Philip Shen, (949) 720-7198

[email protected]
Sales (800) 933-6830, Trading (800) 933-6820

COMPANY NOTE | EQUITY RESEARCH | February 22, 2011

Cleantech
ECOtality, Inc. | ECTY - $3.85 - NASDAQ | Buy
Company Update

Stock Data ECTY: ABB Partnership is a Win

52 Week Low - High $2.42 - $6.55 In this note, we summarize our view on ABB's recent strategic investment,
Shares Out. (mil) 10.67
provide an update on the EV Project, and highlight some of the key market
Mkt. Cap.(mil) $41.1
3-Mo. Avg. Vol. 48,790 drivers for the EV industry.
12-Mo.Price Target $9.00
Cash (mil) $9.9
Tot. Debt (mil) $0.3 ABB recently invested $10MM in ECTY. On January 13, 2011, ABB
Est. 3Yr. EPS Growth 25% invested $10MM for 2.6MM shares of common stock at a 17% premium to
Shares Out. (mil): Includes preferred shares ECTY's stock price prior to the deal announcement. The ABB investment, in
our view, validates the company's technology and market position,
EPS ($) establishes a synergistic partnership, and positions the company for success
Yr Dec 2010 —2011E— —2012E— beyond the EV Project.
Curr Curr
1Q (0.29)A (0.28)E — Leaf deliveries and charger installations have been delayed a quarter
2Q (0.78)A (0.61)E — plus. The EV Project establishes ECTY as the industry leader given the
3Q (0.34)A (0.65)E — volumes of chargers that will be deployed over the next year. Although the
4Q (0.34)E (0.06)E — project has been delayed a quarter, we expect Leaf deliveries—and charger
installations—to accelerate in the near-term.
YEAR (1.81)E (1.59)E 0.63E
P/E NM NM 6.1x
2010 Q2 Includes ($0.57) in non-cash stock comp charges Key market drivers. In our view, there are four key drivers of EV adoption:
2011 Annual: Reflects adjusted share count (1) More aggressive CAFE timeline (35.5 mpg by 2016 under Obama vs. 35
mpg by 2020 under Bush); (2) the $7,500 federal tax credit; (3) various state
Revenue ($ millions) incentives that supplement the federal credit, i.e. CA's $5,000 rebate; and (4)
volatility of oil prices vs. stability of power prices.
Yr Dec 2010 —2011E— —2012E—
Curr Curr
1Q 2.7A 8.5E — Our investment thesis. We view ECTY as the industry leader in establishing
2Q 3.4A 19.8E — EV charger ecosystems in the U.S. We expect the EV market to grow
aggressively in the years ahead. President Obama highlighted a target of
3Q 3.2A 21.1E —
1MM EVs on the road by 2015 in his State of the Union address. With the
4Q 3.6E 17.4E —
recent $10MM investment by ABB, we believe the company is well-positioned
YEAR 12.9E 66.9E 68.1E for the competitive dynamics ahead. We acknowledge that the company
remains in the early stages of its development and that it still must prove its
1 Year Price History/Ave. Daily Vol for ECTY business and revenue model. Thus, while we rate the company as a Buy, we
7 also highlight the long-term risks and challenges that face the company.
6
5
4 Estimates. We recently transferred coverage of ECTY to Philip Shen from
3
2 Brian Kremer. Given the upcoming release of Q4'10 results, we plan on
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1
1 updating our estimates following the Q4'10 earnings call.
2010 2011

Created by BlueMatrix

Refer to important disclosure information and rating System Definition on pages 12 - 13 of this report. Regulation Analyst Certification ("Reg AC"): The
research analyst primarily responsible for the content of this report certifies the following under Reg AC: I hereby certify that all views expressed in this report
accurately reflect my personal views about the subject company or companies and its or their securities. I also certify that no part of my compensation was, is or
will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed in this report.

Roth Capital Partners, LLC | 24 Corporate Plaza | Newport Beach CA 92660 | 949 720 5700 | Member FINRA/SIPC
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

INVESTMENT SUMMARY

ECOtality, Inc. (ECTY) Our Investment Thesis

Buy We view ECTY as the industry leader in establishing EV charger ecosystems in the U.S. and
potentially other markets. We expect the EV market to grow aggressively in the years ahead.
President Obama highlighted a target of one million EVs on the road by 2015 in his recent
State of the Union address. With the recent $10 million investment by ABB, we believe the
company is well-positioned for the competitive dynamics ahead. We acknowledge that the
company remains in the early stages of its development and that it still must prove its
business and revenue model. Thus, while we rate the company as a Buy, we also highlight
the long-term risks and challenges that face the company.

A. Key Strategic Partnership Established

Our view: The ABB/ECTY strategic partnership positions the company for success
beyond the EV Project. It provides the company a competitive advantage vs. its peers.

ABB transaction resulted in a 17% premium for existing shareholders.

On January 10, 2011, ECTY announced that ABB would invest $10 million for an equity
position in the company. The transaction closed on January 13, 2011 at $3.84 per share with
~40% warrant coverage at $4.91 per share. ABB now owns 2.6 million shares of ECTY and
approximately 19% of the company. Given a share price of $3.29 prior to the transaction
announcement, $3.84 represents a 17% premium for existing shareholders. (NB: The
analysis below does not include 7.9 million shares of preferred stock as of September 30,
2010, which have a one-to-one conversion and the right to convert at any time. If these
shares are included, ABB would own approximately 12% of common plus converted
preferred shares.)

Exhibit 1: ABB transaction conducted at a 17% premium vs. share price on 1/9/11.
ECTY/ABB Transaction Summary
ABB investment (000s) $10,000
Investment share price $3.84
(1) Common shares issued to ABB (000s) 2,604
(2) Warrants (40% coverage at $4.91/share) 1,042

Implied common shares outstanding 11,096

Common share count post-deal (Source: ABB conf call) (000s) 13,700

ECTY share price on 1/9/11 $3.29

Implied market capitalization on 1/9/11 (000s) $36,505
Implied market capitalization of ABB deal (000s) $52,608

ABB ownership 19%

Existing shareholders 81%
Total 100%

Transaction premium vs. 1/9/11 share price 16.7%

Source: Company reports and filings; ROTH Capital Partners.

$20MM of additional capital may be required in 2011.

On the ABB conference call, the company reiterated its need to raise a total of $30 million to
support the EV Project roll-out, implying an additional $20 million following the ABB
investment will likely be required. By design, ECTY management plans to establish a diverse
set strategic partners, which explains why ABB did not provide the entire investment.

Page 2 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

Partnership Key Takeaways

• Partnership validates market leadership and technology. ABB operates in more
than 100 countries and has a $53 billion market cap. The company is a global leader
in power technologies for utility and industrial customers. ABB’s investment validates
ECTY’s market leadership and technology. Moreover, ECTY is now partnered with
one of the top global players, and, in our view, enables ECTY to compete effectively
against the other majors, such as GE, Siemens, Schneider Electric, and Eaton.
• Synergistic partnership. ABB’s core competence is providing services and
equipment from the “pole back to the utility.” ECTY’s value proposition is from the
“home to the pole.” The ABB/ECTY partnership allows the company to service the
entire EV supplier equipment value chain and provide customers a one-stop solution.
• Preferred supplier. ABB will become a preferred supplier for ECTY. The company,
however, is not stuck with ABB if the pricing is not competitive. If pricing for a
particular component is greater than 5% of market value, ECTY has the right to
secure components from ABB’s competitors.
• Pursuing international markets, such as China. ABB-ECTY framework agreement
lasts five years and establishes a steering committee for key strategic decisions. The
companies have already initiated discussions for establishing a presence in China.
Moreover, the agreement lays out a process to establish presences in other markets
outside of North America.

B. The EV Project Overview and Status

Our view: The EV Project establishes ECTY as the industry leader given the volumes
of chargers that will be deployed over the next year. Although the project has been
delayed a quarter or more, we expect Leaf deliveries—and charger installations—to
accelerate in the near-term.

Overview
In August 2009, the DOE awarded ECTY, in partnership with Nissan, a grant of $99.8 million
to manage the largest deployment of electric vehicles and charging infrastructure in US
history. Dubbed the EV Project, ECTY serves as the project manager and is responsible for
installing ~15,000 chargers in 16 cities over six states and the District of Columbia by 2013.
There are three different types of chargers: Level 2 residential charger (240V), Level 2
commercial charger (240V), and a Level 3 fast charger (480V). Under the project, the grant
provides (1) a home charger at no cost to qualified EV owners and a credit of $1,200 to offset
the charger installation costs, and (2) commercial chargers at no cost to qualified partners.
The goal of the project is to “collect and analyze data to characterize vehicle use in diverse
topographic and climatic conditions, evaluate the effectiveness of charge infrastructure, and
conduct trials of various revenue systems for commercial and public charge infrastructure.”

The EV Project has been expanded from ~11,000 to ~15,000 chargers.

Since August 2009, several additional grants and extensions have been granted to expand
the EV Project. The California Energy Commission provided an $8 million grant; the DOE
extended its grant by $15 million and added the Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., and the
Bay Area Air Quality Management District awarded ECTY $2.9 million to expand the project
to San Francisco. The original DOE grant called for ~11,000 chargers. With the DOE
expansion, we now estimate that ~15,000 chargers will be installed by 2013. Exhibit 2 below
highlights the EV Project locations throughout the U.S. Exhibit 4 below provides an overview
of the EV project.

Page 3 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

Exhibit 2: The EV Project Locations (San Francisco was recently added).

San Francisco, CA

Source: Company reports.

Implementation Status: Leaf deliveries delayed a quarter or more.

ECTY’s roll-out schedule is tied directly to the rate at which the Leafs and Volts delivered in
2011. While the original plan called for a Q4’10 vehicle launch, cars have been slow hitting
the U.S. market. One of the key reasons may be due to the substantial demand that the
Japanese domestic market has been experiencing. There is an attractive incentive expiring
on March 31, 2011, and the expiration may have created an aggressive demand pull-in. As a
result, Leafs may have been shifted to the Japanese market, which may have caused a
slowdown in U.S. deliveries. We expect demand to pick up in April as the demand in Japan
subsides and production continues to ramp up.

Exhibit 3: Charger installation has been pushed back a quarter or more due to a slower-than-expected
Leaf roll-out.
Mar'10 Aug'10 ABB Call
EV Project Timeline From….
PPT PPT Jan'11
2010
Establish local stakeholder forums Q1'10
Develop deployment guidelines for each state project Q1'10
Long-range infrastructure planning for each project state Q2'10
Complete EV MicroCllimate for each project state Q2'10
Initial infrastructure planning and permitting Q3'10
Begin residential EV equipment installation Q4'10 Q4'10 Q4'10
Vehicle launch Q4'10 Q4'10 Q4'10
2011
Final infrastructure Q2'11 Q2'11 Sep/Oct'11
Start evaluation Q4'11
2012
End evaluation Q3'12 Q4'12 Q4'12
2013
Project completion Q2'13 Q2'13 Q2'13
Source: Company reports; ROTH Capital Partners.

Page 4 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

Exhibit 4: The EV Project will install ~15,000 chargers by 2013.

The EV Project Overview
Summary
Project manager • ECOtality

EV Project objective • To accelerate market acceptance and adoption of EVs and charging infrastructure

EV Project end-market offer • Home chargers at no cost to EV owners who qualify

• Credit of up to $1,200 to offset installation costs
• Commercial chargers at no cost to partners who qualify

Summary by Grant Date Ann. $MM Purpose Notes

Original DOE/ARRA grant 8/2/09 $99.8 • Total Level 2 chargers 10,950
- Nissan Leafs 4,700 One level 2 home chargers per Leaf
- Level 2 comm'l chargers 6,250
• Level 3 chargers 260

CA Energy Commission grant 8/31/09 $8.0 • Support San Diego Rollout No new chargers

DOE/ARRA grant expansion 6/17/10 $15.0 • Nissan Leafs 1,000 5,700 Leafs total
• Chevy Volt 2,600 One level 2 home chargers per Volt

Bay Area Air Quality Mgmt District 2/2/11 $2.9 • Support San Francisco Rollout Aw arded, but not yet contracted
No new chargers

Total number of chargers 14,810

City State Date added to EV Project

Phoenix AZ 8/2/09
Tucsan AZ 8/2/09
San Diego CA 8/2/09
Portland OR 8/2/09
Eugene OR 8/2/09
Salem OR 8/2/09
Corvallis OR 8/2/09
Seattle WA 8/2/09
Nashville TN 8/2/09
Knoxville TN 8/2/09
Chattanooga TN 8/2/09
Los Angeles CA 6/17/10
Washington DC 6/17/10
Dallas/Fort Worth TX 7/15/10
Houston TX 7/15/10
San Francisco CA 2/2/11

Source: Company reports; ROTH Capital Partners.

C. EV Demand Drivers

Demand Driver #1: Federal Fuel Standards

Established in 1975, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFE) requires car
manufacturers to meet a standard for the sales-weighted fuel economy for the entire fleet of
vehicles sold in the U.S. in each “model year,” or “MY”. CAFE standards initially called for 18
mpg for MY’78 fleets and remained at 27.5 mpg for 20 years. In December 2007, President
Bush signed the Energy Independence and Security Act, which required automakers to boost
fleet wide gas mileage to 35 mpg by 2020. In May 2009, President Obama proposed new
national fuel economy program, requiring an industry average fuel economy standard of 35.5
mpg by 2016.

Page 5 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

Exhibit 5: Obama raised federal passenger car fuel economy standards to 37.8 MPG by MY’16.
MPG Estimated Federal Fuel Economy Standards
Passenger Car
40

37.8
36.2
35 34.9
34.2
33.3

30 30.2
CAFE Standards since 1975

Previous Standards
25 Obama Administration

20

15

MY'11
MY'78
MY'79
MY'80
MY'81
MY'82
MY'83
MY'84
MY'85
MY'86
MY'87
MY'88
MY'89
MY'90
MY'91
MY'92
MY'93
MY'94
MY'95
MY'96
MY'97
MY'98
MY'99
MY'00
MY'01
MY'02
MY'03
MY'04
MY'05
MY'06
MY'07
MY'08
MY'09
MY'10

MY'12
MY'13
MY'14
MY'15
MY'16
MY'17
MY'18
MY'19
MY'20
Source: EPA/DOT Light Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Standards and CAFÉ Standards; Final Rule; Federal Register (May 7,
2010); ROTH Capital Partners.

Demand Driver #2: Generous federal rebate, up to $7,500.

Included in the economic stimulus bill was a federal tax credit of between $2,500 and $7,500
for EVs. To qualify for the credit, the car must draw propulsion energy from a battery with at
least 4 kWh of capacity. The Leaf has a capacity of 24 kWh, and the Volt has a usable
battery capacity of 10 kWh. Both cars qualify for the full tax credit. The full tax credit is
available for the first 200,000 cars. Our analysis suggests that it may take till 2013 to reach
the first 200,000 cars. In the exhibit below, we map out the phase-out schedule once 200,000
have received the credit. In short, we expect the tax credit phase-out to take between 15 and
18 months.

Exhibit 6: The EV tax credit will phase-out over 15 to 18 months after the initial 200,000 cars.
Phase-out Schecule for Federal Income Tax Credits for Plug-in EV
200,000th plug-in Phase-out starts Beginning of fourth Credit ends
electric drive vehicle beginning of second calendar quarter after beginning
produced by the calendar quarter after 200,000-vehicle mark sixth
manufacturer on 200,000-vehicle mark reached, credit calendar
Day 1. reached. decreases again. quarter.

Full Credit Amount 50% of Full Amount 25% of Full Amount No Credit
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Year 1 Year 2
Source: EERE; ROTH Capital Partners.

Demand Driver #3: Attractive state incentives.

In addition to the federal tax credit, many states have attractive incentives and rebates.
California, for example, provides up to a $5,000 rebate through its Clean Vehicle Rebate
Project. California also provides EV owners access to High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes.
PlugInAmerica.org estimates that 22 states have EV incentives that supplement the federal
tax credit.

Page 6 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

Exhibit 7: State incentives supplement the federal tax credit incentives.

Incentive Rebate or Income Sales Tax Conversions HOV Infrastructure
State
Amount or Rate Tax Benefit Exemption Included? Access? Incentives
Arizona ●
California up to $5,000 ● ●
Colorado up to $6,000 ●
Connecticut ○
District of Colombia ●
Florida ● ●
Georgia up to $5,000 ● ●
Hawaii up to $4,500 ● ●
Illinois up to $4,000 ● ● ●
Louisiana up to $3,000 ● ● ●
Maryland up to $3,000 ● ●
Massachusetts ○ ○
Montana up to $500 ●
Nebraska
New Jersey up to $4,000 ● ●
New York ○ ○
Oregon up to $5,000 ● ●
Pennsylvania ○ ○
South Carolina up to $1,500 ●
Texas ○ ○
Utah up to $2,500 ● ● ●
Washington ● ●
● In place ○ In progress

Source: PluginAmerica.org (accessed February 21, 2011); ROTH Capital Partners.

Demand Driver #4: Oil prices are up, while power prices have remained flat.
The threat of high oil prices, in our view, serves as a demand driver of electric and plug-in
hybrid vehicles. The volatility of oil prices is much greater than that of electricity prices. In the
exhibits below, we present oil and electricity prices over the past 15 years. Since 1995, oil
prices are up approximately 400%, while residential power prices are up only 35%. Since the
last recession, oil prices have soared from a trough of $35 per barrel to over $80/barrel, up
over 100%. Retail electricity prices, however, are essentially flat since the recession, though
they may be experiencing some year-over-year growth ahead given the economic recovery.
(NB: Neither data series below has been inflation-adjusted.)

Exhibit 8: Oil prices are up ~400% since 1995… Exhibit 9: …vs. power prices up 35%.
$/Barrel WTI Crude Oil Avg. Retail Price of Electricity
Cents/kWh Residential Sector Electricity prices
$160
14 are flat since
the recession.
$140
12
$120
10
$100
Oil prices are
up ~400% 8
$80 since 1995.
Electricity prices
$60 6
are up only 35%
since 1995.
$40 4

$20 Oil prices are

up >100% since 2
the recession.
$0
0
Jan-95

Jan-96

Dec-96

Dec-97

Dec-98

Dec-99

Dec-00

Dec-01

Dec-02

Dec-03

Dec-04

Dec-05

Dec-06

Dec-07

Dec-08

Dec-09

Dec-10

Jul-95

Jul-96

Jul-97

Jul-98

Jul-99

Jul-00

Jul-01

Jul-02

Jul-03

Jul-04

Jul-05

Jul-06

Jul-07

Jul-08

Jul-09

Jul-10
Jan-95

Jan-96

Jan-97

Jan-98

Jan-99

Jan-00

Jan-01

Jan-02

Jan-03

Jan-04

Jan-05

Jan-06

Jan-07

Jan-08

Jan-09

Jan-10

West Texas Intermediate Price incl. tax

Source: Bloomberg; ROTH Capital Partners. Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration; ROTH Capital Partners.

Page 7 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

RECENT RESULTS
Q3’10. ECTY posted an upside EPS of -$0.34 vs. consensus of -$0.78, but downside
revenues of $3.2 million vs. consensus of $15.8 million. The company generated a gross
margin of 3% for Q3’10 due to a special cost reimbursement contract with the Department of
Energy. Some key takeaways were (1) the company successfully expanded its DOE
sponsored EV project to 16 cities, and (2) the company expected Blink Level 2 and Level 3
chargers to be available/installed in late Q4’10/Q1’11, respectively.

EARNINGS OUTLOOK
We recently transferred coverage of ECTY to Philip Shen from Brian Kremer. Given the
upcoming release of Q4’10 results, we plan on updating our estimates following the Q4’10
earnings call.

Page 8 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

VALUATION

Our $9 price target is based on an 18x multiple applied to our estimated 2015 earnings of $0.95/share
(assumes market share of 16%) discounted back to 2011 at 15% ($0.49/share). We believe this multiple is
reasonable for a company with expected earnings growth of >25%.

Factors that would prevent shares of ECTY from reaching our price target include declining petroleum prices,
reversal of trends supporting stronger environmental regulations, failure to achieve steady reductions in
battery pricing, inability to establish sustainable commercial business models, and poor vehicle/EV Project
performance.

RISKS

Dependency upon on-road electric vehicle (EV) market. The company's EV charging business is highly
dependent upon the adoption of EV for on-road use at large commercial scales. Acceptance of EV globally
remains dependent upon a number of factors including the price of fossil fuels, the cost of battery systems,
environmental regulations, and customer acceptance. Decreases in fossil fuel prices, sustained or increasing
battery costs, weakening of environmental regulations and failure to win over consumers could all impact
negatively ECTY's US business.

Exposure to government grant. The company's near-term revenue (next 3 years) is highly concentrated
through its $99.8 million cost reimbursable contract with the US Department of Energy. Failure by the
company to meet its requirements under the contract could result in loss of the grant. Government grants are
also subject to cancellation and modification with little or no notice.

Developing business and revenue model. In the early stages of a developing market, the company is
exploring a variety of business models, many of which have yet to be put in place or tested on a large scale.
Over the next two years, it may be difficult to forecast revenues given the nature of DOE and government
contracts.

Increasing competition from above and below. As the electric transportation sector garners greater
attention, companies are entering the industry at an accelerating rate. In some instances, such companies are
much larger, with significantly stronger balance sheets and R&D resources. Additionally, the company is
expected to face increased competition from well funded start-ups.

Exposure to China. The company is setting up joint ventures in China. Some of the general risks related to
doing business in China include government interference with the economy, foreign currency control,
international trade restrictions, co-existence of state-owned and private companies, and governmental control
of important natural resources. From time to time, the government may enact new laws or issue administrative
regulations to encourage or discourage the development of a particular industry.

COMPANY DESCRIPTION

ECOtality, Inc. (ECTY) provides electric vehicle infrastructure products and solutions that are used in on-road
grid-connected (including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) and battery electric vehicles (EV)) and
industrial applications (e.g., material handling and airport electric ground support applications). The company's
primary product offering, through its Transportation Engineering Corporation (eTec) subsidiary, is the
Minit-Charger line of advanced battery fast-charge systems. The company has been awarded over $115
million in grants (The EV Project) by the US Department of Energy to manage deployment of charging
infrastructure to support ~8,500 EVs in six states and the District of Columbia. Through its other subsidiaries,
Innergy Power Corporation, and ECOtality Stores (dba Fuel Cell Store), the company also develops and sells
specialty solar products, advanced battery systems, and hydrogen and fuel cell systems. The company is
headquartered in San Francisco, CA.

Page 9 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

MENTIONED COMPANIES

Page 10 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

ECOtality, Inc.
Income Statement
(dollars in millions)
F2008A F2009A Mar-10A Jun-10A Sep-10A Dec-10E F2010E Mar-11E Jun-11E Sep-11E Dec-11E F2011E F2012E
Revenue 11,187 8,602 2,700 3,412 3,197 3,600 12,908 8,525 19,775 21,125 17,435 66,860 68,119
Cost of goods sold 7,109 4,960 2,392 3,062 3,085 3,510 12,048 9,501 25,887 27,750 14,900 78,037 37,865
Gross profit 4,079 3,642 309 350 112 90 860 (976) (6,112) (6,625) 2,536 (11,177) 30,254

Expenses
Depreciation 616 464 142 149 136 140 567 140 140 140 140 560 560
General and administrative 6,992 16,807 2,240 7,769 2,878 2,950 15,836 3,050 3,100 3,150 3,150 12,450 13,100
Research and development 293 19 13 51 135 125 325 150 150 150 150 600 1,600
Settlement Expense
Impairment Expense
Total expenses 7,900 17,290 2,394 7,970 3,149 3,215 16,728 3,340 3,390 3,440 3,440 13,610 15,260

Operating income (loss) (3,822) (13,648) (2,085) (7,619) (3,037) (3,125) (15,867) (4,316) (9,502) (10,065) (905) (24,787) 14,994

Other income/expense
Interest income 17 6 15 9 11 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other income 365 0 0 318 0 0 318 0 0 0 0 0 0
Interest expense 4,620 15,915 329 (323) 5 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0
(Gain)/loss on disposal of assets 7 (49) 0 (12) (124) 0 (136) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Gain (loss) from operations before income taxes (8,067) (29,508) (2,399) (6,982) (3,156) (3,125) (16,220) (4,316) (9,502) (10,065) (905) (24,787) 14,994
Provision for income taxes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

GAAP net income (loss) (8,067) (29,508) (2,399) (6,982) (3,156) (3,125) (16,220) (4,316) (9,502) (10,065) (905) (24,787) 14,994
GAAP EPS ($3.85) ($8.16) ($0.29) ($0.78) ($0.34) ($0.34) ($1.81) ($0.28) ($0.61) ($0.65) ($0.06) ($1.59) $0.63
Fully diluted shares outstanding (including Preferred) 17,500 17,500 17,411 17,411 17,455 23,661 23,661 23,661 23,661 23,661 23,661
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding - basic and diluted 2,095 3,614 8,297 8,994 9,314 9,314 8,980 15,564 15,564 15,564 15,564 15,564 15,564

Depreciation & amortization 2,459 2,568 160 166 176 140 642 140 140 140 140 560 560
EBITDA (970) (11,019) (1,895) (7,130) (2,964) (2,985) (15,532) (4,176) (9,362) (9,925) (765) (24,227) 15,554

Margin Analysis
Gross Margin 36.5% 42.3% 11.4% 10.3% 3.5% 2.5% 6.7% -11.5% -30.9% -31.4% 14.5% -16.7% 44.4%
General and administrative expenses 62.5% 195.4% 82.9% 227.7% 90.0% 81.9% 122.7% 35.8% 15.7% 14.9% 18.1% 18.6% 19.2%
Research & development 2.6% 0.2% 0.5% 1.5% 4.2% 3.5% 2.5% 1.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.9% 0.9% 2.3%
Operating Margin -34.2% -158.7% -77.2% -223.3% -95.0% -86.8% -122.9% -50.6% -48.0% -47.6% -5.2% -37.1% 22.0%
Net Margin -72.1% -343.0% -88.8% -204.7% -98.7% -86.8% -125.7% -50.6% -48.0% -47.6% -5.2% -37.1% 22.0%
Tax Rate 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Percent Change (y/y)

Sales 332.2% -23.1% 9.3% 95.3% 68.3% 44.9% 50.1% 215.7% 479.6% 560.8% 384.3% 418.0% 1.9%
Operating income 69.2% -257.1% -400.1% -946.0% 71.1% -57.1% -16.3% -107.0% -24.7% -231.4% 71.1% -56.2% 160.5%
EBIDTA 92.3% -1035.6% -1368.6% -4574.5% 70.4% -200.7% -41.0% -120.4% -31.3% -234.8% 74.4% -56.0% 164.2%
Net income 41.1% -265.8% -134.4% -93.9% 79.9% 66.0% 45.0% -79.9% -36.1% -219.0% 71.1% -52.8% 160.5%
EPS 48.0% -112.0% 28.8% 41.8% 92.4% 82.9% 77.9% 4.1% 21.4% -90.9% 82.7% 11.8% 139.8%
Shares outstanding 13.2% 72.5% 593.8% 548.5% 395.9% 270.6% 383.0% 35.2% 35.2% 35.9% 35.9% 35.6% 0.0%

Source: Company filings and Roth Capital Partners estimates

Page 11 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

Disclosures:
Within the last twelve months, ROTH has received compensation for investment banking services from ECOtality, Inc.
ROTH makes a market in shares of ECOtality, Inc. and as such, buys and sells from customers on a principal basis.
ROTH and/or its employees, officers, directors and owners own options, rights or warrants to purchase shares of ECOtality,
Inc. stock.

On September 28, 2010, ROTH changed its rating system in order to replace the Hold rating with Neutral.

Rating and Price Target History for: ECOtality, Inc. (ECTY) as of 02-21-2011
04/23/10 06/18/10
B:$8 B:$9

20

16

12

0
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1
2008 2009 2010 2011

Created by BlueMatrix

Each box on the Rating and Price Target History chart above represents a date on which an analyst made a change to a
rating or price target, except for the first box, which may only represent the first note written during the past three years.
Distribution Ratings/IB Services shows the number of companies in each rating category from which Roth or an affiliate
received compensation for investment banking services in the past 12 month.

Distribution of IB Services Firmwide

IB Serv./Past 12 Mos.
as of 02/22/11
Rating Count Percent Count Percent
Buy [B] 203 74.1 47 23.2
Neutral [N] 64 23.4 4 6.2
Sell [S] 7 2.6 0 0
Not Rated [NR] 0 0.0 0 0

Our rating system attempts to incorporate industry, company and/or overall market risk and volatility. Consequently, at any
given point in time, our investment rating on a stock and its implied price movement may not correspond to the stated
12-month price target.

Ratings System Definitions - ROTH employs a rating system based on the following:
Buy: A security, which at the time the rating is instituted and or reiterated, indicates an expectation of a total return of at
least 10% over the next 12 months.
Neutral: A security, which at the time the rating is instituted and or reiterated, indicates an expectation of a total return
between negative 10% and 10% over the next 12 months.
Sell: A security, which at the time the rating is instituted and or reiterated, indicates an expectation that the price will decline
by more than 10% over the next 12 months.
Not Rated: A security which at the time the rating is instituted and or reiterated, indicates that we have no opinion or
expectations as to the price of the security over the next 12 months.
Not Covered (NC): ROTH does not publish research or have an opinion about the security.

Page 12 of 13
ECOtality, Inc. Company Note - February 22, 2011

ROTH Capital Partners, LLC expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking or other business
relationships with the covered companies mentioned in this report in the next three months.The material, information and
facts discussed in this report other than the information regarding ROTH Capital Partners, LLC and its affiliates, are from
sources believed to be reliable, but are in no way guaranteed to be complete or accurate. This report should not be used as
a complete analysis of the company, industry or security discussed in the report. Additional information is available upon
request. This is not, however, an offer or solicitation of the securities discussed. Any opinions or estimates in this report are
subject to change without notice. An investment in the stock may involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual
results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Additionally, an investment in the stock may involve a high
degree of risk and may not be suitable for all investors. No part of this report may be reproduced in any form without the
express written permission of ROTH. Copyright 2011. Member: FINRA/SIPC.

Page 13 of 13