The new van is a development of the original, it’s not a new model its a replacent. Obviously things like crash protection, aerodynamics etc were more of a deciding factor. The first one was more of a prototype
2 Likes
I actually got an answer to this very question in a Twitter Q&A they ran a few weeks back. They said:
We continue to see huge demand from customers around the world for a wide range of van sizes & configurations. The vehicle has been designed to enable us to bring a range of roof heights, type approval & optimised configurations at the speed we need in order to meet demand 1/2
The updated design enables a more rapid global introduction of a wider range of height variants and configurations, all optimised for businesses and consumers 2/2
2 Likes
Not buying that: they would have known much earlier on in the process that customers want different sizes. I don’t see how a different shape makes it easier to produce. In the flat windscreen, you can just ‘cut’ the glass at different heights, in the new shape, you have two extra triangular side windows that have to be of different sizes. So no standardisation possible.
I don’t see why, no reason the doors or side windows need to change just because the roof height changes. the doors can still be standardised
Currently hodling to hell. Appreciating how much the price has tanked for seemingly no reason since the ticker changed.
I expect the old windscreen’s shape was constrained by the original chassis, and as complex as it was, it would’ve been much harder to adapt to new variants. I’d expect there was probably a lot of pressure from private investors to decrease costs in the run up to going public.
IMO, it’s not changing the overall usability of the product. If anything, moving the driving position back will make it easier to achieve higher safety ratings which they can present as an additional feature.
1 Like
I personally don’t have the expertise to judge either way on the design change. For me the key element to arrival will be whether the microfactories deliver the pricing advantages they are claiming. If they do then there is massive market share available and a formula for rapidly growing the company. Commercial EVs still in their infancy in the UK and a price competitive van with 250+ miles range would clean up. We will have to hold for a year or two to genuinely find out. I’m planning to average down when the valuation find its level. Current market cap is not unreasonable given they don’t get have a product on the market.
2 Likes
I don’t believe in the microfactory: you cannot build a moulding facility for 50 vans only or you are going to have massive costs for each mould. Or are they going to move the whjole factory around the world. One year they build in New York, the next year in LA, … That won’t attract specialized and motivated personnel. What will they do with their empty locations? Leave them empty. City officials will not like that a company comes in for 1 year and moves on again.
1 Like
You would expect investors Hyundai and Kia believe in the micro factory.
4 Likes
I dont think that’s the thinking here - they are still building permanent factories with a decent annual capacity. 10,000 vans or 1000 buses I think were the quoted numbers. These are not far off the sort of volumes Alexander Dennis put out at Falkirk for busses and LEVC are planning at Coventry for commercial vehicles but a long way short of the 150,000 sprinter Mercedes build at Dusseldorf each year. As I understand it, their claim is they have come up with production processes which dont require the usual economies of scale to be competitive with diesel so can grow more quickly with smaller factories.
I guess we will find if this is true when they launch their products on the market and begin releasing quarterly financials.
4 Likes
The whole idea of microfactories is that standardisation is unnecessary. Every component can be customised with ease since it only requires software reconfiguration to bring it to production.
3 Likes
How would they produce the panels? If they mean customization to have different colourschemes, I can understand having a paintshop but you cannot change anything structural. And then you come to the beginning question: why should they be produced near the client? If they built in the middle of the USA, they can service the whole country. In the EU same story. And the US and EU are the two most important markets (I cannot imagine them setting up shop in Africa where charging points are completely absent).
1 Like
I recommend you watch some videos of the microfactories on their YouTube channel as they will answer a lot of your questions. The team has re-imagined the idea of a production line from the ground-up, so a lot of the concerns you have don’t apply.
4 Likes
This is a good start…
9 Likes
This is the worst performing stock I have ever owned to date. Its performed worse than my largest dropping cryptocurrency! Looks like I’m in it for the long haul, even if just too break even!
3 Likes
You definitely need patience with this one. The antics from the likes of Nikola an Lordstown took a lot of momentum from the EV start up sector but nothing has fundamentally changed. Also, bag holding for the long haul then selling when you break even is a really common mistake investors often make. If you have conviction the company will be successful then hold and wait for the returns to come. If you dont then better to sell up and move on in my view.
3 Likes
I’ve bounced into profit on Arrival tonight
2 Likes
Alright for some, I still have 37.41% to go, lol
3 Likes
No need to panic with this one. We should expect some big swings and set backs along the way. Im going to monitor progress closely and buy dips if they seem to be executing. If their factories open on time and they fill the UPS order the share price should move along nicely.
3 Likes
I expect to be buying and holding this stock for the next 5 years minimum unless anything goes completely wayward and health permitting of course 
3 Likes
Shares rose as UPS shared confirmation of the vehicles being tested shortly
1 Like