Tesla Motors buying Long Beach Boeing building?
Might the corporate logo of the world's best known electric car maker one day grace the roof of the former "Home of the Boeing 717"? Despite sealed lips from officials, rumors abound that Tesla Motors has found a spot in Long Beach to build their all-electric Model "S". It seems 79 acres of prime real estate, formerly part of the Boeing presence in the city, are available and the automaker is in line ahead of movie studios, solar panel manufacturers and others. A deal to sell the site to Long Beach Studios, who were planning on spending $500 million to convert the two cavernous hangers into the world's most advanced digital studio, fell through in March.
The situation isn't exactly clear-cut though and neither Tesla or Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster are talking about it while Boeing only says that no deals have yet been made. Among the people who are talking is Long Beach Studio's Chairman Jack O'Halloran, though his statements don't clear anything completely up. He says they just went back into escrow and are going forward with Boeing and expects filming to begin at the location later this Spring. An anonymous person says of the situation, "[They want] to build electric cars there in a couple years, but in the interim they're still going to be shooting there," We don't know exactly what is going on here but we can say for certain that the movie industry has at least one connection to the electric car maker under its belt.
Gallery: Tesla Model S
Gallery: Tesla Model S: LIVE REVEAL
[Source: The District Weekly]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Anth 11:23AM (4/27/2009)
Long before it was a Boeing plant, it was a McDonald-Douglas plant, where they built the DC-10, MD-11, and other MD aircraft.
Reply
jharlan 11:30AM (4/27/2009)
I was wrong. These guys have a chance. Their cars are very impressive, and really have become the standard everyone else is trying to catch up to. They almost blew it, but they are executing..
Reply
Evie Futura 1:14PM (4/27/2009)
Tesla has created an incredibly expensive car that has been delivered by their own information to 300 copies. They have done some good things with technology, but they have no reliable case for business viability or mass appeal. Now they need government money to build a plant or take that one over. It is the tech pork barrel and maybe
Elon needs to go through less ceos and deliver more cars before he becomes a government support project with the lion's share of the capital coming from the government, both federal and California. There are empty plants all over the country, that is not the issue.
Why should Tesla get government money over Fisker, or a dozen other companies for that matter, talk about giving a company an unfair competitive advantage when they have almost no ability to talk about impacting the fleet for the next few years. This should be a smaller, venture funded effort so great waste is not realized. Evie likes what Tesla has done on product but Elon's business model of mostly government money floating the boat needs to be rejected.
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 4:01PM (4/27/2009)
"talk about giving a company an unfair competitive advantage"
Well, the US government has already given many billions to GM and Chrysler. Why should those companies be given a competitive advantage over Tesla?
GM makes the high end Corvette which is over $100,000, just like the Tesla sports car. GM makes the big expensive Hummer, which very few can afford and contributes to our oil addition, which caused $700 billion in US currency to leave the country last year to the benefit of OPEC countries.
The cheap "everyman's car" that GM makes, the Aveo? Those are made by Daewoo in South Korea!
Why should the government choose to support GM and not support Tesla?
BlackbirdHighway 4:33PM (4/27/2009)
Almost forgot to mention that Fisker is planning to build cars in Finland, so they won't be eligible for any US government assistance.
Evie Futura 4:43PM (4/27/2009)
I am not generally for GM or Chrysler getting support either. Temporarily in the crisis for the vast amount of jobs they support there could be a case built for helping them restructure.
But to compare the two. GM produces millions of cars and 60k plus jobs The government loaned them money not gave them a grant. The public has not given willing support for any of these approaches but GM is making cars that millions of mainstream American's buy right now. Tesla on the other hand should be operating like a venture capital company.
So Detroit argues that they need a bailout like AIG got, then Tesla argues they need a bailout like GM and Chrysler got, where will it end. I still believe the government will split and take under AIG when they can, that they will let one or both of the automakers fail, and that Tesla may get something but not what they expect.
tinman 1:45PM (4/27/2009)
Evie Futile, couldn't disagree more. It's companies like Tesla and Fisker that should get the money. Their business models fit the mold of how the money is supposed to be doled out. The money I'm talking about is the 25 Billion Congress appropriated and the Pres signed. They deserve every penny of it. I suppose people would rather see it go to GM building the four seat tin can phev.
Best of luck and good wishes to all Innovators/Entrepreneurs in the nation. The nation needs you now more than ever.
Reply
nick 10:46PM (4/29/2009)
And then what if you want to start an electric car company next year? You won't get help from the government and Tesla and Fisker would be put in place as the default manufacturers because they were given such an affair competitive advantage. If we're going to help out Tesla now, we need to help EVERYONE who is trying to make electric cars. Bright Automotive, Phoenix Motorcars, Aptera, Think, AC Propulsion, even ZAP, and those people with just an idea who didn't get rich off from the DOT-Com bubble like Musk.
Dano 3:02PM (4/27/2009)
Long Beach Mayor is BOB Foster. I hope this gets done. City can use some green industry.
Reply
Domenick Yoney 3:58PM (4/27/2009)
Thanks for that, my mistake. Fixed.
Bill 3:20PM (4/27/2009)
The money that Tesla is trying to get is loan money, not handouts. It's not exactly easy these days to raise large sums of money for large capital investments. They have to show a viable business plan to qualify for it just like everyone else who applies. Why the hell would you care if it was Tesla or Fisker or GM or whomever? If you can convince officials that you have a decent biz plan then go for it yourself since you seem to know so much.
Reply
Evie Futura 4:51PM (4/27/2009)
Fisker got their money from venture capital sources and private equity, Elon wants to get his from the government that is the difference. The battery companies are getting strong funding just the investors are not supporting the auto production portion based on their view of the outcomes. There are billions available by the way if they think the returns will be good.
Obviously they don't
Tesla and Fisker have both done some good things, that has nothing to do with government giving them hundreds of millions of dollars to fund their basic business. That is not what the public wants government doing.
why not the LS2LS7? 4:46PM (4/27/2009)
I can't imagine Tesla is going to be able to buy this plant. They're pretty broke.
They'll be looking for a cheap plant, not a "hot property".
Reply
Evie Futura 5:00PM (4/27/2009)
The point was that the government is not supposed to be selecting companies to give money to, any of them.
In some dire cases the government may decide to do it as an emergency, but not as a normal way of funding business.
Bad policy and the government wants to get away from that as soon as they can.
Reply
Bill 9:45PM (4/27/2009)
Tesla has applied for a loan, not a grant. Thus the government isn't "giving" them money, they are lending it and expect to be repaid.
Also, the government gives money to companies all the time for various reasons, ranging from basic research to art.
Reply
Kevin 8:56AM (4/28/2009)
Evie,
Almost nothing you have written here is true. First of all you state that Tesla makes "am incredibly expensive" car. This is actually NOT true if you look at it in prespective to the market they are appealing to which is high end sports cars. Actually at $100,000 it is relativly cheap compared to Porshe, Lambogini Aston Martins, Ferarri and others that are in the same class of car. Additionally this LOAN is for a much cheaper car. Actually HALF the price. This car is also priced right in line with the other cars in its class that it is competing with including Mercedes, Aston Martin, BMW and others. The next car will be in the class of Camary and other even more affordable ones.
But this also brings up your second error. This is NOT a grant it is a LOAN and will be paid back. In addition to that the LOAN that they are appling for is only 450 million. Which may seem like a lot on the surface but in reality it is less than 1% of the funds that are available for this program. All of the other car manufacturers are more than welcome to apply for the rest of the money if they are eligible. And in fact ALL of the major manufacturers have applied for the other 99% of the money.
Also, Tesla has now delivered almost 400 Roadsters. But you fail to recognize that they have an additional 1200 that are still on a waiting list to receive ordered cars. In addition to that Tesla now has a waiting list of over 900 people for the next car - the Model S. With all this back log it shows that there is a demand that has not been filled by Detroit that still needs to be filled.
Finally you state several times that Tesla needs to be more like a Venture Capital company. Well this is actually TRUE and in fact they have been a VC company over the past 5 years. They have raised all of there capital to date from funding rounds. It has now come to time to move to the next level and help the company grow. The only way to do that is by loans. And that is exactly what they are doing.
I hope that this clarifies things for you alittle bit and sets the record straight. Thank you so much for your thoughts and comments.
Reply
Evie Futura 8:31PM (4/29/2009)
Well you say that nothing is true, but then it looks like we just grab the elephant differently.
1) 100k to most people is incredibly expensive, it is a fraction of the total market.
2) I recognize the money is termed a loan, but it in fact becomes the dominant operating budget of the entire company
3) I recognize the company has operated as a venture folio company, and express that it still should, until normal financing can be achieved
4) I have always praised the technical achievement of the Tesla, but not the business viability or the case for government money, to be clear
5) It is recognized that the S is supposed to be significantly less expensive, it is also clear that battery prices have not been going down as much as the industry expected a few years ago, and also Tesla prices went up.
6) If the Telsa case were so compelling why can't they make a partnership with a manufacturing partner and be off to the races? That would not require government money for their adventures
7) The point on venture capital was they should still be operating on venture capital, or private financing, or partnerships, whatever works but not public money
Since you feel strongly on the issue, how big an impact on the fleet will Tesla have in the next two years? I actually want the Tesla to succeed but until the battery price equation changes and more has been accomplished then instead of scaling up what is proven economically, you are scaling up something that is hoped, not at all the same
Reply