When it comes to choosing a guy who's gone from Rocky Mountain High to sea level in the electric vehicle world, the Electrification Coalition couldn't have made a better choice. The EV advocacy group has tapped Tony Posawatz, he of the former Chevrolet Volt and Fisker Automotive fame, to help spread the EV word. Posawatz will head the Coalition's community efforts in Drive Electric Northern Colorado (DENC) and Drive Electric Orlando (DEO).

Last August, Posawatz ditched the proverbial sinking ship of the bankrupt extended-range plug-in vehicle maker Fisker after about a year on the job. Posawatz joined Fisker in August 2012 about a month after leaving Chevy parent General Motors. The one-time chairman of the Electric Drive Transportation Association had been with the General for the better part of three decades and, most notably, was the vehicle-line director for the Volt from 2006 to 2012.

Posawatz has consistently remained gung-ho about plug-in vehicle technology and all things clean-tech. He notably spoke at a Wall Street Journal conference last spring and implored investors in clean-technology companies to be patient to allow for longer-term adoption patterns. For further details about the Electrification Coalition's tapping of Posawatz, check out the press release below.
Show full PR text
Former Chevy Volt Executive and Fisker CEO Posawatz Announced As Member of the Electrification Coalition

Washington, D.C.-Tony Posawatz, a former executive with General Motors responsible for the development of the Chevy Volt and former CEO of Fisker Automotive, was announced today as a new member of the Electrification Coalition (EC). In this new role, Posawatz will advise EC leadership on all matters of electric vehicle policy and the organization's deployment community efforts, Drive Electric Northern Colorado (DENC) and Drive Electric Orlando (DEO).

Electrification Coalition CEO Robbie Diamond welcomed Posawatz to the organization, noting his expertise and ability to help the EC further develop and refine its signature policies aimed at achieving widespread deployment of electric vehicles.

"The entire EC team is ecstatic that Tony is bringing his unparalleled record of experience and accomplishments to our organization," Diamond said. "As a leader in transportation electrification, Tony will play a vital role in helping the EC develop and implement the policies needed to accelerate the deployment of EVs in order to diversify our nation's transportation sector, break oil's monopoly, and strengthen our country's energy security."

Posawatz served as the chief executive officer of Fisker Automotive and as Chairman of the Board of the Electric Drive Transportation Association. He also worked for General Motors for more than 30 years, including as Vehicle Line Director for the Chevrolet Volt from 2006 to 2012.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 14 Comments
      Pavel
      • 1 Year Ago
      Tony P helped drive the company in to BK. He only became CEO because LaSorda left after a disagreement with the Board. LaSorda along with the founders had a plan to rescue the company. The BOD denied te plan. LaSorda and Fisker left.
        Marco Polo
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Pavel
        @ Pavel Tom LaSorda is a specialist in Automotive restructuring and refinancing. He has considerable management skills and operates a Venture Capital fund called Stage 2 Innovations, specialising in the Auto industry. His plan was basically to shelve the Atlantic and restructure Fisker Automotive to be able to attract an existing OEM or large Asian corporation to re-finance the company into a smaller, but more manageable entity. The major investors disagreed, as this plan diluted their investment, and still thought that the DOE loan would be honoured if the Atlantic could be produced in Delaware. By the time Tony Pasawatz was appointed and commenced attempting to implement the boards wishes, Fisker's position had deteriorated considerably, partly due to sheer bat luck, partly due to the DOE cancelling the loan, and mainly because the Atlantic was never feasible for such a disorganised, demoralised, and under-capitalised organisation. Tony Posawatz contribution to the demise of Fisker, was not all that great. By the time he arrived the die was already cast.
          Marco Polo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          @ EVnerdGene Lol, just to help clear your Belfry of bats, Vectrix, an early 2 wheel EV maxi-scooter manufacturer, tore up approximately $ 1 billion, and only produced about as many scooters before declaring bankruptcy.
          EVnerdGene
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          Marco, you're starting to sound like our politicians. If we just had another billion (or trillion), it will fix all our problems. Problems that can't be fixed: 1. Selling them for less than it costs to build them. I remember reading soon after the collapse that it was costing $130k to build a Karma. Do you remember seeing that? I can't remember where I read it; maybe in an engineering publication. 2. Still having new cars for sale is a bleak sign that sales projections were, uh, a little optimistic. Yeah, I know the market turned cold after the problems became public; but people were never clamoring for these things like their market projections. $660k each to produce? http://green.autoblog.com/2013/04/19/each-karma-cost-fisker-660000-to-produce/ Yeah, even I will disagree with this assessment. (interesting comments in the link) Vectrix $1B ? Never heard "B", but I do remember (from a good source), that over $100M was spent before it left the US. And I also remember thinking the same thing: The development costs can never be recouped. The nature of new product development is that when you have a hot new product, someone else is right on your butt ready to do ya one better (obsolete it). Audi and Porsche and . . . will soon be coming out with plug-in hybrids that will shame the Frisker. Projected prices much higher? Yeah, the board of directors of most established companies demand that profits be made on most of their product line.
          EVnerdGene
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          You forgot the drive splines from the Chinese manufacturer failing. More "bat luck" When you take cheap short-cuts, you make "bat luck" Do the numbers. $1.2B is a lot to spend on development of a limited production car. You can never break even; never; whether you have bat luck or not. Henrik is a car drawer. Not an engineer. Not an industrialist. Nor was his partner Bernhard. Was there ever a famous or noted engineer as the technology leader of the organization? Ever remember even hearing an engineer quoted or noted? No. We don't need no stinkin' engineer. (btw: Musk is not an engineer either; but he is smart enough to hire talent and let them do their job.) Back on subject. Posawatz is a talented engineer. However, Frisker hired him as CEO/fire fighter, too late to steer technical direction of the company; and probably failed to mention some 'oh, by the ways' when he hired him. You said it; "By the time he arrived the die was already cast." Good luck Posawatz.
          EVnerdGene
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          "sheer bat luck" Like not buying or paying for insurance on cars in transit ? The DOE cancelled the loan because they didn't meet goals, and even though Frisker was hiding their financial condition, it was pretty obvious they were in deep dodo. Is that bat luck ? "under-capitalised organization" Over $1.2BILLION blown on this. Sounds like poo-lenty to me. Sure would like to see an accounting for where it all went. These guys didn't even build a manufacturing plant, or buy very expensive mfg. equipment.
          Marco Polo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          @ EVnerdGene Gene, what the hell are you talking about ? Tesla had it's problems, but also had bad luck. The shipment of cars destroyed by the Hurricane was insured. The Insurers argument was whether the cars were in transit, or stored. Ford won the their case against the insurer, but Fisker simply didn't have the funds to fight a protracted 3-5 year court battle, and settled on the best terms it could get. From the beginning, Tesla seemed cursed by bad luck. The firm that supplied all the material for the Karmas unique interior burned down, destroying the entire stock, creating continuity problems with Valmet. Two highly publicized fires, one of which turned out much later to be arson, and the other created by a small faulty fan. Then a hurricane, followed by the bankruptcy of the battery supplier, etc etc. The DOE cancelled the loan, (and quite rightly) because it was obvious that Fisker Automotive had no ability to raise another $2 billion, nor had the organisational skills to produce a volume production car. $1.2 billion may seem a lot of money to you, but it's insignificant in terms of the ability to produce even a specialist motor vehicle. Even with all the existing resources of a huge OEM, a new model, ( basically just an update on the previous model ), costs between $1 and 2.5 billion. Unlike Tesla, F.A. had no other sources of income, and although Henrik Fisker is an experienced auto-motive designer, and specialist auto engineer, he lacks Elon Musk's talent as an industrialist. Fisker's demise is mainly a result of pursuing project Nina (the Atlantic) instead of concentrating on perfecting the Karma. Building a high priced, low volume, unique GT for a selected market, requires far less capital and in-house resources, than attempting to manufacture a rival to GM's Volt. The company lost direction, and became increasingly confused about its objectives. It lacked a strong, and resourceful CEO. Henrik Fisker is a nice guy, and a talented designer / marketer, but he's no industrialist. Fisker Automotive's board representing the investors, were also unable to provide competent direction. Hiring an executive like Tony Pasawatz , who learned his trade within the confines of the GM corporation, doesn't solve the problem. Henrik Fisker needed a business/Industrialist partner who could make his vision, a practical reality. Business failures like this, take a terrible toll on the lives all those involved. But that's the nature of Free Enterprise, ..the ever present element of risk ! That why there are few "Captains of Industry" and a lot of opinionated sailors. The element of risk also applies to those who extend credit or invest, there's always an element of risk. Remove the risk, and you remove the 'enterprise'. There'll always be a Christopher Columbus, setting sail for the unknown, just as there'll always be some who sit at home, secretly hoping he'll fail.
          Pavel
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          @Marco Polo You make excellent and valid points. However you should be aware that LaSorda had structured a deal with a global OEM to support Fisker in return for a stake in the company. The board turned this offer down because it would dilute their stake too much. LaSroda realized there was nothing he could do. That is why he and Henrik left abruptly. Tony P is a nice guy but he was put in the wrong place at the wrong time.
          Pavel
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Marco Polo
          One more thing regarding Henrik Fisker and Bernhardt Koehler. I personally do not believe that 6 years ago Elon Musk was any more experienced in the auto industry, in tech yes. But that's is a slightly different animal. The main difference is that Elon had a controlling stake in Tesla because he was wealthy and had good connections to SV investors that trusted him. In 2009 after a investor pulled out in the last minute the founders were forced to further dissolve their share in Fisker and eventually had no say in what was happening in the company. There were multiple occasions when the board steered the company in a different direction.
      Levine Levine
      • 1 Year Ago
      He is another inept GM executive who should apologize to the taxpayers for having lived too long.
        EVnerdGene
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Levine Levine
        LL, that's kinda ruff. I missed the part where you tell us why he should apologize.
      Marco Polo
      • 1 Year Ago
      At 64, and age when most people start thinking about retiring, Tony Posawatz is still excited about EV development. Like his old boss, Bob Lutz, Tony is an American automotive engineer who can see the value of investing in EV technology. It's unfortunate that Tony Posawatz will always be associated with the demise of Fisker, and probably that's not altogether unfair. As CEO, he encouraged the board to continue dissipating Fisker's rapidly depleting resources on the overly ambitious volume Atlantic model. Fisker's problems ran deeper than Tony Posawatz, and he's attracted an unfairly disproportionate amount of criticism. Tony Posawatz is a product of GM, from assembly line worker he rose through the ranks to become a very senior executive. He has been an enthusiastic EV advocate for many years. Always pushing for EV development, often ostracised by the "old guard" at GM for his outspoken support. I'm glad that Robbie Diamond welcomes to opportunity to harness the undoubted talents of Tony Posawatz to further the cause of EV development.
      Jay Rosenberg
      • 10 Months Ago
      Hi Tony, tried to get hold of the top echeleon at Fisker when they were still viable. Would to discuss EV/ Dropins where we are developing. Jay R CEO Sannerwind@gmail.com
      Grendal
      • 1 Year Ago
      Is it me or does this guy look like the quintessential "car executive."
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X