karma will get 67 mpg and travel 50 miles in all-electric mode.  He says some drivers will be able to reach 100 mpg or more, depending on how they drive.

Mr. Fisker also revealed that the Karma will feature "stealth" and "sport" modes which allow the user to manually switch on or off the gas engine for more performance, something not known to be offered in the Chevy Volt.  Even once the battery is depleted, Mr. Fisker states that the gas engine is almost equally efficient at delivering power to the electric motors as the battery system.

A prototype Karma was glimpsed at the
California's Laguna Seca raceway, running laps.  That has been the vehicle's only live appearance so far, outside of auto shows.  No journalist has yet taken the intriguing electric sports sedan out for a spin -- yet.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By Iaiken on 10/30/2009 2:48:33 PM , Rating: 1
Truth from These Podia:
Summary of a Study of Strategic Influence, Perception Management, Strategic Information Warfare and Strategic Psychological Operations in Gulf II

Sam Gardiner
Colonel, USAF (Retired)

Perhaps you should read it and re-evaluate your opinion:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/whispers/doc...

The author has taught strategy and military operations at the National War College, Air War College and Naval War College. He was recently a visiting scholar at the Swedish
Defence College.

Synopsis: The Bush & Blair administrations engaged in a strategic influence campaign of using false information and the media to sway the public into supporting a war that, given actual facts, nobody would approve of.

This is not the only such memo from members of the government, military and intelligence communities.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB207/inde...
http://thepriceofloyalty.ronsuskind.com/thebushfil...
http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oil-maps.shtml

Additionally, the Downing Street Memo offers up proof from high up within the government of the UK that they knew the intelligence was being fixed to garner support for the war.

quote:
C [Foreign Secretary Jack Straw] reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route


Memo as published in the Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article38...

Congratulations, victory over Iraq was also a victory over democracy. Gulf War 2 was imminent, 9-11 and WMD's simply expedited the process by allowing them to push an approving population and an unwilling congress to act in the military interests of big oil.

If you can read all of the above and still think that the actions of the administration (including Cheyney) is anything less than criminal, then you need go crawl back under your rock and leave the world to the free thinkers.


RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By conquistadorst on 10/30/2009 3:38:31 PM , Rating: 2
A "strategic influence campaign" is all around you. It's called marketing. It's what's done to persuade the masses from A to Z. Business, consumer products, entertainment, politics, public opinion, and yes even war. I guarantee you every organized operating entity currently out there has an agenda/strategy/campaign on how they can better manipulate you.


RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By Iaiken on 10/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By randomposter on 10/30/2009 4:56:44 PM , Rating: 1
Come on, be honest with yourself then, critical thinking is a vanishing skill among the vast majority of Americans and you know it. The sooner you adapt your behaviour and expectations to this reality the better.


RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By Spuke on 10/30/2009 5:54:52 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
This is not the only such memo from members of the government, military and intelligence communities.
I'm confused on the memo you linked to. There's no information in it. What are we to take from that? Also, the other references you mentioned. Are those sites you listed unbiased or fair? Are they You are aware that any blog site with a specific agenda will cite "facts" to support their points of view.


RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By Smokey48 on 11/1/2009 11:09:04 AM , Rating: 2
The jamokes who are still trying to blame everything happening now on the previous administration are the same jamokes who worship the ground the 0bama/Biden clowns walk on.

These quotes...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

...show conclusively that politicians both left and right all loudly supported the Iraq invasion.

It's a new administration now, and 0bama will sink or swim based on how he handles it. So far he's not doing too well, bowing down to foreign dictators and apologizing to the world for America.

Blaming Bush at this stage of the game is just an excuse for 0bama's failures.


RE: Hey Joe, who killd JFK?
By Mint on 11/1/2009 12:33:49 PM , Rating: 1
Did they have much of a choice? The Bush administration did the "marketing", convincing the people who were angry after 9/11 to invade, and they in turn pushed their senators to keep going. Anyone who dissented was labeled a traitor or a weak leader by the right wing media, and as I recall (was in Canada back then) even the so called "liberal" US stations like CNN were fairly pro-war.

The Democrats lost a very close election, new that they couldn't do anything to stop the war, and had their constituents asking them to invade. Why wouldn't they? You expect politicians to defy the public with their principles, putting them ahead of their career?

The Bush administration started the war. Like most presidents, Bush was a great leader, but used that skill to lead the people to a horrible decision. Blaming anyone else is retarded.


"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?... So why the f*** doesn't it do that?" -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki