• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    A123 Battery Maker Bankrupt!


    • Lithium ion battery maker A123 Systems today said it has sold its automotive business to Johnson Controls and is filing for bankruptcy protection.

      The moves are a change in strategy for the ailing Waltham, MA-based company, which in August said it will sell an 80 percent share to the auto parts division of Chinese conglomerate Wanxiang for $450 million.

      Johnson Controls will acquire a significant set of assets for its $125 million investment, some of which were paid with federal aid. A123 Systems’ auto business includes its technology, two battery factories in Michigan, a cathode powder manufacturing facility in China, and A123’s stake in two auto parts suppliers in China. Johnson Controls also will put up $72.5 million so A123 can maintain operations during the sale.

    Lithium ion battery maker A123 Systems today said it has sold its automotive business to Johnson Controls and is filing for bankruptcy protection.

    The moves are a change in strategy for the ailing Waltham, MA-based company, which in August said it will sell an 80 percent share to the auto parts division of Chinese conglomerate Wanxiang for $450 million.

    Johnson Controls will acquire a significant set of assets for its $125 million investment, some of which were paid with federal aid. A123 Systems’ auto business includes its technology, two battery factories in Michigan, a cathode powder manufacturing facility in China, and A123’s stake in two auto parts suppliers in China. Johnson Controls also will put up $72.5 million so A123 can maintain operations during the sale.

    http://www.forbes.co...-sell-off-next/

    So how will this affect the auto makers who use their batteries such as Toyota, Ford, Nissan......

    Sounds off on how you see this shaking out in the auto industry!

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    The big question is what Johnson Controls will do with their purchase, and what about A123 made it unprofitable. My initial guess as to what will happen is that JC will continue production, but possibly at a higher cost to the manufacturers. However, if the battery business only made sense as long as gov't subsidies flowed, and if those subsidies are drying up, costs for the car manufacturers may become high enough to really hamper some of the push for hybrids & electrics. Time will tell.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The big question is what Johnson Controls will do with their purchase, and what about A123 made it unprofitable. My initial guess as to what will happen is that JC will continue production, but possibly at a higher cost to the manufacturers. However, if the battery business only made sense as long as gov't subsidies flowed, and if those subsidies are drying up, costs for the car manufacturers may become high enough to really hamper some of the push for hybrids & electrics. Time will tell.

    I am wondering what happened to the half of the $249 Million grant from the Gov that supposedly was not used yet.Is the company sitting on it, did the gov not give that half to them yet. How does a company that has been building battery packs for Toyota for so long not know how to keep at least a break even business plan? Where did the money go that caused them to do this?

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just another case of poorly managed funds given out to the public sector.

    I wish the Goverment would fire up NASA again and put power and battery projects throught them. We had some of the greatest minds in the world working for NASA and they would contract the private contractors to build and develope these systems. The companies then would take what they learned and apply it to the private sector.

    Yes there was some waste but never on the scale we see today. Companies got paid for results too not just handed out money with no oversight.

    I figure JC may take some of the things 123 has learned and developed and use it in their own products. They will have much less invested since they paid less for 123 and it will keep the development cost down. It is a win for JC but a loss for the tax payer.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Johnson Controls has been on a bit of an aquisition bing the past 7 years, I wonder what their debt load is like. Might just be kicking the can here..

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    OCN, care to take your stab at the +s and -s

    Positives:

    JC brings out products based on A123 battery technology that they were not able to do themselves and no one else was willing to do as they did not want to pay a royalty to A123.

    Auto Industry could gain here also as JC has major inroads here and could do a better job of selling certain technology bits into the auto industry better than A123 did.

    Battery management could become better as JC mgmt devices get coupled with A123 battery technology.

    Pure Economy of scale that JC can bring that A123 was not able to do.

    Negatives:

    Since A123 was moving production of products into China and as with any bankruptcy, security and control of Intellectual tends to get weaker, I can see china stealing A123 tech and putting it into their own products. Even with lawsuits, by the time things work their way through the courts, China companies will have figured out backward engineering ways to reproduce what A123 did and move on at a loss to JC and the Tax payers who funded the R&D.

    JC could just sit on a portion of the technology as they might just want the patents but not really interested in doing anything with it. Sit and wait till they can sue someone who comes up with an identical idea and wants to use it.

    Loss of all intellectual products due to having it in China rather than being produced here.

    I actually see more positive out of this than negative at the moment.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

      Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. 1990Suburban
      1990Suburban
      (28 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      A group of Shelby GT350 owners are not happy with Ford.
      Yesterday, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida claiming that the track-ready GT350 isn't. According to filling, owners complain that the vehicle overheats in as little as 15 minutes due faulty transmissions and rear differentials when driven on a track. When the vehicle does overheat, it goes into a limp mode that reduces power to protect the powertrain. The filing goes on to say that Ford fixed this issue in the 2017 model, but told owners of the 2016 model to make the fixes themselves - a possible breach of the car's warranty.
      “When Ford marketed and sold these Shelby GT350 Mustangs, it knew exactly how to appeal to track-enthusiasts: it marketed enhanced performance in a limited-edition iconic vehicle that has been associated with racing for generations,” said Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman, the law firm handling the case.
      “We believe that Ford induced purchasers with its ‘track-ready’ marketing, when in fact it knew that this defect would ultimately bar these Mustangs from ever being the hotrod consumers paid for.”
      At the moment, the lawsuit has four named plaintiffs. Hagens Berman estimates about 4,000 owners are affected by this issue. 
      “Ford is committed to providing our customers with top-quality vehicles. However, we do not comment on pending litigation,” said Ford spokesman Bradley Carroll to The Detroit News.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), The Detroit News

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      A group of Shelby GT350 owners are not happy with Ford.
      Yesterday, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida claiming that the track-ready GT350 isn't. According to filling, owners complain that the vehicle overheats in as little as 15 minutes due faulty transmissions and rear differentials when driven on a track. When the vehicle does overheat, it goes into a limp mode that reduces power to protect the powertrain. The filing goes on to say that Ford fixed this issue in the 2017 model, but told owners of the 2016 model to make the fixes themselves - a possible breach of the car's warranty.
      “When Ford marketed and sold these Shelby GT350 Mustangs, it knew exactly how to appeal to track-enthusiasts: it marketed enhanced performance in a limited-edition iconic vehicle that has been associated with racing for generations,” said Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman, the law firm handling the case.
      “We believe that Ford induced purchasers with its ‘track-ready’ marketing, when in fact it knew that this defect would ultimately bar these Mustangs from ever being the hotrod consumers paid for.”
      At the moment, the lawsuit has four named plaintiffs. Hagens Berman estimates about 4,000 owners are affected by this issue. 
      “Ford is committed to providing our customers with top-quality vehicles. However, we do not comment on pending litigation,” said Ford spokesman Bradley Carroll to The Detroit News.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), The Detroit News
    • By William Maley
      We have been wondering what kind of impact the Mitsubishi and Nissan alliance would bring to the table. According to a report from Automotive News, it looks like delays for a couple of key products for the diamond star brand.
      Speaking with supplier sources, Mitsubishi has pushed back the redesigns of the Outlander and Outlander Sport crossovers. Originally, Mitsubishi was planning to launch the next Outlander "in the fiscal year ending March 31, 2019", while the Outlander Sport would follow a year later. Now, the Outlander has been pushed back to late 2019 or 2020 and the Sport to after 2020.
      The delay is due to a review being undertaken by Mitsubishi and Nissan to search for a way to share architecture and parts with the Rogue and Rogue Sport. According to sources, the goal is to "commonize underpinnings and components" to save money while keeping an outer identity distinct to each brand.
      Mitsubishi confirmed the review but declined to comment on any delays.
      This delay could be a big blow for Mitsubishi's dealers in the U.S. who have been clamoring for new products. Joe Bizzarro, chairman of Mitsubishi's national dealer advisory board told Automotive News that no such delay was discussed during a meeting with dealers earlier this year - leading us to suspect this delay has come up recently. Dealers have yet to be notified about this delay.
      Right now, the only new product destined for Mitsubishi's U.S. dealers is the upcoming Eclipse Sport due in early 2018.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      We have been wondering what kind of impact the Mitsubishi and Nissan alliance would bring to the table. According to a report from Automotive News, it looks like delays for a couple of key products for the diamond star brand.
      Speaking with supplier sources, Mitsubishi has pushed back the redesigns of the Outlander and Outlander Sport crossovers. Originally, Mitsubishi was planning to launch the next Outlander "in the fiscal year ending March 31, 2019", while the Outlander Sport would follow a year later. Now, the Outlander has been pushed back to late 2019 or 2020 and the Sport to after 2020.
      The delay is due to a review being undertaken by Mitsubishi and Nissan to search for a way to share architecture and parts with the Rogue and Rogue Sport. According to sources, the goal is to "commonize underpinnings and components" to save money while keeping an outer identity distinct to each brand.
      Mitsubishi confirmed the review but declined to comment on any delays.
      This delay could be a big blow for Mitsubishi's dealers in the U.S. who have been clamoring for new products. Joe Bizzarro, chairman of Mitsubishi's national dealer advisory board told Automotive News that no such delay was discussed during a meeting with dealers earlier this year - leading us to suspect this delay has come up recently. Dealers have yet to be notified about this delay.
      Right now, the only new product destined for Mitsubishi's U.S. dealers is the upcoming Eclipse Sport due in early 2018.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By dfelt
      G. David Felt - Staff Writer Alternative Energy - www.cheersandgears.com
      Leaf 1.0 Leases to be extended till 2.0 is released!!

      If you have followed Nissan at all they have decided to starting with the month of April, allow anyone that is in a Nissan Leaf 1.0 that has a lease up to extend their lease till the end of the year when Leaf 2.0 becomes available world wide. Thus hoping to keep a good number of their existing customers from defecting to the BOLT. If you choose this, they are offering 3 months of courtesy payments and you are put on the list to get the next leaf before the general public.
      For more details, lessees should contact Nissan's EV call center at 855-467-3214.
      https://twitter.com/NissanEVnewsUS
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)