If you’re interested in capitalizing on the burgeoning electric vehicle charging station market, check this out: Special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) Tortoise Acquisition II (NYSE:SNPR) is preparing for its upcoming merger with Volta Industries, and investors can take a position on SNPR stock before the companies combine.

Granted, this isn’t the only stock for investors looking for exposure to charging stations. There’s competition from ChargePoint (NYSE:CHPT), which I covered very recently, as well as from Blink Charging (NASDAQ:BLNK), which I’ve also mentioned before.

Thus, investors have several stocks to choose from in this niche. The billion-dollar question, then, is: why should people place their bets on Volta?

Basically the answer is that Volta offers a different approach to building out a charging station network. I’ll  discuss that today, but let’s start off with the basics and focus on the stock’s recent price action.

A Closer Look at SNPR Stock

Back in September, Tortoise Acquisition II announced the pricing of its initial public offering (IPO). It issued 30,000,000 units at a price of $10 per unit.

That’s a typical initial SPAC stock price, and SNPR stock did indeed stay close to $10 for a little while.

In early 2021, however, the bulls came out and started to aggressively push up the share price. So the stock price exceeded $13 on Jan. 22 and even touched a 52-week high of $18.33 on Feb. 8.

Chasing a stock after it has rallied sharply isn’t always a great idea. SNPR stock provides a textbook example of that, as it fell sharply after peaking in early February.

Yesterday the stock settled at $10.91. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily, since at least prospective investors might now be able to take a position in the stock at a more favorable price point.

By the way, I should probably also mention that when the SPAC merger closes, the stock will trade under the ticker symbol VLTA on the New York Stock Exchange.

A Unique Approach

Since Volta just recently came onto many people’s radars, investors might want to know what makes the company different from its peers.

From my research, I’ve gotten the impression that Volta isn’t necessarily trying to outdo Blink or ChargePoint in terms of raw charging power or speed.

I wouldn’t blame Volta for not trying to compete in this way, especially with ChargePoint. After all, ChargePoint is quite aggressive in its effort to advance powerful charging technology.

So what will Volta’s unique angle be? I’ll let the company explain:

“Volta’s business model centers around evolving spending habits caused by the move to electric vehicles by building a charging infrastructure that reinforces desired behaviors at each location. Volta’s charging stations feature large eye-catching digital displays that function as a sophisticated media network, providing brands a way to reach millions of shoppers moments before they enter a store.”

Increasing “Dwell Time”

Volta seems to be implying that Blink’s and ChargePoint’s charging ports are boring. And admittedly, those company’s chargers are functional but visually unremarkable.

When I think of Blink’s and ChargePoint’s charging ports, I think about gas stations. I don’t visualize something that could attract me to a nearby restaurant, shopping mall or grocery store.

Volta claims that the company’s business partners who install the company’s charging stations “report an increase in spend, dwell time and engagement on site.”

I haven’t heard Blink and ChargePoint spend much time discussing “dwell time.” Apparently, that’s not their focus. So, perhaps Volta can capitalize on a strategy that its peers aren’t currently pursuing.

Volta’s interesting approach has already resulted in some market penetration. Currently, Volta’s charging stations are located in 23 states and in more than 200 municipalities.

The Bottom Line

Only time will tell whether Volta’s unusual charging station market strategy will pay off.

Still, you might be on board with Volta’s pursuit of enhanced “dwell time.” If so, then SNPR stock may be an investment worth considering.

On the date of publication, David Moadel did not have (either directly or indirectly) any positions in the securities mentioned in this article.