Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Businesses

Faraday Future Selects Las Vegas As Home For $1B Electric Car Factory (autoblog.com) 110

An anonymous reader writes: Faraday Future, the newest and most unknown player in the electric car game, has selected North Las Vegas as the home for their billion dollar factory. The 3 million square foot factory will be built on 900 acres and create 4,500 jobs. Faraday Future will release more information on their Tesla fighter, a 100% electric car, at CES in January. Autoblog reports: "Nevada topped finalists California, Georgia and Louisiana in the race to land the 2.5 million square foot plant. It's expected to sit on 600 acres in North Las Vegas's Apex Industrial Park and bring 4,500 jobs to Nevada. Mayor John Lee called the site choice 'a transformational opportunity' for his city of about 220,000 residents. North Las Vegas boomed as the nation's fastest-growing city in the early 2000s and nearly busted when the recession hit and pushed it close to insolvency."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Faraday Future Selects Las Vegas As Home For $1B Electric Car Factory

Comments Filter:
  • Numbers? (Score:5, Funny)

    by dwillden ( 521345 ) on Friday December 11, 2015 @07:32AM (#51099601) Homepage
    900 acres will sit on 600 acres? Me thinks this company has invented more than just a new electric car design.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      First time being exposed to corporate mathematics?
    • Re:Numbers? (Score:4, Funny)

      by MightyYar ( 622222 ) on Friday December 11, 2015 @07:52AM (#51099655)

      If only there was a way to construct buildings vertically, so that more square footage could come magically from the air...

      • They can, that's how they get more square footage of floor space than exists in 600 or 900 acres. But the summary states first that it will be a 900 acre foot print, then it says (as does the article) that it will be on a 600 acre site. Foot print isn't changes by building up.
        • But the summary states first that it will be a 900 acre foot print

          Unless they changed the summary or article, nowhere does it say "foot print", "footprint", or anything like that. It says both 1.5 million square foot and 2 million square foot, but nothing about the building footprint.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Nah, see, its 900 in nominal acres, but if you multiply by .707, you get 636 RMS acres.

    • 900 acres will sit on 600 acres? Me thinks this company has invented more than just a new electric car design.

      The problem is the summary mentions two different claims for the size of the factory and the land it's supposed to be build on, but only gives one source (for the second set of numbers). Her's one for the first [inverse.com].

      • by fhage ( 596871 )
        You all get a "can't see the forest because of the trees" award for not recognizing that a 3 million ft square factory has less than 69 acres of floor space.
        • That's not the point. That is the building space, it will also include large parking lots. My original comment was meant to be a joke but it flopped. But the summary and the article both say that it will have a 900 acre foot print, then they state that it will be placed on a 600 acre lot.
        • You all get a "can't see the forest because of the trees" award for not recognizing that a 3 million ft square factory has less than 69 acres of floor space.

          Maybe you should save the money and give yourself the "too fucking stupid to understand the difference between a factory building and the plot of land it's build upon" award.

  • Faraday Frosty (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Hognoxious ( 631665 )

    They deserve to fail horribly just for having such a stupid name.

    I'd have gone for Henry Horseless, or maybe Volt Vagons.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Yes build a factory, in a desert where there is no water. What are they thinking?

    • by Eloking ( 877834 )

      Yes build a factory, in a desert where there is no water. What are they thinking?

      Yeah, make me wonder why Las Vegas didn't die from thirst. Oh wait......booze!

    • I'd hazard a guess that they've thought about it longer and harder than you have.

    • Las Vegas is very close to Lake Mead and the Colorado River.

      • 100% of the water in the entire Colorado river system is already spoken for; there is no extra for anything new.

        However, if they shut down the fountain at the Bellagio, they'll have more than enough water for the factory.

  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Friday December 11, 2015 @07:59AM (#51099673) Journal

    "We plan to revolutionize the automobile industry by creating an integrated, intelligent mobility system that protects the earth and improves the living environment of mankind," wrote Jia Yueting (ZHAW' YOO'-weh-ting), who's the founder and CEO of the holding company LeTV.

    ... also came with the revelation that it's backed by a Chinese billionaire investor who styles himself after Apple's late Steve Jobs. ..

    California-based automaker Faraday Future's choice of Nevada over three other states is contingent on state lawmakers' approval of tax incentives that haven't been publicly described.

    Already Tesla is striking its own trail, its superchargers not inter operating with nascent common charging interfaces of other companies. At least Tesla has declared it will not sue others copying its designs, so Tesla chargers might end up as the de-facto standards. Hope this new venture interoperates with the existing infrastructure and not be another walled garden.

    I think the tipping point would be something like charging stations as ubiquitous as gas stations and one gets a 120 mile range in 20 minutes. Not as good as gas car for long distance, but good enough to tolerate it for the occasional long drives a few times a year.

    • Elon Musk is in the business of becoming the Intel of batteries; he knows Tesla itself will not show huge profits. He has every incentive to license charging technology to other car companies so that he can sell them batteries. The only limiting factor is safety concerns.
  • by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Friday December 11, 2015 @08:02AM (#51099683)

    Faraday Future will release more information on their Tesla fighter, 100% electric car at CES in January.

    Why would you build a $1Billion factory or even plan one before you have a marketable product in an industry that is promising but barely exists? Who would finance that? I don't care how wealthy the backers (allegedly some mysterious Chinese guy named Jia Yueting) are, that make zero sense unless the backer has no expectation of a return on their investment. Something bigger and possibly fishy is going on here. I'd like to know who really is financing this because that would explain a lot about what their motivations might be.

    Furthermore building manufacturing plants in the middle of the desert is nuts. Sure you can get some solar power but it just stretches already thin water resources even further. It's insanely bad public policy. The air conditioning bill alone will be astronomical.

    • by enjar ( 249223 )

      I hear there's a tech company with $200B in cash that's rumored to be building a car. You might have heard of them. They have a bit of a presence in consumer electronics and stuff.

      • I hear there's a tech company with $200B in cash that's rumored to be building a car.

        No it almost certainly is not Apple. Apple would have little reason to hide the fact that they were getting into building cars. Furthermore, Apple as a corporation has some.. ahem, control issues. I very much doubt that they would work through proxies like this - it's completely out of character for them. Furthermore there have been plenty [fortune.com] of [9to5mac.com] journalists [drivingsalesnews.com] asking if Apple is involved and the answer seems to be a pretty clear no.

        • by enjar ( 249223 )

          They also said they would never make a tablet computer, too.

          • They also said they would never make a tablet computer, too.

            Oh, well that's a clearly compelling piece of evidence... Glad you cleared that up with such an airtight argument. [/sarcasm]

            Seriously, could it be Apple? I suppose, but it doesn't really make a lot of sense. The argument for it is basically that A) Apple has a lot of money and B) there are rumors they are thinking of building cars and C) Apple is secretive. That's it. That's a pretty thin argument. There is, to my knowledge, no known link between the two companies. Zero. So saying it has to be Appl

            • by enjar ( 249223 )

              This is the Internet. We specialize in vague conjecture!

              The conjecture comes in that it would fit with the "secrecy" argument. The construction of an auto plant is something that involves too much captial, material, involvement with local, regional, national officials, permitting, etc that you can't just make prototypes happen like you can with small devices like phones and computers. To some extent you can keep a lot of that kind of thing controlled, although of course once you scale up and send it out to

              • I actually also really discount the Apple Car idea, myself.

                Sounds like we have the same thought. I have NO idea why Apple would want to get into the business of manufacturing automobiles. I work in that industry. The companies with the best margins (Toyota, Porsche, etc) clear around 10% net profit. Compare that with the 25%-30% Apple currently enjoys and it's hard to see how Apple could get into the market without incurring massive shareholder dissatisfaction. (read lawsuits galore) There is a reason there hasn't been a new major car company in decades.

                Like

                • by enjar ( 249223 )

                  There are very few companies in the world that do well with multiple products lines in the same space, and even fewer that do well with multiple product lines in radically different spaces. Apple has become wildly successful going after things they do well in the areas they know, generating repeat business and creating a lot of satisfied customers. I'm not a Apple fanboy but you can't deny their business acumen. They could do far better by expanding their already substantial presence in entertainment. I'd f

                  • There are very few companies in the world that do well with multiple products lines in the same space, and even fewer that do well with multiple product lines in radically different spaces. Apple has become wildly successful going after things they do well in the areas they know, generating repeat business and creating a lot of satisfied customers.

                    The biggest reason why I'm pretty sure it isn't Apple behind this weird venture in the desert is simple. Apple has ~$200 billion in cash. They could buy 100% of Ford, GM, FiatChrysler AND Honda and at their current market capitalization and still have several billion left over. They have ZERO reason to shadow finance some speculative startup in an industry they have no experience with. Would make far more sense to buy a company like GM outright and run it as an independent subsidiary.

                    Note I'm not saying

                • by rch7 ( 4086979 )

                  Current Apple competitors do not have the same profit margins as Apple either. And Apple wasn't always successful with all their products either. Apple needs constantly introduce new products to stay relevant, how else they would hype their products as superior and most fashionable? Today's cars are becoming computer driven, it is Apple field again. You may consider it a well known fact that Apple is getting into automotive production even if they do not admit it publicly. You just don't know how successful

                  • Current Apple competitors do not have the same profit margins as Apple either.

                    Incorrect. Both Google and Microsoft both have net profit margins comparable to Apple. Go look at their financials. They are all between 20-30% net margins depending on the time period examined and those sorts of margins are nothing unusual for software companies. (Yes Apple is really a software company [youtube.com]) Those sorts of margins are unheard of for manufacturing companies. Apple will not change this equation.

                    Today's cars are becoming computer driven, it is Apple field again.

                    Not all software is the same. The difference between the software in a car and the software in

                    • by rch7 ( 4086979 )

                      . Designing and tuning a suspension or building a structural frame or a seat are not software and never will be.

                      Yes, sure. Why would Apple or Tesla do that? They can just order suspension from Continental like everybody else :/ OK, they still need to design something mechanical. But large part of it is just order from OEM parts bin that everybody uses. I don't think future really autonomous cars without steering wheel would emphasize mechanical part. E.g. look at recently shown Nissan concepts. What is important, is how it looks and feels inside, how it sounds, is it trendy and fashionable. Handling cornering? Who ca

            • by rch7 ( 4086979 )

              Apple is building car, it is more than just unverified rumors now. You may consider it a fact, as it hires automotive engineers. And yes, Apple is still very secretive about it even it starts looking silly now when everybody knows about it. So they may as well invent some Chinese front end to hide the obvious. It is just speculation, but somebody from China moving capital to the US to build cars doesn't sound very convincing either. There is bigger market in China, and Chinese know their home market better.

        • by Jeremi ( 14640 )

          Apple would have little reason to hide the fact that they were getting into building cars.

          Since when has Apple ever needed a reason to hide things? A friend of mine went to work for Apple, he's no longer permitted to confirm or deny his own existence...

    • by DogDude ( 805747 )
      They're building it right next to the joke that is Zappos, and it'll be another money pit, so I'm guessing Amazon.
    • Furthermore building manufacturing plants in the middle of the desert is nuts. Sure you can get some solar power but it just stretches already thin water resources even further.

      Nevada doesn't have an *water* problem, they contribute more water to the Colorado river than they take out of it. Their problem is that California, which is totally overpopulated and drought stricken, desperately needs Nevada's water, and lobbies the Feds to get Nevada to use less of the river. What Nevada has is a *political influence* problem [mit.edu]. Maybe this Chinese guy can help with that ;)

      Also, Las Vegas is powered by the Hoover dam. The worst place you could put this factory is in one of the cold clim

      • Nevada doesn't have an *water* problem, they contribute more water to the Colorado river than they take out of it.

        The mere existence of Las Vegas at it's current size IS a water problem. There is zero reason for a city that size to exist in the middle of the desert. The amount of water that has to be diverted to support Las Vegas is obscene.

        Their problem is that California, which is totally overpopulated and drought stricken, desperately needs Nevada's water

        The fact that California's farmers use more water does not excuse the existence of Las Vegas and it certainly isn't a justification for making the place larger than it already is. It is a ridiculous place to build a factory, no matter what tax incentives they offer.

        Also, Las Vegas is powered by the Hoover dam.

        No it is not [howitworksdaily.com].

    • a. The fact they haven't published a design yet doesn't mean there isn't one.
      b. In the car industry, a $1B factory is an absolute requirement if you want to, you know, actually build your marketable product. Introducing your worldbeater and then going "whoops, we forgot we need a place to build them, so come back in 4 years when we finish the factory so we can build more than this single hand-built prototype that cost $3M to fabricate" is not a recipe for success.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • There may not be much of one, I'll grant you, but you really only need to sell one...

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Reasons for chosing Las Vegas:

    1. Because Detroit turned them down.

    2. Because they've got "a lucky feeling about this one"

    3. They're spending a billion dollars on a new car factory before they've even got a prototype... they probably felt they would be legally required to build it somewhere that permits gambling.

    4. Because if it all goes horribly wrong, they could just convert the whole place into a casino.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Faraday Future, the newest and most unknown player in the electric car game

    It's unknown if there are more unknown unknowns, we don't know if those in the know know more about this unknown rather than other unknowns. Needless to say we will all know about the known unknowns as soon as there is more to know.

    • by tsqr ( 808554 )

      Faraday Future, the newest and most unknown player in the electric car game

      It's unknown if there are more unknown unknowns, we don't know if those in the know know more about this unknown rather than other unknowns. Needless to say we will all know about the known unknowns as soon as there is more to know.

      I don't know about that. Surely with the probably huge but unknown number of unknowns, there may be other unknowns that are even more unknown than this one.

  • by tompaulco ( 629533 ) on Friday December 11, 2015 @09:12AM (#51099931) Homepage Journal
    Based on the what we know of this company and their product so far I would be willing to invest up to $0 in it. However, if I know my government, I have already invested thousands in it.
    • Exactly what I was thinking. The company is very secretive - initially even refusing to identify its CEO. The backers of this start-up remain a secret.
    • by DogDude ( 805747 )
      I invested in getting power and water and phone to your house, so please shut up.
      • Yes, but fools do not want to acknowledge that.
      • I invested in getting power and water and phone to your house, so please shut up.

        So did I, should that make me happy to invest money in paying some CEO to skim whatever he can off of the billion dollar investment before pissing the rest of it out into the Nevada desert?

  • But it's aliens. They're building this new facility over a giant under ground vault system filled with amazing alien technology.
  • Putting a new car factory in the desert smacks of stupidity to me.
    • Nevada is very business friendly. No income tax. Hoover Dam nearby. Solar electricity farm nearby. Large labor force. Cheap housing nearby (Henderson). Water from Colorado River nearby.

    • Why? The Los Angeles area was mostly desert-ish before the metro sprawl paved over it, and we had a massive (and very successful) aerospace industry here for decades. Cheap land and low precipitation/humidity is perfect for manufacturing and storage. There's quite a bit of rail that runs out that way too, which makes transportation easier than trucking it all in.
  • "and create 4,500 jobs."

    yeah for about 2 years before it folds

  • Not a good idea. That's where that manhole cover [wikipedia.org] is due to come back down.

  • "Tesla", "Faraday"... Watt is going on with these company names? Next thing you know, they'll giving cars names like "Volt"!
  • Tesla v2.0

news: gotcha

Working...