Skip to content
RiDERgy RiDERgy
Smart Charge · 6 August 2025 · 1 hr 21 min

Ep. 20: Thorsten Weber Service4Charger CCO, weltweite Erfahrungen, Telko Industrie, Innovation & Gründung, Unternehmertum, ZF

Transcript

Cleaned up from a machine transcript. Translations are machine-generated and may contain errors.

Welcome to the Smart Charge by RiDERgy Podcast. This is Claudio Geyken, Founder and CEO of RiDERgy. This is your show to learn about all things energy management and smart charging innovation for electric vehicles and fleets.

Welcome to Smart Charge, the podcast that shines a light on the people and ideas driving electric mobility forward. In this episode, we have Service for Charger with us here in our studio in Berlin. Founded in 2020, the company has already planned, installed or serviced over 15,000 charging points. This is made possible by its own network of specially trained electrician teams, the so-called Mobile Heroes, who are deployed nationwide. Our guest is Thorsten Weber, Chief Commercial Officer. He brings more than ten years of industry experience with him. As an entrepreneur, he accompanied DriveNow to market, among other things.

Now he is responsible for sales and marketing at Service for Charger and is steering growth following a Series A financing round of ten million euros, led by BP Ventures. We'll be talking about how to build charging infrastructure in record time and yet reliably, why the promise "You charge, We care" is more than just a slogan, and what role partnerships with energy suppliers, fleet operators and municipalities play in the rollout of e-mobility. Heads up, check your charge level and let's go with Torsten Weber on Smart Charge. Hello, Thorsten. Great that you're here in the podcast studio

with us today. How are you doing? Hello, Claudio. I'm doing great. Thanks very much for the invitation to the podcast today. I'm looking forward to the conversation. Very good. You also just mentioned that your wife is involved with the Royal Porcelain Manufactory. Maybe you can fill in our listeners on that as well. I found that particularly interesting because we're basically in the KPM building here and your operation is right across the way. In fact, my wife trained as a porcelain and ceramic painter right here in this building

and then worked here for many years after her training, until unfortunately the first restructuring wave at KPM led to them having to lay off part of their workforce. And she was part of that. But she really loved this profession. Yes. I think I haven't really gone into that actively in my podcast so far. But if you're visiting Berlin or are from Berlin, you can still

see this exhibition here, observe the beautiful porcelain manufactory and learn more about its background. Before we dive into the topics that concern Service for Charger and e-mobility, we'd like to get to know you better and find out what your background is. Can you tell us who you are and what you did before you came to Service for Charger? Of course. I originally come from Berlin and after school I did a vocational training as a hotel specialist and chef, sorry, and then studied business administration here at TU Berlin, just around the corner here. I realized fairly early on that I wasn't aiming for a classic career in a large corporation, but rather towards medium-sized companies or my own ventures, and I started founding companies while still studying – in the telecommunications sector, calling cards – and then after graduation took my first job in a very technical company in the Voice-over-IP technology field. That was the first provider of Voice-over-IP technology for

Voice-over-IP-based calls for ethnic communities – calls to countries that were very expensive to call back then using classic phones. In what year was that roughly, so we can get a picture? That was in the 90s. The market had just been opened up. That meant that Deutsche Telekom was still dominant – even more dominant back then. International calls were very expensive. A call to the USA cost three Deutsche marks and something per minute, to Pakistan, India,

African countries – we were all in the range of several Deutsche marks per minute. And calling cards were a cheap way to speak very cheaply with loved ones back home via a central dial-in number. Many of the ethnic communities here used it extensively. What exactly was that technology? The calling card business is a model that specifically used Voice-over-IP, that is, internet connection to transport the call to the destination country. And in the destination country there was

then a conversion from IP back to the normal telephone network. The background was: if I start a call from here via one of the classic telecommunications networks, the international charges were so high that they led to those prices. But if I convert the call back in the destination country, so to speak, and turn it into a local call, then it only costs a few cents – like Skype, basically like Skype. Except that this step at the end was converted back into the normal regional telephone network,

because back then nobody had the bandwidth in private households or business households to be able to have stable conversations. That came in parallel, and the ethnic communities here often didn't have this infrastructure. Not every telephone, every mobile phone – if people had one – automatically had internet and then a Voice-over-IP client on it or something like Skype, ICQ, Yahoo Messenger or similar, which would allow such calls. That came later or just came out in parallel. I understand. And what

happened then? There wasn't automatically internet on every phone, every mobile phone – if people had one – and then a Voice-over-IP client on it or things like Skype, ICQ, Yahoo Messenger or similar, which would allow such calls. That came later or just came out in parallel. I understand. And what

So did the large corporations not interest you early on, so to speak, and you preferred mid-market companies? I come from an entrepreneurial family. My parents come from the hospitality industry, were self-employed for a long time. Retail, then hospitality. And I always found it exciting, somehow to develop something self-determined. My father demonstrated to me what it means to be an entrepreneur and to create your own opportunities. I just didn't find it attractive at first to go into a large corporation and be a small, be a

small fish in a big pond, instead I wanted to be a big fish in a small pond. So I thought, better to be successful in a niche, do something of my own, than to be one of many in a large corporation. And the telecommunications industry – how did you end up in that, so to speak, coming from your hotel business background? At some point, even during my hotel training, I realized that I really, really enjoy being a guest in hotels, but it's a completely different thing to

work in a hotel and serve guests. And I decided relatively early to study business administration. I wanted to have a foundation that would enable me to start my own companies and have the most important tools. Telecommunications was simply a matter of interest. I actually considered studying computer science as an alternative, but decided against it because back then computer scientists weren't the cool nerds yet, but rather those who shut themselves in the basement without daylight with cola and pizza –

I didn't find that very attractive. I was always fascinated by languages, by contact with people and by technology. And telecommunications – I found that step fascinating at the time: from classical circuit-switched telephony to the growth of mobile networks and for the first time Voice over IP. That made it possible not only to send voice over a copper line, but basically to send any content digitally over the network. And I found that extremely exciting because it opened up completely new possibilities. Back then all network operators talked about offering so-called Value

Added Services. They all had the fantasy: okay, we have SMS now – that's a huge revenue generator, a random product by the way. And what comes next? Geofencing, location-based services – what else can I as a network operator incorporate into telecommunications? And this was in the course of liberalization. Or was that before? No, that was in the course of liberalization. Then – also as in the energy industry – in '97 or '98, I think, the market was opened. But it was similar.

And yes, then Call-by-Call providers were founded first, and some early companies like Arcore for example were really, really successful. The applications piled up because users welcomed an alternative. Nevertheless, Deutsche Telekom still had a dominant position – back then with well over 95% market share it was simply the market leader, and it still is. In the meantime, though, I think fixed-line connections have lost importance. Yes, well,

everything has shifted to mobile. I know many people who don't have a landline anymore. Or if they do, then only as the basis for their internet connection at home, as a byproduct, but no longer primarily for making calls. An exciting development, how everything has completely shifted to the internet – really every kind of service. And what came after this experience you described? What drove you next? So after the first ventures in the call card business, after the first carrier, i.e. after the first Voice-over-IP-based niche carrier, I then founded my own company. The company I worked for was taken over hostilely – quite a story at the time. I decided not to go along with it, but found the idea so exciting that we said – with two colleagues – let's start our own company. And we then founded the first really big player, basically the first player as a wholesaler for other telephone companies for international calls on

an IP basis, we were also located here in Berlin at the Palais am Festungsgraben. The company was called Gecko.net. And it was actually – we worked for other telephone companies: when someone dialed 0098 for Iran or Cuba or India, we had routes to those countries and then took over the calls – in real time, the end user knows nothing about it – and they were then routed through us to the destination country. And that was an exciting business. A bit too early, as always. I think,

that's a learning point: timing is simply decisive. You can have the best idea – if you're too early or too late, it might not fly. We were technically just a bit too early. Also the internet quality in emerging countries wasn't good enough yet for stable calls to always be guaranteed. Alternative satellite connections have a time delay, you can hear it, and are very, very expensive. Accordingly – two years later it would have been easier. By then the hardware had also advanced. But I think from a market perspective, the timing was exactly right. The company still didn't make it. My first bankruptcy. But well, you certainly learned something. Yes, exactly. And that alone, what you just said – I think I and many other entrepreneurs can relate to that. Market timing can be influenced to some extent. And you also don't know when the perfect timing is. Then I went to one of our customers, from Frankfurt. They also had among other things a

small fish in a big pond, instead I wanted to be a big fish in a small pond. So I thought, better to be successful in a niche, do something of my own, than to be one of many in a large corporation. And the telecommunications industry – how did you end up in that, so to speak, coming from your hotel business background? At some point, even during my hotel training, I realized that I really, really enjoy being a guest in hotels, but it's a completely different thing to work in a hotel and serve guests. And I decided relatively early to study business administration. I wanted to have a foundation that would enable me to start my own companies and have the most important tools. Telecommunications was simply a matter of interest. I actually considered studying computer science as an alternative, but decided against it because back then computer scientists weren't the cool nerds yet, but rather those who shut themselves in the basement without daylight with cola and pizza – I didn't find that very attractive. I was always fascinated by languages, by contact with people and by technology. And telecommunications – I found that step fascinating at the time: from classical circuit-switched telephony to the growth of mobile networks and for the first time Voice over IP. That made it possible not only to send voice over a copper line, but basically to send any content digitally over the network.

And I found that extremely exciting because it opened up completely new possibilities. Back then all network operators talked about offering so-called Value Added Services. They all had the fantasy: okay, we have SMS now – that's a huge revenue generator, a random product by the way. And what comes next? Geofencing, location-based services – what else can I as a network operator incorporate into telecommunications? And this was in the course of liberalization. Or was that before? No, that was in the course of liberalization. Then – also as in the energy industry – in '97 or '98, I think, the market was opened. But it was similar. And yes, then Call-by-Call providers were founded first, and some early companies like Arcore for example were really, really successful. The applications piled up because users welcomed an alternative.

A subsidiary in England, which I then restructured and brought back to the parent company in Frankfurt. In the meantime, the company got into difficulties because large customers simply fell away. Wound up that company with an insolvency administrator, second insolvency, restructuring, sold off part of it. Then founded something of my own again – basically something like a voice assistant. Back then, the topic of speech recognition wasn't quite as advanced. Accordingly, we set up a call center in Morocco to process voice calls. But behind that was Voice over IP, as we called it. I wanted to

Call Claudio Geyken. And he was sitting – you're now sitting in America – and said: "Call Claudio on his mobile." And then I was transferred. And that way I saved about 1.50 euros per minute. This interaction usually only lasted a few seconds with the call center agent, and then the call was transferred and it continued. And we then sold that to a larger company that was just about to go public, Amitello AG. I came on board with them.

Sold the company, had to stay on. I was sent to Spain, where I then lived for five and a half years. There I essentially pulled together the local group, restructured it, prepared it for the IPO and helped with it. When the IPO happened, towards the end I was also on the board of Amitello AG as CTO for broadband-based services. I was then traveling a lot in emerging markets, also in North Africa and West Africa, and in the Middle East, and I bought out what had

Restructured there. Unfortunately the company was not successful and had to file for insolvency as well. I then bought out a part and attacked again, founding a company in Iran – also the first private provider for internet and telephony. How did you get to Iran then? From the previous company we had contacts there to route calls there. We also had conversations with the local telecom, who asked us: What was the experience in Germany with

Privatization? Because it was foreseeable that Iran would open up as well. And what started as a simple consulting conversation then became permanent. And eventually we were offered licenses for different provinces in Iran. We bought those back then. Amitello didn't want to do anything there because at the time, due to the IPO, they didn't want proximity to Iran. And I picked it up after Amitello ended. And we founded the first real provider in Iran, in Tehran, in

Three provinces we built our own network – a mix of radio and fixed-line technology – and then delivered internet service and telephony. And then had to learn the hard way that it worked technically, even though there were some real surprises – local network peculiarities that you can't even imagine here – but also especially politically. You end up in a security-critical area. Internet is sometimes restricted during important political events. So as a mixed

Foreign-Iranian provider, we were naturally under special scrutiny. That became pretty clear to us when we had visitors and it was about: Okay, how can we ensure the surveillance regulations there on site? And that looks different than here. And yes, we eventually decided, also in light of international tensions, to withdraw from the market. And then it was time for me to think: Okay, do I want to stay in telecommunications after all these years? Did you live in Iran then? At the time

No, I didn't live there permanently. I commuted back and forth – first between Spain and Iran, and then later between Germany and Iran. So we eventually moved back to Germany because my family wanted to be closer to friends and family and I wasn't there part of the time anyway. And then I always commuted. Two weeks there, two weeks back, or ten days there, ten days back. And I had a business partner on site, a German-Iranian, who was permanently on site,

Usually, and also a team of course. 100 sales offices in Tehran alone. That was quite a significant operation that we built there. Yes, it's a shame that didn't work out. That was bad timing too. Iran is, like many countries in the region, always affected by political tensions. We were just not sure at some point how long we could sustain that. And decided: Okay, we're out. At that time I had

I thought about what would not be a good moment to maybe do something different. Telephony eventually became very, very simply a displacement competition, pure price competition. The topic of innovative services didn't materialize – at least not on the network operator side. That was more in the end-customer business or simply third parties who then developed services based on the networks. But the network operators themselves didn't have the role they once thought they would have. That was quite interesting. And then I thought: Okay, what

What fascinated me? What else had a connection to communication? There was the area of mobility and smart infrastructure – everything networked via mobile communications by then. And so I took on an interim mandate in Leipzig. I built a new business division for the company – end customers, so a B2C channel. Essentially we networked car dealerships with their end customers to ensure that contact frequency and communication between buyer and dealership ran better. I did that for about a year and then received a

call to Munich at Unternehmertum, through a friend of mine who said: look, they're looking for someone who is anchored in the startup world, so has already founded several companies, but also has hands-on experience collaborating with corporates and in various areas. That would be just the thing. We agreed quite quickly. So I worked at Unternehmertum in Munich for five and a half years. What time period was that? Just so we can get our bearings again. Around 2013, 2014. Exactly. And was that

the beginning of Unternehmertum, or when did Unternehmertum actually start its activities? No, it was already several years old. But when I joined, we were still sitting on the campus of TU Munich, not yet in our own building, and there were about fifty people, not all of whom were always there. It felt considerably smaller than now. We had a small half-wing in a building on the campus and then we planned and built our own building. Susanne Klatten

is the owner of Unternehmertum and they made the decision to give Unternehmertum its own building. And that was a huge milestone. When it was finished, we really had – I think – 6,000 square metres of space, plus another building section where all the entrepreneurship chairs were located and also space for start-ups. So to speak: spin-outs from TU Munich and the surrounding area could have office space there. There were coworking spaces. All the entrepreneurship chairs were in the

same building. I mean, that's already an ideal environment. And at Unternehmertum, knowledge is exchanged so freely. I was incredibly fascinated by the speed at which things were developed there. Start-ups like Lilium, for example – the electric vertical take-off aircraft, who build electric aircraft – or FlixBus went through there. But also numerous companies where you knew the small founding teams who later became large companies. That was really extremely exciting. I can imagine. What was your exact role there in the

I led the management consulting practice there as one of the partners. We were the interface between corporate clients to see what learnings and benefits you could transfer from the way start-ups approach their company and their challenges to the corporate world – and conversely to show start-ups: how do I actually get through this firewall of large enterprises? So how do I establish a connection with large companies? How do I work with them? What about pricing, market access, partnerships? What options are there?

And we filled this intermediary role on both sides. That was very exciting because we also supported some spin-outs, including ParkNow and ChargeNow. These were "Now" services of the BMW Group – that was one of the major clients. My area was automotive and smart city and energy. So we were able to support some of these really exciting projects. In part we had the teams in our war room with us, so sort of isolated them a bit from their

corporate bubble so they wouldn't get so caught up in day-to-day business. And I think that was mutually very, very enriching. And then at the end, after more than five years, ZF came along and floated the idea of whether we could support them with the spin-out of their first start-up. Part of the task was: find a CEO and find a CTO. And eventually they came to me and said they'd looked at my LinkedIn CV. And whether I might

be interested in doing it. So at that point I said, after more than five years of consulting I thought it would be exciting to get back on the field, and I accepted the assignment. And what was this company about? We built a platform that sat between fleets and service providers and later autonomous vehicles – really to make them truly autonomous – by enabling economic transactions. In other words: a vehicle can independently refuel and pay for refuelling services, it can independently charge and pay for the charging process, or it can also receive money

by, for example, transporting goods. And the first step was refuelling and charging. The idea was: you drive up to the petrol pump or charging station. Via GPS the vehicle recognises where it is and unlocks the charging station if necessary. Maybe it also enters the charging station number. So initially the idea was to integrate that into the vehicle, in the cockpit. We then implemented that in the head unit with two major car manufacturers, so you could unlock these processes from the

head unit. After refuelling or charging is complete, you drive off and you get a confirmation: you've just charged so many kilowatt-hours or pumped so many litres. Safe driving. And the billing then happens in the background via the fleet or via the vehicle's wallet. From an economic perspective, that's of course a kind of plug and charge. Essentially that then became mainstream through Plug and Charge. At that time – again the question of timing – 2018.

Let's be precise. And there was simply the infrastructure – not all chargers were online, which is a mandatory requirement to activate charging stations. The gas station infrastructure wasn't advanced enough yet to really enable fuel dispensers everywhere outside the vehicle – or in Germany they're not blocked like in other countries. But then to automate the fueling process and billing, that just wasn't there yet; the infrastructure wasn't advanced enough. And we did, like every startup,

pivot. We changed direction. We then focused on the topic of fraud, so fuel fraud, because actually especially in the truck sector large quantities of fuel are involved and part of the transaction doesn't end up in the truck's tank, but maybe in a barrel or a separate tank, which then heats the home or gets sold. We're talking about up to 5% fraud. We used the telematics data from the vehicles in connection with fuel level, time and GPS position

to prevent that. You could basically see exactly: the fuel pump says you got 1,000 liters. Your vehicle says it got 900 liters. Find the error. And that started off quite well. But at some point ZF decided to bring the whole thing more firmly back into the group. That was the beginning of the crisis in the automotive market that was emerging. ZF reacted to it quite early and had the idea to bring this little free radical back into the group

internally. That was the moment when I said: that wasn't the idea. I wanted to prove – the thesis was – a startup with a large corporate in the background is much more powerful and faster than an independently founded startup. Part of that may be true. But it also has other implications. There are political developments within corporations that prevent a startup from unfolding the way it wants to. There's

fear of cannibalizing core products of the company. There are budget constraints that can prevent the startup from getting the financing it needs. And if you have a very dominant shareholder – I was just a tiny shareholder, I co-invested but couldn't decide anything with my small stake – then if you wanted to raise further capital, it's significantly harder compared to a classic startup, because VCs of course won't go in if a large corporation holds 90 percent of a company.

What's actually your opinion? You've gathered quite a lot of experience, both with your own companies and with this ZF startup where a corporate was essentially behind it. Can that even work, a startup financed by a large corporate so to speak? Or is this model just too difficult? I've also seen some models where people tried it. But if you look around the market, there aren't that many successful examples. At least I can't think of that many

successful ones. One of the most successful that comes to mind for me is IMCD. I think that came out of Philips. Maybe also Booyar from the VW group. I think there are more examples where it doesn't work so well than examples where it works well. Actually, I've always wondered why the power that such a large corporation brings can't be bundled in such a startup, because that would really be the rocket thrust

for every startup. And like I said, there are positive examples where it works well. But often corporate politics, individual interests of players in the corporation, strategy changes and budget restrictions get in the way. The question really is how seriously the corporation pursues this strategy. Is it just an idea – we think it's cool, want to be cool too, we want innovation, so we do something with startups too – or is it really the desire: we want to tap into new business fields and we send these

small speedboats ahead, and if we see that's successful, then we really bring muscle to make them successful. That would actually be the recipe for success. But I think in most cases that's approached wrong.

And then you went to Service for Charger. Or was there something else in between before the Service for Charger experience? I had another stop along the way in a non-tech or low-tech company, raw materials trading. Something completely different. I really wanted to do something different and then realized that's a game where you need very deep pockets. Even though we had by then, I think, quite good industrial contacts and were well-networked in the Middle East, it didn't work out the way we had imagined it.

That's also the reality in the startup environment, that most startups don't make it. And then through the investors behind Service for Charger I came into contact with Service for Charger, through Energie 360 AG. And that was a pretty fortunate coincidence. I then sat down with Lukas Altermatter and we clicked and were on the same wavelength. He was looking for someone to support him for the next funding round, so someone with experience as an entrepreneur and sales-oriented. That fit perfectly. And then we started to

talk. He had just hired another employee at that time, but at some point during the year they parted ways. And then he called me again last summer sometime and said: what are you doing right now? And that's how we got together, we became aligned pretty quickly. I started on September 1, 2024 as CCO at Service for Charger. And can you give some insights into the Service for Charger key figures, the company history

and what services you focus on? We are a 360-degree provider for everything related to charging infrastructure. The company started in 2019 and now has over 100 employees, with headquarters here in Berlin and two other branches in Ingolstadt and Essen. About 70 percent of the staff are technicians. We call them Mobile Heroes. These are the technicians in the field. Then of course there are engineers and master electricians who work in supporting, central functions in the company to answer questions that arise in the field or to provide planning services,

that the Mobile Heroes in the field cannot solve. So there are always fallback levels. And what is special about Service for Charger is that we are distributed nationwide with our Mobile Heroes. That means we currently have a maximum of 50 kilometers to the nearest public charging point. And with that we can offer services nationwide, which many other electricians cannot do because they are located at one site somewhere. If I'm sitting in Berlin and I'm supposed to offer services in the Saarland, that's difficult. And you say

360-degree provider. Can you give me more details? For example, AC, DC, use cases in companies, residential real estate, public charging stations. Exactly, actually the entire area you just mentioned. The company originally started more strongly in the AC area, which also affected the first wave of electric car drivers who had a single-family home. These were the early adopters. They needed charging infrastructure at home, the classic wallboxes. That's actually where the company comes from. Those were the first customers. And then it expanded quite quickly towards public

charging infrastructure. And 360-degree provider means it starts with planning, installation, commissioning, operation through to maintenance and service. Because I think that was not initially a major focus. It's not enough to just put a charging station somewhere, but it also ages and has technical faults or gets damaged. And then someone needs to be there to repair it or ensure it continues to function. How can you imagine your role, especially in terms of the market? There are

maybe – the citizen or a company usually knows rather a municipal utility or has a trusted electrician. Where do you then play a role? Are you essentially a supplier that helps municipal utilities plan everything, commission it and complete the commissioning? Yes, exactly. We ourselves do not operate a B2C business. That is to say, we don't do end customer business directly. That means if someone has a single-family home and says: I need a charging point in front of my house, then

they should best call the local electrician. He installs it for them, and that's it. We are a B2B provider or B2B2C provider, which means our customers are business customers and companies that in turn deal with end customers. Large fuel card providers, for example, for whom we install several thousand charging points at their end customers per year, but where we don't directly acquire the end customer, but always go through this B2B channel. But you also do home installations. Exactly, exactly. And that is

the special thing, that we not only install but also ensure that it remains in good condition, maintain it and offer this range. I think that is also what distinguishes Service for Charger from other typical electrical contractors. There are quite a lot of electrical contractors in Germany. I think it's just under 3,350 that have over ten employees, and 71 large companies. I think only very few fall into the Service for Charger category – partly because of the strong focus. We

don't do building automation or anything like that, but we really focus on charging infrastructure and also partly on renewable energies in the sense of commissioning heat pumps or photovoltaics. Not the installation itself, but the electrical commissioning or troubleshooting, yes right through to home storage systems. And now everything is slowly coming together, because you can see that the environment has become more complex. That means we see this setup quite often in companies too. You have large roof surfaces on top, for example on a logistics hall, where photovoltaics are installed. On the

photovoltaics are installed. This electricity cannot always be consumed immediately. There is a battery storage there, there is a heat pump, then there is an energy management system. And then as the last link perhaps the charging infrastructure is added. And the requirement is: we want to use as much solar power as possible from our own production. And only if there is no other way, then draw from the grid, which ultimately also benefits grid stability if the storage is large enough. And this setup is then quite

complex. And that might not be something the average small electrical contractor can handle. And that is where Service for Charger comes in, which can implement something like this with the nationwide available network of qualified specialists. I understand. And who are your multipliers then? Those are the fuel card providers and also energy suppliers. Those would be the classic CPOs who then do the operations. You essentially do the preliminary work, and then the operations are taken over by your customers. Exactly. So we now have a very broad customer base. It ranges

from energy suppliers, from CPOs, from large companies, from resellers, including project developers who are strong in a specific area like planning or project management, but don't have the capacity for implementation. And I think it was Robert Habeck who said it: no walls without hands. And I think that applies very well to what Service for Charger does. Exactly that. So ultimately, it's not enough to just plan it, someone has to implement it. And that's where Service for Charger is at the forefront, because

we really do have our own full-time skilled workers who can handle such projects. Understood. And they're distributed throughout Germany, so to speak completely distributed throughout Germany, so you have that flexibility. We're also expanding strongly right now. That's somewhat against the general market trend. Currently, I think the market is consolidating on various levels. There are competitors of ours who now have short-time work or are in economic difficulties. Some market players have also exited last year and this year because of

the dip in electric vehicles, which didn't come as quickly – the boom, so to speak. So on one hand, the ramp-up happened more slowly than expected. Of course, you have to be able to weather that. On the other hand, maybe also because they were specialized in a particular segment. For example, if I specialize in large charging parks, so classic EPC services, and those don't materialize, then of course I'm very vulnerable to those fluctuations. And I think that's where Service for Charger is particularly strong in the market because of

the enormous range from AC installations – let's say maintenance of an AC charging point for under 100 euros per year, all the way to installation of a complete bus or truck charging park in the seven-figure range. And we offer that range – not many companies offer that. Logistically, that certainly presents some challenges. But that's also what makes it special: if you master that, you're simply much more resilient to market fluctuations than if I say I'm dependent on, for example, large truck charging parks being installed. If nothing happens for

half a year there, because, for example, a subsidy situation is unclear about when it will come and how much it will be, and companies simply hold back their decision – as was the case last year – then that can definitely become difficult. And what are the typical biggest challenges you face in your day-to-day work? How can you picture that? Phew, where do I even start? So of course

like with any company that's growing and has full-time employees: triggering this growth deliberately, so growing in a controlled way in the areas where you need it, while at the same time staying lean so you stay agile – that's definitely difficult. We're fortunate that due to our now good reputation, we have good access to new Mobile Heroes. We've also developed a very structured process for how we onboard them quickly and how we train them. These are all

trained electricians. But we then bring them up to speed additionally by having them train intensively here in Berlin at our academy for two weeks, and we basically give them the approach we take to charging infrastructure and the expertise they need to then operate independently in the field. And these are typical topics that most already-trained electricians usually don't know, where we have to provide training. So every charging hardware has its quirks. And we're fundamentally not tied to any particular charging hardware,

rather we're hardware-agnostic. That means our Mobile Heroes are used to working with all sorts of manufacturers. That has to come from your side in exactly the same way. And then you have no influence over what that hardware will be. Exactly. And we don't always provide the hardware – in some cases we do provide it and can then choose what we offer. But in other cases, we work with what's there. And the Mobile Heroes have to be able to handle that. Accordingly, the software, I assume. Exactly. And then also special

test equipment to legally set up, measure, and commission AC hardware. Those are things that aren't standardly taught in traditional electrician training. IT, telecommunications, internet. Exactly right. That's especially relevant for large migrations. And it does happen that large networks change operators. That means the charging infrastructure in the field has to be migrated to a different backend, for example SIM cards have to be replaced. Then someone actually has to be on-site to

replace the SIM card and update the wallbox firmware or adjust the settings so it works with the new backend for billing, then test that it works, and then you move on. It's quite – so it is exciting. And we have the feeling, also the feedback from our employees, that they like working in such a forward-thinking sector. And that it's already a very rewarding job, that they're happy to

work on sustainable mobility, rather than for example being on a construction site in winter and cutting into walls to pull cables. They see more purpose here, more sense of mission. That's a nice statement that really pleases us. Yes, it gives meaning. That's great. And the charging stations – can they really handle that? Because there's also DC, especially now up to 400 kilowatts, if I'm not mistaken, or megawatt – Alpitronic or so – the largest DC charging stations on the market.

Now megawatt chargers are coming. Can you do all that too, or is there a limit? Installing transformers – where do you hit a ceiling, so to speak? Well, basically there's no limit on the electrical side. What we've seen is that we've moved from AC towards DC charging as well. Especially last year there was a strategic push to install more DC charging and high-speed chargers. Simply because, on the one hand, installation in the public charging area was progressing, and on the other hand, adoption in the truck and bus sector increased massively.

adoption in the truck and bus sector increased massively. So the area of heavy trucks and heavy-fleet applications, truck and bus, is growing faster than the passenger car segment in terms of volume. At least a lot of fleets are switching quickly there. And then the infrastructure has to be built relatively quickly too. And you just asked: What are typical problems? That's one example: You can plan, order and build this charging infrastructure relatively quickly, but one of the limiting factors right now is the grids, especially the grid operators.

We have over 850 grid operators in Germany, various ones. That means, in part – I should clarify now: electricity grid operators, because we talked a lot about telecommunications network operators before. Distribution grid operators for electricity, exactly – for the power grid, so distribution grid operators who ultimately provide the local connection. And when, for example, a logistics company says: "We're converting part of our fleet to electric trucks", then I need charging stations there. And then the question is: How large is the current connection dimensioned?

How much load can I still add before I hit limits? And there's an interesting aspect to consider here too: you typically pay for your connection based on your peak load. That means if you constantly have load peaks, you pay for the highest capacity you need. And that's where storage systems can help, for example, to prevent such load peaks and ultimately reduce connection costs. And what kind of magnitudes are we talking about? I don't know if you know,

but the grid connection capacities you usually find, particularly at depots – I actually can't tell you that. I'm not enough of a technician for that. For something like that, I'd ask our technical operations manager, because our people – the engineers could certainly tell me that. That's also a very detailed question. And does it happen frequently that you have to install battery storage because the grid operator won't approve that capacity, or because the approval costs don't pay off compared to battery storage?

Or is load management enough? I wouldn't say it that way. There are companies that specialize in advising companies on what their optimal energy system looks like. What's the right mix? We haven't done that in the past. So we're not a classic consulting company; we're more the ones who implement it. But we're increasingly encountering situations where combinations of different elements – like I mentioned before: PV, heat pump, storage, charging infrastructure – come together.

And what then gets combined in an energy management system. And you have to be able to handle that – manage the complexity. Our people can do that. And that means we also install controllers, for example, or inverters from solar systems. Yes, absolutely, absolutely. And one effect we've been seeing since last year, because we've been increasingly active in the DC charging area, is that we also install transformers that I simply need from a certain connection capacity onwards. And that has completely different implications – because I'm working with significantly higher currents, so particularly the initial commissioning – we haven't done that so far.

We work with other companies for the initial commissioning. We're authorized for medium-voltage switchgear work, or parts of our staff are, so we can work on it during operation – just not the first startup. We don't do the first commissioning, simply because we love our employees and don't want to roast them. And to give you a picture – I don't know if you're allowed or can say this, but it would be for example a customer that people know publicly – Berlin municipal utilities for instance, or a larger fleet, an Amazon – if a few names came up, so you can get a picture.

Definitely. So the two mentioned are certainly interesting customers, and I think our customer portfolio now includes all the major companies that probably come to mind as CPOs or fuel station chains. I can maybe name two: one that we're releasing a press statement about now – HIH, a large real estate portfolio and property management company that manages a very, very large real estate portfolio.

Commercial properties mainly, but also residential properties. That's over 35,000 properties. And we're one of the preferred partners for electrifying a total of 25,000 parking spaces that are under their management. That gives you a sense of the scope. And that also touches on one of the most exciting topics we're dealing with right now: this charging-as-a-service area, that is, installation of charging infrastructure in underground garages based on a contracting model. You do that too?

We do that too. This is one of the major initiatives that we're really pushing hard right now and where we're having great success. That means property owners are now required to electrify parts of their parking spaces – if I have over ten parking spaces. The GEG law, exactly, GEG and WMoG, or also European legislative lines that will tighten things up even more starting next year. And that means as a property owner I have to think about it: if I have a larger parking area, I need to electrify part of it.

But I might not know today which tenants or which people will actually use their electric vehicles, which ones will quasi need charging infrastructure – because it's not economical to simply equip an entire underground car park with charging infrastructure at every space. And what we do then: we offer to do the pre-equipping, so the basic infrastructure. That means we install appropriate conductor rail systems or flat band cable systems and build it out beforehand, depending on the situation. We first survey the need together with the owner. And then the tenants can

simply say: "I'd like to have 10, 15 parking spaces electrified." That's then a rental model. That means they pay a monthly fee, get power from us, service, everything from one source, and we install the charging infrastructure right there. And that has benefits for both sides. The owner doesn't have to worry about it at all. He knows exactly: if any problem comes up, we handle it. We own the power connection, which means we also take care of the power supply. If the

tenant has any problem, he calls us or writes to us electronically, and we come and fix it. So are you then quasi a CPO? In that case, yes – yes, in this case we are a CPO. That's not our business model in the classical public sector. There we really are Service for Charge, so we build, we install. But in this area we're also a CPO. Interesting. And you bring the financing here quasi via banks? Correct, well, correct.

I think that's very interesting. In any case, this Charging as a Service – that certainly makes things easier for those who then have to install it, all the charging stations. Because that's probably a huge – which is probably why you ended up there, because the whole financing is not trivial, all those charging stations in such a huge parking lot. That's true. And that's – well, you can see it in the market right now: this classical CPO model is under pressure. CPOs have become more selective about where they put infrastructure. Especially in the

public sector, in the fast-charging area, infrastructure is more likely to be built out at locations with high frequency and high charging frequency, rather than just putting charging stations everywhere across the board. But it's assumed – rightly so – that the majority of charging operations don't happen in the fast-charging area in public space at all, but rather up to 80 percent in the private sector or in the work or residential area, because vehicles are typically parked there for several hours. And then I don't need this high charging speed and the expensive infrastructure either, but rather

I can charge my vehicle with a classical wallbox – let's say an 11 kW one. If I'm in the office for eight hours, then that's actually... I typically don't arrive with 0 percent anyway, but I probably arrive with a partial charge. And then after a few hours the vehicle is actually full. And as CEO you're also responsible for acquiring customers. How do you manage to find customers, or how do customers find you? What are the channels? Well, we have

a lot – much happens through word of mouth. Because we were indeed one of the first major players in the market and we've simply stuck around since then. We're there, and we're above all one of the few players who can really implement nationwide with our own team. Accordingly, many reach out to us who either have heard of us or run into us during our installations. Our vehicles are quite distinctive. The lightning bolt symbol of Service for Charge – that's definitely recognizable. And we notice that

already. When we've installed something somewhere, other customers reach out to us saying they have a project too. That's one thing. On the other hand, we're of course findable online. That means if you search for charging infrastructure, you also find Service for Charge. And in direct comparison: we also regularly win public tenders. So that's also a channel through which we acquire customers. One argument is of course this own team. That means,

other competitors of ours, who partly work with subcontractors, simply can't credibly claim that they can meet SLAs – so service level agreements – for example. If I say that someone will be there in 24 or 48 hours, then I can do that because I know we have our own team. I can dispatch them. If I use a sub-service provider, then it's not certain whether – that's not entirely in my power to determine. Subcontractors would be, for example, electricians if

I outsource the service, or service companies that work in building technology but now also service charging infrastructure. And that's already interesting. They might have their own staff, but not the expertise – or they have the expertise, but not their own staff across the board and then have to fall back on partner companies somewhere else. And are you planning to expand? Geographically: definitely. So on the one hand, next year we're going to massively expand Mobile Heroes across the board in Germany.

invest. Because of this particular range of assignments, on the one hand we have thousands of orders – so smaller orders like wallbox installations in the B2B-C sector, or battery replacements, or putting PV systems into operation or troubleshooting. And that creates this background noise that makes it possible to keep such a large team permanently busy. And we're noticing: the more the market consolidates, the more inquiries come directly to us, plus through the proof we can provide that we're capable of doing it,

more and more large companies now trust us to work with us directly and have us implement it. That means next year we'll multiply our active fleet of Mobile Heroes in the field – probably increase it five or six times – and that's the declared plan. We're also currently in the Series B financing round, and that's going relatively well, I think. We're swimming a bit against market trends, it feels to me. You hear in the market that it's quite a

difficult environment right now. Decision processes are taking a very long time – you can definitely see that in the B2B environment, so with the classic larger construction projects. But the other area, these smaller-scale projects, they're currently in great numbers and are in very, very high demand. That sounds good. And how do you look strategically at your business model? There are the prominent companies like 1.5 degrees or NP that people know – perhaps somewhat more present in the public – who don't have the focus on e-mobility,

but nevertheless in a certain way are similar to how you are – in that it also consists largely of electricians. And I think especially 1.5 degrees came in with the thesis: we need to consolidate such a fragmented market of electrical specialist contractors into one large one. And with NP, I think it was more the training strategy – that you train people in-house – and they also have a Mobile Heroes strategy. How do you view these two strategies of acquisition versus building? You're choosing

more the NP strategy, if I understand correctly, rather than an acquisition strategy. Do you have thoughts on that? Yes, I don't know if I want to share all my thoughts on that here. But yes, of course – in the future it will be a mixed strategy: between organic growth on our own as much as possible, but then also to enable stronger growth, also acquisition – so also grow inorganically through acquisitions of complementary competitors in the market. And that's also what this current financing round is for, to enable this growth so that you have

a war chest to make such a transaction possible. And we do believe that there are no effects that would favor a larger company. And that's what's special about it. We're basically already a craft business or at least rooted in craftsmanship, but we're a digital company at our core. That means we're currently investing a lot of effort – a lot of effort – in catching up with the digital core processes. These are, for example, when an order comes in – so example: with a large customer, orders come directly via our CRM, so to speak from CRM to CRM, are then internally allocated optimally via an AI-supported route planning system to the various Mobile Heroes with the corresponding skills they need to keep driving distances as low as possible. They use a digital app to document progress on the work and the results of their work. That gets uploaded, and the system then automatically creates the billing for this customer. That means the entire process is digital in the background. And the

work is of course still analog. Someone really has to be on site. No walls without hands. Exactly. But everything else, all the paperwork that otherwise exists at many smaller operations – that's just not the case anymore. And if you want to scale something like that – you threw us in a basket with Enpal and 1KOMMA5° – thank you for that.

Then we have to create this background infrastructure. And that's what we're building right now, catching up on that. And that also allows us to continue scaling without losing oversight, but on the contrary to capture efficiencies in further growth. Because driving costs, for example, are the second largest cost factor in the fleet besides personnel costs. And it's clear: the fewer empty trips there are, the shorter the driving distances, the less time is wasted in work time and the lower are

also the driving costs per assignment. Yes, I understand. And you already mentioned Series B. But looking back: before Series B there's logically Series A and then Seed. And you have BP and Energie 360 as shareholders. How much do they play a role for you? Did you install Aral charging points, for example, or other kinds of synergies? An interesting question. Yes, we have. And yes, we do work together. Are we the exclusive

partner? No, we're not. We're working on making these fertilization effects come back more strongly with our own shareholders. That's a good example of this topic of symbiosis between corporations and start-ups, where there's always room for improvement. We're very pleased that we have very good relationships with our shareholders and are now also expanding on that more. With BP Aral it's obviously clear, although we have the stake with the venture arm of BP, so BP Ventures – then not with the business unit, the operational side. But also with the

operational side we're developing a partnership. We're looking forward to deepening these collaborations even further in the coming months and years, because we believe these synergies can create tremendous value for all sides involved.

Energy 360 is certainly an excellent partner as an energy producer and energy supplier, also in Switzerland for our market entry into Switzerland – and excellently networked in the European environment as well. That helps us a lot, also partly in conversations and when introducing ourselves to important market partners, when we come along with such strong investors. Are there regulatory hurdles that you face – if a politician or someone who can influence policy is listening – that are in your way, where you're thinking

and would like to initiate changes?

Well, I think in network planning, in network expansion, processes would have to happen much faster. And with building permits – those are two things: civil engineering and building permits, if a building permit is required, for example for building a corresponding transformer house – or when applying for grid connections, the lead times are sometimes considerably long. And that's naturally related to the network operators having very long lead times. If

they want to expand networks, they in turn also need building permits and operating permits. And that has a very, very long lead time. And I would wish that these processes in Germany would happen much faster, because we feel over-regulated. And that's actually a big part of your work – all these network permits and contact with the network operators. It's often now the factor that takes the longest: applying for a grid connection or a new connection or a connection expansion. Is that digitalized or does it depend heavily on the distribution network operator?

We have our own small department that only deals with communicating with over 800 network operators in Germany. And very often it's actually: making calls and sending emails back and forth. The applications are often now digital, but there are people behind it. And then you're very, very closely in communication and you try to get it accelerated somehow. Unfortunately it's still not completely automated. Yes, there are also network operators that are now completely

overloaded. I think you meant Hamburg now. Yes, there are some areas where either it takes very, very long, or now in the Hamburg area, where I believe it was announced that by year-end no new applications will be processed at all. That's of course fatal if I'm in the Hamburg city area or surrounding area and planning charging infrastructure and I know: okay, I don't need to expect processing before the start of next year. The Netherlands is really a huge issue, I believe, throughout the country. Of course. It keeps coming up again

Remarkable. Of course, actually everyone knew what it means when charging infrastructure is added nationwide as additional consumers to the grid. But when it's there and it actually happens, you realize: okay, so there are simply bottlenecks. We're seeing this increasingly, in some cases in industrial areas where there are multiple logistics companies. One was faster and applied first – then there may not be sufficient connection capacity in that network segment for the others. And then they're just out of luck.

Then you can only hope they coordinate with each other, for example by granting each other access to the charging infrastructure and settling it among themselves. And what role does intelligent charging or bidirectional charging play for you? Is that already something relevant that you use, or is classic load management the issue? Is that coming in a few years, or how does it look? Currently classic, classic not. We now have first projects in bidirectional charging that we're just installing. You also have to say that

so far only a small portion of electric vehicle fleets actually enable bidirectional charging. Nevertheless, we now have first projects. However, in my opinion, this will serve more to optimize costs for the individual single-family home or individual family, rather than providing grid stability. The original idea was that if a large number of vehicles were available as a temporary storage, you could also stabilize the grids. But I think that's currently wishful thinking. It's more about

optimization. Especially now against the backdrop of dynamic electricity tariffs that are coming – first in the commercial sector, but increasingly eventually in the private sector too. That's when it gets interesting. Then I can optimize my consumption if I use, say, a 100 kWh storage in the vehicle as temporary storage. In what way do you mean the grids won't be stabilized? Well, to really ensure grid stabilization in the sense of avoiding peak loads or also maintaining frequency, such small storage units, which aren't really predictable going on or off the grid, are actually less suitable. It's more about optimizing costs for the individual household. What can stabilize a grid are large storage systems that are, for example, next to large renewable energy

facilities, so at wind turbines or at large photovoltaic fields. If there are large storage systems there that can temporarily store electricity in times when little electricity is needed, or can also load or discharge load from the grid – that helps stabilize the grid, both the frequency and avoiding peak loads. But these small storage units in large numbers, which may or may not be there – difficult to plan. Yes, difficult to plan, but I also don't think it's impossible. At least if you also

have the corresponding infrastructure and planning mechanisms in place. Yes, exactly. Because if you have aggregators who can predict and coordinate these small storage units, then theoretically you could achieve something. But that requires a lot of coordination and standardization, which we don't have yet. So for now, it remains more of a cost optimization tool for individual households. The real grid stabilization will come from large centralized storage systems, especially in connection with renewable energy sources. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't also develop these solutions for the smaller scale – they complement each other.

has a sufficiently large mass. Of course it won't happen overnight, as you say, and bidirectional charging is only just starting now with the charging stations and so on. But if you imagine, with 40 million vehicles already in Germany – if a large number of those were electric, that's already three-digit gigawatts, even up to terawatts of capacity. That's not negligible, is it? So it will get interesting. When do vehicles stand idle? Vehicles generally stand idle for

95% of the time. Either they're at home – which means I can connect them to the house connection. Then of course I can use self-generated energy, for example from the photovoltaic system on the roof or from a small wind turbine, whatever the household has. Or when I'm at work, in the company – sure, then I could of course store in the vehicles what energy is generated on the large roof area of the building. That's of course a

good question: how do you bill something like that? Technically feasible, but the question is: what does the business model behind it look like? Tax-wise – does he mean tax-wise? – so also just from the billing perspective. Possible, yes. But I'm very curious what business models will develop there. Yes, we're definitely still in the early stages of this whole transformation. Dynamic electricity tariffs only became mandatory from this year, and I think everyone still needs to develop an awareness that

this even exists, and so on. That's one thing. I think it opens up significant cost-saving potential for many businesses and for many private individuals too. Also interesting are the pass-through tariffs, where I can use my household electricity tariff as a company, initially at any charging stations for example, as long as the operators support it. But that doesn't play a role for you yet. That's more something the CPO handles. Exactly. Maybe in this charging service constellation. Yes. So there are various start-ups that are

also dealing with that and saying that you could maybe clean up this whole CPO sector, which of course the CPOs don't like – and rightly so. So if I'm an energy producer and I have my own charging infrastructure in the field, I'm essentially saving an entire layer. A third party takes that over. Exactly. But we'll see how successful that really turns out to be. Currently I haven't seen any compelling business models that are really

sustainably benefiting from that, because it's clear that the infrastructure I'm creating costs money – both in creation and in operation. And if I don't enable that operation to be economically successful, then nobody will build charging infrastructure anymore. Which means I can use my own electricity tariff, but then I have usage fees plus maybe a variable charge per use or a share per kilowatt-hour that's being charged. So I'm back

to a combined electricity price. And I need to prove that. Is it really cheaper? How much cheaper? You can already see that CPOs sometimes have quite attractive charging offers – away from 0.99 euros, 0.79 euros, 0.99 euros, but increasingly lower. Now there are some offering 0.49 euros, 0.39 euros. And with that I'm already in the ballpark of household electricity tariffs for many private households. That's the core argument. We'll certainly do a

deep dive on that. I've already invited a Knut from D Carbon to the podcast, we just need to find a date. So then we'll do a deep dive and he can also answer those kinds of questions. Exactly. He's basically the head behind this pass-through model thing – that's my rough understanding. The core argument is that it brings more competition, more openness, if the CPO doesn't completely control the electricity tariff at a charging station. But actually,

as you say, it's not in everyone's interest, and it will work itself out. That'll be interesting. Just a quick summary again: what exactly is your situation? Do you do more passenger cars, more vans, more trucks, more buses? What's the split? And how do you see that developing for you in the coming years? It's, as I said earlier, a mix. In terms of volume, we're currently still doing more AC charging points, B2B to C, that's

clearly in the passenger car sector. But in the large projects, so in the bigger charging infrastructure IBC projects, we're seeing a lot happening in the truck and bus area. So we're now increasingly outfitting truck depots, truck charging parks, and also bus charging parks and bus depots. Those are big projects that are easy to plan, but they also have a longer lead time than these smaller projects. A segment that's very strong right now is the whole retail sector. We're already seeing that all the supermarket chains have started installing charging infrastructure all over their

parking lots. Usually DC charging infrastructure, depending on orientation and partnership, between 150 and 400 kW chargers. And that's already interesting – I drive past there regularly. If I'm in the supermarket for half an hour, my car is essentially fully charged in that time. Do you think it will realistically be possible to achieve this target – 2030, I think – roughly 30% of new sales of electric trucks in Germany? Wow.

Yes, I think that is realistic. Infrastructure needs to be further developed, especially for trucks, which draw significantly larger amounts of electricity than cars. But you can see – we received some interesting images – where trucks are simply supposed to charge at charging stations for cars. Of course, that doesn't work in terms of space requirements. That means they're really parked all over the place. You don't see that very often yet, but it's interesting to look at. And I hope that through the expansion of infrastructure in the future it will also be ensured that

trucks on their routes – if they don't have a route where they're back at the depot in the evening and the distances are so small that they can manage it with one charge, but if they drive, for example, across Germany – then either they can charge reasonably at low cost en route. That's where we get into the topic of throughput tariffs or attractive electricity rates. Or that they have agreements with their customers: destination charging. That means I drive you there and I

charge my truck at your location, so to speak, then drive back. And if your vehicles are at my place, then they can charge at my place. For example, and then bill each other for it. That's already happening, and very pragmatically in that area. There are also some large logistics service providers who are standing out a bit and now offering consulting services to other market participants because they say: not every logistics service provider, and especially small businesses, has the money to hire their own consultants and have

them create a concept. And they want to support that, so they're basically – at least according to their own statements – simply giving a jump-start to the spread of electric mobility for truck fleets by passing on advice, best practices and actual field experience and saying: here's how we do it. Yes, exciting. And looking ahead once more: innovations that really drive you or you personally in e-mobility, that you also find exciting and are watching.

So for me, the rapid development of battery technology is exciting. I think it's already the case that this issue of range anxiety no longer plays a major role for most people. People no longer generally have the fear that they'll set off and then end up completely out of power somewhere and can't go any further. But in the future, when ranges grow even more – I think they're currently suitable for everyday use, but if they grow a bit more – then even the last person, I believe, will be convinced. They

can also drive to Italy or Portugal with their car just as well as they do now with their diesel. The megawatt charging topic – I'm not sure if that's relevant in the passenger car market. It's just very good for press coverage, especially in China. BYD has communicated that. I currently think that's more of a PR stunt. I think 800-volt charging technology, getting to 80 percent in a quarter hour – fast charging with the 400-kW charger is really quite enough for me. I go get a small coffee

or stretch my legs for a moment, and then we're good to go. I think that's suitable for everyday use and is also sufficient for longer trips across the country. Otherwise, most people I know who have switched to an electric vehicle at some point report positively about it. So this calmness while driving – you also slow down a bit, you become somewhat calmer while driving, you pay a bit more attention to consumption and driving style. I think that's playing into the current political situation. It keeps coming up again when

speed limits are being discussed – it will happen eventually. I hope that's still a while away, as someone who likes to drive fast. But I think that definitely plays into the hands of electromobility. And yes, otherwise: an exciting development, of course, is the area of bidirectional charging. That's exciting to see how it will affect the grids, whether it will have positive effects – simply to make an individual household more independent, or whether, in larger quantities,

it can really stabilize individual communities or certain network segments. That will be interesting. And yes, those are two very exciting things that I'm following closely. Cool. Yes, finally: what message do you want to leave with your listeners? How can they contact you, and is there anything else you want to get off your chest? Well, for those who have my number, of course just give me a call. Otherwise you can find me most easily on LinkedIn or also on Xing. You

can find me pretty quickly there by name. And if anyone is interested in an exchange of ideas, always happy to – I always look forward to good conversations and exciting ideas and I'm happy to give feedback on those. Well then, thank you very much, all the best to you and see you soon. Thank you very much. It was exciting what Torsten told us. You rarely meet someone who has such diverse experience in so many different countries and roles. I found his telecommunications experience particularly exciting in the very early days of that industry with

voice over IP before Skype, and how he acted as an entrepreneur and gathered many entrepreneurial experiences – sometimes it worked, sometimes less so – and that he then not only stayed in the telecommunications industry but also developed into the mobility world with ZF and a very early example of Plug and Charge and other innovative ideas that he wanted to implement. How he, as an entrepreneur, of course went about things innovatively, early on with startups and corporates and the networking, which wasn't so easy

is in practice, but also the deep dive into e-mobility service for chargers, the challenge with the Mobile Heroes, how they manage to train them in such a way that they can work in diverse areas – with solar installations, batteries, but of course also charging infrastructure – and that nationwide with 50-kilometre distances everywhere, which is not so simple logistically, and how they then also use AI-based route optimization, and how he views intelligent charging and especially interesting logistics concepts for this industry, so that they are not only on the road with cars and

also buses and electric trucks, how optimistic he is also about innovations in the market. So a lot, a lot was covered. I hope this very practice-oriented experience has brought you something. And if you liked it, please share and like. Until next time.

Episode notes

In dieser Folge geht’s nach Berlin zu Service4Charger: Das 2020 gegründete Scale-up hat bereits über 15 000 Ladepunkte geplant, installiert oder im Service – möglich macht das ein eigenes Netzwerk aus speziell geschulten Elektriker-Teams, den sogenannten „Mobile Heroes“, die bundesweit im Einsatz sind. Unser Gast ist Thorsten Weber, Chief Commercial Officer. Er bringt mehr als zehn Jahre Branchenerfahrung mit: Bei UnternehmerTUM begleitete er u. a. Ionity und DriveNow auf dem Weg zum Markt. Jetzt verantwortet er Vertrieb und Marketing von Service4Charger und steuert das Wachstum nach einer Series-A-Finanzierung über 10 Mio. €, angeführt von bp ventures, mit Engagement von Energie360. Gleich sprechen wir darüber, wie man Ladeinfrastruktur in Rekordzeit und dennoch zuverlässig aufbaut, warum das Versprechen „You Charge. We Care“ mehr ist als ein Slogan und welche Rolle Partnerschaften mit Energieversorgern, Flottenbetreibern und Kommunen für den Hochlauf der E-Mobilität spielen. Also: Kopfhörer auf, Ladezustand checken – und los geht’s mit Thorsten Weber bei Smart Charge!“