Maybe A123 knows something here..... Maybe they know GM will never go for their batteries in the EV because they are prohibitively expensive....So they might as well offer GM 1/10th of the batteries that EV needs to get a hybrid on the road!
You break an A123 battery pack and get the cells out, you realized you paid about $84 for the Cells (street Price.. not even retail) ... You're going to need 24 of these cells in a pack and you're going to need about 24 of these packs for an EV to give you enough range for 100 miles ... so without any additional circuitry, cooling (and yes A123 batteries do get toasty while charging) you're looking at $24,000 for EV. This exclude a charger and engineering costs......
LMAO, okay... Basher thrashers go celebrate now.... The final cost of an A123 powered EV is about $30,000-$35,000 on the cheap side just for the batteries...
According to bashers that is 1/2 the cost of the hand assembled Altair Nanosafe batteries..... so lets put that in perspective... Altair delivered 10 batteries at $75,000 that includes everything you need to implement it in an EV, including a charger.... and A123's mass production yields $35,000 EV implementations at bare-bones .... LMAO....
Go Altair, Dr. Gotcher is on the right path. I stand by my prediction, Altair will eventually be able to provide these batteries under $1000 per EV. Within 5 years I suspect the quality of the battery will be magnitudes x magnitudes higher than what we have today at 1/100th of the price....
i did a search on a123 ... and added my post to peskydud comments ... I think we were all wrong on this one. and aoneq was up like 17% on Fri! LOL
"A123 Systems has won permission to sell its assets at a Dec. 6 auction where bidders will include Johnson Controls and Wanxiang Group. About 25 parties are interested in the company's assets."
perhaps it was a good thing ALTI didn't get the AES contracts!
I wonder if ALTI will even be there?
Johnson Controls Inc. and China’s Wanxiang Group Corp., competing bidders for assets of bankrupt A123 Systems Inc. , tried to convince a judge today that their preferred auction dates should prevail.
Johnson Controls told U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Carey that Dec. 3 would be the best date, while Wanxiang said it presented a “qualified” bid to A123 and is seeking a Dec. 10 date, according to testimony in Wilmington, Delaware.
“My client does not consent to an extension beyond Dec. 3,” Joshua Feltman, an attorney for Johnson Controls, told Carey.
A123 Systems Inc., a maker of electric-car batteries that received a $249.1 million federal grant, is asking Carey to establish procedures for conducting a court-supervised auction.
A123, based in Waltham, Massachusetts, filed for bankruptcy protection last month with plans to sell its automotive-business assets to Milwaukee-based Johnson Controls for about $125 million. Last week, a unit of Wanxiang said it wants to be the lead bidder for all of A123’s assets.
A123 has received interim approval for a $50 million loan from Wanxiang, replacing Johnson Controls as the lender for its Chapter 11 case. Johnson Controls said it withdrew as the lender to avoid a fight over the financing.
Also objecting to parts of the sale process were the official committee of unsecured creditors, the U.S. Trustee’s office, Wanxiang and patent holders.
A123 asked the court to deny Wanxiang America Corp.’s request to delay the sale process by 30 days, saying Wanxiang “may not be able to secure the governmental regulatory approvals it is seeking even under this extended timeline.”
Wanxiang is pursuing approval from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. “to protect itself from the risk that the sale could subsequently be unwound,” A123 lawyers said in court papers.
U.S. Republican Senators John Thune of South Dakota and Chuck Grassley of Iowa expressed concerns about A123’s financing deal with Wanxiang in a letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
“A123 has received millions of taxpayer dollars to develop technology and intellectual property that should not simply be shipped to China,” Thune said in a statement.
In its Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition, A123 listed assets of $459.8 million and debt of $376 million as of Aug. 31.
The case is In re A123 Systems Inc., 12-12859, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware (Wilmington).
Let's tell the morons again that the $750,000 for those
10 battery packs included non-battery costs, like engineering services rendered, etc.
Gotcher clearly stated that NanoSafes under full production will cost about the same as li ions. That means around $400 per kWhr. It should be obvious to even the dullest minds that if Phoenix is selling their vehicles for $45,000, then the batteries can't possibly cost $35,000.
They should come in at around $14 grand for the 35 kWhr pack. I don't think there is any info out there that would contradict this.
What the A123 System bateries will cost is anybody's guess, but it should be crystal clear that GM HOPES they will cost less than $400 per kWhr, and must have SOME reason for believing they might, otherwise why would they and the other US automakers spend the money for the research? Of
course, it would be best if they could gain control of a
technology unavailable to the foreign competition.
>>>Let's tell the morons again that the $750,000 for those
10 battery packs included non-battery costs, like engineering services rendered, etc
It doesn't matter what we tell the morons about what they cost... Morons don't usually resort to understanding to make the evolution leap in to smart-ville...
So one of them has a calculator and learned to use it... Lets humor them shall we :-)
>>>Gotcher clearly stated that NanoSafes under full production will cost about the same as li ions
This is a FACT.
>>>Phoenix is selling their vehicles for $45,000
This is a FACT
>>>it would be best if they could gain control of a
technology unavailable to the foreign competition
FAT CHANCE IN HELL... GM has to go begging Toyota for a hand n Hybrid technology... FAT CHANCE IN HELL if A123 will limit it to GM
your right, so how come did alti not say it in its prs?
whyd it say it was an order for 4750,000 of batts> cuz it was goin for the biggest hype pump affect it could get from its cheap pr op?
whys it now saying oh we didnt mean it was a $750,000 battery order $750,000 batt shipment like we said? cuz we learned it comes to $750,000 a piece.
<<Altair will eventually be able to provide these batteries under $1000 per EV>>
whats your thinking here pesky? it knows no one will buy them at any price so its safe saying they cost $1000 & any rate saying they cost $1000 doesnt mean you need to sell them to any body? so it can sell 10 to some body & so it issue a hype pr bout a huge batt sale & raise $20 mill cash for the $250,0000 they eat at $1000? other ideas you have in mind pesky?