Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE Responds to HP2g Claims

HP2g put out a release last night claiming withdrawal from the Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE as well as making some unsubstantiated allegations. I’d like an opportunity to set the record straight:

 

As you recall, HP2g was one of over 120 teams that entered the Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE non-binding Letter of Intent program. While Mr. Pelmear states in his release that HP2G voluntarily withdrew from the competition, HP2g actually did not complete the full Registration Application prior to the deadline and was therefore rejected as a Registered Team.

 

Mr. Pelmear claims in his statement that an LOI contender “was allowed to be part of the competition rule setting and ultimate team evaluation process” (italics added for emphasis). As for the former, X PRIZE deliberately sought feedback from a variety of sources in an effort to construct a fair competition incorporating the best industry insight from a wide range of automotive experts. It is true that all teams in fact had the opportunity to provide input... We recorded over 2,000 comments, held a webinar with the LOI Contenders, and reviewed and considered input from every LOI Contender that took the time to contact us. We also held multiple working groups with industry experts to establish the competition guidelines.

 

With regard to the latter accusation levied by Mr. Pelmear, at no point were teams were involved in decisions about rules and procedures. It is very important to note that none of the teams are part of the judging panels for the upcoming Design Judging Phase of the competition nor were any teams part of a competitor evaluation process in the past.  

 

Here are two excerpts from official documents that may prove useful:

From the Letter of Intent itself:

                                                                    

“The Team will receive timely updates on significant competition developments, including the release of draft competition guidelines for public comment.  In addition, while there is no guarantee that the Team’s suggestions will be accepted, the X PRIZE Foundation will provide written responses to all comments and suggestions submitted by the Team in response to the draft competition guidelines.  As well, the Team will have an opportunity to submit additional comments before final competition guidelines are released."

        

From the Competition Guidelines:

 

“We recognize that some contributors may end up competing, or perhaps advising those who compete, but that is an unavoidable result of engaging with so many experts who have real-world knowledge of the automotive industry.  We believe that the Guidelines published here are balanced and credible, and that this would not have been possible without seeking as much feedback as possible from diverse parties, without regard for future possible conflicts.  Had we only sought or accepted input from those unlikely to have a future interest in the competition, the result would have been poor Guidelines.  Our process has been open, and we do not hide our involvement with any party."

                                                                                      

“With the publication of these final Guidelines, we are adopting a strict no-conflict policy.  For example, the Prize Development Advisory Board will be disbanded and we will now appoint a conflict-free Prize Administration Advisory Board."

 

As to his unsubstantiated allegations, I can only say that the Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE has consistently run a highly-public and transparent process in accordance with the highest professional standards of conduct as a fair and honest broker. We wish Horsepower Sales well in the development and sale of their technology and we remain focused on our accepted Registered Teams. We wish them all luck as we move forward to the Design Judging phase of the competition.

Posted by Eric Cahill on June 05, 2009 at 01:22 PM in Automotive Industry, Prize Updates, Teams & Competitors | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

We've Got Mail

The postman, UPS, Fed Ex , and DHL all stopped in today (some more than once) and look what they left us...

Application packages 2009_0302

Posted by Bethann Buddenbaum on March 02, 2009 at 02:42 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (0)

Reasoning Behind the Purse Split

We get a lot of questions and comments about the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE purse split, so I thought I would review briefly the history and rationale.

The original Draft Guidelines specified that the purse would be split 3:1 respectively between the Mainstream and Alternative Classes. This split did not reflect any judgment on our part regarding the likely relative importance of the two classes with respect to energy and transportation issues.   Some believe that Alternative Class vehicles will be more important than high-efficiency Mainstream vehicles, and that may turn out to be correct.

Regardless, the purse split did not reflect importance – it reflected engineering difficulty, in that the 100 MPGe goal is considerably harder to achieve for Mainstream class vehicles.  Indeed, we were criticized by some who argued that 100 MPGe is too hard for the Mainstream Class, and that we were in effect guaranteeing that only Alternative Class vehicles would win (thereby providing little incentive for Mainstream entrants).   Our imperfect but chosen solution was to offer a greater reward for the more-difficult challenge. 

When we decided to allow tandem-seating in the Alternative Class, we faced a similar issue – criticism that accepting both tandem- and single-seat vehicles would guarantee that a side-by-side vehicle would not win in the Alternative Class, since it’s considerably easier to build a fast, 100 MPGe vehicle that doesn’t require side-by-side seating.   Our (again, imperfect) compromise was to propose splitting the Alternative Class purse in proportion to the relative number of side-by-side vs. tandem vehicles.  We did so in the Guidelines Revision Topics document, as follows:

Tandem and single seating.  Issue: Given that this is the Alternative class, it should permit tandem seating and also single-seat vehicles.  Probable Change.  Our original concern was that tandem- and single-seat vehicles would have too much of an advantage, but we agree that they should be permitted.  Thus, the probable change is to relax constraint on number of seats to one seat and not to constrain the seating arrangement.  All vehicles must have automatic, dynamic and static stability (i.e., so that balance while moving or stopped/parked does not depend on the driver).  However, we would have two Divisions of the Alternative class – side-by-side seating vs. everything else (tandem, single).   There would be a winner in each Division with the Alternative class purse split between the Divisions in proportion to the number of vehicles in each Division (still under consideration).

Many criticized this proposed split as particularly imperfect for a variety of reasons – for one thing, teams reasonably want to know in advance what the purse will be; for another, a population-based split could result in an unreasonably low, unattractive purse. These were good points, so in the end we decided to keep things simple by reducing the ratio of the Mainsteam:Alternative purses, and dividing the Alternative Class purse equally between the winning side-by-side and tandem seating vehicles. Here’s what we said in the “What’s New” Section of the current Guidelines:

· The $10M purse will no longer be split 3:1 between the Mainstream and Alternative Classes. Instead, half of the $10M purse will be awarded to the Mainstream Class winner. The remaining $5M will be split between two winners in the Alternative Class – one vehicle with side-by-side seating, and one vehicle with tandem seating. .

There really isn’t a “right” answer – any purse allocation will seem unfair from certain viewpoints. We listened to a lot of feedback, and we think the current split is reasonable. Regardless, we believe strongly that the value of the competition is the publicity, not the purse.   And we are working hard to deliver that value. 

Posted by John Shore on March 02, 2009 at 08:48 AM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (1)

Registration Closes for the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE

The last few hours of open registration for the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE are coming to a close. This past week has been an absolute firestorm of phone calls, emails, and overnight packages. The flood of correspondence this week required that three of us dedicate ourselves full time to dealing with potential applicants. While we anticipated that there would be a number of last minute entries, I can honestly say that nothing could have prepared us for the overwhelming response that we received.

I cannot immediately provide an actual accounting of the number of applications that we received this week. I can say that it easily exceeds 50. Add these applications to the almost 40 Registered Teams that have previously been reviewed and accepted, and you can imagine that we are looking at a very compelling year to come. Not all of the new applicants will be accepted as a Registered Team. However, from the initial reviews, we anticipate having a very strong starting line up as we move to the next phase of the competition.

Over the next few weeks, we will be working to document every application and follow up with questions before we submit the applications for review. Once the review  process is complete, we will advise the accepted Registered Teams of their status. And then, we will introduce these teams to the public. This next week, we will begin to gain perspective on how long this process will take and we will do our best to share up-to-the-minute information.

Personally, this day is bittersweet. I began working for the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE the week that the Letter of Intent program opened -- almost two years ago. During this time, I have had the opportunity to get to know some wonderful people in the pool of LOI Contenders. Some of these Contenders are not able to take the next step to becoming a Registered Team. I do hope that we have not seen the last of these inspiring individuals and that they will continue to be a part of the competition in some way. I am equally excited to begin the processing of learning more about the new teams. The number of new entrants caught us by surprise, but it has been a fascinating journey so far.

After tonight, the competition will begin a transformation. Come Monday morning, our entire focus will change. The work of sharing new ideas and technologies from the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE Registered Teams will begin in earnest.

I can't wait.

Posted by Bethann Buddenbaum on February 28, 2009 at 05:50 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (1)

Accept No (Progressive Automotive X PRIZE) Imitations

Over the past two years, I have been intrigued to see how many automotive groups use the Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE as a validator for their technology. I'm not talking about Letter of Intent Contenders or Registered Teams. I'm referring to teams who we have not even heard of. On more than one occasion, I have had to contact someone who created their own LOI Contender logo and placed it front and center on their website.

Lately, there has been a rash of press about Progressive Automotive X PRIZE competitors who do not exist -- at least on our books. Some of these teams have even received funding based on their supposed involvement. The most amusing one showed up this past week. It started out innocently enough.

I noted that someone was selling their 1995 Chrysler LaBaron on eBay using the "X-Prize" name as a selling feature. This group was not involved in the competition in any way, and it seemed from their description that they tried to make the entry goals but couldn't, so they were selling the vehicle and giving up the idea. Admittedly, their ad was misleading, but who would have thought that it would get picked up by so many bloggers including Wired? The story showed up again this morning and the bidding on the vehicle had already closed.

It's nice to know that people have such faith in the competition and its competitors. But, because of the respect that is given to our competitors, it is frustrating to have people claim to be involved when they are not. Our competitors work tirelessly on their vehicle technology. They have the courage to step forward and prove to the world that they have created something worth hearing about. That's just one of the things that the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE is there to do for them.

One day, we'll have an official Progressive Automotive X PRIZE "Seal of Approval", until then, check our website for a list of Registered Teams and Letter of Intent Contenders to see who really has a claim to the name.

Posted by Bethann Buddenbaum on February 11, 2009 at 08:34 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Avion Posts Exhibition Challenge

Craig Henderson, of Avion Car Company in Bellingham, Washington, is a registered Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE competitor, who also happens to hold a Guinness World Record for MPG achievement during a drive from Mexico to Canada along the west coast of the United States.  Craig set the record of 103.7 mpg in 1986, and is going to attempt to break his own record this summer in a drive from Canada to Mexico.  He has extended the offer to his fellow registered competitors to participate with him in a friendly exhibition competition, for which first prize is bragging rights!  Craig is in the process of building a second vehicle, and hopes to have it completed for this exhibition.  “This drive will give all of us an excellent opportunity to test the capability of our vehicles and fuel efficient technologies, as well as find out the actual MPGe achieved by the systems before the official kickoff of the competition,” offers Craig.  The exhibition is tentatively planned for mid to late summer 2009, and will include a number of stops along the coast for vehicle checks, team building and press opportunities.  Craig hopes that a number of the other registered teams will bring their vehicles up to the Canadian border and join him on this trip, as he attempts to break his own fuel economy world record. 

 

Knowing the vehicles and technologies found within the Progressive Auto X PRIZE registered competitor list, I believe Craig could end up with bit of competition!  Good luck to all those who participate!

 

Posted by Julie Zona on January 30, 2009 at 02:42 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Twenty Five Registered Teams Announced

We announced the opening of the registration period for the Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE in August of this year. Since that time, we have added over 25 competitors to our roster of official Registered Teams, and have more waiting in the wings to be announced.

We closed the Letter of Intent (LOI) program with over 120 LOI Contenders participating. While many of these Contenders have been filling out their paperwork, our biggest surprise at the end of the year was that most of the applications were coming from teams that we had not heard of before. It’s been exciting to see a great number of new applicants come through, and we look forward to introducing them publicly.

We are pleased with the progress of the registration period, but also recognize the hardship that many of the current Registered Teams, Letter of Intent (LOI) Contenders, and other potential competitors face. This is why we decided to extend the registration period through February 28, 2009.

During the year and a half since the launch of our LOI program, we have watched and reacted as market forces impacted the competition and our competitors. U.S. fuel prices shot up to over $4 per gallon and are fell back down to their lowest in five years. At the same time, the world economy has taken a turn that has left some teams struggling to remain competitive.

As difficult as this period of uncertainty has been, we are continually inspired by both the teams and interested competitors who are dedicated to creating 100 MPGe vehicles. Knowing that there are teams who are already making tremendous fuel economy achievements is truly exciting.

Posted by Bethann Buddenbaum on January 23, 2009 at 02:12 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Spotlight on AXP Letter of Intent Teams

On the Automotive X PRIZE website, we report frequently on the coverage that the prize is getting in the global media.

We have also been watching the growing media coverage of the teams that have signed a Letter of Intent to compete in the Automotive X PRIZE (AXP). We salute these first brave teams (currently 43 teams from 6 countries) and we are excited when we see these teams get recognition in the press.

One of the biggest benefits offered to teams that enter the AXP is the press and media coverage they can expect to receive. Even before the AXP has been officially launched, we have seen interest in our Letter of Intent teams ranging from articles and blog posts to radio and television interviews.

Here is just a small sample of the hundreds of recent articles about our teams:

We expect to see much more coverage of the important work being done by AXP teams in the coming months and years as the AXP is launched and more teams join the competition. It is going to be quite a ride!

Feel free to comment and add links to other interesting articles you have read about AXP teams.

Posted by Cristin Lindsay on November 09, 2007 at 03:13 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (3)

AXP: NASCAR Goes Green?

Today's ruminations are inspired by this cartoon in a recent issue of the New Yorker (click fast, this link will expire once the cartoon moves into for-sale status in the NY's Cartoon Bank).  I liked this on several levels. 

First, it brought together NASCAR and the green movement, in its own way: two groups which the media tends to stereotype into polar opposites.  (You might be surprised to know that NASCAR is actually seriously considering switching its cars to ethanol, which has led to numerous jokes about the racing series returning to its roots as a moonshine-based competition!)  After all, if you think about it, NASCAR (or any racing series for that matter) in its own way is all about fuel efficiency: a car that can get that extra lap around the track out of a gallon of gas has a marked advantage over the rest of the field.

Second, it highlights how climate change is entering the daily conversation, moving from Important But Distant status (e.g. avian flu) to Part of Daily Life (e.g. trash recycling).  Bringing up global warming during a 6-second pitstop is a wildly inappropriate action, but the joke is funny because the action is (just barely) within the realm of possibility.

And third, it makes a related point about consciousness: we'll probably crack the climate change problem once we all become more aware of the consequences of our energy choices, not only within a political and social context, but in the environmental sphere as well.  It's not a lot of work, for example, to take the 30 seconds on a Saturday morning to think "I bet I can combine this errand with two others today, and reduce three trips in the Volvo to one." 

And that is what, in a way, the AXP is all about: promoting consciousness and awareness.  Awareness that there are powertrain options out there that drivers might choose, awareness that some of those efficient and green vehicles are actually pretty nice-looking and well-equipped!  Other actors will work on public awareness of greenhouse gases in their own ways (e.g. schools can educate, the media can raise the alarm, NGOs can -- sorry to put it this way, but I think it's true -- harangue us all).  But the AXP can make the whole process of gaining awareness about these choices actually fun and exciting.  Race observers will be asking not just "How many grams per mile of CO2 does this car generate?" but also "Who will win this stage of the race?  Do you think the team from Korea can fix their broken car in time?  What is the mysterious power source the car from the University of Southern North Dakota is running on?" 

Let's face it, humans and especially Americans love a race.  The Oklahoma Sooners driving their wagons to grab new farmland (much to the dismay of course of the displaced Native Americans), the railroad crews striving to win the Golden Spike that connected the transcontinental train lines, the explorers sledding to both North and South Poles, and of course Lindbergh heading for Paris -- all captured the American imagination.  "Go West, young man!" would not have been as powerful an exhortation if the young men didn't think that maybe someone else might get there ahead of them!

The AXP aspires to match the excitement of these races, and maybe, at the risk of the sin of pride, to match their importance in terms of transforming public opinion.  The Sooners showed that anyone could stake out and own their own farm, the great railroads showed us how the entire country was finally forged into one economic whole, the polar explorers taught us about the relentless curiosity of the scientific human mind, and Lindbergh showed us that aviation could work for all of us, not just barnstormers and dogfighters.  And maybe the AXP will show us that clean and efficient cars can really make a difference in the struggles for energy independence and a cooler climate.

Not much in common between the Nature Conservancy and NASCAR?  Well, now that we think about it, maybe more than we knew.

Posted by Glenn Mercer on March 25, 2007 at 09:59 AM in Energy & Environment, Teams & Competitors | | Comments (2)

Where is the Innovation?

Over the past few months we've seen glimpses that change is afoot in the automotive industry.  Whether it's coming from individuals, large auto manufacturers, or everyone in between... innovation is happening right now.  Our goal is to act as the catalyst that brings that change to market.

Of course, the large auto manufacturers (GM, Toyota, Honda, Ford, DaimlerChrysler, BMW, VW, Hyundai, etc.) each have their own initiatives, from clean diesel to flex-fuel, from hybrids to hydrogen. 

You may not know about the rest. Following are just a few of the organizations that are trying to change the status quo:

Who else are we missing?  Chime in and let us know...

Posted by NealAnderson on August 28, 2006 at 05:45 PM in Teams & Competitors | | Comments (19)