General

GM says that they will be able to sell EVs at a cheaper price.

edited November -1 in General
www.yahoo.com/finance/news/gm-planning-electric-cars-wont-211435164.html

With Tesla lowering the cost of batteries, this makes sense.
«13456789

Comments

  • edited June 2019
    They need to talk less, and do more.
  • edited June 2019
    My thoughts exactly- then do it. (Insert Ben Stiller GIF here).
  • edited June 2019
    Every Tesla-killer wannabe is promising to have cars that are cheaper/better/have more range than a Tesla Model <insert Tesla Model name here> car - and all are invariably going to be available 3 or more years from now. GM is simply one of the worst offenders. Seems 2022 is the new 2020.

    I am sure GM can release a gimped to the eyeballs EV, thats just as crappy inside and out as most of their ICE mobiles that they struggle to sell now are.

    By the time they do get it out though, the market will have moved on and people will for the most part expect a better car when its electric, for the money, not just a "look! its the same as your old gas car" - which is more or less what GM is aiming (low) to achieve.

    And in any case what exactly do the likes of GM, BMW, VW, Jaguar, Volvo etc all think Tesla will be delivering to customers then? Merely the same 3 models as today, that are nothing more than "warmed over and rehashed" a dozen times versions of whats on offer today?

    If these guys want to stay in the game, they should focus on beating the 7 year old Model S specs today, or the 10+ year old Model S specs in the future.

    Instead of wishing/pretending cheap, in voluminous quantities of battery packs for $1 a KwH at the pack level are going to descend from up on high and mysteriously install themselves into their vehicles, and only their vehicles.

    Simply put, if Tesla doesn't eat their lunch in the meantime - the Chinese BEV makers will.

    Maybe the tariffs on Chinese BEVS might make their presence in the US not so common in 2022 - but they'll control the rest of the world wide market that GM and co normally export to.

    So remind me again who GM think they are going to sell these cheap as shit EVs to exactly?
  • edited June 2019
    Just more of the same ole same ole.
  • bpbp
    edited June 2019
    Tesla has a several year lead on battery and motor technology, plus with the ability to design and manufacture battery packs and motors in-house, they have additional cost advantages - and that probably won't change for a while. So it'll be difficult for other manufacturers to provide comparable range/capacity at a lower price for the battery & motors.

    One factor usually ignored in comparisons between Tesla and the other manufacturers is that Tesla is in rapid growth mode while the other manufacturers are stable or declining. This puts Tesla at a disadvantage because they have to invest in new manufacturing, service, support and supercharging - while the other manufacturers generally have excess capacity that can be shifted to EV production and sales.

    However, with direct sales - Tesla's cost per sale is significantly lower because they aren't funding dealerships - which will make it more challenging for other manufacturers to compete with Tesla on price/range/performance without losing money on EV development & sales.

    Tesla's biggest challenges continue to be mostly internal - can they handle the rapid growth, continue to add/improve vehicles, rollout FSD - and do that with sustainable profitability (since there's a limit of how much new funding they can scrounge).
  • edited June 2019
  • I wish GM the best. We need more EV options including more affordable ones.
    However, I wish a pox on GM if they really don't intend or can't deliver and this is just disingenuous rhetoric.
    We know that GM can make a good EV, the EV1, S-10EV, Volt, SparkEV, and Bolt are proof of that. They just need to actually make a desirable one and not crush it.
  • edited June 2019
    So "will be able" means "not able to sell" now.
  • edited June 2019
    And *only* if an extraordinary number of ducks for some reason, decide to line themselves up for GM to take aim at.

    Evidence says that likely its *not* going to happen.

    This announcement is just GMs belated loser speech along the lines of "We woulda, shoulda, coulda".
  • edited November -1
    GM is paying Tesla to get regulatory credits . It's hard to believe that they will be able to sell EVs cheaper if they are prioritizing selling gas guzzlers now. I mean, it would be great to have more EVs on the road, but it's annoying when companies claim to support EVs but don't follow through with meaningful actions. The Bolt is a "Tesla Killer" if someone could die from laughing at the sales numbers years later. How about Tesla Tickler?
  • edited June 2019
    Redundancy, except as a fail-safe, is a sign of incompetence.

    All I've ever heard out of GM (except when they were deliberately killing their customers) is alot of empty promises and this is more of the same, just a different day...wash, rinse and repeat.
  • edited November -1
    Notice that GM never said they could sell EVs at a cheaper price profitably. Anyone can sell a car at a "cheaper" price. Just depends how much you're willing to lose. Still, consider it costs GM $5-10K per ZEV credit to keep shipping massive polluter vehicles. They do get something back for selling a few EVs - the ability to dump the other 99% pollution/gas hogs into the few states that care about the environment and what we breathe.
  • edited June 2019
    They will sell it cheaper probably because its shittier.
  • edited June 2019
    Good point. They wouldn't want their EVs to be so compelling that they would lose profits from selling gas guzzlers.
  • edited November -1
    You will know they are serious about EV when they introduce it on their flagship brand, Cadillac. otherwise it’s just more lip service
  • edited June 2019
    The last 'sort of' EV that they introduced into the Cadillac brand was the overpriced ELR which was basically a Chevy Volt with nicer seats.

    But you are correct. Unless GM ships a pure EV as a Cadillac, they are not serious.
  • edited June 2019
    The largest and remaining issue continues to be fast charging nationwide. I think whatever GM does will not make a hoot of differance if they don’t have a fast charging option with total nationwide coverage. The car could be the most awesome car available in the world but if you can’t travel with it what’s the point?
    Customers will be wowed by the performance, the handling, the creature comforts, then they’ll ask the dreaded question , how far can I go? Salesman will say something like 320 miles, customer responds with “oh, that’s pretty good, what do I do when I need a charge?”
    What’s the salesman going to say?
    “Oh, use the onboard computer to show you where the nearest charging station is”, customer says “ how long does it need to charge”, salesman says depends on where you stop, could be anywhere from 3-8 hours”
    Customer says “ forget you” and walks out.
    This applies to all manufacturers. Especially in the U.S., Europe is addressing this very issue much better than the U.S. is.
    The car remains a short commuter car. Who the heck wants to spend their hard earned money on a commuter car that you can’t drive long distance. For having a lot of big shots occupying fancy offices in Detroit, they sure are not very good at looking ahead to the future.
    Tesla is years ahead of anyone else.
  • edited June 2019
    oh, they're looking ahead to the future all right...hoping the electric car thing will pass and they can stop worrying about innovating a new paradigm of sustainable transport. There is a reason legacy mfgs do not want electric cars. Same ol', same ol' makes immediate money, screw the future.

    No way I'd ever get a non-Tesla for a gasmobile replacement. It can't be done with 3rd party hodge podge expensive charging network.

    With Tesla, just plug in your destination and go. stop and plug in at any of the multiple stalls per Supercharger location. no muss, no fuss. it's a thing of beauty that NO legacy mfg is EVER going to do. period. costs too much.

    All the reviews of "long" distance non-Tesla EVs come up short on this EVERY SINGLE TIME.

    Go Elon!
  • edited June 2019
    I have to give some credit to GM. They are at least not totally brain dead.
  • edited June 2019
    At least all automakers are being forced into EVs in the China market, often the more profitable for legacy companies. Hopefully they will learn something that can be applied to the domestic market.

    I predict some states in the next 5 years will invert incentives. Rather than give money to buy an EV, they will switch to charging a pollution tax or some such on ICE cars. Likely not quite like Norway (100% tax on non-EVs), but a 25% tax doesn't seem out of the question. Perhaps start at 5% and go up an additional 5% per year. Could bring in enough revenue to reduce sales or income taxes too!
  • edited November -1
    I like that idea. Gas tax would be better but that will face too steep a consumer opposition. Extra sales tax on non-EV's in just few major states would make a great impact on auto companies' strategy. That will face less oppositions too. Not that many people will buy a new car in the next few years.
  • edited June 2019
    Yes, a pollution tax on new ICEV. Then they don't complain about subsidizing EVs.
  • bpbp
    edited November -1
    Before the Bolt came out - the media portrayed it as a Tesla killer with long range, coming out before the Model 3 and with features lacking in Tesla vehicles like Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

    First quarter, Tesla delivered about 6X more Model 3's than GM delivered Bolts, even though the average price of a Model 3 was higher (and that was quarter that was below expectations for Tesla).

    Tesla has raised the bar again with V3 Superchargers and refreshing S/X, including longer range battery packs - making it more difficult for manufacturers to compete on the high end, along with plans to compete in the larger markets with Y and pickups.

    Tesla has a technology advantage today - which will be difficult to maintain in the long run, though with unique benefits like the Supercharger network and using mobile service for most maintenance, if/when the other manufacturers catch up, Tesla may be able to defend its market share.

    Tesla's biggest threat right now is Tesla - can they survive the transition to higher volume vehicle production, get back to profitability, improve customer support & service with an increasing # of vehicles, and do so while continuing to innovate and introduce new/refreshed models?
  • edited June 2019
    “Tesla's biggest threat right now is Tesla - can they survive the transition to higher volume vehicle production, get back to profitability, improve customer support & service with an increasing # of vehicles, and do so while continuing to innovate and introduce new/refreshed models?”

    I agree with bp on this. Granted, these are anecdotal but I see a few posts from people getting cars delivered with issues, causing delays or unpleasant experiences. Keeping in mind that people having problems are more likely to post their experiences than those who didn’t, this seems to be an area for improvement. Some of those posting are on their 2nd or 3rd Tesla. That may play into expectations as well.

    Anyone done research on how various charging networks compare? I may try looking up what’s out there besides the supercharger network for grins. Maybe it’s not as bad for non-Tesla cars as we think?
  • edited June 2019
    "Maybe it’s not as bad for non-Tesla cars as we think?"

    It is worse.
Sign In or Register to comment.