HinesSight

Arcimoto's current financial situation: facts and my opinion

I'm an early Arcimoto backer with an early pre-order reservation number of #129. There's a lot that I like about the company's effort to design, manufacture, and sell an innovative electric three-wheeled motorcycle, which they call a FUV (Fun Utility Vehicle).

But there's also a lot to be wary about.

Notably, initial purchasers of the FUV have to make a bet on two things: (1) the quality of the final design of the FUV that will be used in retail sales (the design isn't finalized yet), and (2) the ability of Arcimoto, a start-up company, to stay in business through the three-year/36,000 mile warranty, and to be able to handle local repair, servicing, warranty, and recall needs that FUV purchasers have.

Regarding (2), I've been paying closer attention to Arcimoto financial reports as the projected date of the first retail sales draws closer. A November 2018 video indicates that this will happen in the first quarter of 2019. (Screenshot above; video is below.)

So here's my take on the company's recent third quarter 2018 earnings report, and the stock offering that following immediately after the report. 

Earnings report. I'll repeat an excerpt from the 3rd quarter earnings report that I included in a November 17 blog post:

"The Company incurred an operating and net loss of $3.2 million, or ($0.20) per share in the third quarter of 2018, compared to an operating and net loss of $0.7 million, or ($0.05) per share in the third quarter of 2017.

The Company had $2.4 million in cash and cash equivalents and $0.8 million in short-term investments as of September 30, 2018, compared to $2.1 million cash and cash equivalents and $5.2 million in short-term investments as of June 30, 2018. As explained in more detail in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the periods ended September 30, 2018, our current resources are only sufficient to fund our intended operations through the end of November 2018."

Since Arcimoto only had $8,000 of revenue in July-September 2018, the loss of $3.2 million in the third quarter is all due to expenses incurred by the company, which averaged about $1.1 million per month.

Above is a more detailed look at Arcimoto finances, which I found on a GuruFocus.com page. It shows that total operating expenses for the 3rd quarter were indeed $3.2 million. Expenses have gone up markedly from the year before in all three areas, R&D, sales/marketing, and general/administrative. 

Another way of looking at how quickly Arcimoto is burning up cash (not literally, obviously) is the fact that at the end of June, 2018 the company had $7.3 million in cash and short-term investments, while at the end of September, 2018 the company had $3.2 million in cash and short-term investments. 

So the company had $4.1 million less in cash and short-term investments at the end of the 3rd quarter, compared to the end of the 2nd quarter. This decline in cash isn't a surprise as the company made progress in 2018 on the design and promotion of its FUV product, which involved increased expenses. 

Still, since the 3rd quarter earnings report was released on November 16, a month and a half into the 4th quarter, it is easy to see why the company said that current resources were only sufficient to fund operations through the end of November -- given that only $3.2 million was available at the beginning of the quarter, and expenses in the previous quarter were running at about $1.1 million to $1.4 million per month. 

(Expenses also may be running higher in the 4th quarter, given the ramp-up toward retail sales.)

Stock offering. On the same day as the earnings report, November 16, Arcimoto announced a public stock offering of 2,500,000 shares priced at the higher of $3/share or the closing price as of that day, which was $2.94/share. So $3 turned out to be the price.

It's a bit confusing as to how many shares actually were offered for direct sale via wiring money to Arcimoto by 5 pm EST on Monday, November 19. Here's how I understand what happened, which may not be totally correct. 

The October 17, 2018 prospectus spoke of 2,500,000 shares being offered. But a "Subject to Completion" note dated November 16 says that "the information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and may be changed." This fits with a BusinessWire document (partial screenshot below) that says 504,900 shares were being offered at $3 per share. Note: the offering date is wrong. Friday was November 16, not the 18th.

It appears that the company decided to offer less than the maximum number of 2,500,000 shares. I've been curious about how the stock offering went, but hadn't been able to learn how many shares were sold. The email address for the media/public relations person listed on the Arcimoto website isn't working, something I've pointed out to Arcimoto staff. 

[UPDATE: It turned out that while Donahue's email address was correct on two Arcimoto web site pages, the underlying "mailto:" link had a typo in her last name, so I got the wrong address when I clicked on the email link. Arcimoto has corrected the problem, and I've re-emailed Donahue with my question about how many shares were sold in the stock offering.]

So at the moment I'm having to assume that information posted on the Arcimoto SRK "FUV" Club on Facebook is accurate, though I'm not sure how the person who posted this knew that $1.5 million was raised through the public offering. That appears to have been the goal, but I'm not aware of any public documents confirming that amount.

Well... damn, when I clicked on the post to generate a link to it, Facebook told me that the post had either been deleted or I don't have access to it. Since I'm still a member of the Facebook Club, I'm assuming that it was deleted. Fortunately, I'd made a screenshot of the post before it disappeared. 

Again, I don't know how Colverson learned that $1.5 million was raised by the recent stock offering, or if this information is accurate. If he got the information from Arcimoto personnel prior to it being released publicly, that might be a violation of SEC rules.

At any rate, it does appear to be correct that Arcimoto insiders/executives bought 274,247 shares of stock in the offering on Monday, November 19. At least, that's what the GuruFocus link says. CEO Frohnmayer -- 139,903 shares. CFO Campoli -- 800 shares. COO Becker -- 210 shares. Director Eisler -- 75,000 shares. Director Scherer -- 33,334 shares. Director Curl -- 25,000 shares. 

That brought in $822,741, at $3 per share. So Colverson was off a bit, when he said that company insiders put down $750,000 of their own money. Actually it was a bit more. 

Now that I've re-read Colverson's post, one reason he deleted it might be the mention of Arcimoto directors heading off to Mexico and assuming new identities if they thought the company was just weeks away from going under. Sure, the remark was made in jest, I'm pretty sure, but it is a strange remark nonetheless. 

For one thing, it was the company itself that said in the 3rd quarter earnings report that Arcimoto would run out of funding for current operations by the end of November 2018, given current resources. It wasn't "naysayers," which might have been a reference to me. Or to people on the Facebook forum who think like me.

Like so many others, I want Arcimoto to succeed with its FUV. I sure need more fun in my life. But I'm also a big believer in doing as much research as possible before making a significant purchase. I poured over VW GTI reviews and company information about the car for weeks, maybe months, before deciding to buy one in 2017. 

And I believe I've got the 7th generation GTI, which has a long track record, as does VW, obviously. So research is way more important when considering a purchase of a new vehicle from a new company, which is the case with the FUV/Arcimoto.

Regarding the outcome of the stock offering, if all of the 504,900 shares put up for sale sold at the $3 price, that's great. Arcimoto now has $1,514,700 to keep the company operating. But as I noted above, this amount would only pay for about a month of a half of expenses, at best. 

Which gets the company through the end of the year, or thereabouts. Again, assuming that all of the 504,900 shares were sold, something the company hasn't reported itself so far. 

There are different ways to look upon the purchase of 274,247 shares by company insiders. In his Facebook post, Colverson thought this was a great endorsement of the company's prospects by people who know the most about what is happening with Arcimoto. OK, that's one perspective.

Here's another one.

All of the shares were bought on November 19, the last day of the stock offering. The reason might simply be that this was the first business day after the earnings report, and the insiders weren't able to wire money for the share purchases any earlier. (Assuming they were required to wire money, like other purchasers were.)

It also could be that the Arcimoto insiders knew that few "retail" investors were biting on the $3 share price, since the price of Arcimoto stock dropped dramatically on Monday. See above. I'd be surprised if anyone outside of the company was willing to pay $3 a share for FUV stock that was trading well under $2.50 a share soon after the opening bell on November 19.

Maybe only a few people were willing to do this. And maybe when company insiders realized the stock offering wasn't going to meet its $1,514,700 goal, they stepped in with share purchases of their own. After all, these insiders have the most to lose if Arcimoto were to cease operations, and the most to gain if the company hangs on and becomes a success. 

Maybe. What I've just said is opinion, based on some facts. Here's another fact: CEO and founder Mark Frohnmayer's shares in Arcimoto were worth about $39 million after the first stock offering in 2017. So Frohnmayer and other insiders have good reason to invest more money in Arcimoto, if this is necessary to preserve the value of their stock holdings.

Question is: Will more money be needed by the company in addition to what was just raised by the stock offering? And if the main source of additional funds is company insiders, to what extent will they be willing to continue to buy shares of Arcimoto, if this is needed?  

Salem Weekly closes down. Sad day for our town.

Today, being a subscriber to Salem Weekly, I got a letter from our alternative newspaper that said the paper is being closed down, effectively immediately. I'll share my thoughts about this following the letter.
Download Salem Weekly letter


I feel a sense of loss, yet also thankfulness.

A.P. Walther, who I assume wrote this letter, has been the tireless force that's kept Salem Weekly up and running since its birth in April 2003 as a monthly.

Wikipedia describes the origins of the paper. I remember with fondness the Coffee House Cafe, a marvelously funky and welcoming place.

The Salem Monthly traces its origins to a coffee house in Downtown Salem, Oregon known as the Coffee House Cafe. Dating back to the mid-1990s, the Coffee House Cafe served as a popular meeting place and hangout for Salem's youth culture. In its later years of operation, the cafe began publishing a newsletter to engage customers in Salem's community and cultural affairs. Inspired by the reaction to the cafe's newsletter, cafe owner, A.P. Walther decided to start up a publishing operation for an alternative newspaper in Salem, Oregon.

The main thing I want to say is: Thank you, A.P., for your 15+ years of service to Salem by serving as Salem Monthly's/Weekly's publisher.

I know that for that much, or most, of that time you also was the artistic director, advertising salesperson, and deliverer of copies downtown via your bicycle, which towed a cart filled with papers.

The first time I saw you cycling along on a publication day, I thought, How marvelous! The Statesman Journal publisher sure doesn't hand deliver copies of that newspaper to downtown boxes.

Equal thanks go to Helen Caswell, the chief reporter for Salem Weekly.

I don't know when Helen started writing for the paper, but I know it has been for a long time. The Salem Weekly "Our Authors" page says that Helen moved here in 2008.

It's an open secret that Helen used several pseudonyms to disguise the fact that sometimes (many times, I'm sure) she wrote almost all of the stories in Salem Weekly.

Here's the email addresses for A.P. Walther and Helen Caswell.

[email protected]
[email protected]

I invite you to share your own thanks for their exceptional service to our community over so many years. Some other Salem Weekly writers are listed on the above-mentioned "Our Authors" page.

Here's a photo I found of Helen and AP on Google Images. It's a screenshot from a You Tube video of a CCTV program, The Valley View.

I love both Helen and AP, though I can't say I was close friends with either of them. It's just that every encounter I had with them was wonderfully positive. I don't believe in God, nor in souls, but these words come to mind: They are two sweet souls.

For a couple of years I was fortunate to have been able to write a Strange Up Salem for Salem Weekly. The deal was that I didn't want to be paid, and I also didn't want someone telling me what to write, or to edit the column. AP kept both bargains. 

When AP first contacted me, asking  if I wanted to write for Salem Weekly, early on he told me, "Brian, I'd prefer if we mainly talked by phone. I'm dyslexic, and it is difficult for me to write email messages." (I'm pretty sure AP used the term dyslexic; if not, sorry for giving you a mistaken diagnosis, AP.)

That moved me. Gosh, a publisher of an alternative weekly who finds it tough to write. So admirable! 

And that wasn't only the only hurdle AP had to overcome during the time I wrote the column. Several times he'd tell me that an issue couldn't be published on time, because there wasn't enough money to cover printing costs. But somehow AP would find enough cash to get Salem Weekly back on track. 

As for Helen, she'd send me nice email messages about many of the Strange Up Salem columns I wrote. Helen was unfailingly positive -- never saying a bad word about a column, even though some of them deserved more than a few bad words.

Anyway, I'm so grateful for what AP Walther and Helen Caswell have given Salem. I'd say, there are no words. But I've just written 677 of them, so that'd be a lie.

Shingrix gave my wife and I bad side effects. Still way better than shingles, though.

Getting shingles isn't fun, to put it mildly. 

Shingles, also known as herpes zoster, is a painful skin rash caused by reactivation of the varicella zoster virus (the same virus that causes chickenpox).

...Generally, people only develop shingles once, although it is possible to get shingles more than once. Shingles may lead to long-term complications such as debilitating pain that lasts for months or even years. In rare cases, serious, long-term eye or hearing issues can occur.

My wife, Laurel, and I are 69 and 70, respectively. We'd gotten the original Shingles vaccine, Zostavax, but we wanted to get the new and improved vaccine, Shingrix, because it is much more effective at preventing shingles. 

However, Shingrix has considerably stronger side effects. And between the two of us, we've experienced most of them. Here's how the makers of Shingrix describe the side effects.

The most common side effects of SHINGRIX are:

Pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site
Muscle pain
Tiredness
Headache
Shivering
Fever
Upset stomach

Severe allergic reactions are less common and include: hives, swelling of the face/throat, difficulty breathing, a fast heartbeat, dizziness, and weakness. If you experience any of these reactions, seek medical attention immediately.

You're supposed to get two Shingrix doses, with the second ideally two to six months after the first dose. Problem is, there's a shortage of Shingrix. 

We lucked out when we went to our local Walgreens a couple of months ago and were told they had two doses left. So Laurel and I each got vaccinated, a few minutes apart. 

But Laurel had much more severe side effects after taking the first dose.

My arm was just really sore. However, this didn't prevent me from sleeping more or less normally. Laurel, though, had a really bad night. She barely slept, being beset with uncontrollable shivering that, not surprisingly, put a big dent in her quality sleep time.

A few days ago we reached the two-month mark after getting the first dose of Shingrix. So I optimistically headed to the same Walgreens and said I wanted to get the second dose. The reply: We've been ordering it for weeks, but haven't got any more doses. So keep on coming back, since we can't be sure when we'll get additional doses.

The next day Laurel started calling drug stores and pharmacies here in Salem, Oregon. The responses were discouraging. Some drug stores had a waiting list as long as six months. Nobody had Shingrix in stock. Except...Costco.

Laurel was told that the Costco pharmacy would save two doses for her and me. When we went to the Salem Costco yesterday, the pharmacist who gave us the Shingrix shots told us that Costco is prioritizing doses for their customers who have gotten the first dose.

Which makes sense, since while one dose probably is better than nothing, the effectiveness of Shingrix is at least 90% if two doses are given, again, ideally two to six months apart. 

Pleasingly, the pharmacist told us that Costco also allocates a few doses for people who got their first dose at a non-Costco pharmacy, but are having difficulty locating a second dose. (We're Costco members, but we hadn't used the Costco pharmacy until yesterday.)

So when we left Costco yesterday afternoon, both of us were happy that we'd managed to get a second dose of Shingrix. But if you'd asked either of us how we felt after we went to bed, our feelings would have been different.

Almost as soon as I turned the light out, I started to feel really weird. Soon I was feeling chilled, even though the heat was set to 67 degrees. I also started shivering uncontrollably. Both side effect symptoms persisted after I turned the heat up to 71 degrees, though I didn't feel quite as chilled.

Neither of us slept much, if at all. It was one of the worst nights of my life, and the same was even more true for Laurel. In addition to the chills and shivering, she felt nauseous and just about every part of her body ached. Really bad. 

For most of today I've felt more or less normal, aside from being tired from lack of sleep. But Laurel's side effects persisted. They're only supposed to last 2-3 days, so hopefully she'll be feeling better tomorrow, which is Thanksgiving.

Understand: in no way do we regret getting the Shingrix shots. Getting shingles would be much more painful and distressing than suffering for a day or two after getting a dose of Shingrix. 

Everybody is different with regard to side effects.

And for some reason I had little problem with the first dose, but a big problem with the second dose. Just keep this in mind if you get Shingrix vaccinations. If it's possible to do this on a day where you don't have to function well the next day, that'd be a wise thing to do.

City Club talk about opioids both enlightening and disturbing

We're all addicted to something. Coffee. Video games. TV. Golf. Travel. Whatever. But usually our addictions aren't so intense as to wreck our lives. And rarely are they fatal.

Opioids, though, are both addictive and highly dangerous. They can do good, when used correctly. They also do a lot of harm, when used incorrectly.

Last Friday a Salem City Club talk, "The Opioid Epidemic: How We Got Here and the Way Forward," both fascinated me with facts I hadn't been aware of before, and depressed me with fairly familiar statistics about how opioids are ravaging our country. 

Coelho and Holton

The speakers were Dr. Paul Coelho of the Salem Health Pain Clinic and Dwight Holton, CEO of Lines for Life (and a former US Attorney for Oregon). This isn't a very cheery photo of them that I took, but then, their topic was deadly serious. Literally.

Holton spoke first. He said that when he was US Attorney, he started to work on an effort to combat heroin use in Oregon. But he shifted gears after someone told him, "You're looking at the wrong drug." Indeed, opioids are a much bigger problem.

There are 42,000 car deaths per year. The Vietnam War killed 58,000 Americans, in total. And in 2017 it is estimated there were 72,000 drug overdose deaths. That number seemed so high, I worried that my notes were wrong. So I found a National Institute of Drug Abuse link that confirmed it.

Here's a figure from that web page. It shows that deaths from natural and semi-synthetic opioids, both prescription and black market, have been steadily increasing. Heroin deaths have been rising even more rapidly, now surpassing "regular" opioid deaths. 

But deaths from synthetic drugs other than methadone have been really increasing in recent years.

In his remarks, Coelho said that $1,000 worth of Fentanyl can be worth $8 million on the black market, while $1,000 worth of heroin is only worth $4,000. So there's a huge incentive for drug dealers/cartels to push Fentanyl onto people addicted to opioids. Problem is, only a few grains of Fentanyl can be fatal.

So how did we get into this opioid mess? 

It's well known that pharmaceutical companies must shoulder a large part of the blame. I'd say, most of the blame. Holton mentioned a New Yorker story, "The Family That Built an Empire on Pain,"  that I'd read which described in excruciatingly painful detail how the Sackler family became hugely rich by selling OxyContin through Purdue Pharmaceuticals.

"Selling" doesn't do justice to the crap that happened. Purdue knew that OxyContin was being overprescribed, with jillions (more or less) of pills finding their way onto the black market. Purdue paid six hundred million dollars in fines, but the New Yorker story says:

Given the billions of dollars that the Sacklers and Purdue had reaped from OxyContin, some observers felt that the company had got off easy. Arlen Specter, the Republican senator from Pennsylvania, remarked that such fines amounted to “expensive licenses for criminal misconduct.”

Coelho said that doctors were encouraged to prescribe OxyContin by attractive young female pharmaceutical reps. Helping to sway them was an absurdly over-cited 1980 letter to the editor in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). Yes, a mere letter to the editor. Here it is.

This study only dealt with hospitalized patients, not people prescribed opioids on an outpatient basis. Nonetheless, the letter was used frequently in advertising for OxyContin and, I assume, other opioids. The NEJM only issued a retraction in 2017, long after it should have.

Holton said that pharmaceutical companies marketed opioids as being low risk and high benefit, but they were very wrong on both counts. 

After 30 days of using opioids, there's a 47% chance a person still will be using them in three years. And if I can read my scribbled writing correctly, after using opioids for 90 days, there's a 66% chance a person still will be using them in five years. Whatever the percentage actually is, the longer the use, the greater the chance of addiction. Also, the higher the dose, the greater the chance is.

Four out of five heroin users had used opioids previously. So if there's a gateway drug to heroin, it is opioids, not marijuana. Regarding marijuana, neither of the speakers mentioned this, but research shows that after states legalize marijuana, the number of opioid prescriptions and the daily dose of opioids goes way down. 

Since no one has ever died from an overdose of marijuana, this argues for legalizing pot as a way to reduce opioid addiction and the harms that come with overuse of opioids. 

Astoundingly, Holton said that 216 million opioid pills are prescribed each year in Oregon. That's about fifty pills per person. So it's hard to believe that all of these prescriptions are medically necessary. The good news is, as shown in the slide above, that Oregon is making progress on reducing opioid use. 

Nationally and in general, though, the trend is disturbing. This slide showed how opioid deaths are just the tip of the opioid problem iceberg. 

And this slide shows how mortality rates in the 45-54 age group, which I gather is a prime age for using opioids, has been rising in the United States (red line; not sure why it says "USW"), while the rates have been falling in other industrialized countries.

Another slide fell prey to bad focusing on my iPhone. It showed that opioid prescription rates are much higher in this country, perhaps because we have such evil pharmaceutical companies like Purdue, and lack a national health system. Coelho said that meth use is spiking in Oregon. Stimulant prescriptions are increasing. 

On the positive side, this slide showed that Baltimore had a 40% drop in overdose deaths over seven years following an expansion of opioid agonist (counter-acting) medication. Many police officers now carry agonists such as Naloxone, which is great.

Lastly, this slide shows what needs to be done to combat the opioid epidemic. It's a bit hard to read, so here's what it says; 

(1) Safe pain management. Better access to safe and effective pain care.

(2) Fewer pills. Protect the community through safer prescribing and better medication disposal. 

(3) Support harm reduction, treatment & recovery. Better access/availability of naloxone, MAT, & other addiction treatment & recovery supports.

(4) Data/education. Better data to inform action. 

Be wary of Arcimoto's new last-minute stock offering

In general I've been supportive of Arcimoto's attempt to design and market an electric three-wheeled motorcycle, which they call the FUV, Fun Utility Vehicle. It does indeed look like fun, but this doesn't take away from the fact that the company is on shaky financial ground.

(You can see my previous posts about this effort by clicking on the Arcimoto category in the right sidebar. I have an early pre-order number of #129, so I've been following Arcimoto for quite a while.)

But yesterday Arcimoto did something that strikes me as ethically dubious -- a new last-minute stock offering announced after the markets closed on Friday, which requires investors to wire money by 5 pm EST on Monday if they want to buy shares via this offering.

This is after Arcimoto also announced yesterday in a third quarter earnings report that "our current resources are only sufficient to fund our intended operations through the end of November 2018."

Here's how I described my concerns about this stock offering in posts on the Facebook Arcimoto FUV Fan Club page.

First post was about the third quarter earnings report.

Well, as was suspected, Arcimoto is on shaky ground financially. The third quarter earnings report says they only have enough cash to last through November 2018. Excerpt:
-------------
"Total revenues in the third quarter of 2018 were $8,000 as compared to no revenue in the third quarter of 2017. Sources of revenue in the third quarter of 2018 were $8,000 from the sale of merchandise and metal fabrication revenue.

The Company incurred an operating and net loss of $3.2 million, or ($0.20) per share in the third quarter of 2018, compared to an operating and net loss of $0.7 million, or ($0.05) per share in the third quarter of 2017.

The Company had $2.4 million in cash and cash equivalents and $0.8 million in short-term investments as of September 30, 2018, compared to $2.1 million cash and cash equivalents and $5.2 million in short-term investments as of June 30, 2018. As explained in more detail in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the periods ended September 30, 2018, our current resources are only sufficient to fund our intended operations through the end of November 2018."

Second post was about the new stock offering.

At the risk of being called a negative Arcimoto "boo-bird," I've got to say it like I see it. The company's weekend stock offering of up to 2,500,000 shares at $3 a share strikes me as ethically dubious (at best). Here's why I think this way:

(1) The subscription (sales) agreement says that the price will be the highest of $3 or the closing price today, November 16, which was $2.94. So Arcimoto is asking investors to pay more than the last market price.

(2) Payment has to be wired to the company no later than 5 pm EST on Monday, November 19. There's a good chance the market price of Arcimoto stock will be less than $3 by that time.

(3) Why the rush to get the money wired so fast? Seemingly because Arcimoto wants to get some money committed for shares over the weekend before the markets have a chance to digest the fact that Arcimoto says it will run out of cash by the end of November.

Note: if you've ever wired money, you'll know that once it is sent, it can't be retrieved. It isn't like a check that you can stop payment on. So this is another reason I'm suspicious of this scheme. Arcimoto wants the money before people can see what happens to the stock price next week.

(4) If someone wants to buy more Arcimoto stock, here's a suggestion: wait until next Tuesday. See what happens to the stock price on Monday. There's a good chance the price will be less than the $3 Arcimoto is demanding for the special stock offering unveiled today.

This scheme just feels wrong to me. It smacks of desperation. Arcimoto has known for months that it was running out of money. Likely it has tried to raise the $7.5 million of so from a variety of sources: banks, venture capital, institutional investors, etc.

Now time is running out, so it appears that Arcimoto is hoping to be bailed out by individuals who want very much to buy a FUV.

But these individuals are at considerable risk of paying $3 per share for stock that could be worth much less, even close to zero, before too long -- if Arcimoto isn't able to finalize design of its FUV and make a lot of retail sales.

I'm just speaking for myself, obviously. That said, this last minute weekend scheme makes me very reluctant to buy a FUV, if this is ever possible. Up until today I've felt that Arcimoto had high ethical standards. That feeling is much diminished now.

Third post was about risk factors in the prospectus.

I want to add this advice to prospective buyers of the new stock offering. Be sure to scroll down the offering document and carefully read the "risk factors" in the prospectus. Some are more or less boilerplate, but the first one talks about how Arcimoto is running out of money fast and may not be able to continue operations if enough stock isn't sold. I've copied it in:
---------------------
"We may not sell all of the common stock we are offering, and we may not raise enough capital from the sale of our common stock to address our short-term cash flow needs or adequately fund and execute our developing growth strategy.

There is no minimum amount of our common stock we must sell in this offering. Accordingly, investors will bear the risk that we will accept subscriptions for far less than the maximum amount of shares offered.

In that event, we will be unable to successfully complete all of the anticipated uses of the net proceeds of this offering. The financial notes to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2018, contain an explanatory paragraph expressing substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern and the depletion of our cash as of approximately the end of November 2018.

If we raise less funds than planned, we might not be able to address our short-term cash flow needs and continue operations.

Even if we can continue our operations, if we raise less funds than planned, we might be unable to execute our developing growth strategy as planned and our prospects, business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected, all of which would have a negative impact the return on your investment in our common stock."

Tai Chi actually is good for self-defense (just not against MMA fighters)

Recently TIME magazine had a story about how a Chinese MMA (mixed martial arts) fighter, Xu Xiaodong, beat up Wei Lei, a Kung Fu master in the discipline of Tai Chi, in about 10 seconds. 

It doesn't take long to watch the thoroughly one-sided fight. Reading the story, "Meet the Chinese MMA Fighter Taking on the Grandmasters of Kung Fu," will require a lot more time.

Nonetheless, about eleven years ago I wrote a blog post that I still stand by, "Tai Chi as a kick-ass martial art." I wrote that post after I'd been studying Tai Chi for three years, which followed thirteen years of hard-style (karate, mostly) martial arts experience. 

Now, with around fourteen years of Tai Chi to base my opinion on, I'm even more convinced that this internal martial art has a lot to offer self-defense wise.

My Tai Chi instructor, Warren Allen of Pacific Martial Arts, has much more experience than I do in both hard-style and soft-style martial arts. In class we never do full-on sparring, but I've seen enough real-world examples of Tai Chi self-defense techniques (and practiced them myself) to realize that they are indeed practical techniques.

Just not against a MMA fighter. And maybe not against a skilled martial artist in some other style, given that success in a fight depends on much more than knowledge of classroom techniques.

My first karate instructor liked to say, "If you have to take a bet on who will win a bar fight -- a 2nd degree Shotokan karate black belt, or a Marine who's just drunk a six-pack of beer, put your money on the Marine." Why? Because the Marine will do whatever it takes to win a fight. And he's used to getting hit.

Along that line, I found a video that my Tai Chi instructor told us about -- a tough as nails Shaolin monk who does pretty damn well against kick boxers, who, admittedly, aren't as dangerous as MMA fighters. The monk takes punches like they're marshmallows. 

He uses kickboxing techniques, which don't look like traditional Kung Fu, and even less like Tai Chi. But in an actual fight, on the street or somewhere else, every sort of technique is going to look a lot more messy than it does when being practiced in a classroom.

This is the point of someone who made a right-on video, "Tai Chi - Scam or deadly fighting art?"

The speaker says that he's trained people in both Tai Chi and MMA fighting, so he knows what he's talking about. A basic message is that if you aren't training in real-world applications of Tai Chi moves, which should include freestyle sparring, you're not going to fare very well in an actual fight.

Lastly, this video does a good job of showing how a few simple Tai Chi moves can be effective in the sort of encounter that people should worry about most: someone attacks you who isn't highly skilled, just belligerent and/or drunk. The confident relaxation Tai Chi teaches will come in handy in that sort of situation.

 

Arcimoto owes prospective buyers answers to key questions

Arcimoto is a company based in Eugene, Oregon that has been working on the design and production of a three-wheeled electric motorcycle since its founding in November 2007. I plunked down a $100 pre-order deposit in October 2015, so I've got a low reservation number: #129.

I'm still trying to decide whether to buy an Arcimoto. I like the concept -- a fun to drive electric motorcycle with two heated seats, a windshield, seat belts, rollover protection, and other options yet to be revealed by Arcimoto. 

But I've got unanswered questions that, hopefully, will be answered by the time I need to decide whether to go ahead with paying an estimated $12,000 to $15,000 for an Arcimoto FUV (Fun Utility Vehicle) with an extended battery, some storage, and at least half doors.

To the company's credit, the FAQs on the Arcimoto web site address most of the questions that concern me. However, so far Arcimoto hasn't provided good answers to those questions. 

Here's six excerpts from those FAQs. I've highlighted the as-yet unanswered question or issue in red. My comment on each question or issue is in italics. 

(1) What is the top speed, and for how long can the FUV maintain that speed?

The FUV’s top speed is 80 mph. The range is 70 miles with a full charge on the base model and 130 miles with the extended battery model. Driving at a high speed for an extended period will affect the range. We will provide more information on range under varied driving conditions once we have more testing data from the Alpha and Signature Series vehicles.

This is crucial information. I live about seven miles from the Salem, Oregon city limits. I'd be driving into town on a hilly two-lane road at about 45-50 mph. I want to be sure that I'll have enough range with the extended battery to drive around Salem, then get home with enough remaining battery capacity to avoid "range anxiety." Arcimoto needs to provide range estimates at various speeds and temperatures for vehicles with no doors, half doors, and full doors, as this is important information for prospective buyers to know.

(2) Can you drive in extreme cold or hot climates?

Yes. However, we will have better information on vehicle performance in various environmental conditions as we near full-scale production. All models of the FUV will have vent and heat for defrost and cabin comfort. We also plan to offer the option for a complete climate-control system.

Some years ago my wife and I briefly owned a Nissan Leaf with a claimed 130 mile range, if I recall correctly). [UPDATE: no, I didn't recall correctly. Wikipedia says Nissan's 2011 Leaf had a claimed range of 100 miles, but the EPA official range was 73 miles.] During cold weather, like 40 degrees, the range would drop markedly. A friend recently bought a used 2015 Leaf and he told me that the car is only getting about 60-70 miles of range, even though it hadn't been driven very much by the previous owner. [UPDATE: the EPA range for the 2015 Leaf is 75-84 miles.]

As noted above  I need to know how many miles the extended battery Arcimoto will go at various temperatures and various speeds. Cars show "in town" and "highway" mileage estimates. Arcimoto needs to provide this information for cold, mild, and hot temperatures. 

(3) What is the safety simulation status?

We have a mechanical engineer on staff with several years of experience in automotive safety and crash. The team has redesigned the front and side impact structure, and is working on nonlinear analysis on a variety of safety scenarios, to be backed up by testing.

Being a motorcycle, the Arcimoto lacks air bags. And being so small and light, albeit three-wheeled, it isn't going to fare very well in a collision with a car or truck. I'm OK with this, in part because I rode a Suzuki Burgman 650 maxi-scooter for three years, and survived without any accidents. But being older now, and maybe a bit wiser, I'd like to know how the Arcimoto and driver/passenger will hold up in certain types of crashes: head-on, side impact, rear-ended.

(4) How long does it take to charge the FUV?

Using a 110V outlet, the estimated time for a full charge is 8 hours. Using a 220V outlet, the estimated time is 4 hours. These are estimates that we will update as we continue testing.

We have a Level 2 charger in our carport. But my wife's Chevy Volt is hooked up to it most of the time, so if I got an Arcimoto, likely it would have to be charged outside at 110V. Eight hours would be fine, since I'd only be driving it once a day. But it'd be nice to have firmer charging estimates.

(5) What is the servicing plan?

The optimized design of the FUV will make servicing a very straightforward process, and most replacement parts are off-the-shelf automotive standards. We’ve started to build our service network in key cities, and will continue to expand as our production levels increase. FUV owners will be taken care of throughout the lifetime of your vehicle.

This is a significant concern for me -- how the Arcimoto would be repaired if something goes wrong. Before I'd seriously consider buying one, I'd need to know the name of the local service company here in Salem that would deal with problems. And what are the "key cities" that Arcimoto is building its service network in?

My understanding is that Arcimoto is accepting pre-order reservations from people all over the country, and even in foreign countries. How will servicing be handled for everybody who buys an Arcimoto FUV? I'll address the "lifetime of your vehicle" issue below.

(6) What is the FUV manufacturer’s warranty?

Arcimoto plans to offer a standard 3-year/36,000-mile warranty.

OK, this sounds good. But a 3-year/36,000 mile warranty requires that Arcimoto stay in business for that long. There's a fairly good chance that this won't happen. Arcimoto is a new company with a single new product. The most recent quarterly earnings report (August 2018) showed that Arcimoto lost $2.2 million in the second quarter and had $2.1 million in cash and $5.2 million in short-term investments as of June 30, 2018. 

That's about $4 million less than the company had the quarter before. So if sales/revenues don't manifest substantially in 2019, it's easy to see how Arcimoto could go under, absent an influx of outside investment money. The company's stock price isn't particularly encouraging at the moment, being much closer to its 52-week low than the 52-week high. I doubt Arcimoto could guarantee that early purchasers of its FUV would be covered by the warranty no matter what happens to the company. This is just a valid concern for those of us with low pre-order reservation numbers.

 

Good news for Dems in my daughter's Orange County report

Along with other progressives, I'm trying to tread a middle way between undue optimism and excessive pessimism regarding tomorrow's Super Duper Important midterm election. 

But after getting a politically-oriented phone call this evening from my daughter Celeste, who lives in Orange County, California (Laguna Niguel, to be exact), I'm tilting more to the side of "Democrats could have a great day on Tuesday." 

Celeste has been interested in politics, but until this year I wouldn't call her an activist. Tonight, though, she excitedly told me that last weekend she did her first-ever canvassing -- for Harley Rouda, a Democrat who is running against Dana Rohrabacher in California's 48th District. 

Rohrabacher, a conservative Republican who is known for his love of Putin and all things Russian, has held his Orange County seat for 30 years. But he's in a tough fight with Rouda this time around. FiveThirtyEight.com rates the race as a toss-up, with Democrat Rouda narrowly favored to win.

Celeste told me that over 1,100 people have volunteered to campaign for Rouda. Even more impressive, she said that young people were much in evidence at the Rouda meetings she's been to. (Celeste is 46, which I consider young, so those really young people must be in their 20s and 30s.)

She felt super-energized after canvassing for Rouda.

Remember, this is Orange County we're talking about. Sure, Laguna Beach leans liberal, but historically the 48th District has been solidly Republican. Celeste said it consists of coastal areas like Huntington Beach, which is a conservative stronghold.

So the mere fact that the Rouda-Rohrabacher race is so close is one reason to feel positive about Democratic chances tomorrow.

Another reason is the influx of fresh progressive energy into Orange County. Celeste proudly told me that she had recently joined  WAVE, Women for American Values and Ethics, a non-partisan progressive group in Orange County formed after the 2016 election. 

Regarding the Rouda campaign, Celeste told me that there were so many people wanting to canvass for Rohrabacher's Democratic challenger, they've been canvassing Democratic leaning households who haven't returned a ballot yet twice. 

This sort of anecdotal evidence isn't proof that a Blue Wave is about to wash over the United States tomorrow.

However, when combined with polling, early voting, and other indicators of Democratic enthusiasm, my daughter's phone call tonight makes me pretty darn optimistic that November 6 will mark the beginning of the end of the national nightmare that began two years ago, when Trump soundly lost the popular vote but squeaked out a narrow victory in the electoral college. 

Here's a photo of Celeste and her husband, Patrick, looking all southern California'y in Newport Beach.