$25,000 EV from Bezos? Sounds revolutionary, feels…familiar. We've been promised affordable electric vehicles for years, haven't we? Remember Aptera? Elio Motors? Where are they now? That's the anxiety creeping in. This is not just a matter of a car; this is a matter of trust. So can we actually take the bait this time?

Is Customization Truly Revolutionary?

With Bezos’ blessing, Slate Auto is promising “Transformer”-style adaptability. The concept is extremely attractive – a $25,000 “Blank Slate” that you can customize. It’s the motto on their trademark that reads “We Built It. You Make It. Let’s face it, who really wants to create their own vehicle?

It’s similar to those early 2000s customizable PC order websites. Looked awesome, but no one else needed an exercise in creativity, everyone else needed a boring old reliable Dell or HP. Are we entering a period where car geeks build their Slates like high-end automobile aficionados build custom Maseratis? For the average consumer though, they just want a car to get them back and forth without any headaches.

By the time you start accounting for other aspects of customization, the awe factor of personalization goes out the window. Who's liable when a user-designed modification fails? What about safety standards? Will this turn into a new Wild West for backyard tuners and emission-sucking mods? I can already envision the YouTube videos: "Slate Auto Mod Gone WRONG!"

$100M Funding: Is That Really Enough?

Slate has raised more than $100 million in VC funding. Sounds impressive, right? Wrong. The automotive industry is notoriously capital-intensive. Tesla burned through billions before achieving profitability. Rivian is still struggling. $100 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the resources required to design, engineer, manufacture, and support a new vehicle.

There’s definitely a sense that we’re seeing history repeat itself, think DeLorean. Shiny, grand, aspirational, but ultimately dashed against the hard stones of fiscal reality. There is a real apprehension that Slate will become just another cautionary tale of Silicon Valley hubris. This concern continues despite its grand goals and Bezos’ roundabout ownership. Mark Walter from Guggenheim Partners joining the board is a good sign, but it doesn't negate the fundamental challenge: scaling automotive production is brutally expensive.

Design Secrecy: A Genius Move or Red Flag?

Slate has been promoting Slate in concept versions, under the cover of fake companies and working in relative secrecy until it’s planned April 24th launch. NDA’s for auto journalists on preview days, alluding to a “revolutionary design.” This secrecy, though successful in building intrigue, invites further perception and distrust.

Why the cloak and dagger? Are they hiding something? Is the design as game-changing as they claim, or is it all smoke and mirrors to distract us from fatal flaws? The “Transformer” metaphor, which has fueled investor pitches, feels like a clever marketing ploy more than an honest engineering breakthrough.

I am reminded of the Theranos saga. All the smoke, all the mirrors, and all the build-up—and at the end of it… blank. Now, again, I’m not saying that Slate is another Theranos, but the amount of secrecy surely raises the hairs on the back of one’s neck. We, the would-be consumers, warrant more than smoke and mirrors, NDA-sheltered peeks and expertly choreographed reveals.

The underlying anger is a sense of being played. What we’re actually getting is very controlled information meant only to drum up excitement, without any of the important stuff behind the curtain. Are we being set up for disappointment?

Concept cars aren’t enough for Slate to make his case. They should be required to show proof of a successful manufacturing strategy, a strong supply network, and a willingness to provide years of follow-up assistance. Until then, the “Transformer” car is just another Silicon Valley pipe dream, likely to end up on the automotive turf cutting room floor.

So, game changer or hype? The jury remains out, but my data-driven skepticism is ever at the ready.