Why Charge Cars and Carbogatto Are Not Looking for a Market — They’re Looking for an Investor Who Sees Deeper
On June 4, Charge Cars launched a fundraising campaign on Crowdcube. This was an unexpected move in a story that seemed close to its conclusion: earlier in the spring, the company had announced that a strategic investor was on board. Headlines conveyed confidence — but apparently something changed. Maybe it was the terms. Maybe it was the investor’s stance. Or maybe, as often happens with complex engineering projects, the deal fell apart in the final stretch — quietly, without explanation.
A product with a philosophy
Charge builds electric cars using licensed retro designs, blending the aesthetics of the past with modern engineering. Their first product — the Charge 67 — is based on the 1967 Ford Mustang Fastback. This isn’t a restomod or a conversion; it’s a new electric vehicle, built from the ground up with deep respect for the original and attention to technical detail.
Their philosophy closely mirrors what we pursue at Carbogatto: not just a means of transport, but an engineering statement. An object of precision and intent. A vehicle that carries meaning — culturally, visually, mechanically.
And yet, Charge is now turning to crowdfunding.
“The industry has yet to witness a successful case of an engineering-focused transportation project reaching full-scale production purely through crowdfunding. That’s why I remain skeptical about this path. Still, I sincerely hope Charge succeeds — if they do, it will be a rare precedent. One that would make me reconsider crowdfunding as a viable instrument. That’s why I’m following their campaign closely.
Why pre-orders don’t work
The popular belief that “you can fund production through pre-orders” simply doesn’t hold up in transportation engineering.
In the early stages, yes — it’s possible to move step by step: development, prototyping, refinement. In Carbogatto’s case, $8.4 million has been invested into development and prototyping over four private rounds, most of it provided directly by the founder.
But eventually, a company reaches a threshold where it needs a single, external capital impulse to transition into production. This isn’t about optimism — it’s a structural and financial reality. While Charge is now seeking £25 million to fund this phase, Carbogatto needs a relatively modest sum — $4 million — to launch production.
That capital is not for “marketing” or for testing ideas. It is for a clear, well-defined set of tasks:
- Deploy production infrastructure
- Purchase components and secure manufacturing under MOQ and lead-time constraints (Carbogatto LR Monocoque involves 832 parts from 35 suppliers across 9 countries )
- Set up logistics, warehousing, assembly, quality control
- Hire and train the production team
- Implement operational and manufacturing software
- Finalize certification and legal approvals
- Bridge the cash-flow gap between procurement and delivery
None of these steps can be covered through pre-sales — especially in limited production runs where the price must remain premium.
“Charge and Carbogatto are not collector’s whims. They represent a real, sustainable market segment with a solvent audience. We build for those who value aesthetics, uniqueness, and engineering integrity. And these customers are not dozens — they’re hundreds of thousands around the world. The product can scale. The only question is: who will be the first to see it?
Demand exists. Why doesn’t capital?
What’s left when VCs call a project too late, too capital-intensive, too hardware — and in personal transportation, not public infrastructure? And when private equity calls it too early, lacking revenue and conventional traction?
Only one category remains: private capital and family offices. In theory, these are the spaces where exceptions are possible — where decisions are made not only by risk profile, but by personal conviction. But in practice, these deals require a rare combination of factors:
- Sufficient capital under direct control
- Freedom from short-term return pressure
- Emotional connection to the product or its philosophy
- Strategic alignment with the founder’s values and long-term vision
- A timely and meaningful personal encounter
- Preferably: transparent capital with no international constraints
Hundreds of meetings, and every deal failed at the final step
Over the past two years, I’ve held hundreds of one-on-one meetings. Some investors spoke with genuine enthusiasm — saying they’d love to gift 50 Carbogattos to their friends. We reached advanced stages several times — with signed letters, shared vision, aligned intent. But in every case, the deal fell apart at the last moment — for the same reason: no precedent.
The feedback was consistent: “We just don’t know this space.” There was no internal expertise. No industry pattern to lean on. And with that came fear — of being the first to try. This is why one more condition must be added to the list: a willingness to learn.
“if you don’t understand something — start understanding it. And as you understand it, you’ll eventually understand it.
These seemingly minor barriers — lack of context, lack of examples, and unwillingness to engage — are the main reasons why projects with serious engineering and cultural potential fail to emerge.
This is especially paradoxical, given that:
- demand is real, stable, and proven;
- the audience is solvent, and — more importantly — they are already looking for these products;
- the financial model, when paired with controlled, limited production, is highly scalable and profitable.
The question isn’t whether people want to buy. They do — and they find us.
The real question is whether the investment world is ready to support not just what fits a pattern — but what is built with depth, clarity, and purpose.