Offshore Funds: GM Sinks $150 Million Into Electric Boat Company

Matthew Guy
by Matthew Guy

Making waves, treading water – the list of puns for this type of investment is nearly endless. In a deal reported by The Detroit Free Press, General Motors has plowed $150 million into a Seattle-based startup company called Pure Watercraft. The outfit makes electric outboard motors and batteries for marine applications.

To be clear, all references to this deal makes sure to point out that the sum touted by both parties includes both “in kind commitments and capital”. This makes it tough to determine just how much cash The General has transferred from RenCen to Pure Watercraft, especially since those in the know ain’t talking. Referring to “in kind commitments” could mean anything from marketing advice to the use of a warehouse, the value of which is often determined by the company supplying the largesse.

This can be troublesome when trying to ascertain the actual value of a deal. For example, your author could claim he gave $1 million of in-kind services when he toiled for three days building a new deck for a family member. I might think the effort was worth that amount, but the open market surely does not.

In any case, GM now lays claim to 25 percent of Pure Watercraft, a ten-year-old company that bills itself as the purveyor of lithium-ion battery packs which are claimed to have the equivalent of 50 horsepower. Their R&D department has apparently been busy, since their website details advancements the team has made in developing a proprietary gear set and motor control design. This years-long research has apparently resulted in a system that runs quietly with less vibration than some other market options.

So what is GM’s endgame here? It could be getting access to that so-called silent tech, though The General’s EVs aren’t exactly noisy. Perhaps they jumped in bed with this company for modular power, touted by Pure Watercraft as a stowable battery pack system. Each pack has 8.8 kWh of juice and can be connected in series for larger capacity applications. They weigh just over 100 pounds each and measure about two feet long by roughly a foot square. Silverado PHEV with a couple of these batteries under the bed, perhaps?

Ok, that’s not likely to happen given GM’s investment in their own Ultium battery technology. If anything, it’ll be the other way around. Suits at RenCen specifically said they’re investing in this company with an eye towards “future zero-emissions marine product offerings”. Specifically, they’ll further develop tech for BEV watercraft, deploying some of The General’s battery technology to help push the industry’s transition to electric power. Remember, GM has its fingers in many pies including rail and aerospace. They’re not all about Silverado and Sierra pickups, no matter what we gearheads like to think.

[Image: GM]

Matthew Guy
Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 41 comments
  • 28-Cars-Later 28-Cars-Later on Nov 27, 2021

    Just an opinion for the editor, why do you maximize the size of the blue GM logo? I ask because it really makes it look even more ridiculous blown up than if it were a more manageable size with a white border around it.

  • Farhad Farhad on Nov 29, 2021

    How much I hate that stupid logo. Linux Mint shall really sue them!

  • Mike-NB2 This is a mostly uninformed vote, but I'll go with the Mazda 3 too.I haven't driven a new Civic, so I can't say anything about it, but two weeks ago I had a 2023 Corolla as a rental. While I can understand why so many people buy these, I was surprised at how bad the CVT is. Many rentals I've driven have a CVT and while I know it has one and can tell, they aren't usually too bad. I'd never own a car with a CVT, but I can live with one as a rental. But the Corolla's CVT was terrible. It was like it screamed "CVT!" the whole time. On the highway with cruise control on, I could feel it adjusting to track the set speed. Passing on the highway (two-lane) was risky. The engine isn't under-powered, but the CVT makes it seem that way.A minor complaint is about the steering. It's waaaay over-assisted. At low speeds, it's like a 70s LTD with one-finger effort. Maybe that's deliberate though, given the Corolla's demographic.
  • Mike-NB2 2019 Ranger - 30,000 miles / 50,000 km. Nothing but oil changes. Original tires are being replaced a week from Wednesday. (Not all that mileage is on the original A/S tires. I put dedicated winter rims/tires on it every winter.)2024 - Golf R - 1700 miles / 2800 km. Not really broken in yet. Nothing but gas in the tank.
  • SaulTigh I've got a 2014 F150 with 87K on the clock and have spent exactly $4,180.77 in maintenance and repairs in that time. That's pretty hard to beat.Hard to say on my 2019 Mercedes, because I prepaid for three years of service (B,A,B) and am getting the last of those at the end of the month. Did just drop $1,700 on new Michelins for it at Tire Rack. Tires for the F150 late last year were under $700, so I'd say the Benz is roughly 2 to 3 times as pricy for anything over the Ford.I have the F150 serviced at a large independent shop, the Benz at the dealership.
  • Bike Rather have a union negotiating my pay rises with inflation at the moment.
  • Bike Poor Redapple won't be sitting down for a while after opening that can of Whiparse
Next