It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Modec electric car maker goes into administration

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 05:16 AM

Modec electric car maker goes into administration

An electric van maker in Coventry has gone into administration making more than a third of its staff redundant.

Modec in Binley secured a £23m grant from the US government in 2009 to jointly make electric vans for the American markets with US firm Navistar.

Founder Lord Borwick said the deal had not produced as many orders as he expected and only 400 vehicles had been made since its launch in 2007.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related Discussion Threads:
Electric Luxury for The Elite
Petrol in UK could reach £2 a litre

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 05:16 AM
Americans, this is where your vehicle market has gone.. to the UK, only for that to fail too!!

400 vehicles in 4 years...

23million GBP grant and it's GONE...

Only 9 sold to the US market..

What has gone wrong here? Who has made a profit out of this?

Surely, with oil prices so high, and climbing, these electric vehicles could have been a god-send for many, many people..

This should have boomed, but no, people made unemployed and the grant wiped out..

Someone might be able to buy this and keep it going.. possibly at a huge profit to themselves..

I had absolutely no idea that this company even existed or of what they were producing. I was under the impression that only electric cars were being made and even those were sort of spurned due to the recharging.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:39 AM
reply to post by Extralien

There may be a language problem here.

Does "go into administration" equate with "go into bankruptcy"? ...or "receivership"?

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:20 AM
reply to post by soficrow

The company is bankrupt. When a company goes into administration it means their creditors can now get in touch and lay a claim to the money they are owed. The administrators will work out how much money is left in the company from sales of all its assets, and then pay off its creditors.

I hope that clears it up for you.

all that is left is the tools, equipment, part built vehicles, the remaining staff, possibly the building (but may be rented) and the coffee machine... this is where the debts will be repaid from by selling off the stock.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:49 AM
Unless I am mistaken, and please correct me if I am, creditors have MUCH more power in some European countries than their equivalent's do here in the US.

I had hear that it goes beyond them placing liens and whatnot on the debtor. They have recourse to 'take' what is owed to them, no?

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:00 AM
reply to post by Maxmars

Here's some info that should cover your question..

An administrator is a person placed into a company to take control and run it in order to try and save it. Administrators are also fully qualified insolvency practitioners. If the company can't be saved then the administrator will try to get the best result for all the secured creditors than if it just folded. The main reason an administrator is called in to a business is when the secured creditors are worried that they won't get their money back as the company is showing signs of failing. The court normally appoints the administrator, but there are a few other people who can call in the receiver, usually the creditors or their representatives.

If the administrator can't save a failing company and bring it back to trading at a profit, they will then fold the company before it is worthless. They sell off the assets to raise capital in order to pay the creditors, or if possible, they will sell the company as a whole.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:01 AM
37 million taxpayer dollars for 9 electric vehicles delivered to the U.S. market. Just another Obama "success" story to add to his how-to on bankrupting America.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:03 AM
reply to post by Extralien

I am surprised that the EU wasn't more interested in supporting and promotion of these vehicles since the companies founding in 2004 ?

It appears as if the Navistar partnership, an established truck manufacturer in the US is being used to jump start the sale of these vehicles in the US.

The stipulation concerning the US investment in these vehicles was that the manufacturing and suppliers be moved to the US, vs reliance upon Modec. This is somewhat reflective of the OP's news concerning Modec.

Since Navistar, already a leading manufacturer of Trucks, has the manufacturing facilities in place. they should be able to mass produce these vehicles at lower costs than Modec, which would also potentially incite more interest long term.

The US version, based upon the Modec, was just recently introduced 2010 and is currently under vehicle trials by FedEX where they are currently testing 4 in the Los Angeles area.

Only 4 , one might ask ?
Being new and unproven, The only way in which these trucks will gain acceptance is by field testing of these vehicles and proving their worth in the real world.

FedEx showcased a prototype of the eStar electric truck during last month's "Charge Up Route 66" tour that began in Chicago and ended in Los Angeles as part of the Fortune Brainstorm Green Conference. FedEx will evaluate the performance of the eStar vehicle in its fleet as it operates in the Los Angeles area.

ON a positive note.
With the current situation in the middle east and Oil prices projected to go significantly higher, the timing couldn't be better for a vehicle of this nature.

Only then will the market begin looking at alternatives.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:15 AM
reply to post by nh_ee

Then surely it is this type of company and its type of goods that should be bailed out immediately...rather than the banks being bailed as we have seen.

Someone has got their priorities well out of sync.

I'm sure many tax payers would be much more pleased that their money was to go towards the saving of such a company. It would seem to be far more beneficial for the job market, the economy and the environment overall.

Would have been a hell of a lot less money than bailing corrupt banks.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:24 AM
Electric cars, who can afford those things anyway?

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:25 AM
reply to post by Extralien

There's a reason why companies; whether manufacturing, banking, or whatever; go bankrupt. They make bad business decisions or there's no market for the product or services they provide. Saying it's better to waste taxpayer money on companies that manufacture unwanted products rather than wasting it on banks making bad business decisions leaves out one factor. It's better if we don't waste taxpayer money on either, and let all of them go under the way they should have in the first place.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:33 AM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

Well, you know what they say... the lesser of two evils

Letting them all fail could very well be the best answer.. clear the dead wood to make way for the new..

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:45 AM

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Electric cars, who can afford those things anyway?

This is the reason they don't go over well. Many people buy second hand vehicles.

Furthermore, I wonder how the electric models are financed? I wonder if the financing terms are different and more costly?

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:07 AM
reply to post by Unity_99

FedEx executives said that the electric truck costs many times what its traditional trucks do. But the company is trying the technology to measure its cost benefits, which it estimates to be about one third the operating cost of diesel delivery trucks. It sent the truck on a cross-country promotional tour last month in advance of putting them into commercial use.
Read more:

Price seems to be the real issue..
looks like they may have been a bit too optimistic in the pricing.. am trying to find an exact sale price.

Why they couldn't have made it cheaper in the first place, i'll never know..

Here's the eStar trucks main site..

This little snippet is interesting to read.. maybe someone can get the full details about the figures they mention.. as the news piece only mentions the grant given to the UK firm;

The eStar’s entry into the U.S. market has been long-anticipated. It is a culmination of Navistar’s 2009 acquisition of U.K. electric vehicle manufacturer Modec and a $2.4 billion investment by the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 – funds that were matched by the trucking industry at large, for a total investment of $4.8 billion in the research and development of clean energy vehicles.

Further down that same page and we get to the nitty gritty.. A 150k type of gritty..

The eStar features an all-electric drivetrain that delivers 75 kilowatts, or 104 hp, and a usable range of 100 miles per charge, making it ideal for many urban applications. When it returns to its home base at the end of the day, it can be plugged in and fully recharged within 6 to 8 hours. The initial purchase price for the new truck was pegged by Navistar at less than $150,000.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by MidnightTide

This is sad..but true.. a lot of those electric cars are way out of the average persons budget.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:21 AM
Going over the data and you get to see why this company has gone the way it has..

400 vehicles expected to be delivered by the end of 2010.. yet only 9 were ever sold.. maybe the 391 left (which were all made since 2007) over are sat in a yard somewhere.

100 mile range..seriously bad for any vehicle.
6 to 8 hour battery recharge... not very good for a company that may need to do 300 to 400 miles worth of deliveries every day, unless you got banks of batteries constantly on charge..

50 MPH max.

On the good side is its 4000 pound load ability..

This just makes me think of the constant, deliberate upgrades we keep getting offered.. a new mobile phone comes on the market.. a few months later there is a better one.. Why didn't we all just wait a few more months to get the better one or why doesn't someone make the best of the best and have done with it (we know's not profitable)..

Makes me laugh.. heartily

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 01:31 PM
reply to post by Extralien

Chakotay's Laws:

Electric vehicles as long distance transport are forbidden by the laws of physics and economics.

The pollution produced by any electric vehicle over its manufacture and lifetime exceeds that of any internal combustion engine equvalent.

The labor cost for producing any electric vehicle will exceed that of any internal combustion engine equivalent.

Usage of energy at the point and moment of generation is always more efficient than usage by storage or transmission to a remote point.

Royalty is subordinate to physics.

edit on 6-3-2011 by Chakotay because: Obama's US Recovery Plan: 4.8 Billion Dollars For 9 Trucks From UK...

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 03:19 PM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

hey there guy i think obama is a shill just as much as anyone else, but in this case he really cant be to blame(honestly cant be to blame for anything as it is either walk the line or end up like the kennedys). Even if he did have a choice in the matter of buying these vehicles, a quick look at the modec website shows that it would have been a giant waste of money(thus giving folks like yourself more fodder to throw right back at him regardless).

It is a waste because the vehicles have a top speed of 50 and can only travel 100 miles with an 8 hour charge.(not very efficient) Now the website isnt very specific if those specs are with the full 2 ton load(max capacity), you would think they are, so those are in all actuality not that bad but still not as efficient as their gas counterparts. If not then of course you would see drops in top speed and range.

Well as I was typing this out I went back to thread and saw that a few other posters actually did some research as well. So i will just stop pointing out the vehiles horrid stats and move on to the real reason for this post.
People need to realize obama has absolutely nothing to with what happens in this country, neither do the 500+ douches that just muddy up an already decrepid voting process( what with their fillabusters and all). Instead of focusing on one part of the equation realize the whole system is in shambles and just a facade for the fed.

So I say when the whole world(or the us democratic system lol) is a stage, tear that mother down and rebuild with nothing but true peace and prosperity in mind.

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:25 PM
if the us goverment paid 37 million pounds and if we are the largest creditors so to speak i say we take all the proprietary properties and if it is innovative enough and pay off rest of creditors bring it back here and start seeing if any of the tech could upgrade some of are utility vehicle fleet they could maybe even open some of our closed auto plants and gear them up to make electric utility vehicles to sell to local municipalities and states. that could put people to work we already paid for the tech we might as well use it.

new topics

top topics


log in