He was a personal friend of my father in law (who met him at a McDonalds of all places). He visited my house last summer for a party.  Amazingly vital right up until the end, and was super gracious about being introduced to all the party guests as the astronaut.

Maybe, but a Porsche 550 spider from a decade earlier is worth millions despite anybody who might remember them new being 80+.

In 10-15 years, most of those guys will be dead or in a nursing home. So at least you will eventually stop seeing them. 

Well, I was talking about countries rather than the super wealthy. But there’s an unrelated reason why the super wealthy don’t tend to fly in 747s: it severely limits the airports you can fly into. Only major hub airports have facilities to support a 747, and private jet terminal support is even more spotty. Most…

Part of the problem may be super high costs to fly and maintain the thing. A lot of “not super rich” countries wouldn’t have that budget even if the plane itself were free.

I find it repulsive in the flesh too. It’s honestly one of the only cars on the market that is so offensive to me I would never even consider it.

What more could I want?

Yes, I acknowledged this in the last paragraph. 

This is a silly signaling device that will never become law, but it’s extremely misinformed and wrong headed about oil and gas taxation.

Needed? No, but nice if you have a short commute in traffic or want to pop to the store in it. 

Hope they are wrong about the lack of a plug. Even a relatively short all electric range can be nice.

I know the MC12s had serious transmission issues (and the transmissions were stupid expensive). 

These are actually pretty heavy for what they are. That’s several hundred pounds more than a contemporary c6 corvette. Love the gated shifter, but a c6 z would be half the price and considerably faster. Plus, this particular example just screams “negligent owner.”

Exactly, which is why you should have a 300 mile range vehicle.

Or you could just get an EV with better range to begin with for your $60k.

No, you won’t lose 40% of your range from just running the heater, but that combined with freezing weather, combined with driving at 75-80mph will. The “edmunds real world” test uses a mix of city and highway. Inside EVs does a relatively generous 70mph highway test and found that the Hyundai Ioniq 5 only made it 225…

If a 250 mile rating was 250 miles on the freeway in cold weather and the heater blasting, I might agree. But in practice, 250 mile EPA range means you are going to need to charge every ~125-150 miles in less than ideal conditions from full. You aren’t going to drain to 0.

Call me an unsophisticated troglodyte, but I have a very simple litmus test for EVs that cost more than $50k. Does it have at least 300 miles of range? If not, it fails. This fails.

Yeah, I’m pretty sure the headline is simply wrong. They may lose $200k per car sold, but that doesn’t mean they lose an additional $200k every time they sell a new car. To the contrary, the loss per car sold almost certainly goes down when they sell another car. 

“Frisland” appears to be the result of a confusion between Iceland and Svalbard on that map. The relationship between the two islands is roughly consistent. This also explains why there are detailed place names associated with Frisland (actually Iceland) but not the place labeled Iceland (Svalbard), which would have…