Talk:Rimac Automobili
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mate Rimac
[edit]I think mate Rimac needs his own Wikipedia page. Bobbyshabangu talk 12:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Partial ownership by Porsche
[edit]Is there a problem with listing Porsche as a 10% owner? References to back it up at
- https://twitter.com/AutomobiliRimac/status/1009449231508234240
- https://newsroom.porsche.com/en/company/porsche-rimac-automobili-development-partnership-technology-sports-car-company-zagreb-croatia-electromobility-geneva-motor-show-electric-hypercar-c-two-15697.html
Companies buying large amount of shares in other companies is not an unusual thing, so I don't see why this has become a controversial topic. Stepho talk 01:25, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Stepho-wrs: Are you refering to these [1], [2] removals by @Markkonen: ? I do not have enough knowledge of the article subject to weigh in here, but if you're referring to this I would like to thank you for starting this thread. I've left some warnings on Markkonen's talk, but they just remove them. Cheers, - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 01:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
- Yes. Waiting for comments by Markkonen/ I left a request for him to join this discussion on his talk page. If he chooses not to comment then we can freely revert him but I prefer to get his comments first. Stepho talk 03:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
@Stepho-wrs: @FlightTime Phone:
How do I write here, is this OK @Stepho-wrs? It's @Markkonen...
There is no problem about Porsche 10%, but it's already mantioned in the text...
Mate Rimac is the majority owner, others are:
Integrated Asset Management (Asia) Limited, The British Virgin Islands
China Dynamics (Holdings) Limited, Bermuda
NEW AUTOMOVILE DEVELOPMENT LLP, UK
Adriano Mudri, Austria
Ziad Tassabehji, UK
CONSULTING GROUP LIMITED, Hongkong
Paul E Runge, USA
Camel Group Co., Ltd., China
Porsche Engineering Group GmbH, Germany
You have it on record here:
https://sudreg.pravosudje.hr/registar/f?p=150:28:0::NO:28:P28_SBT_MBS:080712981
Also, there are other major problems with Mate Rimac, and Rimac automobili, and it is very controversial, and fiercely debated topic here in Croatia, but language barrier is the problem for others who don't know Croatian language... @Stepho-wrs, can you give me your email, so I can write you there? - Markkonen 06:09, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, good, now we can have a real conversation. I followed that link, worked through the horrid captcha (having learnt that "semaforima" is Croatian for "semaphore" or "traffic light") and copied the list of investors. Shame that it doesn't list the percentages of each major investor but it is a start. I did a quick search on some of the investors and found this nice 2014 reference (in English) https://www.electricautosport.com/2014/11/rimac-automobili-secures-10-million-euro-investment/ It lists IAMAL as a 2% investor and China Dynamics as a 10% investor of a €70 million company. I'm sure we can take this and similar references and figure out the major shareholders/owners.
- I prefer to not put my email address where robots, spammers and scanners can see it. But if you search on "Stepho" and "Celica" then you will find my website easy enough and contact me from there. Take note that I prefer to keep discussions public and anything sent to me by email might be copied to here.
- Also, if you put ~~~~ at the end of your comment then Wikipedia will automatically add your username and the time+date. This makes it easier to follow the conversation. Stepho talk
- Yes, semafor is singular, semafori is plural in Croatian, word for traffic light(s)... I don't know why captcha took you to photos, you just need to click left on - nisam robot - (I'm not a robot)...
List of all of the investors is in annual financial report, it is on the same link, click on - Pregledaj na stranicama RGFI - and download - Godišnje izvješće + Revizorsko izvješće s prilozima + Bilješke -, on the page 30 you have list of investors with percentages, I will make it easy for you, click here:
https://i.postimg.cc/zX8z1Mx4/0001.jpg
Annual financial report of 2018., will be done around June 2019., and should show 10.78% from Porsche Engineering Group GmbH, Germany
I think I have found your email, I will contact you, feel free to fully disclose those emails...~~~~
~~~~ Doesn't seem to work, or I am doing something wrong...
- Markkonen 20:14, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will analyse it later tonight (I'm on Australian time). A very quick check shows that it is current as of December 2017. Porsche bought its shares in June 2018, so the numbers need to be adjusted by hand.
- Use the 4 tildes (~) without the nowiki parts. I had to surround it with nowiki to show you, otherwise it would substitute my own username, time and date. Stepho talk 23:14, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
@Kiksam: stop with disruptive editing, and do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point...
Markkonen (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
- Actually, we are wondering what your point is deleting the Porsche ownership. From the facts presented in the article, we have Mate Rimac owning most of the shares and a reference that says Porsche bought 10% of the total shares. Which means you are the one being disruptive. Best to leave it in the original state until the discussion has completed, as per the guideline WP:BRD. Afterwards, the article will be adjusted according to the result of the discussion.
- But let's continue the conversation. From the additional facts on this talk page, I can take the percentage numbers from December 2017, adjust them down by 10% (the shares sold to Porsche) and add Porsche to the list. This assumes no other large share trading happened since December 2017. This gives:
Entity %December 2017 % June 2018 Mate Rimac 62.5% 56.25 Camel Group 19.35 17.325 Porsche 0 10 China Dynamics 8.06 7.254 New Automobile Development 4.84 4.356
- I used an arbitrary cut-off of 2%. From what has been presented, the 2018 figures in the above table could be used in the article infobox.
- The other controversies you mentioned in your email don't seem to affect the share percentages and can be sorted out as a second step. Stepho talk 22:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
@Stepho-wrs: @EdJohnston:
- Then show only majority holder, and that is Mate Rimac, or all of the owners, not just Porsche Engineering Group GmbH, because it's not just Porsche Engineering Group GmbH, and they have only 10%...Markkonen (talk) 01:22, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
- The list is long and tedious and small players like Paul E Runge at 0.036% don't really make much difference to the company's bottom line (no insult intended). I'd like to use the arbitrary cut-off point of 5%. That creates a list of important players and keeps the list to a reasonable length. We can't list Mate Rimac by himself because the others in the list hold too much to be ignored. Is 5% acceptable? We could move it up or drop it down a bit more but when we're getting down to 1% we're normally talking about relatively unimportant players in most companies. Unless there is a reason that one of these small players needs to be mentioned. Whichever cut-off point we pick, it must definitely include Camel (second largest) and Porsche (third largest) - they are too big to ignore. Stepho talk 11:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
- 5% seems fine to me...
BTW Paul E Runge is the only known owner of Concept One, besides Applus IDIADA Volar-E, that is Spanish firm, that with collaboration with Rimac automobili bought Concept One, changed the outside, and presented it like their car, and took money from EU fonds...
https://www.applusidiada.com/en/new/volar-e-1340222851925
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-151_en.htm
Contract award procedure for EU fonds said that car needed to be completed in 4 months, and Mate Rimac is in many interviews proud of that, that him and few others slept in his garage and made that car in 4 months...
Also, Concept One is basically GTM kit car with electric engine:
https://www.factoryfive.com/gtm-supercar/
And other things are also bought, but you will read all about that when I translate all, like I said in email...Markkonen (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- And what does it have to do with the discussion at hand? This is about the ownership structure of the company, not what an anonymous nobody on the internet believes about how someone runs their business. Try not to veer off-topic.Kiksam (talk) 13:28, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Practically everybody contributing to WP is an anonymous nobody (including me). Markkonen has providing some extra details that may lead to further discussion after this particular topic has run its course. Personally, I find it interesting, even if it does drift a little off topic. Stepho talk 21:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't a place for gossip or allegations as per: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a forum. Translation isn't necessary since there is a thing called Google translate for the articles one can provide. The problem is, I have a feeling Markkonen is not contributing in good faith, I hope I'm wrong.Kiksam (talk) 00:14, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- Practically everybody contributing to WP is an anonymous nobody (including me). Markkonen has providing some extra details that may lead to further discussion after this particular topic has run its course. Personally, I find it interesting, even if it does drift a little off topic. Stepho talk 21:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- No gossips or allegations, just plain truth/facts, with evidence and data.Markkonen (talk) 06:59, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
@Stepho-wrs: @FlightTime Phone:
@Stepho-wrs, please see what FlightTime is doing...Markkonen (talk) 02:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- Your revert was fine, nothing more for me to do. Thanks. Stepho talk 04:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Markkonen - that is simply not true. I was looking it up - the Croatian agency FINA (and therefore all the other services that you are linking) are using total hours per year worked to get the average number of employees through out the year.
This is the metodology: ". Broj zaposlenih − stanje na temelju sati rada: prosječan broj zaposlenih radnika na bazi sati rada utvrđuje se tako da se ukupan broj ostvarenih sati rada u godišnjem razdoblju podijeli s brojem mogućih sati rada po jednome zaposlenom radniku u odnosnome razdoblju."
Google Translated:
"Number of employees - working hours: average the number of employed persons on the basis of working hours shall be determined by: is the total number of hours worked in the annual period divided by the number of possible hours of work per single employee worker in the relevant period."
https://misljenja.hr/dok/novosti/782/vij_init.pdf
I am using Google Translate as I don't speak Croatian but the point is clear.
I will explain it again to you - read it slowly, you might get it: If you start the year with 100 employees, and end the year with 200 employees, and grow linearly between, the statistics will show that you have 150 employees during the year. And, that information is available for 2018, which is 6 months ago, so not relevant for such a high growing company. I would think that an official press release, but Hyundai, a huge company that is a shareholder in Rimac, is more relevant. Why are you ignoring this? What is your agenda? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sittinginsanfrancisco2 (talk • contribs) 09:41, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Lies, damned lies
[edit]@Stepho-wrs: @Kiksam:
Kiksam you are again reverting changes without explanation! Markkonen (talk) 20:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- I already explained it in the edit summary. The Večernji List article you're quoting is largely outdated (2013), and is contradicted by later (English language, such as: https://auto.howstuffworks.com/rimac-concept-one1.htm, http://issuu.com/luxuriousmagazine/docs/luxury-defined, http://www.greencardesign.com/site/news/rimac-concept-one) sources. Moreover, you're citing a forum thread, which is a clear violation of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, as well as various company sites, which aren't 3rd party sources. Your edits also violate Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research, cheers.Kiksam (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- Also this (https://www.telegram.hr/price/podsjecamo-na-nevideni-put-mate-rimca-od-amaterske-utrke-u-velikoj-gorici-do-aston-martina/) source does not seem to support your claim (Factory Five Racing's GTM kit car), and the Večernji source actually speaks of CELLS being imported from A123, not batteries. The rest is pretty much self-explainatory.Kiksam (talk) 22:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- And, again this (https://www.rinehartmotion.com/uploads/5/1/3/0/51309945/pm250datasheet2.pdf) does not support the claim (Rinehard) in the article, and neither does the Factory Five: https://www.factoryfive.com/gtm-supercar/, assuming we could use them as reliable sources in compliance with Wikipedia editorial policies. And this forum thread: https://web.archive.org/web/20100503233805/https://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php/bmw-bi-moto-ev-project-28287p22.html actually predates the subject matter by a full year, and it can't be used either way. Kiksam (talk) 22:49, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- You changed "The C_Two is able to accelerate from 0–60 mph (0–97 km/h) in just 1.85 seconds and achieve a top speed of 258 mph (415 km/h). " to "The C_Two is able to accelerate seat cupra e-racer conceptfrom {{cvt|0-60|mph|kph|0|abbr=on}} in just 1.85 seconds and achieve a top speed of {{cvt|258|mph|km/h|0|abbr=on}}." I mean, what does that even mean?Kiksam (talk) 23:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- You removed " as well as other automakers,[1][2] and developed infotainment systems for Renault.[3]" this section without explaination.Kiksam (talk) 23:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- I think I have figured out the source for the Factory Five claim, it looks like the first car built after the BMW was based on a GTM, you can see this in one of the photos on the site he linked, the front structure is an exact match to the GTM. But I think this was only a test mule, as all the later cars have a frame that looks to be a new design. Toasted Meter (talk) 21:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- That's beyond the point. We need explicit statements from a authoritative/reliable 3rd party source (journal, jounalistic research from an established source) to support the claim, not an "opinion" of an editor, citing what he claims to be "evidence". That's why there's Wikipedia:No original research. Kiksam (talk) 22:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- I certainly agree that it has no place in this article, although it can be useful to know the root cause of errors and misconceptions. Toasted Meter (talk) 22:32, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- That's beyond the point. We need explicit statements from a authoritative/reliable 3rd party source (journal, jounalistic research from an established source) to support the claim, not an "opinion" of an editor, citing what he claims to be "evidence". That's why there's Wikipedia:No original research. Kiksam (talk) 22:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- 1. Concept One was made in 2011. and shown at Frankfurt autoshow, where Mate RImac said buyers are coming from all over the world, and said that they sold ten cars:
2. Concept One was announced - The production is limited to only 88 units, 10 to 15 cars per year. Tailored by the customer’s wishes every car is an exquisite masterpiece.
Later, they changed that to 8 - The production is limited to only 8 units, tailored by the customer’s wishes, every car is an exquisite masterpiece.
Strange, 8 units, and they have already sold 10.
3. Vecernji list is Croatian biggest newspaper, the text is from 2013., so it is not uotdated, the car was made in 2011. Also, the text is interview with Mate Rimac:
https://www.vecernji.hr/techsci/sve-tajne-koje-rimac-concept-one-cine-superautomobilom-532704
4. Crodriver is Mate Rimac on various forums. This is Factory Five forum:
https://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3485-Holy-Moley
Most interesting parts:
„The integrity to give credit where it is due.“
„Crodriver went onto the other forum and deliberately deleted all his posts.“
„He took FFRs stuff, reworked it, and is now trying to pass it off as his own...and profit from it!“
„I have no problem with someone reworking something and wanting money for the improved product, but when they claim it to be 100% their creation...when climbing on the backs of other hard working people who they give NO credit to, well, yeah, then I have an issue with it.“
„He should should give credit where credit is due.“
6. Article from telegram is there because you can clearly see on the pictures, Mate Rimac sitting in Factory Five GTM kit car, and you can clearly see on the pictures boxes from Factory Five, and Factory Five logos on the boxes.
7. Mate Rimac/Rimac automobili are buying products from various companyes, and sell them as their own.
Just one example, in interview - Recite Al Jazeeri: Mate Rimac, he is saying that almost all components are made internally, in the house, from scratch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-0Hi9fKjNI
R&D & hardcore manufacturing in-house
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-37qpjyy.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-38o5jc9.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-39u9kgn.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-40swj8i.jpg
So, let’s see "in the house” made from scratch electric motor:
But in fact that product is from USA, from company AMRacinginc:
Just look at that two smiling faces, just before shipping to Rimac automobili, I bet you would be smiling to, when a nice sum of money sits to your banking account...
Look how AMRacing have a nice video about R&D of that electric motor:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFblZxNsl8
They are delivered on the stands. And look at them on this picture, maybe the saddest picture of all, when they are in Rimac automobili, on the same stands:
https://abload.de/img/rimac-slide8uf0n.jpg
"Inspiring new generations"...
What are we now going to say to children?
Also, Mate Rimac entered Croatian schools and he is already in school books:
Rimac, new Nikola Tesla:
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-44w5jie.jpg
First electric car was made by Anyos Jedlik in 1828.
Children writing about Rimac:
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-47tvkhj.jpg
Rimac haircut:
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-54wmjx5.jpg
Most interesting part, school book:
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-454ok0q.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-46yakbx.jpg
But in fact, first Croatian electric car was made a year before, in 2010., DOK-ING xD and was inttroduced in Geneva motorshow in 2010:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nayp6GGBrYk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOsoIDmlMSc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf-_EnCviGA
So lies even in the school books...
8. Rimac is not making anything for Jaguar Cars!!! It is misleading! I have friends working on Jaguar I-PACE, first all-electric Jaguar, and 99% of them didn't even know Rimac existed until I have told them! Jaguar E‑type Zero concept car is made by Jaguar Land Rover Classic Works, they made one example of that car have some components from Rimac.
9. Rimac is not making anything for Seat!!! It is misleading! Seat Cupra e-Racer concept car is a project from Porsche Engineering Group GmbH. Rimac, Porsche, remember 10% ownership?
10. I didn't change anything about Concept Two.
11. Can we talk about Mate Rimac initial capital, and his father, Ivan Rimac? Both Mate Rimac and Ivan Rimac in numerous interviews says his father borrowed him the money.
Why don't you check father connections that are involved with the highest government officials?
His father was wanted by the Interpol, he was wanted for tax evasion in Germany, he was in prison in Serbia and Croatia, and has numerous affair, most known are RIM I ZOV, access road for Lidl, Slavonija DI, HNK Hajduk, Sibinj, and world famous Mossac Fonseca i Panama Papers which were also involved in Rimac automobili...
Croatian journalist Drago Hedl wrote about some of the affairs.
Why don't you check financial reports, and debts to companies owned by his father Ivan Rimac.
Also, why don't you check how much money is Croatian goverment is giving to him? And beside that, Rimac automobili finished the fiscal year of 2017. in minus of 43 million...
Why don't you check interview with Richard Hammond, you can use internet search engines and find - Richard Hammond discusses his Rimac crash, where Rimac says it was produced only 8 cars, but in article from 2011. - Rimac o Concept_Oneu: Kupci nam stižu sa svih strana svijeta, već smo ih prodali deset! where he says he sold 10 cars:
Also, do you remember the car which was introduced in Geneva in 2016, Concept S:
That one is also sold out:
https://www.tportal.hr/tehno/clanak/rimac-prodao-oba-concepta-s-evo-koliko-su-kostali-20170315
Also, Mate Rimac in the same interview with Richard Hammond declares that the car is privately owned, in possession of private buyer, but in the financial reports you can see the part where it says that - during the recording of the new Amazon series The Grand Tour, host, Richard Hammond completely damaged the Concept One car owned by the firm (Rimac automobili).
Why don’t you check the interview N1 Pressing: Mate Rimac (1.6.2015), at 28:55 in the interview he is saying the host, that his firm doesn’t have some holding company on British Virgin Islands, but in Court registry of commercial records there is Integrated Asset Management (Asia) Limited, from British Virgin Islands, and that firm is there from the moment of starting Rimac automobili. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrBTnQHbPM4
In the same interview at 42:00 Mate Rimac is saying that Rimac automobili have already developed the car that is driving by itself, without a driver, which would mean that in 2015. they had fifth level of autonomous driving, which is unbelievable, since no one it the world have made a car that is fourth level, newest Audi A8 D5 from 2018. Is only third level.
In the same interview he is saying that they have started on the project of building boats, that confirms the article from 2014. - NOVI POSLOVNI POTEZ MATE RIMCA Gradi prvu brzu električnu jahtu na svijetu
In the same interview Mate Rimac continues the story, saying they are working on the "personal watercraft" project, which is floating over the water, and 300 will be built in2015. And 1000 in 2016. And testings can be seen in the lake beside Sv. Nedelja.
In the same interview Mate Rimac is saying they are working on flying car and that they will need an airfield.
And so on, and so on, and so on, etc, etc, etc...
Markkonen (talk) 00:46, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- Your drawn-out answer hasn't adressed any of the issues raised above. In fact, most of the above has nothing to do with the edit warring here. I suggest you read the policy on sourcing: Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:No_original_research. Kiksam (talk) 01:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- Either you did not read anything what i wrote, or you have some personal interest in hiding lies from Rimac automobili.Markkonen (talk) 00:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
- Breaking down my problems with Markonnen's edits:
- A picture from a business website, clearly in breach of Wikipedia:No original research
- Two pdf data sheets from another business website, which does not make any reference to Rimac,or the claim in question, and likewise fails Wikipedia:No original research
- A Večernji list article which does not accurately support the statement, and it actually refers to "battery cells", not batteries (baterijske ćelije)
- A paper dealing with batteries in which I couldn't find any reference to Rimac (I coiuld be proven wrong, if someone would point to the exact page)
- A homepage of Factory Five GTM Racing, which also fails Verifiability and Original research.
- A forum thread which according to Wikipedia:Reliable sources does not constitute a reliable source
- An article on Telegram news website which makes no mention of "Factory Five Racing's GTM kit" and therefore does not support the claim. Instead, Markonen was referring to an image in the article on the RA's talk page in the above link. (Therefore again OR)
There are other problems with Markonnen's editing, namely:
- Here he is seemingly vandalizing some parts of the the text, changing "The C_Two is able to accelerate
from{{cvt|0-60|mph|kph|0|abbr=on}} in just 1.85 seconds and achieve a top speed of <nowiki>258 mph (415 km/h)" to "The C_Two is able to accelerate seat cupra e-racer conceptfrom 0–60 mph (0–97 km/h) in just 1.85 seconds and achieve a top speed of 258 mph (415 km/h).", whatever that means.
- Here he is seemingly vandalizing some parts of the the text, changing "The C_Two is able to accelerate
- The "N1 television" video source is used here, and does not pertain to the accusations of deception regarding components.Kiksam (talk) 02:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ Bigg, Martin (13 October 2017). "Jaguar Worked With Rimac To Develop The All-Electric E-Type Zero". CarBuzz. US. Retrieved 6 May 2018.
- ^ Atiyeh, Clifford (8 September 2017). "E, 'lectrified: Jaguar Classic Makes a 1968 E-type Roadster into an EV". Car and Driver. US. Retrieved 6 May 2018.
- ^ "Radimo na autima koji će na tržištu biti tek 2022., ne smijem reći za koga, što mi smeta" [We're working on cars that will only be in the market in 2022, I'm not allowed to say for who, which bothers me]. Večernji (in Croatian). Croatia. 4 March 2018. Retrieved 24 March 2018.
- @Sittinginsanfrancisco2: why have you deleted - A limited production of 88 units was to be offered?
Also, start reading from the start in this talk page... Markkonen (talk) 22:03, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Please start reading from the start in this talk page...
And yes, Concept One can only have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_or_Display plates, because it is not homologated anywhere in the world. Even here in Croatia, you can't see it on regular plates, only on PP plates: https://www.cvh.hr/propisi-i-upute/pravilnici/zakon-o-sigurnosti-prometa-na-cestama/pravilnik-o-registraciji-i-oznacavanju-vozila/ Markkonen (talk) 08:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
- Show and display refers to a specific American law which has nothing to do with what kind of license plates the car is issued. I have no plan to read the entire Croatian vehicle registration law, if this happens to be true and verifiable it would be best written as "The Concept One has not received type approval in the European Union or United States". Toasted Meter (talk) 08:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
What wrong information and information not supported by the provided source am I writing?
Read what is Show or Display and what kind of plates are those:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_or_Display
Also, read this list:
https://icsw.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/Eligible%20Show%20or%20Display%20Vehicles%20Feb212017.xlsx
That list is from National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, agency of the Executive Branch of the U.S. government, part of the Department of Transportation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Highway_Traffic_Safety_Administration
Markkonen (talk) 09:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
- Show and display does exist, however there is no such thing as a show and display plate, if you want to note that it is not homologated in the United States go for it. Toasted Meter (talk) 09:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, how do you want to write it?
Markkonen (talk) 09:53, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
- I would go for "The Concept One has not received type approval in the United States, meaning that it must be imported under Show or Display". Also why did you remove the Sony battery thing? Your sources say nothing about the A123 cells being used in the Concept One, and mine directly state the exact model number, in the context of a submission to the EPA. Toasted Meter (talk) 10:55, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Why have you deleted - A limited production of 88 units was to be offered?
The Concept One has not received type approval in the United States, meaning that it must be imported under Show or Display - that is OK with me.
Sony battery thing? I don't know what are you talking about?
About A123 systems:
I doista, na baterijskom modulu “uvozne” su samo ćelije. One su proizvod poznate američke tvrtke A123 systems.
https://www.vecernji.hr/techsci/sve-tajne-koje-rimac-concept-one-cine-superautomobilom-532704
The cell selected for modelling is a high-performance cylindrical cell in the 26700 package developed by A123 Systems.
https://dspace.ut.ee/bitstream/handle/10062/60714/Dreija_MSc2018.pdf?...1...y
Markkonen (talk) 17:33, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Here you go, I have edited:
1.The Concept One has not received type approval in the United States, meaning that it must be imported under Show or Display
2. Battery cells are from USA firm, A123 Systems
- First up I have never removed the 88 claim, have a look at the edit history. Good job on the changes to the Show or Display portion.
- As to the Sony batteries, if you don't know what I am talking about then you should read the cite, it is a submission to the EPA, I find this highly reliable and see it as much more likely that an error was made with the article you linked than in a filing by the company to a government agency, and your second source does not state which "one of the current projects" it is talking about, it could be an entirely different project.
- And how do you explain the Factory Five claim? And Boardguardian, and Rinehart? The problem here is that the source does not say firm X makes part X for Rimac, and that is the standard, if the source does not support the text the claim should be removed. Toasted Meter (talk) 18:29, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- Also, you said "until consensus is made, I will not revert anymore" on Requests for page protection, what happened to that? Toasted Meter (talk) 06:15, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, then someone else removed that about 88 cars...
What cite is talking about Sony batteries?
Factory Five claim? I thought I have explained that, you also have pictures with that, and discussion of Factory Five forum, all explained before...
Source for x firms making x parts for Rimac is:
https://www.vecernji.hr/auti/samoborac-izradio-najbrzi-elektricni-auto-na-svijetu-319971
So ypu can see that Board Guardian is mentioned here:
https://www.vecernji.hr/auti/samoborac-izradio-najbrzi-elektricni-auto-na-svijetu-319971
Also you have Board Guardian pages:
http://www.boardguardian.hr/en/home/references
You can see Concept One, and Project „P2“ which is Applus+ IDIADA Volar-e.
For Rinehart Motion Systems, you can clearly see on various pictures, that is the same product.
Here is the latest one from Cupra e-Racer concept car:
https://abload.de/img/reinhart_cuprambkbf.png
https://www.rinehartmotion.com/standard.html
Also here on Tajima Rimac eRunner video on 2:43:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44LLzOBrswA
https://www.rinehartmotion.com/uploads/5/1/3/0/51309945/pm250datasheet2.pdf
And Concept One:
http://quantumworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/QWC-SEV-RMS-PM100-150-250_Datasheets.pdf
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/lqnukbchhsy1bdplzgbg.png
https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-tech-behind-rimacs-two-220-mph-all-elec-1762444456
In fact, on Rinehart pages you have:
Specialty Vehicles Hillclimb Monster Tajima took First Place at the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb in the Electric Vehicle Class in 2013. This unit used 4 of our PM150DZR inverters, one at each wheel, with peak power just under 800kW. Tajima-san was back on the hill in June of this year and managed a second place OVERALL - both the first and second place electric vehicles beat every other vehicle on the hill including the Unlimited Class vehicles. Note that this is the first time, ever, that the EVs have beaten everything else at Pikes Peak. This year's car used 4 of our brand new PM250DZ inverters and managed just over 1MW of peak tractive effort.
https://www.rinehartmotion.com/motorsports.html
Sorry, I thought consensus was made.
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
Markkonen (talk) 03:26, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- The reference for the Sony thing is directly after the claim, I even included a page number. Here it is [3] page 18.
- On Rinehart, none of the motorsport sources say anything about the Concept One, the other one is a Jalopnik article which says nothing about Rinehart and then we have a cut away photo which I can't see proving anything about the manufacturer of the inverter, and then we have Rinehart's datasheet which does not mention Rimac and serves to prove that the inverter is a metal rectangle? In short, none of this comes anywhere close to being a reliable source for identifying who made an automotive component.
- The Board Guardian sources and site seem to say that they made moulds, they say nothing about making parts.
- You have entirely failed to prove that the Concept One uses any part from Factory Five, the photo of Mate in the Factory Five proves nothing (this is just my guess but it was probably used as a test mule for the quad motor setup). Toasted Meter (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, we can add Sony calls with A123 cells, do you agree with that?
Board Guardian is making and milling moulds. I can agree to change, making body parts to making and milling moulds. Is that OK with you?
Rinehart propulsion inverters are not just on Concept One, but on Tajima Rimac eRunner, Cupra e-Racer concept car, etd., you can clearly see that on the videos and pictures I have provided. Rimac will not tell anyone that is from Rinehart, because they are saying they are producing all by themselves, and it is the same story with electric engine, I also wrote about that before:
Mate Rimac/Rimac automobili are buying products from various companyes, and sell them as their own.
Just one example, in interview - Recite Al Jazeeri: Mate Rimac, he is saying that almost all components are made internally, in the house, from scratch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-0Hi9fKjNI
R&D & hardcore manufacturing in-house
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-37qpjyy.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-38o5jc9.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-39u9kgn.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-forum-40swj8i.jpg
So, let’s see "in the house” made from scratch electric motor:
But in fact that product is from USA, from company AMRacinginc:
Just look at that two smiling faces, just before shipping to Rimac automobili, I bet you would be smiling to, when a nice sum of money sits to your banking account...
Look how AMRacing have a nice video about R&D of that electric motor:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFblZxNsl8
They are delivered on the stands. And look at them on this picture, maybe the saddest picture of all, when they are in Rimac automobili, on the same stands:
https://abload.de/img/rimac-slide8uf0n.jpg
"Inspiring new generations"...
What are we now going to say to children?
Regarding Factory Five:
Crodriver is Mate Rimac on various forums. This is Factory Five forum:
https://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3485-Holy-Moley
"After rereading the threads from the Crodriver poster on the other forum, he kept complaining about how FFR wouldn't send him any CAD work on the car even though he had one of the kits. I actually defended him, but it looks like David Borden and the FFR guys were right to not trust this guy.
He took FFRs stuff, reworked it, and is now trying to pass it off as his own...and profit from it!
I have no problem with someone reworking something and wanting money for the improved product, but when they claim it to be 100% their creation...when climbing on the backs of other hard working people who they give NO credit to, well, yeah, then I have an issue with it."
He even wanted CAD work for the car.
Mate Rimac -Crodriver on unofficial− Factory five forum:
https://www.ffcars.com/forums/42-factory-five-gtm-forum/229801-planing-1000hp-electric-gtm.html
Unfortunately nothing is saved on internet archive, but we also have this:
"The GTM was ordered 4 months ago."
And here you can see Mate Rimac in Factory Five GTM kit car:
Also, he deleted his posts on every forum he could. Why deleting everything if you have nothing to hide?
Markkonen (talk) 18:04, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- The A123 claim is not supported by its sources and should not be on this page in any way with the current citations.
- I have no clue what he is saying in that interview as I do not speak Croatian.
- There is still no actual proof that any Factory Five parts/Factory Five derived parts were used, if we are to use photos of stuff as proof (which are not reliable sources anyways) you can see the photo of the completely different looking frame being welded up at Rimac, using another car as a test mule has a long history, McLaren used an Ultima to test the powertrain for the F1, this does not mean that the F1 is based on a Ultima. [autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/matt-priors-testers-notes-how-hide-your-test-car-mclaren-way] all we have is speculation and conjecture same with Rhinehart. Toasted Meter (talk) 14:43, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Again about A123 battery cells:
https://www.vecernji.hr/techsci/sve-tajne-koje-rimac-concept-one-cine-superautomobilom-532704
I doista, na baterijskom modulu “uvozne” su samo ćelije. One su proizvod poznate američke tvrtke A123 systems.
https://www.vecernji.hr/techsci/sve-tajne-koje-rimac-concept-one-cine-superautomobilom-532704
The cell selected for modelling is a high-performance cylindrical cell in the 26700 package developed by A123 Systems.
https://dspace.ut.ee/bitstream/handle/10062/60714/Dreija_MSc2018.pdf?...1...y
- Again, in the interview he is saying that almost all components are made internally, in the house, from scratch.
- Again, Regarding Factory Five:
Crodriver is Mate Rimac on various forums. This is Factory Five forum:
https://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showthread.php?3485-Holy-Moley
"After rereading the threads from the Crodriver poster on the other forum, he kept complaining about how FFR wouldn't send him any CAD work on the car even though he had one of the kits. I actually defended him, but it looks like David Borden and the FFR guys were right to not trust this guy.
He took FFRs stuff, reworked it, and is now trying to pass it off as his own...and profit from it!
I have no problem with someone reworking something and wanting money for the improved product, but when they claim it to be 100% their creation...when climbing on the backs of other hard working people who they give NO credit to, well, yeah, then I have an issue with it."
He even wanted CAD work for the car.
Mate Rimac -Crodriver on unofficial− Factory five forum:
https://www.ffcars.com/forums/42-factory-five-gtm-forum/229801-planing-1000hp-electric-gtm.html
Unfortunately nothing is saved on internet archive, but we also have this:
"The GTM was ordered 4 months ago."
And here you can see Mate Rimac in Factory Five GTM kit car:
Also, he deleted his posts on every forum he could. Why deleting everything if you have nothing to hide?
- Can you agree to add Sony cells with A123 cells?
- If you agree we can change - Chasis is a product from USA, by Factory Five Racing's GTM kit car - to Chasis for Concept One is modified chasis of Factory Five Racing's GTM kit car, from USA.
Markkonen (talk) 17:54, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- We still have no proof that any Factory Five component or design made its way into the final car (a photo of him sitting in car is not a WP:RS for the design of a car's frame being derived from another one!), same with the batteries, for all we know the future product the paper was talking about is the C_Two or some other thing they are working on. Verifiability is non negotiable, we can not make a "compromise" on whether something is verifiable, and the claims I removed are not. What you are doing here is Wikipedia:No original research you are taking multiple sources of information and using inference and speculation to form a conclusion that is not supported by a source, that is not how things are done on Wikipedia, there is no reliable source that says "The Rimac Concept One uses A123 battery cells" and without that we can not say that it uses those cells. Toasted Meter (talk) 19:10, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, we have many proofs that Factory Five GTM is modified Concept One. I think I'm done with providing data and links, you can search for yourself and provide data and links that proves me wrong. The same is with battery cells, I have provided data and links... It is almost funny for battery cells, that are mentioned in this article:
https://www.vecernji.hr/techsci/sve-tajne-koje-rimac-concept-one-cine-superautomobilom-532704
One su proizvod poznate američke tvrtke A123 systems.
That you don't see that it is written - Concept One, that does not need translation, which is mentioned several times, including in the headline of the article. I'm just going to say LOL to this...
Markkonen (talk) 23:46, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- Confusingly they have said they used both the chemistry of the A123 cells and the Sony ones, I think it may have been changed before final production began, it's not entirely clear if the A123 cells ever made it into a customer car but I think both could be mentioned.
- There is still not a WP:RS for the Factory Five claim, only your original research. Toasted Meter (talk) 01:32, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Two sources say A123 cells, one Sony, we can include both cells if you agree...
- Research with data, pictures and links, I would call that a reliable sources (multiple)...
Markkonen (talk) 05:11, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
- On Factory Five, just because you have a link does not mean that the link is a reliable source. The claim should be removed until a reliable source says it. Toasted Meter (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Not one link, there are multiple links and pictures that confirms Factory Five claims... Regarding reliable sources, reliable source is not even Rimac himself because he is a proven liar. I would also suggest reading a story about Fisker, Twentieth Century Motor Car Corporation, Lightning GT, Gemballa, and Tucker (you even have a movie about that - Tucker: The Man and His Dream). Hell, even DMC DeLorean is not far off...
Markkonen (talk) 23:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- None of the links provided are reliable sources for Rimac using any Factory Five parts or designs, I would suggest you read WP:RS so you can understand why they are not. Toasted Meter (talk) 01:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
I disagree, there are several reliable links. Also you have deleted everything, and not just about Factory Five parts... Markkonen (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- They are not reliable, I can't tell if you don't understand WP:V or don't care. I am not sure how this is going to get resolved, short of you getting a indefinite block for WP:NOTHERE, and that is what you are heading towards. So you need to figure out a way to actually discuss this, not by posting walls of text and asserting that things are definitely reliable sources despite that being entirely wrong. Toasted Meter (talk) 02:07, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I think we need some more unbiased opinions on this matter.
Markkonen (talk) 03:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Anyway, more deception and lies from Rimac:
Iz Rimac Automobila potvrdili su da je njihova serija od 150 komada električnog automobila C-Two koji je predstavljen u Ženevi prije samo tri tjedna praktički rasprodana.
29. ožujka. 2018:
Krešo Ćorić, voditelj prodaje u Rimac Automobilima, rekao je na autoshowu u New Yorku za Autocar kako je prodano skoro svih 150 komada modela koje planiraju proizvesti, a čija je osnovna cijena 1,7 milijuna eura. Kupac ima mogućnost dodavanja različitih opcija, što može povećati cijenu vozila do još pola milijuna eura, no usprkos visokoj cijeni, onih koji žele u svom voznom parku "Rimčevu zvijer" očito ne nedostaje.
05. OŽUJKA 2019.
Interes je velik. Ne brinemo za prodaju, i koliko će primjeraka biti prodano, važnije nam je razviti automobil do kraja - zaključio je Rimac.
Ovdje je zanimljivo da su u Večernjem editirali tekst koji je u orginalu glasio: Neki su već prodani tajnim klijentima, a interes je velik. Ne brinemo za prodaju, i koliko će primjeraka biti prodano, važnije nam je razviti automobil do kraja - zaključio je Rimac
Original članak Večernjeg je prenio https://poskok.info/ovo-je-nova-verzija-super-automobila-c_two-rimac-otkrio-kada-krece-isporuka/ sa izbrisanim dijelom o tajnim klijentima koji se već pomalo izlizao, ne?
I don't know if you need translation again...
Markkonen (talk) 03:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- And this proves what? We know that they revised the production number down significantly, we have proof of this and I did not remove it. Toasted Meter (talk) 06:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
It proves continuous lies from Mate Rimac, and Rimac automobili.
You can read the rest here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RGOpgHymSoDwB0WsaE3jeJPmE1YmWaSD/view
Markkonen (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
User:Toasted Meter User:EdJohnston Stepho-wrs :@Stepho-wrs: :@Toasted Meter: :@EdJohnston:
Who is going to correct lies from Rimac automobili?
Like I said before, they lie, and lie, and lie, and I was right.
This is just regarding for number of employees which is stated on Wikipedia - 482 employees
13.11.2018
As of October 2018, Rimac and Greyp number 429 full-time employees, or 482 with external collaborators and students.
https://www.rimac-automobili.com/en/press/news/rimac-grows-to-450plus-employees/
Mate Rimac trenutačno u svojoj kompaniji ima 429 radnika, odnosno njih čak 482 ako se pribroje vanjski suradnici i studenti.
New official data/numbers just came for FINA and other financial services (for most of this services you must pay to use them) for this fiscal year:
2018.:
Number of employees: 316
Average salary: 4.637 kn (that is 627,41 EUR, or 713,61 USD on this date 28.6.2019.), third year in a row lower average salary.
Period's profit/loss: -22.052.184 kn (minus/loss third year in a row).
Proof from https://www.transparentno.hr/
https://abload.de/img/014mjnl.jpg
https://abload.de/img/02qzjqi.jpg
Also, credit worthiness/credit rating/solvency, I don't know which year in a row, D2, which is when you are recomended NOT to do business with the company.
Proof from http://poslovna.hr/
https://abload.de/img/03k2jj4.png
And like I already said, they are known for lying:
Rimac: Plaće u mojoj firmi su preko 10.000 kn neto
https://www.tportal.hr/biznis/clanak/rimac-place-u-mojoj-firmi-su-preko-10-000-kn-neto-20140930
Mate Rimac saying that average salary is 10.000 kn, date 30.09.2014
Official data/numbers on average salary:
3.533 kn
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparenbgje0.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparencxkwz.jpg
06.03.2016
http://www.seebiz.eu/rimac-automobili-ove-godine-udvostrucuju-broj-zaposlenih/ar-131435/
Rimac automobili will have 300 employees
1.11.2016
Rimac have 200 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 109
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparenm3j5h.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparen2mkvd.jpg
06.03.2017
Mate Rimac nije oprostio jalnim sunarodnjacima, pogledajte što je poručio 'dragim Hrvatima': Da, uspjeli smo skupiti 100 statista i poduplati ih u fotošopu...
Mate Rimac talking about number of employees to other "jealous" Croatians, saying they have 250 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 163
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparen16k1b.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparenudkhz.jpg
And we have covered 2018. in the begining, so I'm not going to repeat that.
Markkonen (talk) 01:43, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Four days later, still no answer from any of you?
User:Toasted Meter User:EdJohnston :@Toasted Meter: :@EdJohnston:
Markkonen (talk) 18:10, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
I did the edit myself, and I have removed Greyp, that is a different firm/company:
https://sudreg.pravosudje.hr/registar/f?p=150:28:0::NO:28:P28_SBT_MBS:080680892
We can make a new Wikipedia page about that company.
Markkonen (talk) 18:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
This is data based on average working hours. If a company starts a year with 100 employees, and ends a year with 200 and grows linearly, this statistical data will show 150 employees, which is misleading. Additionally, we are now 6 months into 2019, so this sources have no meaning for such a fast growing company. There have been many articles that mention 500+ employees, including this announcement from Hyundai, which is a shareholder. This article was published yesterday, from a shareholder of the company so it is more relevant than your links. Therefore, I would assume that it is reasonable to state that the company has 500+ employees. https://www.hyundainews.com/en-us/releases/2805 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sittinginsanfrancisco2 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
- No. This is official number of full-time employees who are working there.
You can ask:
Data which was stated on Wikipedia - 482 employees was from here on this date:
13.11.2018
As of October 2018, Rimac and Greyp number 429 full-time employees, or 482 with external collaborators and students.
https://www.rimac-automobili.com/en/press/news/rimac-grows-to-450plus-employees/
Mate Rimac trenutačno u svojoj kompaniji ima 429 radnika, odnosno njih čak 482 ako se pribroje vanjski suradnici i studenti.
New official data/numbers just came for FINA and other financial services (for most of this services you must pay to use them) for this fiscal year:
2018.:
Number of employees: 316
Average salary: 4.637 kn (that is 627,41 EUR, or 713,61 USD on this date 28.6.2019.), third year in a row lower average salary.
Period's profit/loss: -22.052.184 kn (minus/loss third year in a row).
Proof from https://www.transparentno.hr/
https://abload.de/img/014mjnl.jpg
https://abload.de/img/02qzjqi.jpg
Also, credit worthiness/credit rating/solvency, I don't know which year in a row, D2, which is when you are recomended NOT to do business with the company.
Proof from http://poslovna.hr/
https://abload.de/img/03k2jj4.png
You have linked one article that mentiones 500 employees.
Here you have another one, they claim 550 employees, and link in the article leads to link you have mantioned, that claims 500+ employees.
Date of the articles: 01.07.2019
Here is one article from 20.03.2019, that claims 600 employees:
https://ebike-mtb.com/en/greyp-g6-review/
Also like I have written before, they are known for lying:
Rimac: Plaće u mojoj firmi su preko 10.000 kn neto
https://www.tportal.hr/biznis/clanak/rimac-place-u-mojoj-firmi-su-preko-10-000-kn-neto-20140930
Mate Rimac saying that average salary is 10.000 kn, date 30.09.2014
Official data/numbers on average salary:
3.533 kn
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparenbgje0.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparencxkwz.jpg
06.03.2016
http://www.seebiz.eu/rimac-automobili-ove-godine-udvostrucuju-broj-zaposlenih/ar-131435/
Rimac automobili will have 300 employees
1.11.2016
Rimac have 200 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 109
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparenm3j5h.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparen2mkvd.jpg
06.03.2017
Mate Rimac nije oprostio jalnim sunarodnjacima, pogledajte što je poručio 'dragim Hrvatima': Da, uspjeli smo skupiti 100 statista i poduplati ih u fotošopu...
Mate Rimac talking about number of employees to other "jealous" Croatians, saying they have 250 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 163
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparen16k1b.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparenudkhz.jpg
And we have covered 2018. in the begining, so I'm not going to repeat that.
So again, latest officialy confirmed data - 316 employees, official data that just came in from official financial agency of Republic of Croatia, FINA, and and other financial services (for most of this services you must pay to use them), and not some mumbo jumbo crap from PR of Rimac automobili. Markkonen (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Sittinginsanfrancisco2 (talk) 20:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Markkonen - that is simply not true. I was looking it up - the Croatian agency FINA (and therefore all the other services that you are linking) are using total hours per year worked to get the average number of employees through out the year.
This is the metodology: ". Broj zaposlenih − stanje na temelju sati rada: prosječan broj zaposlenih radnika na bazi sati rada utvrđuje se tako da se ukupan broj ostvarenih sati rada u godišnjem razdoblju podijeli s brojem mogućih sati rada po jednome zaposlenom radniku u odnosnome razdoblju."
Google Translated:
"Number of employees - working hours: average the number of employed persons on the basis of working hours shall be determined by: is the total number of hours worked in the annual period divided by the number of possible hours of work per single employee worker in the relevant period."
https://misljenja.hr/dok/novosti/782/vij_init.pdf
I am using Google Translate as I don't speak Croatian but the point is clear.
I will explain it again to you - read it slowly, you might get it: If you start the year with 100 employees, and end the year with 200 employees, and grow linearly between, the statistics will show that you have 150 employees during the year. And, that information is available for 2018, which is 6 months ago, so not relevant for such a high growing company. I would think that an official press release, but Hyundai, a huge company that is a shareholder in Rimac, is more relevant. Why are you ignoring this? What is your agenda?
- Agreed, this site does not know how many employees they have, it only tries to estimate, therefore it can not be a reliable source for those numbers. Toasted Meter (talk) 20:10, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Sittinginsanfrancisco2 You don't speak Croatian, but you managed to find https://misljenja.hr and that article. Here is what it says:
12. Broj zaposlenih krajem razdoblja: prosječan broj zaposlenih krajem razdoblja utvrđuje se kao prosjek stanja zaposlenih 1.1. i krajem svakog tromjesečja prethodne i tekuće godine, uključujući i zaposlene u inozemstvu.
13. Broj zaposlenih − stanje na temelju sati rada: prosječan broj zaposlenih radnika na bazi sati rada utvrđuje se tako da se ukupan broj ostvarenih sati rada u godišnjem razdoblju podijeli s brojem mogućih sati rada po jednome zaposlenom radniku u odnosnome razdoblju.
Google translate:
12. Number of employees at the end of the period: average number of employees at the end of the period is determined as the average of the employed persons 1.1. and at the end of each trimester of the previous and the current including overseas employees. 13. Number of employees - working hours: average the number of employed persons on the basis of working hours shall be determined by: is the total number of hours worked in the annual period divided by the number of possible hours of work per single employee worker in the relevant period.
For number of employees that Hyundai article used one of Rimac PR articles. Like we know from before, that numbers are false:
Rimac: Plaće u mojoj firmi su preko 10.000 kn neto
https://www.tportal.hr/biznis/clanak/rimac-place-u-mojoj-firmi-su-preko-10-000-kn-neto-20140930
Mate Rimac saying that average salary is 10.000 kn, date 30.09.2014
Official data/numbers on average salary:
3.533 kn
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparenbgje0.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparencxkwz.jpg
06.03.2016
http://www.seebiz.eu/rimac-automobili-ove-godine-udvostrucuju-broj-zaposlenih/ar-131435/
Rimac automobili will have 300 employees
1.11.2016
Rimac have 200 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 109
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparenm3j5h.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparen2mkvd.jpg
06.03.2017
Mate Rimac nije oprostio jalnim sunarodnjacima, pogledajte što je poručio 'dragim Hrvatima': Da, uspjeli smo skupiti 100 statista i poduplati ih u fotošopu...
Mate Rimac talking about number of employees to other "jealous" Croatians, saying they have 250 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 163
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparen16k1b.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparenudkhz.jpg
13.11.2018
As of October 2018, Rimac and Greyp number 429 full-time employees, or 482 with external collaborators and students.
https://www.rimac-automobili.com/en/press/news/rimac-grows-to-450plus-employees/
Mate Rimac trenutačno u svojoj kompaniji ima 429 radnika, odnosno njih čak 482 ako se pribroje vanjski suradnici i studenti.
New official data/numbers just came for FINA and other financial services (for most of this services you must pay to use them) for this fiscal year:
2018.:
Number of employees: 316
Average salary: 4.637 kn (that is 627,41 EUR, or 713,61 USD on this date 28.6.2019.), third year in a row lower average salary.
Period's profit/loss: -22.052.184 kn (minus/loss third year in a row).
Proof from https://www.transparentno.hr/
https://abload.de/img/014mjnl.jpg
https://abload.de/img/02qzjqi.jpg
So again, I'm not making up those numbers, they are the latest officialy confirmed data - 316 employees, official data that just came in from official financial agency of Republic of Croatia, FINA, and and other financial services (for most of this services you must pay to use them), and not some mumbo jumbo crap from PR of Rimac automobili.
Markkonen (talk) 10:49, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- You have not proven anything false, all you have found is sources that disagree. It could just mean that the official figures (unclear on whether or not they are estimated) lag realty a bit. Toasted Meter (talk) 12:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- The statment "12. Broj zaposlenih krajem razdoblja: prosječan broj zaposlenih krajem razdoblja utvrđuje se kao prosjek stanja zaposlenih 1.1. i krajem svakog tromjesečja prethodne i tekuće godine, uključujući i zaposlene u inozemstvu." translates as "The number of employees at the end of a time period: an average number of employees at the end of a time period is calculated as an average from the state of employment at 1.1 (that is: January 1, op. ed.) and at the end of every trimester from previous and current year, including those employed abroad." In any case, whether the statistic presents the actual (current) state of the number of employees at the end of each year, or is merely an average calculated from a various number of factors, it doesn't matter, since the User:Markonnen, does not provide an exact link-path to the information in question, see: Wikipedia:Citing_sources, specifically: Citations for World Wide Web pages typically include: URL of the specific web page where the referenced content can be found; the whole system seems to be locked behind a paywall making the information difficult to verify firsthand. Ultimately, the source is much less verifialble, is dubious to what it actually refers to, or whether it actually contradicts the existing source in question, as well as the questionable citing practices of the user. He eventually resorts to using Straw man arguments in order to support his "claims".31.217.10.111 (talk) 13:28, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
1. Can someone explain to me why is the official data from FINA and other financial services CORRECT for at least 20 compaines I am familiar with. Some of them are high profile companies with over 1000 employees, which regularly recruit and hire new employees? Only data for Rimac automobili are not correct. Can someone please explain why?
2. Because you must log in or in for some financial services pay to see that data, I have made screenshots and posted them, so no one needs to log in or pay, so your your argument is invalid.
3. Numbers from Rimac automobili are false year after year, regarding both number of employees and their salary:
Rimac: Plaće u mojoj firmi su preko 10.000 kn neto
https://www.tportal.hr/biznis/clanak/rimac-place-u-mojoj-firmi-su-preko-10-000-kn-neto-20140930
Mate Rimac saying that average salary is 10.000 kn, date 30.09.2014
Official data/numbers on average salary:
3.533 kn
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparenbgje0.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2014-transparencxkwz.jpg
06.03.2016
http://www.seebiz.eu/rimac-automobili-ove-godine-udvostrucuju-broj-zaposlenih/ar-131435/
Rimac automobili will have 300 employees
1.11.2016
Rimac have 200 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 109
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparenm3j5h.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2016-transparen2mkvd.jpg
06.03.2017
Mate Rimac nije oprostio jalnim sunarodnjacima, pogledajte što je poručio 'dragim Hrvatima': Da, uspjeli smo skupiti 100 statista i poduplati ih u fotošopu...
Mate Rimac talking about number of employees to other "jealous" Croatians, saying they have 250 employees
Official data/numbers on number of employees: 163
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparen16k1b.jpg
https://abload.de/img/rimac-2017-transparenudkhz.jpg
13.11.2018
As of October 2018, Rimac and Greyp number 429 full-time employees, or 482 with external collaborators and students.
https://www.rimac-automobili.com/en/press/news/rimac-grows-to-450plus-employees/
Mate Rimac trenutačno u svojoj kompaniji ima 429 radnika, odnosno njih čak 482 ako se pribroje vanjski suradnici i studenti.
New official data/numbers just came for FINA and other financial services (for most of this services you must pay to use them) for this fiscal year:
2018.:
Number of employees: 316
Average salary: 4.637 kn (that is 627,41 EUR, or 713,61 USD on this date 28.6.2019.), third year in a row lower average salary.
Period's profit/loss: -22.052.184 kn (minus/loss third year in a row).
Proof from https://www.transparentno.hr/
https://abload.de/img/014mjnl.jpg
https://abload.de/img/02qzjqi.jpg
Proof from http://poslovna.hr/
https://abload.de/img/03vhkb5.png
Proof from https://infobiz.fina.hr/
https://abload.de/img/04uej8x.jpg
Proof from https://infobiz.fina.hr/ in English language
https://abload.de/img/05aukdm.jpg
Markkonen (talk) 17:30, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- Stop posting the same thing like it changes anything, you have failed to address whether they are estimates, and you have proved nothing false. All you have done is find conflict between sources, that does not prove one to be untrue. Toasted Meter (talk) 17:42, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
I have addressed estimates:
Can someone explain to me why is the official data from FINA and other financial services CORRECT for at least 20 compaines I am familiar with. Some of them are high profile companies with over 1000 employees, which regularly recruit and hire new employees? Only data for Rimac automobili are not correct. Can someone please explain why?
Markkonen (talk) 18:16, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- Interesting discussion here. I concur that numbers from Rimac just doesn't add up, and I tend to believe that official numbers are correct. Also, this article needs a lot of editing, I'll try to make time for editing.Automotive engineer (talk) 21:23, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Markkonen - do those companies that you are referring to grow at a rate of 100+% per year? Is it so hard to understand how those services come up with those numbers based on simple mathematics? I will repeat it again for you - albeit you do not seem to understand it - or don't want to.
The figures are calculated based on average number of employees during the year, based on working hours. If you start the year with 100 employees, and end the year with 200 employees, and grow linearly between, the statistics will show that you have 150 employees during the year. And, that information is available for 2018, which is 6 months ago, so not relevant for such a high growing company. I would think that an official press release, but Hyundai, a huge company that is a shareholder in Rimac, is more relevant. Why are you ignoring this?
Other projects
[edit]Reverted an edit by 213.149.61.246. This section should remain for historical context, even if they did not follow up on their plans. TheManInTheBlackHat (talk) 22:11, 27 November 2022 (UTC)