If the FTV were a chiefly recreational vehicle
like the SUV I would agree that a spike in gasoline would crimp demand. But it is not. It is a vehicle made to perform tasks that need to be done no matter the cost of gasoline, and tasks that are performed by users well able to afford to fill up at any price: government, big oil, the forestry industry, as so on. Even for recreational use, which I consider minor myself, if you can afford the sticker price of one of these babies you do not much care about the price of gas. In short, the market for the FTV is a tier of very deep pockets, perhaps recession-proof. And if the FTV does the tasks they need done more efficiently, it will be their vehicle of choice.
As far as Nissan, my earlier post was perhaps itself too subtle (and on re-reading perhaps a trifle smug). I think your apparent gloom reflects the notion that Nissan walked because it found the isotorque wanting. I cannot believe that. What is more likely, given Torvec's history, is that Nissan found a gold mine but wants to pay for a rock quarry. If that is the case, and I don't know, I can tell Nissan that our esteemed CEO and Board will not bite. And, if so again, I hope they do not. And, posters like yourself going around shedding desolation are not helping our cause intimating a shareholder revolt. There isn't one. After that mini-shareholder meeting reported by Torv4me, it is clear to me that the heavy hitters are sticking. And a lot of the rest of us. And besides, management owns Torvec and they will not be low-balled.
Microsoft walked out on Google: too much money. Does that mean a deal is dead? According to Friday's WSJ there are players involved who won't let that happen. All it means is that someone has to re-think their position. Let's not get too despondent about this.
