http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2017/08/what-a-vision-mercedes-maybach-vision-6-cabriolet-is-a-retro-futuristic-show-stopper/

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/auto-industry/2017-tesla-model-3-has-unexpected-electric-motor-design.html​
​………………..

The big news is this: the Model 3 uses a permanent magnet (PM) electric motor instead of the AC induction motors used in all Tesla products to date.
It may sound like a nerdy difference, but this is a huge deal on many levels. Tesla’s entire identity is tied up with the AC induction motor, a type that Nikola Tesla himself patented in the late 1880s. Not only that, the Tesla logo is said to be a cross-section of one lobe of one of its own AC induction motors. Tesla is the only production electric carmaker with this type of motor, so it has historically bad-mouthed the PM motors used by everyone else. Tesla liked pointing out that PM motors tend to be less efficient when operated at higher speeds. Also, such motors are made from rare earth elements, which are mostly mined in China and are thus subject to trade politics. No wonder Tesla didn’t feel like revealing this nugget at the Model 3’s coming-out party, which was well-attended by Tesla fans who are invested in the Tesla story.
But none of this is bad news for consumers or deposit-holders waiting in line to buy a Model 3. In fact, it’s a good thing. For one, PM motors are more efficient, so long as you’re not intent on building a hyperperformance machine. This makes them a better choice for daily-driven commuter vehicles. Not to oversimplify it too much, but AC induction motors have to use some of the electricity stored in the car’s battery to generate the necessary magnetism within the motor. Permanent magnet motors have no need for this because they are made using, as the name suggests, permanently magnetic materials.
This change has many cascading benefits, especially if you are trying to build a smaller, less-expensive electric car. A more efficient electric motor means you can use a smaller battery to achieve a given range, which not only lowers the price, but also reduces the battery’s weight and footprint. A smaller and lighter battery in turn allows for a smaller and lighter car, which increases efficiency and range and reduces the need for a big motor even more. It’s a self-reinforcing change that makes the Model 3 possible, as well as affordable.

​Why did Tesla change its motors?

We know that the cost of permanent magnet motors has been on the minds of Fremont boffins in recent months. An April interview with Konstantinos Laskaris, head of motor design, undertaken by ChargedEVs.com, may have given the game away early.

When asked about motor cost he said, unprompted, “When we’re talking about permanent-magnet motors, the magnet price in the past has fluctuated so much that maybe this is not very representative of a general discussion about motor cost.”
At the time, as far as anyone could see, the firm didn’t put that kind of motor in anything. Despite that, Laskaris continued, saying that costs of motors were still going lower because of optimization. The entire piece is full of interesting ideas about the future of Tesla motor design. Given that it appears to have pointed to this revelation, there may be more secrets hidden in his answers.
What we can take away from the discussion is informative, however. Tesla has likely made the permanent magnet style motors cheap enough to be worth using. When it comes to the Tesla Model 3, after all, cost and margins are the most important part of the equation.

The conference will be chaired by Prof. Oliver Gutfleisch, Technical University of Darmstadt and Fraunhofer IWKS, and Dr. Matthias Katter, Vacuumschmelze GmbH.
The workshop has a long history, ever since Karl J. Strnat initiated the series of meetings almost 40 years ago. The aims of the workshop are to bring together scientists and engineers working on rare-earth permanent magnets and their applications and to facilitate exchange of recent results and ideas on topics such as raw materials, resources, and processing and properties of rare-earth and future permanent magnets.

http://www.repm2016.tu-darmstadt.de/repm_2016/index.en.jsp

http://247wallst.com/commodities-metals/2015/06/26/molycorp-files-for-chapter-11-delisted-from-nyse/

By Paul Ausick June 26, 2015 1:05 pm EDT

When Molycorp (MCPIQ) held its initial public offering in July of 2010, the company priced the shares at $13.25, below the IPO range of $15 to $17 that the company had hoped for. The stock rose to an all-time high of around $77 a share by April of 2011, before collapsing to just over a dime on the OTC Pink market Friday morning, following the stock’s delisting from the New York Stock Exchange.

The company’s Mountain Pass mine in California was touted as the answer to global dependence on China’s rare earth metals mining industry. In an attempt to clean up the country’s illegal rare earth mining operations (and to keep global prices high in the face of the threat from Molycorp), China imposed export restrictions on certain rare earth metals. Then the unexpected happened.

Major users of rare earth metals began to explore for substitutes for the expensive minerals — and users found them. Add to that the lifting of China’s export restrictions, and it was just a matter of time before new rare earth mining companies like Molycorp folded.

The company’s European and Asian operations are not affected by the bankruptcy filing, and all of Molycorp’s U.S. operations will continue running under debtor-in-possession financing while the company negotiates with its creditors. The financing package totals $225 million and the total debt being negotiated is $1.7 billion. Molycorp said that it had executed a restructuring support agreement with creditors holding more than 70% of the principal on its 10% senior secured notes.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-24/china-export-tax-decision-to-boost-rare-earth-demand-lynas-says

Users have been drawing down on stockpiles while awaiting clarity over China’s policy on the export of the elements, Amanda Lacaze, Chief Executive Officer of Malaysia-based Lynas, said in an interview. Rare earths are used in everything from cruise missiles to iPads.

“In the short term, a lot of what has been damping demand will be released,” Lacaze said today by phone. “Some customers have been living off inventories and they’ll come back and start placing orders.”

Lynas, one of two major producers outside China, rose as much as 30 percent in Sydney after Molycorp Inc., the largest U.S. producer, jumped 9.4 percent Thursday in New York.

China, which produces about 85 percent of global supply, will remove export tariffs on rare earths from May and in January abandoned its 15-year export quotas after the World Trade Organization ruled the policyviolated trade rules.

“If China is committed to eliminating illegal processing and establishing a tax that’s simple to administer then prices will go up, and that will assist companies like Lynas and Molycorp,” said Dudley Kingsnorth, Perth-based executive director at Industrial Minerals Company of Australia Pty. “However, we are not going to see an instant response.”

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2870476-will-molycorp-be-delisted

Jan. 30, 2015 6:24 PM ET  |  28 comments  |  About: Molycorp, Inc. (MCP)
Disclosure: The author is short MCP. (More…)

Summary

• Molycorp recently received an NYSE notice that the stock could be delisted after trading below $1 for 30 consecutive days.
• With consistent cash burn and operating losses, I do not see any near term catalysts to drive the stock back above $1 for an extended period.
• Investors should avoid MCP as an NYSE delisting appears imminent.

……..
Is Delisting Imminent?In my opinion, a delisting of the stock appears imminent. DA Davidsonrecently downgrated MCP from Buy to Neutral due to lingering production issues at the company’s Mountain Pass facility. At bottleneck related to the facility’s Leach system has kept the company from operating at full capacity. With cash burn and operating losses not expected to abate any time soon, I do not see any near term catalysts that would drive the stock above $1 for an extended period. Therefore, I believe a delisting is imminent.

ConclusionI believe an NYSE delisting is imminent for MCP. Such an event would cause investors to lose interest in MCP and it would be disastrous for the stock. Investors should avoid MCP.

………..

See the fellowing plots for Molycorp’s stock price and rare earth prices. (Data obtained from Google Finance and Metal-pages.)