Philip Royle – Aug. 17, 2026
If things play out the way they appear to be going, Lucid may end up like Fisker: another failed electric-vehicle startup. However, there’s one important distinction that could determine what happens to Lucid when its current business model finally runs out of road.
Many signs point to Lucid being out of business in its current form within a year. That could mean bankruptcy and a complete shutdown, but an acquisition is considerably more likely. The reason is simple: unlike Fisker, Lucid actually has technology worth buying.
The warning signs are already there. Lucid is going through an operational reset, delaying its midsized vehicle and potential savior, the Cosmos, and changing its approach to sales in some international markets and struggling with the same fundamental problem that has plagued the company for years: building expensive electric vehicles without enough demand to support the business. Its stock has fallen, its leadership structure has been unsettled, and the company appears to be searching for ways to generate revenue and keep the lights on.
The move toward dealers is particularly telling. Lucid has been experimenting with a dealer model in Germany and is extending an indirect sales strategy into the UAE. That immediately brings Fisker to mind.
Fisker made a similar move near the end of its life. It began pushing vehicles into dealerships, creating a way to move inventory, generate revenue, and bring cash into the company. That strategy did not fix the underlying business. It simply bought time before Fisker ended up in bankruptcy and liquidation.
Lucid appears to be following some of the same playbook. Moving cars through dealers can make the financial picture look better in the short term, but it does not solve the problem of whether enough people actually want to buy the product at a price that makes the company viable.
That’s where the comparison with Fisker breaks down.
Fisker essentially outsourced the engineering and manufacturing of its vehicle to Magna. Magna is a highly capable company, but it meant that Fisker did not possess a portfolio of proprietary technology that another automaker desperately needed. When Fisker collapsed, there was little reason for another major automaker to buy the company because, essentially, Fisker brought no engineering prowess to the table. Beauty, in Fisker’s case, was simply skin deep.
Lucid is different. The company has developed proprietary electric-vehicle technology that is both efficient and powerful, and that should be valuable to an established automaker. Its technology is the asset that makes an acquisition plausible even if the business itself cannot survive independently.
That creates a very different endgame.
Lucid could simply run out of money and close its doors, but a more likely outcome is that somebody decides the technology is worth more than the company is worth as a standalone automaker. Potential buyers could include Hyundai, Mercedes, or another established manufacturer. A Rivian combination is another possibility, particularly because the two companies both have major Saudi investors and could potentially find strategic value in combining their resources.
Mercedes is especially interesting because it could potentially take Lucid technology and design and incorporate it quickly into its portfolio. In fact, imagine a Lucid Air with a Mercedes badge – the idea isn’t farfetched. A little quality control might be needed, but that’s a Mercedes forte.
Lucid may fail as a company, but that does not mean Lucid technology fails with it.
When Lucid’s doors shut, I wouldn’t bet on a clean bankruptcy followed by liquidation. The more interesting bet is that another company buys the pieces that matter, which makes this a very different situation from Fisker’s story.
Put another way: Fisker had the shell of a car company to sell, Lucid has technology.
(Image courtesy Lucid)
