[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

That’s only one datapoint. Nobody can produce as many EVs as Tesla right now and you can’t sell what you can’t produce. As more automakers come up to scale production and offer more compelling products they will compete better with Tesla. But Tesla does have a 5 - 10 year head start, depending on who you’re comparing them to.

But Ford can't sell what it does produce.

As per the sales manager at a fairly large dealership, the Mach-E is a very hard sell and nobody even wants to look at a Lightning.

Also a quick story... Ford has Mach-E's stacked up so the owner of the dealership buys 20. Staff is like WTF are you doing, we will never sell these!!! Owner then incentivizes staff to buy one with, essentially, whatever it takes to get them to do it. Reason? On the surface to be familiar with EV's to better be able to sell them but I suspect the end game is simply to curry favor with Ford. Result? Ford counts 20 EV sales... but they weren't really legit.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

But Ford can't sell what it does produce.

As per the sales manager at a fairly large dealership, the Mach-E is a very hard sell and nobody even wants to look at a Lightning.

Also a quick story... Ford has Mach-E's stacked up so the owner of the dealership buys 20. Staff is like WTF are you doing, we will never sell these!!! Owner then incentivizes staff to buy one with, essentially, whatever it takes to get them to do it. Reason? On the surface to be familiar with EV's to better be able to sell them but I suspect the end game is simply to curry favor with Ford. Result? Ford counts 20 EV sales... but they weren't really legit.

I’ve been trying for months to figure out how Ford allowed themselves to land in this situation. The best I can come up with is maybe they have supply agreements that might force them to reimburse key component systems suppliers for bespoke tooling should volume fall below a specific threshold. I’ve seen this type of agreement for critical components where suppliers are responsible to acquire specialized equipment that can only be used for specific parts. For example, I expect the supplier of the frunk tub may have a ridiculous amount of capital involved in the molding equipment to make that part. If I were the business supplying this part, I would negotiate volume triggers that basically say “you fall below this volume and you buy my tooling and also the piece cost goes from “$X” to 1.75X”. Extend this over multiple components and suppliers. Ford may have been betting that holding high inventory for a short period of time would be economically wiser than just buying out the tooling and paying higher piece costs. I could be wrong.

[Capricio]

I have no expectation that even if GM figures out their Ultium assembly process and works out their software bugs, that they will be selling even 10% of Tesla's EV volume. Ditto for Stellantis. Yet they are all betting the farm on it. Sad to watch this catastrophe unfold.

I thought Hyundai/Kia would be selling more, anecdotally I've at least seen some of those on the roads around here. Most of those on the list of 29 I have not even seen in real life.

[Capricio]

https://fortune.com/2024/02/24/next-...nvestors-flee/


Some highlights:


For investors, the sense of gloom has been building since October, when Tesla Inc. warned of sagging interest in EVs. Though shares of the EV giant have fared poorly since then, losing around 20% and massively underperforming the broader market, the impact on smaller rivals like Rivian and Lucid has been nothing short of disastrous.

Both Rivian and Lucid are now worth a fraction of the prices they fetched at their public-market debuts in 2021. Rivian’s market value is around $9.6 billion, and Lucid’s is about $6.9 billion. That’s a long way down from their $153 billion and $91 billion valuation peaks, respectively, in 2021.


Global sales of EVs are estimated to grow 20% this year, to about 16.7 million units, according to BloombergNEF’s most recent analysis. That’s a marked cooling from the 33% jump seen in 2023.


So, yes, still growing, but leveling off to that ~25% market share plateau.

[snizzle]

Wife and I looked at a Grand Cherokee 4xe this past weekend. Blown away by how nice this vehicle is, especially the interior. PHEV with enough range to get her to and from work on an overnight charge (level 1, no pricey level 2 240v install) and roughly the size she wants. Plus we can take this on long trips without worrying about charging infrastructure. GM may have lost us this go 'round.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Capricio

https://fortune.com/2024/02/24/next-...nvestors-flee/


Some highlights:


For investors, the sense of gloom has been building since October, when Tesla Inc. warned of sagging interest in EVs. Though shares of the EV giant have fared poorly since then, losing around 20% and massively underperforming the broader market, the impact on smaller rivals like Rivian and Lucid has been nothing short of disastrous.

Both Rivian and Lucid are now worth a fraction of the prices they fetched at their public-market debuts in 2021. Rivian’s market value is around $9.6 billion, and Lucid’s is about $6.9 billion. That’s a long way down from their $153 billion and $91 billion valuation peaks, respectively, in 2021.


Global sales of EVs are estimated to grow 20% this year, to about 16.7 million units, according to BloombergNEF’s most recent analysis. That’s a marked cooling from the 33% jump seen in 2023.


So, yes, still growing, but leveling off to that ~25% market share plateau.

To paraphrase a favorite quote from my favorite Monty Python movie…”they’re not quite dead yet”.

Rivian and Lucid are burning through cash at rates similar to Tesla’s burn rate after launching the Model S and before launching the Model 3. Their largest investors (Amazon for Rivian and Saudi Arabia PIF for Lucid) understand this and are staying the course, but watching additional investment like a hawk. There are a number of EV automakers much closer to the grave than Rivian and Lucid. No stories on those guys because most readers wouldn’t know who they are. The main difference between Rivian and Lucid compared to those closer to insolvency is that Rivian and Lucid have product on the street bringing in revenue. It’lll be a couple years before the revenue effectively offsets cost, so if you’re an investor looking for a 12 - 24 month profit, stay away.

[lbls1]

I would not call the technology dead either. Pre-mature is a better description. Liquid gasoline engines are at a prime technological state, so an alternative fuel will need to go through stages of development before it can be cast as an alternative to gas engines.

[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

To paraphrase a favorite quote from my favorite Monty Python movie…”they’re not quite dead yet”.

Rivian and Lucid are burning through cash at rates similar to Tesla’s burn rate after launching the Model S and before launching the Model 3. Their largest investors (Amazon for Rivian and Saudi Arabia PIF for Lucid) understand this and are staying the course, but watching additional investment like a hawk. There are a number of EV automakers much closer to the grave than Rivian and Lucid. No stories on those guys because most readers wouldn’t know who they are. The main difference between Rivian and Lucid compared to those closer to insolvency is that Rivian and Lucid have product on the street bringing in revenue. It’lll be a couple years before the revenue effectively offsets cost, so if you’re an investor looking for a 12 - 24 month profit, stay away.

I think both Rivian and Lucid make cool vehicles but unless Amazon and the Saudis simply don't care if they are ever profitable - which is possible - I think they are both dead men walking.

[Martinjlm]

This is a very good, very neutral article that details GM’s problems in bringing their Ultium based EVs to market.

https://insideevs.com/features/70970...are-batteries/

As I’ve said before strategy? Good. Execution? Really bad. Looks like they may be out of the woods soon.

[90503]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

This is a very good, very neutral article that details GM’s problems in bringing their Ultium based EVs to market.

https://insideevs.com/features/70970...are-batteries/

As I’ve said before strategy? Good. Execution? Really bad. Looks like they may be out of the woods soon.

Good article. Neutral is a good way to put it. Not sure how it makes it a good strategy. Looking at it neutrally, the strategy seems like a colossal failure with horrible planning and foresight. The 2017 decision by gm to go all electric doesn't seem to be working out for them.

As years drag on, perhaps they may get their act together at some point. In the meantime, why would anyone wait for a gm product? The potential future EV customers are already onboard a ship that's set sail: Tesla. (The Bolt, for example, eliminated and the void filled by other makers). The 300K Lyriq strategy in China, seems to bury any chance of an affordable GM EV. My, the strategy!

In 2017 they should have named their EV future lineup the EX-Quse model series.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by 90503

Good article. Neutral is a good way to put it. Not sure how it makes it a good strategy. Looking at it neutrally, the strategy seems like a colossal failure with horrible planning and foresight. The 2017 decision by gm to go all electric doesn't seem to be working out for them.

As years drag on, perhaps they may get their act together at some point. In the meantime, why would anyone wait for a gm product? The potential future EV customers are already onboard a ship that's set sail: Tesla. (The Bolt, for example, eliminated and the void filled by other makers). The 300K Lyriq strategy in China, seems to bury any chance of an affordable GM EV. My, the strategy!

In 2017 they should have named their EV future lineup the EX-Quse model series.

I was speaking more about the Ultium strategy. Basically making it a very flexible vehicle platform with flexible battery sizing through use of modules that can stack or lie side-by-side and be replaceable. The execution of getting the packs manufactured is the poor execution.

The overall EV or nuthin’ strategy is not anything that I expected at the time it was announced, nor is it a strategy I would adopt if CEO for a day, but I understand the rationale.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

Apple gives up on EV project.

https://hotair.com/headlines/2024/02...ffort-n3783695

Apple Car never made sense even if EV's were still growing at 4000%.

[Capricio]

They better get it together before the Chinese get here via Mexico...

https://www.theautopian.com/how-mexi...-car-industry/

Still waiting for that ~$15k-ish commuter EV I can buy.

[Evergreen6]

Interesting to point out that the USMCA (NAFTA twisted by the previous administration) is making the ingress of Chines goods through Mexico easier than the original NAFTA agreement. The only way forward is to impose new tariffs and incentives, which began with the revised EV tax credit--it is only available on new and used EV's which meet a designated North American sourcing and manufacturing content by component. Batteries and the main components of the car need to be created within North America -- not imported for China. I expect stiffer tariffs and even more pointed incentives as time goes on.

Speaking of $15k-ish EV commuters, used Model 3's are going for about $20k and I'm not sure what used $26k MSRP Chevy Bolts are going for, but they're a decent and cheap little car with good range.