Ford Just Reported a Massive Loss on Every Electric Vehicle It Sold (cnn.com) 160
Ford's electric vehicle unit reported that losses soared in the first quarter to $1.3 billion, or $132,000 for each of the 10,000 vehicles it sold in the first three months of the year, helping to drag down earnings for the company overall. From a report: Ford, like most automakers, has announced plans to shift from traditional gas-powered vehicles to EVs in coming years. But it is the only traditional automaker to break out results of its retail EV sales. And the results it reported Wednesday show another sign of the profit pressures on the EV business at Ford and other automakers.
The EV unit, which Ford calls Model e, sold 10,000 vehicles in the quarter, down 20% from the number it sold a year earlier. And its revenue plunged 84% to about $100 million, which Ford attributed mostly to price cuts for EVs across the industry. That resulted in the $1.3 billion loss before interest and taxes (EBIT), and the massive per-vehicle loss in the Model e unit. A price war among EVs for about a year and a half has made profitability very difficult said Ford CFO John Lawler. He said while Ford has removed about $5,000 in cost on each Mustang Mach-E, "revenue is dropping faster than we can take out the cost." In 2023, Ford Model e reported a full-year EBIT loss of $4.7 billion on sales of 116,000 EVs, or an average of $40,525 per vehicle, just more than a third of the first quarter loss.
The EV unit, which Ford calls Model e, sold 10,000 vehicles in the quarter, down 20% from the number it sold a year earlier. And its revenue plunged 84% to about $100 million, which Ford attributed mostly to price cuts for EVs across the industry. That resulted in the $1.3 billion loss before interest and taxes (EBIT), and the massive per-vehicle loss in the Model e unit. A price war among EVs for about a year and a half has made profitability very difficult said Ford CFO John Lawler. He said while Ford has removed about $5,000 in cost on each Mustang Mach-E, "revenue is dropping faster than we can take out the cost." In 2023, Ford Model e reported a full-year EBIT loss of $4.7 billion on sales of 116,000 EVs, or an average of $40,525 per vehicle, just more than a third of the first quarter loss.
Gotta start somewhere (Score:4, Insightful)
They are new at it. You don't get great overnight.
Re:Gotta start somewhere (Score:5, Interesting)
While that's true, the economies of scale are lacking. They sell a few million cars a year, but are only selling 10,000 of these in a quarter. They can't even compete with their own ICE brands at those small numbers.
I would buy an EV if there was a good car option on the market for me. Most are either overly premium or cut the wrong corners. Going SUV size fits more batteries, but then cuts the range because of the overall size and weight.
It's at the point where Tesla is still one of the cheapest options.
Re: (Score:3)
This may be compounded in that EV sales in the US, in general, over the past year or so, have been down, and new car inventories of EVs are piling up on sales lots as compared to their ICE counterparts.
It seems, to a large extent, the people that actually really WANT an EV, have one....and the rest of the US, for reasons ranging from price, range anxiety to insurance, etc....aren't really in the market for one.
See here [youtu.be].
and
Here [youtu.be]....
Re: (Score:2)
Economies at scale don't work when you're operating at a loss - as all EV production has until very recently (to the exception of some Tesla models). Every other manufacturer has to subsidize their production with increased costs for their other models.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Gotta start somewhere (Score:5, Informative)
Ford made the Ford Ranger EV 1998 to 2002, then the Ford Focus Electric from 2011 to 2018 before switching to the Mach-E. They are not "new at it". They're just bad at it.
To be fair, I have a lot more hope for Ford than GM, as Farley seems to actually understand the critical importance of turning things around and the limited timeframes to do so, unlike GM, which still seems to only care about press.
Re:Gotta start somewhere (Score:4, Interesting)
Ford is not bad at it as much as they haven't figured out how to make a profit yet. How many years did it take Amazon to be profitable?
Can't make profit with only early adopters (Score:2)
Ford is not bad at it as much as they haven't figured out how to make a profit yet.
Ford's method of making a profit requires the large volume of sales that only the mass market can provide. They are not designed to profit off of only the early adopter market.
Re: (Score:2)
It's pretty easy to offer consumers a great deal when you're willing to dump wheelbarrows of cash into a furnace to do so.
Re:Gotta start somewhere (Score:4, Informative)
No, Ford is bad at it. They're bad at it because FOrd isn't good at making reliable vehicles. Ask anyone who's had to get work done on their Ford's, or a Ford mechanic.
The engineering culture at Ford is such taht they design things to be sold, not maintained. This is true for all Fords, with things like having to completely disassemble large parts of the vehicle to do basic maintenance being commonplace, even on ICE. Little things change sometimes multiple times per year on the same model year, so you're never sure if you need parts from one year or the other until you try to fit them. This leads to some really horrible QC, with vehicles often failing straight off the lot. I've known 2 people in the last several years to have their brand new Ford have major mechanical failure, and heard a number of other anecdotal stories from others.
If you need more anecdotes, just hop over to Facebook Marketplace or Craigslist and look at the used price and condition of Fords vs comparable Chevy, etc. vehicles. Pick one - Ford trucks, midsize/small cars, SUVs, hatchbacks. You'll pay significantly less for the Ford, which will likely be in "better condition" with fewer miles, than the comparable vehicle for this very reason. Case in point: old Broncos vs Ramchargers or K5 Blazers, or trucks in general. There's a definite pecking order and it is largely based on the reality of overall vehicle quality. A 25 year old rusted out Toyota with 250k+ would go for 8k, where a similar truck from Chevy S10 $4k, but the Ford Ranger - which may not be rusted out or have any visible issues - sits around at $1500-2000 for months unsold. (I say this as someone who buys, repairs, and flips old vehicles.)
Now imagine those problems when you add software computing parts to every component in the operation of the vehicle...
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you on GM. I've heard Mary Barra speak a dozen times in the past couple of years, and I've never heard her make a lick of sense.
Technology Adoption Lifecycle (Score:5, Interesting)
Ford made the Ford Ranger EV 1998 to 2002, then the Ford Focus Electric from 2011 to 2018 before switching to the Mach-E. They are not "new at it". They're just bad at it.
That's not true. The market is not ready for mass adoption. We are barely getting past the "early adopter" stage.
There is a thing called the Technology Adoption Lifecycle. It recognizes that there is not really one market, that there are actually five markets with five distinct sets of customers with different means, different requirements, and different perspectives. We can simplify this for discussion by reducing the first two markets to the "early adopters" and the latter three markets to the "main market". Between these two is a "chasm" that is notoriously difficult, and time consuming, the cross.
The early adopters tend to be far wealthier, they tend to own homes that be updated with their own chargers, these home tend to offer shelter to the vehicles from extreme weather, etc. The preceding makes them ideal customers for a new EV offerings in general. Now add that they also tend to be less risk averse and willing to try new and unproven things. They are now idea customers for the new and emerging EV technology.
They can afford the higher price tags.
There is very little range anxiety as they top off their batteries to full each night when they park in the garage.
There is very little cold weather anxiety as their car is protected in their garage overnight
There is very little anxiety of expensive repairs, the lack of small local inexpensive repair shops.
They can afford a mistake, buying a technology before it is truly ready for the mass market.
Much of the main market simply can't afford the more expensive EV vehicles. Shortages of chargers and unmaintained broken chargers generate legitimate anxiety, as the Ford CEO's charging problems demonstrated on his failed "road trip". As did last winter's example of EVs that failed to start in the morning after exposure to harsh overnight conditions. The main market is terribly innovative, they want to see a reasonable timespan were the new technology is largely working, working for people like them, not people in some idealized situation. We aren't there yet.
We are only now attempting to get past the early adopters, and the chasm between them and the mass market is not built yet.
Re: Technology Adoption Lifecycle (Score:2)
As an early adopter who leased a Nissan Leaf in 2012, I agree with the first part of what you wrote- having a home with chargers and garage.
The other concerns don't ring true. Even though I'm fairly affluent - I live in a mansion in the hills in a very high cost area, vehicle cost is still a concern. A mistake can still be costly. That's why I leased, at a cost od only about $200/month.
Range anxiety was not a thing for me. But range reality certainly was, with the Leaf's very limited range. I emptied the ba
Re: (Score:2)
Range anxiety was not a thing for me.
I think the range anxiety is elevated in those that don't have a charger to top off the battery every night. For people who act sort of like ICE owners, charging when necessary or getting "low" (YLowMV), find a working charger when needed can take some work, and it definitely is a longer process.
A garage doesn't prevent the car from using much more electricity due to heater use when weather is cold.
The garage is more for protection against extreme weather. Note the various stories last winter about EVs not working when it got really cold. They seem to have been parked outside overnight. A garage, especially at
Re: (Score:2)
The garage is more for protection against extreme weather. Note the various stories last winter about EVs not working when it got really cold. They seem to have been parked outside overnight. A garage, especially attached, should help the car/battery stay a little warmer and avoid that sort of failure.
Also note that ICE cars also frequently fail to start when parked outside in cold temperatures. This isn't specific to EVs. If anything, EVs should be a lot less likely to fail to start, because they have a giant lithium ion battery pack with battery heaters to maintain its temperature, and that main pack periodically tops up the 12V battery when it gets low. Also, EVs tend to have active monitoring to warn you when the 12V battery is getting near the end of its life.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I'd like a plug-in hybrid (PIH), and hope those are perfected soon. It gives one more fuel options. For normal commuting I could plug in at night to charge and never have to visit a gas station, yet have gasoline as an option for longer trips or blackouts.
IFF the ICE side is something equivalent to a classic 2.2L Toyota 4 cylinder. Something that easily generates sufficient power, not a 1.xL that has to get near an "explosion imminent" level just to pass someone on the highway.
I expect more pandemics, civil wars, Yellowstone eruptions, petulant Presidents, and/or zombie apocalypses. PIH's are a better fit for chaos.
Well, perhaps if a PIH had a setting to run on moonshine. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Ford made the Ford Ranger EV 1998 to 2002, then the Ford Focus Electric from 2011 to 2018 before switching to the Mach-E. They are not "new at it". They're just bad at it.
Or they're unwilling to stick it out past a release cycle or two and give up on the long-term too quickly. Sounds like pretty standard short-term, gotta get my stock options, upper-management / board-room thinking to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Gotta start somewhere (Score:4, Insightful)
FORD has always had a bad safety culture, so there are no surprises when people are extremely cautious about a new type of vehicle from FORD.
Toyota pretty much always takes the king maker crown when it comes to engineering of a new vehicle type, even if ultimately that type (eg Hydrogen) doesn't pan out.
Everyone else has to play second fiddle. Americans are encouraged to buy American, but when the choices offered by American motor companies is "might kill you" and "gutless wonders that will be in the shop more than it will be driven", it's any wonder why it's hard to go "Hey look we got this high tech, cool car", and everyone goes "PINTO~~"
Re: Gotta start somewhere (Score:2)
Toyota makes a Prius Prime without active battery cooling, and without a battery capacity warranty. Many owners are reporting mass loss of EV range with no recourse.
They are certainly not the king of engineering when it comes to PHEVs.
Passive cooling of the battery is the same mistake Nissan made on the Leaf, an early EV. No excuse for Toyota not to learn from that.
Even GM gives a 70% capacity on my 2015 Volt, and I have never had to use it. 9 years later, it still charges the same amount of kWh each time I
Re: (Score:2)
Ford has always been the 'more bling than sense' option, at least as long as I've been alive. Some are very nice vehicles, and their interiors are top notch for an American vehicle (vs like, a Land Rover), and they're often the vehicle most purchased by people who aren't smart enough to connect the dots or pay attention to their environment enough to not buy a vehicle which is obviously not well built. Case in point - middle aged Karens buying gutless Mustangs. Their reliability is even worse than VW.
Re: (Score:3)
The true information gleaned from this article is that Ford actually makes some EVs...
Re: (Score:2)
"New" at it? Do you consider the fact that Ford produced one of the first commercial EVs over 100 years ago, or that they've been in continuous commercial production of EV and hybrid vehicles since 2011 - likely designing them for many years prior to that (probably around 2008, like every other automaker, when the gov't started pushing massive subsidies in that directioN)?
Tell me, do you consider a "tech startup" that's 13 years into funding and on Class K funding to be "new at it"? Come on.
Most of the EV v
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the EV vehicle costs are material costs - the batteries, copper for the motors and wiring, and so on, are a huge part of this cost disparity. The bulk of the vehicle weight is in rare earth minerals, and that weight is not insubstantial.
Very little of an EV's weight comes from anything that's particularly rare.
The main components in a modern Tesla battery are lithium, iron, phosphorus, and oxygen. Lithium is the rarest, at about .002% of the Earth's crust. There's "only" about a third as much of that as there is copper. Now think about how much we use copper. Iron makes up 6.3% of the Earth's crust, making it the fourth most abundant element behind only oxygen, silicon, and aluminum. Phosphorus makes up about .1% of the Earth's crust
The mandates are just theatre right now (Score:3)
If so, we shouldn't have the government pushing such immature tech on us.
Its just theatre to keep the true believing party members happy. No one expects the current and proposed mandates to really go into effect. All the hardship and inconvenience is scheduled to take place on some other politician's watch. Well, that future office holder has no obligation to accept the pain of past theatrics. The mandates will be scrapped or changed as their start dates near.
The dates will be pushed forward due to the anticipated technological and infrastructure requirements that have not ma
Ebikes demand is huge, cars not so much. (Score:3, Interesting)
The public did not ask for BEVs, a few evangelists excepted and they already own at least one.
Ebike demand OTOH exploded as they're terrific urban vehicles.
EVs are for politicians... (Score:2, Interesting)
... to pretend to make a difference while actually doing nothing of the sort and potentially making things worse depending on how the battery materials are sourced and the electricity to charge the EVs is produced.
And no, H2 fuel cells are not the solution - energetically they're a complete non starter when you take the full lifecycle of H2 generation into account.
Unpopular though it is , if you want something with good efficiencity, long range and lowish CO2 production diesel is the answer. Yes, particulat
Re:EVs are for politicians... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, particulates and NOx but thats a solved problem now.
Is it? Are you talking about everyone having a DPF and Urea system in their cars just to use diesels?
Also we have the EV push in part because of fucking diesel-gate so your biggest proponents (VW) were the ones that effectively killed it's chances in the US>
All these arguments are like 10 years old no longer applicable. The public demand argument (it's there, cost is the issue currently) the materials issue (BEV's make up their carbon faster than an ICE car) sourcing (battery manufacturers are always knocking down the amount of cobalt and nickel. Part of why a lot of Teslas's are on lithium-phosphate(?) batteries instead of traditional lithium-ion. and a BEV still comes out ahead of an ICE car even if you charge it with nothing but coal power.
Get new arguments please.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not just cost....it's range anxiety, and the fact that not everyone has a single family home they own with covered parking where they can recharge overnight....and the lack of charging infrastructure in the vast swaths of land between CA and NYC on the extreme coasts.
For a number of reasons, the people that really want EVs....have them, the rest of the country for the most part is "meh"....and not really in the market.
At least not
Re: EVs are for politicians... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not only range anxiety either, its charging time. Who wants to sit at some windswept charging point for an hour (assuming you can find one and it's high power) possibly in the middle of nowhere when with an ICE you can drive in, fill up, pay and be on your way in under 5 mins.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: EVs are for politicians... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: EVs are for politicians... (Score:2)
Re: EVs are for politicians... (Score:2)
All new diesels come with a dog and a blue system. No not all the old ones dont have them but they'll be in the road still for while EVs or no EVS so what's your point?
As for VW , that's corporate cost cutting for you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The most popular car on the planet (as measured by absolute sales) is the BEV tesla model 3, what are you on about
Re: (Score:3)
The public did not ask for BEVs, a few evangelists excepted and they already own at least one.
The public doesn't ask for anything. They inherently hate change. It took years for car makers to even get the concept of the automobile into the public's heads. It's called marketing.
The issue is the marketing right now favours traditional pollution, so you have two different interests at play.
FWIW I used to think the gasoline engine was the be all and end all. Then I tried an EV, then I bought an EV, and I will never buy a gasoline car again because I realised how ignorant I was.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just the accounting (Score:5, Insightful)
Ford is taking advantage of favorable accounting rules to shift cost to the EV unit from other parts of the company. That allows Ford to take further advantage of tax loopholes that allow companies to deduct more from "green" businesses than other businesses.
Re:It's just the accounting (Score:5, Informative)
This, so much this. It's a shame that reporting is allowed to create (mis)leading headlines.
The articles on this don't even mention that this is standard practice related to amortization schedules of R&D and other capital costs - it absolutely does not mean that the marginal cost of every vehicle is $100k greater than the sale price of each vehicle, and the article writers know it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's just the accounting (Score:5, Funny)
Remember when religious zealots were known for fire and brimstone? Now they're apparently known for predictable weather and a habitable planet.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Ford does not have the luxury of using those same credits so its numbers are more reflective of the cost to start up an EV car company.
Re: (Score:3)
This is not accounting tricks. This is sales issues, and highlights serious problems in the market. Ford attributing costs to the EV unit is not a problem, as it does get them more tax breaks which should make the enterprise more profitable. If that were the
Re: (Score:2)
"The EV unit, which Ford calls Model e, sold 10,000 vehicles in the quarter, down 20% from the number it sold a year earlier. And its revenue plunged 84% to about $100 million, which Ford attributed mostly to price cuts for EVs across the industry."
...This is not accounting tricks...
So you believe they literally sold 10,000 units for a total of $100 million, i.e. at a price of $10k each ?
Re: (Score:2)
And many people are not interested in buying EVs; some are curious. Particularly with Chinese dumping and a price war going on, many people are leasing EVs [bloomberg.com] instead of buying, waiting to see how far prices go down before committing or simply curious but not ready. Ford can report a lease as a "sale" beca
Re: (Score:2)
It IS a question of accounting.
Do you count the massive expenditure of building/refitting manufacturing lines to produce EVs as a massive loss on the few thousand EVs produced thus far? Or do you look at it as a capitol investment and amortize it over decades of future production?
The article chooses to look at it as a single point in time "OMG THEY SPENT SOOO MUCH, AND (so far) MADE SO LITTLE" perspective.
It's not a lie, but it is misleading..
So product keeps pace with write offs only? (Score:2)
Clearly they need to drop the prices (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, some people can't sarcasm. And it seems more and more exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah we are getting there, we are in the transition as manufacturing capacity catches up, especially on the battery front. A lot of factories are currently under construction.
Re:Clearly they need to drop the prices (Score:5, Interesting)
That's not clear. One of the big problems with EVs is the ability to charge them. Lots of people don't have any way to do this at home, and the away-from-home chargers are often iffy either in access or availability. (Reports say they are often broken.)
FWIW, I won't be interested in a new car until full-automatic driving is included. So my observation of the market is a bit sketchy. But if I were to buy an EV I'd have no reliable place to charge it.
Re: (Score:2)
Presumably (Score:5, Insightful)
Eventually, yes, you need to make money on each vehicle to eventually recoup the NRE, otherwise you don't have a business. But the time horizon is quite different than a single quarter or fiscal year.
Someone somewhere probably has the info: by comparable measures, how deep in the red was Tesla when they were only a few 10k units into Model S production?
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for explaining. I was dumbfounded when I read "$132,000 for each of the 10,000 vehicles it sold". That made no sense to me.
But if they factor in the "ancillary" costs, yeah, it would make sense.
Re: (Score:3)
EVs are perfectly fine for daily commutes within a 120 mile round trip (just pulled that number out of my ass with 1 hour each way @ 60mph) as long as you can charge at home over night. The entire problem for those potential customers is PRICE PRICE PRICE.
Re: (Score:3)
Everyone seems to be missing a BIG factor that isn't price.
It's the fact that a LARGE, very significant number of people do not live in single family dwellings they own with off street parking where they can "charge overnight"....
Right now as it stands,
Re: (Score:3)
Your use case is simply not the intended market.
But the whole point people are trying to make is, once you take out the people who don't have a place to charge, the people who can't afford an ev, the people that don't want to modify their homes for an ev, the people who go on long trips occasionally and don't want them to take longer or take more planning, the people who don't like change, and all the other smaller reasons why people don't want these.... The intended market is very small. EV proponents keep saying things like '80% of all trips are withi
Re: (Score:2)
EV proponents keep saying things like '80% of all trips are within range' but they forget that it doesn't mean the same thing as 'EVs will work for 80% of people'.
^this, One of my friends bought a Model 3 as he mostly commutes around town, after 2 years he is going back to ICE. He loves the EV but that small percentage of time he travels for family or a holiday is hugely inconvenient, requires planning or a rental vehicle. Easter this year was the final straw for him as he was stuck in an hour queue just to get to a charger. So probably 95% of the time EV's work for him, but he can't put up with that 5% of the time anymore.
Someone doesn't understand basic accounting... (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be the person that wrote this article.
Ford has to depreciate their CapEx costs. There was a significant capital investment to design the cars, build the factory, buy machinery, install production lines, etc, etc, etc. You depreciate those costs.
This loss per vehicle is basically meaningless, except to manufacture some outrage for certain political camps.
Re:Someone doesn't understand basic accounting... (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone probably understands just fine. You don't get nearly the clicks with stories about amortization that you do with stories about OMG ELECTRIC VEHICLES SUXXORS TO THE $110,000!!!
EBIT or EBITA? (Score:4, Informative)
Wouldn't be surprised (Score:4, Interesting)
I cannot think of a better definition for "lemon".
Re: (Score:2)
In case anyone else is wondering, this is the Mustang Mach-E, which is an SUV and has nothing to do with the Mustang muscle car.
Re: (Score:2)
Accounting or Economy? (Score:2)
The accounting angle alot of people are commenting about is true. Wish they would be more specific on if there are big sunk capital costs included here.
The other side is the economy. Most people can't afford the cost of these cars. Some of the smaller one have come down, but there is a premium on them. On top of that, inflation is a real thing people think about when they buy food/necessities and see a larger bill. Ford also announced it was cutting it's projections for sales of EVs this year just a bi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This should shock no-one.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel like the auto-makers trying to jump on the EV bandwagon arrogantly assumed, "Tesla is just a n00b at auto manufacturing. We've got over 100 years of experience. As soon as we step into this game, it's all over for them and the rest of the Johnny-Come-Lately brands trying to sell people electric cars!"
They didn't take into account a VERY important factor. Tesla established itself as a "premium/luxury" vehicle pretty quickly. The combination of the instant torque and industry-leading 0-60MPH times, plus advanced tech like the "Autopilot" functionality, not to mention the huge touch-screen panel/infotainment system that was miles ahead of everyone else.. and then the subsequent build-out of the large supercharger network world-wide meant people would pay as much as 6 figures for one of these vehicles, gladly.
All this stuff was AMAZING back in the 2012-2016 time-frame, when traditional auto-makers only dabbled in EVs by essentially tossing a battery pack and motor in an existing vehicle, winding up with poor range and no big advantage for the buyer.
At this point in time? Early adopters of EVs are through. They're just another mainstream option, now. So companies like Ford were fools to expect good sales of anything priced like Tesla asked for a Model S or X. They made vehicles like the Mach-E assuming they'd be profitable asking that kind of money for one. But this is 2024, where people who had that kind of money for an EV already spent it on their Tesla -- and everyone else is only interested in an EV to save money on total cost of ownership. If the car costs 2-3x more than they can get a decent, reliable gas powered one, the ROI isn't there.
Re: (Score:3)
I would mod this up if I had points at the moment.
We have endured over a decade of "XXX is going to eat Tesla's lunch just you watch" postings and it just never happened. Every argument in the vein showed up right here at /. Still does.
It was almost 10 years ago when Musk first started pointing out that designing the car was only 5% (his summation) of the R&D job. Their real IP and assets were the factories that made the cars, which in turn are designed to be built in those factories economical
Re: (Score:3)
I would mod this up if I had points at the moment.
We have endured over a decade of "XXX is going to eat Tesla's lunch just you watch" postings and it just never happened. Every argument in the vein showed up right here at /. Still does.
Tesla is a massive #1 in market cap [companiesmarketcap.com] and a dismal 14th in sales [factorywarrantylist.com].
Traditional manufacturers have only started showing any interest in BEVs at all in the last couple of years. It's far from clear that Tesla could remain the #1 BEV brand when they start showing interest, it's also far from clear that even if Tesla maintains it's dominance that it justifies it's valuation.
It was almost 10 years ago when Musk first started pointing out that designing the car was only 5% (his summation) of the R&D job.
It's more than 10 years ago that Elon Musk predicted that full self-driving was just around the corner [jalopnik.com]. Now that multiple other companies have
Re: (Score:2)
It's more than 10 years ago that Elon Musk predicted that full self-driving was just around the corner [jalopnik.com]. Now that multiple other companies have surpassed Tesla in self-driving tech he's onto Robots as his next pile of magic beans.
False. Tesla is light years ahead of the competition is self driving tech. It takes 5 minutes of research. Stop being a political drone.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more than 10 years ago that Elon Musk predicted that full self-driving was just around the corner [jalopnik.com]. Now that multiple other companies have surpassed Tesla in self-driving tech he's onto Robots as his next pile of magic beans.
False. Tesla is light years ahead of the competition is self driving tech. It takes 5 minutes of research. Stop being a political drone.
Based on what? Musk's tweets?
Waymo and Cruise delivered a self-driving taxi years ahead of Tesla. And among level 2 cars on the consumer market Tesla is only middle of the pack [consumerreports.org]. As for level 3 self-driving consumer cars, there's only one and it isn't Tesla [mashable.com].
Tesla was the first to put it in vehicles, and it's arguably the most aggressive in pushing the tech, but I don't see evidence that they're the best. And honestly, I think the reason is Musk. He's a smart guy, but he doesn't know ML as much as he thinks h
What a bunch of BS (Score:2)
Electric cars can be made, from scratch, at a cost of about $12 or $13k in materials, the most expensive part being the batteries.
I've never seen an electric vehicle offered for sale that didn't cost at least three times that amount.
So unless they are giving their salesmen an absolutely massive commission, I'm pretty sure that this claim is nothing short of lying.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I don't know what it costs in materials, but there is also labor cost, and up-front costs in setting up an assembly line and supply chain. Not clear how they figured the cost per vehicle. If they are amortizing up-front costs over 1 year, that is an unfair way to characterize it.
Re: (Score:2)
But but but.. (Score:2)
But they saved the climate! Give them more free money!
13 bucks a car. Close to break even. (Score:2)
Some on salesman, one teeny tiny upgrade (Score:2)
However I'm concerned about the $5K reduction in cost on the "Mustang", how was that achieved specifically?
Give Them Away! (Score:2)
If Ford really wants to increase the number of EVs on the road, Ford should GIVE THEM AWAY, because with the savings on marketing expenses, they wouldn't lose all THAT much more money than they're already losing.
Creative accountancy (Score:2)
Meanwhile, China's eating their lunch.
Replaceable batteries (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Great news: someone lied to you... BEVs didn't need battery replacement every seven years.
As it happens, my daily driver is a seven year old BEV, a Tesla Model S. Its estimated range was 335 miles when new and is 315 miles now. Assuming we can trust the car's estimate (I, for one, do trust it) my car still has 94% battery capacity after seven years.
My car is far from worthless, but it's not for sale. I like it and I am keeping it.
How about (Score:2)
Why not just make standard EVs that are not flagship cell phones on wheels. You know, cars that people can afford. Remove the auto driving crap. No iPad screen needed. Knobs and dials, how nice. Body panels without camera and sensors so a bent panel won;t cost $10K to replace (and insurance rates won't skyrocket!). No phoning home and raping the customer's information. Things people will actually want.
They might be losing money on every EV (Score:2)
But they can make up for it in volume.
Embrace. Extend. Extinguish. (Score:2)
Time to bring back gas turbines? (Score:2)
Gas turbine technology failed as a replacement for ICE because a turbine can run efficient.y only at a limited range of speeds. So why not replace the dual drive train hybrids with plug-in EVs that use small gas turbines as charging engines that run at near-constant speed when in use? This design would have all the advantages of today's hybrids, but without the complexity of dual drive train. No more range anxiety - you can drive it as an all-electric in the places you know while still being able to make cr
Joe Schmoe opinion (Score:2)
Imagine the Lucky Bastards getting to write off every penny of their loss on EVs, between gov’t subsidy, credits, financial handouts and creative accounting its all write–off
Smucks like Joe have to eat the mortgage, ahem car payment, take the drop in depreciation, pay insanely expensive connection fees, charging equipment, installation and tie-in just to “cheaply” recharge his EV at home. Joe has eaten his last EV sucker-bill and finds himself using ride-share, public transit or 15yo
Re: (Score:2)
Except in this case Ford hasn't gone "all in" on electric vehicles. Once they start making non-luxury sedans, then they will have gone all in. Until then, this is all self-inflicted.
Re: (Score:2)
Sedans are dead.
Re:I, for one, am happy to hear that. (Score:4, Insightful)
Hybrids are good and every single manufacturer today offers them. In 2024 if I am shopping for a car I have options across all 3 ranges, pure ICE, Hybrid and BEV, what's the problem?
Fact is a lot of buyers like the idae of a BEV. It has a lot of inherent advantages for a good chunk of drivers if you have a place to charge (biggest challenge).
They are less maintenance, have better performance, less noise, no smog, quieter, smoother, filled up every day from my home, cheaper to operate long term. It's a no brainer second car for any 2+ car households. The median commute is what, like 20-30 miles? Perfect case for BEV. The issue today is cost and infrastructure, all things solved in time. You are looking at today at declaring the state of the future is determined already, it's kinda silly honestly.
Doug DeMuro put it really well where he said the Model 3 is the perfect example of "car as an appliance", it does just basic commuting better than anything on the road today.
Re: (Score:2)
no smog
it's not 1977 anymore. When was the last time you saw actual sky-blotting smog? I mean, beisdes Beijing and India.
Cars cleaned up their act 30 years ago, really since modern engine controls, so let's call it.. late 80's.
What BEVs are for is muggles that hate cars and think they're appliances. The person who will start a gasoline car from stone cold, drive it only 5 minutes to the store, then back to the house. That car never got hot. That car will die a horrible, early death from the condensation in t
Re: (Score:3)
it's not 1977 anymore. When was the last time you saw actual sky-blotting smog?
This is just semantics dome. How long do you want to be around car exhaust, from any car? Car exhaust is not compatible with living things. That's a downside.
What BEVs are for is muggles that hate cars and think they're appliances. The person who will start a gasoline car from stone cold, drive it only 5 minutes to the store, then back to the house. That car never got hot. That car will die a horrible, early death from the condensation in the oil never being boiled out.
Welcome to like, 80% of drivers. What's your point? A BEV is great for 80% of drivers? Fantastic.
You just lost all credibility with me. Of all the car youtubers you could pull, and you pull him? Doug DeMuro? Really?
lol, regardless of what you think of him is the quote wrong? Argue the point, not who said it. What if I told you your mom said it after we finished up last night? Doing that just says i don't have an answer.
I loathe the idea of car as appliance, and I don't quite sit well with people who look at cars as just an appliance. A good, fun car is so much more than just transportation.
Great, for the rest of us a car is transport
Re: (Score:3)
But technology marches on. Gas is messy and stinky, manuals are almost always operating outside of the power band and efficiency curve of the engine, gapping plugs is a thing for racers - even lawnmowers don't need that anymore.
The general public wants to get from A to B with little fuss or worry. Keep your high maintenance gasser and enjoy driving it, but please don't treat the public roads like a race course as some self defined 'enthusiast
Re: (Score:2)
> Hybrids are good and every single manufacturer today offers them. In 2024 if I am shopping for a car I have options across all 3 ranges, pure ICE, Hybrid and BEV, what's the problem?
In 2024, Subaru does not currently offer new hybrid vehicles for sale. And their electric vehicle has poor recharge speed and driving distance compared to rivals.
I think it's difficult to find a car that hits all of the major checkboxes these days. Specifically I'm referring to:
- Inexpensive and no dealer markups (rules out
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah the Japansese are all famously behind in BEV now. Ironically, I think in 5 years we are actually going to be impressed with how good American BEV's are, at least until the Japanse get their shit together. However their hybrids are top notch, especially Toyota.
- Inexpensive and no dealer markups (rules out hybrids and electrics)
There's a push to change dealer laws, this is legal issue more than anything. Companies want to sell direct but they can't many places.
- Great gas mileage in both short and lon
Re: (Score:2)
No I hear you, Toyota is probably the best in for hybrids right now. But inventory is low, and dealers are marking them up. And while they're good for bland day-to-day driving, in my experience they're not that engaging. The Rav4 Prime has some horsepower, but the steering feel isn't great, and the regenerative brakes are terribly mushy.
> There's a push to change dealer laws, this is legal issue more than anything. ... Again, time and infrastructure solves this. More charging stations, longer range cars.