Zap Pulls The Plug On Xebra EV, But Not On Stock Shenanigans

Paul Niedermeyer
by Paul Niedermeyer
zap pulls the plug on xebra ev but not on stock shenanigans

Did you think Zap would issue a press release announcing the death of the Xebra? Those are strictly reserved to keep their perpetual motion machine of stock hyping going. No worries; despite perpetual losses ($132 million to date), their executive self-enrichment machine continues. Sales in the dumps? Still no worry; there’s always a new investor around the corner to buy their “today, ZAP is continuing its focus as one of the pioneers of advanced transportation technologies and leveraging its place in the market as a magnet for new technologies” line. As a consequence of our mucking around in their mandatory 10-Q report, we can tell you that the flagship of their EV fleet, the miserable golf-cart technology three-wheeled Xebra, is no more. Is the long-anticipated and endlessly delayed Alias next? And even the whole company?

My review of the Xebra, the only ever undertaken by a major automotive site, was somewhat worse than scathing. And before the counter broke, it was vying with Lieberman’s RS4 review for the highest number of views of any TTAC review. Explain that, if you can. If Jonny’s review helped make a career, perhaps mine helped put the Xebra out of our collective misery. I’m less popular with ex-Xebra dealers than another (inevitable) burnt out battery pack. Or perhaps Wired magazine, because of their highly unflattering corporate expose.

Enough schadenfreude and on to the salient facts: buried in Zap’s latest 10-Q filing is this tidbit: “The decrease of $1.5 million (in revenue) is primarily due to the phase out of our three wheeled Xebra vehicle with reduced selling prices.” But that’s not all:

Research and development expenses decreased by $57,000 from $138,000 in 2008 to $81,000 for the third quarter ended September 30, 2009. The decrease was due to less work on the development of the Alias prototype vehicle

Press releases on the Alias, which looks remarkably similar to the Arcimoto Pulse have been conspicuously absent of late. But the Zap printing presses in their now-empty warehouse keeps spinning off new stock certificates at a heady clip, despite the fact that the stock ( ZAAP.OB) is currently trading around nineteen cents. Quite the comedown since its crowning stock-spiking announcement of 2004 of Zap-electrified Smart cars sent the price to over $4.00. But executives need to be paid! Just spin the presses faster. Despite losses in the quarter ending September 30, 2009 of $2.8 million (on sales of $1.2 million), and a worsening trend line, Zap fesses up:

Under the provisions of SFAS 123R, we recorded $ 963,000 of stock compensation, net of estimated forfeitures, in general and administrative expenses

Of course, the 10-Q offers up some required disclaimers;

We incurred net losses of $7.5 million, $9.8 million, $28 million, for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 respectively. We can give no assurance that we will be able to operate profitably in the future. And this:

Our current products are designed for use with, and are dependent upon, existing electric vehicle technology. As technologies change, we plan to upgrade or adapt our products in order to continue to provide products with the latest technology. However, our products may become obsolete or our research and development efforts may not be sufficient to adapt to changes in or create necessary technology. As a result, our potential inability to adapt and develop the necessary technology may harm our competitive position. We may be unable to keep up with changes in electric vehicle technology and, as a result, may suffer a decline in our competitive position. How true and delicately understated. For all the gory details, see Zap’s latest 10-Q filing, including the lawsuit between Zap’s recent investor, who is the Chairman, and the company, over unpaid debts he made to Zap. Messy stuff.
Join the conversation
2 of 8 comments
  • Porschespeed Porschespeed on Nov 30, 2009

    Sounds a lot like GM, and there's still people trading that stock. Regardless of the 10-Qs, how does anybody look at a Zebra and say to themselves "they'll sell millions, I'd best get a piece of the action..."? How?

  • Ingvar Ingvar on Nov 30, 2009

    Is Zap really a going concern? I mean, how many units do they have to sell to cover up a LOSS of 132 million dollars? That's a lot of revenue needed...

  • Alan The Prado shouldn't have the Landcruiser name attached. It isn't a Landcruiser as much as a Tacoma or 4 Runner or a FJ Cruiser. Toyota have used the Landcruiser name as a marketing exercise for years. In Australia the RAV4 even had Landcruiser attached years ago! The Toyota Landcruiser is the Landcruiser, not a tarted up Tacoma wagon.Here a GX Prado cost about $61k before on roads, this is about $41k USD. This is a 2.8 diesel 4x4 with all the off road tricky stuff, plus AC, power windows, etc. I'm wondering if Toyota will perform the Nissan Armada treatment on it and debase the Prado. The Patrol here is actually as capable and possibly more capable than the Landcruiser off road (according to some reviews). The Armada was 'muricanised and the off road ability was reduced a lot. Who ever heard of a 2 wheel drive Patrol.Does the US need the Prado? Why not. Another option to choose from built by Toyota that is overpriced and uses old tech.My sister had a Prado Grande, I didn't think much of it. It was narrow inside and not that comfortable. Her Grand Cherokee was more comfortable and now her Toureg is even more comfortable, but you can still feel the road in the seat of your pants and ears.
  • Jeffrey No tis vehicle doen't need to come to America. The market if flooded in this segment what we need are fun affordable vehicles.
  • Nrd515 I don't really see the point of annual inspections, especially when the car is under 3 years (warranty) old. Inspections should be safety related, ONLY, none of the nonsensical CA ARB rules that end up being something like, "Your air intake doesn't have an ARB sticker on it, so you have to remove it and buy one just like it that does have the ARB sticker on it!". If the car or whatever isn't puking smoke out of it, and it doesn't make your eyes water, like an old Chevy Bel-Air I was behind on Wed did, it's fine. I was stuck in traffic behind that old car, and wow, the gasoline smell was super potent. It was in nice shape, but man, it was choking me. I was amused by the 80 something old guy driving it, he even had a hat with a feather in it, THE sign of someone you don't want to be driving anywhere near you.
  • Lou_BC "15mpg EPA" The 2023 ZR2 Colorado is supposed to be 16 mpg
  • ToolGuy "The more aerodynamic, organic shape of the Mark VIII meant ride height was slightly lower than before at 53.6 inches, over 54.2” for the Mark VII."• I am not sure that ride height means what you think it means.Elaboration: There is some possible disagreement about what "ride height" refers to. Some say ground clearance, some say H point (without calling it that), some say something else. But none of those people would use a number of over 4 feet for a stock Mark anything.Then you go on to use it correctly ("A notable advancement in the Mark VIII’s suspension was programming to lower the ride height slightly at high speeds, which assisted fuel economy via improved aerodynamics.") so what do I know. Plus, I ended a sentence with a preposition. 🙂