Thread by @TaylorOgan

@garyblack00 @ScorpionFund 1/ Yes. A highly technical short report, and the points were well made. First of all, solid-state batteries (SSB) are the holy grail of the future of batteries. $QS investors have known this was a long term play right out of the gate.

@garyblack00 @ScorpionFund 2/I’m not surprised they went public. In their defense, they made it clear that their technology wouldn’t bear fruit until 2024 (pre-pilot line 2023), at the earliest. I’m also surprised a short report came out this early. It was inevitable, though. Not just for $QS, but for SSB.

@garyblack00 @ScorpionFund 3/ $QS had to raise that capital that early on to be taken seriously in the battery space. It was simple: IPO and be crowned winner of SSB in the early stages of the race.

@garyblack00 @ScorpionFund 4/ Throughout @ScorpionFund’s report, you could almost replace “QuantumScape” with “Tesla 4680”. Theranos it is not, though, by any stretch. Many experts in the field speak the same of $QS as they do of 4680: on paper and in the lab, it sounds good, but that’s not production.

@garyblack00 @ScorpionFund 5/ I do trust VW’s DD more than interviews with former employees and unnamed professors. $QS isn’t a moonshot thing for VW. They need this to work. That $100M milestone was met with skepticism internally at VW early on, as QS’s 4-layer cell was very early.

@garyblack00 @ScorpionFund 6/ But the technology checked out, in VW’s eyes, and that’s what is most important. VW isn’t throwing mud at the wall and seeing what sticks. $QS remains a very long-term play. This report doesn’t change that. It’s just PPT gossip, at this point. The report could’ve been 25 pages