Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Power

Don't Look Now, but GM's EV Sales Are on Fire (msn.com) 147

GM's president of global markets says their EV portfolio "is growing faster than the market," according to Investopedia, "because we have an all-electric vehicle for just about everybody, no matter what they like to drive."

The headline at Barrons? "Don't Look Now, but GM's EV Sales Are on Fire." GM delivered almost 32,000 all-electric vehicles in the third quarter — a record — and up about 58% from a year earlier. The more affordable Chevy Equinox, which starts at about $35,000 before any federal tax credit, helped boost sales. GM delivered almost 10,000 of the new EVs, up from 1,013 in the second quarter, when they first went on sale.

EV penetration of total GM car sales was about almost 5%, up almost two percentage points year over year. EVs accounted for 19.4% of Cadillac sales, up about 11 percentage points year over year. Year to date, GM has delivered just over 70,000 all-electric cars.

GM originally planned to manufacture 200,000 EVs in 2024. That still looks aggressive, but the strong third-quarter showing makes 120,000 possible, which would be up almost 60% year over year — a respectable outcome. More important to investors than EV sales right now might be dealer inventories. GM said there were about 627,000 vehicles on dealer lots at the end of September. That's a little better than what Wolfe Research analyst Emmanuel Rosner expected. It indicates GM dealers have roughly 60 days worth of sales on their lots. That's a safe level. Lower dealer inventories reduce presure to reduce prices. They also reduce the need to cut production because dealer lots are full... GM expects to generate a full-year operating profit of about $14 billion.

Meanwhile, Stellantis "slashed its financial guidance recently, partly because it needs to dramatically reduce its U.S. inventories," according to the article. For example, its Jeep dealers ended August with roughly 122 days worth of sales on their lots, while its Dodge dealers "had almost 150 days of inventory."

And Investopedia argues that while GM's EV sales growth is "soaring," Ford's is showing "only modest gains." [W]hile Ford's overall U.S. sales were 0.7% higher at 504,039, it had just a 12% gain in EVs to 23,509.3 In the second quarter, Ford's EV sales had soared 61% to 23,957. Sales growth was more than three times higher for Ford's hybrid models, with President of Ford Blue and Ford Customer Service Division Andrew Frick arguing that the company has "listened to customers to offer them vehicles with powertrains to meet their specific needs."

Ford is hoping to boost EV sales by offering buyers a free home charger and installation.

Don't Look Now, but GM's EV Sales Are on Fire

Comments Filter:
  • would not say that their EV sales are "on fire".

    • "We updated the safety guidelines and production at our explosives factory went through the roof".

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by kenh ( 9056 )

        GM originally planned to manufacture 200,000 EVs in 2024. That still looks aggressive, but the strong third-quarter showing makes 120,000 possible, which would be up almost 60% year over year — a respectable outcome.

        Let me break that down:

        GM planned to build 200,000 EVs in 2024.

        They HOPE to build 120,000 in 2024.

        That's up (60% up) over 2023 production number, about 75,000 I guess.

        In the real, non-EV beer-goggle world, missing your sales target by 40% isn't considered "a respectable outcome."

  • by AlanObject ( 3603453 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:06PM (#64915191)

    Well I guess all those predictions from way back about all the big automakers eating Tesla's lunch will finally come true.

    Of course you don't read much about how much margin they make selling those EVs. As far as I can tell the only companies to actually make money selling EVs are Tesla and BYD.

    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      Well I guess all those predictions from way back about. Tesla Stans moving the goalposts will also finally come true.

      " As far as I can tell the only companies to actually make money selling EVs are Tesla and BYD."

      One of those, not for long. The other actually makes cars.

    • If you believe Sandy Munroe then there is still some profit in Teslas without the credit, but not all that much. Now that Tesla has admitted that FSD will not be possible without additional hardware they may have several thousand lawsuits coming their way for selling a product they couldn't deliver. They will end up having to issue a bunch of refunds if they want to dodge that problem.

      • by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @09:00PM (#64915425) Homepage Journal

        If you believe Sandy Munroe then there is still some profit in Teslas without the credit, but not all that much. Now that Tesla has admitted that FSD will not be possible without additional hardware they may have several thousand lawsuits coming their way for selling a product they couldn't deliver. They will end up having to issue a bunch of refunds if they want to dodge that problem.

        Why would they do that? It's way cheaper to just upgrade the hardware. And no, there's no fundamental reason why they can't install HW4 in an HW3 car. It might not be the exact same HW4 that they ship in current cars (different board layout, wiring harness, cooling hardware, etc.), but the power consumption is comparable, so in principle, it is just a matter of Tesla deciding that it is worth the engineering effort to make it happen, which they won't do until they hit the ceiling on HW3.

        HW5 will be more of a problem because of its insane power consumption, assuming they don't find a way to bring that number down (and given the wattage we're talking about, they really need to do so, IMO). But that's a problem for a couple of years from now. :-)

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Either way it could be extremely expensive for Tesla. Automotive grade computers are not cheap, and neither is labour to retrofit them. And that's assuming that the cameras don't need an upgrade as well.

          There are a lot of vehicles that will need it. They started selling FSD in 2016 on the Model X. That's a huge number of vehicles and a huge number of different models that will need retrofitting kits.

          Then there are all the people who bought one believing Musk and his "FSD this year" nonsense, who will want t

        • Why would they do that? It's way cheaper to just upgrade the hardware

          Show your math. Make sure you have verified that the harness won't need to be replaced.

          • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            Why would they do that? It's way cheaper to just upgrade the hardware

            Show your math. Make sure you have verified that the harness won't need to be replaced.

            Start with the number of people for whom buying the car was based on Tesla's promise that they would continue replacing the hardware until it was capable of self driving. Those folks won't accept a $10,000 settlement. They're gonna want the full difference between the $120k Model X and the $30K RAV4 they would have bought otherwise, and the courts will side with them.

            If even half of Model X users make that demand, that's 135,000 times 90,000, which is $12.15 billion. Plus a $10k settlement for probably 4

            • Want to make Tesla completely implode? Do something that destroys trust in the brand.

              I do. How do I encourage Leon to skip around on stage more often?

    • BYD makes a shit load of money.

      The other Chinese I did not investigate yet.

      They are not only horizontal integrated but also vertically integrated. They have buses, cars, trains, ships and so on. Soon airplanes.

      Every damn part of their cars: they make themself. Except for glass and tires.

      • BYD is making money right now, but it's not clear that the profit is sustainable. The last time we talked about EVs, there was much debate about actual battery costs. You will see a number of $53KwH for Chinese made batteries. At that price, yes, any EV manufacturer will be profitable. But that seems to be fire sale prices (bad pun intended) due to over capacity. The cost per KwH in the car needs to be at about $125-$150 for EVs to be price competitive with ICEs. https://about.bnef.com/blog/li... [bnef.com]

        Th

    • Well I guess all those predictions from way back about all the big automakers eating Tesla's lunch will finally come true.

      This was probably at least part of Tesla's motivation to open their charging network. If you can't stay top dog in EV sales forever, at least you can make bank selling juice to the owners of other makes of EVs. [bloomberg.com]

    • Well I guess all those predictions from way back about all the big automakers eating Tesla's lunch will finally come true.

      Of course you don't read much about how much margin they make selling those EVs. As far as I can tell the only companies to actually make money selling EVs are Tesla and BYD.

      Depends on what you mean by eating Tesla's lunch, considering Tesla shipped greater than 10x GM in that same quarter, (469,796 vehicles) I think it might be better defined as eating Tesla's table scraps out back by the dumpster where no one is looking.

    • Well I guess all those predictions from way back about all the big automakers eating Tesla's lunch will finally come true.

      Of course you don't read much about how much margin they make selling those EVs. As far as I can tell the only companies to actually make money selling EVs are Tesla and BYD.

      When we can have this discussion without Federal (taxpayer) subsidies, THEN we can talk about “profit”. Especially when we’re talking about the same arrogant fucks who were Too Big To Fail before and got saved from bankruptcy by taxpayers.

    • Well I guess all those predictions from way back about all the big automakers eating Tesla's lunch will finally come true.

      Not yet. These are just the replacement cars for the EVs that got immersed in water during hurricanes. Its especially bad if salt water.

  • Why GM failed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:29PM (#64915229)

    I know you people don't like autonomous self driving cars. But the prospect of autonomous is what generates the excitement and fans for Tesla. Will Tesla actually have full self driving? Who knows? Who cares!! (note. they are actually quite close). But it's irrelevant, the point is that Tesla cares about making full self driving cars. The cars have an advanced AI chips and 8 cameras. GM cars do not. That reflects in the low enthusiasm for GM cars. GM spends hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising, Tesla buys little to no advertising. They don't even have a PR department. GM isn't doing anything cool. Tesla is working making cars drive themselves. On building the factory of the future. On making robots. GM isn't doing anything exciting. If they are (which they aren't) the millions they spend own advertising is a waste. Tesla is doing things that people talk about and are excited about.

    • Re:Why GM failed (Score:5, Informative)

      by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:36PM (#64915245)
      I was in a tesla with the self-driving activated, just last year. It worked awesome, 99.5% of the time. That means that the driver only needed to intervene twice, in a 10-mile suburban route, to prevent an accident.

      That’s not good enough. Not even close. I’ll accept self-driving when the car is at least as good as I am - which means one accident every 20 years. Until then, it’s a hard no for me - I’ll stick with the more reliable system (the human).

      Waymo’s cars seem to be genuinely better than human - probably because they limit themselves to specific routes? I’m not up on this tech.
      • Re:Why GM failed (Score:4, Informative)

        by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:56PM (#64915275)
        I really think Elon is putting Tesla in mortal danger by dropping the anticipated low-cost model and putting everything on the self-driving car. I simply don't think Tesla is close. It's like you said, 99.9 sounds close to 99.9999, but it's actually nowhere near! Waymo started offering truly driverless rides in 2019, and Tesla cannot do that in 2024. And yes I know Waymo still requires some intervention. But Tesla is simply falling further behind by refusing to acknowledge they will need that too, and getting started on it. I'm also extremely skeptical of the "camera only" approach. Just get it to work first, then pare down the complexity and price.
        • Re:Why GM failed (Score:5, Insightful)

          by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @08:31PM (#64915389) Journal

          Waymo started offering truly driverless rides in 2019, and Tesla cannot do that in 2024.

          It's not comparable, Waymo only drives on pre-selected routes.

          • So what? It still has to navigate all the problems of driving with other road users
            • It still has to navigate all the problems of driving with other road users

              Presumably Google doesn't allow them to drive on some other roads because they know it will have trouble navigating those roads. Either way, we don't have enough data to really know, Waymo keeps that secret.

        • Waymo is NOT true driverless, there is ALWAYS a remote operator ready to take over. The other "thing" is Waymo is very much geofenced, try to ask a Waymo to take you from San Francisco to San Jose. I can EASILY program a "self-driving" car to operate in the confines of my driveway, does that make it "truly driverless"? Not slamming Waymo, they've made some solid progress, but they're behind Tesla on my scorecard.

        • by kenh ( 9056 )

          Waymo started offering truly driverless rides in 2019, and Tesla cannot do that in 2024. And yes I know Waymo still requires some intervention.

          Explain please: "Waymo started offering truly driverless rides in 2019", and "Waymo still requires some intervention."

          What do you call the person that intervenes in waymo's "driverless rides"?

      • I've never understood why people even pay for and use current 'self-driving' (whatever the hell that means) systems that require you to pay attention all the time. I already have to pay attention all the time when I drive. With self-driving you have to pay EXTRA attention, because you have to be ready to take over at a moments notice. If I have to pay attention either way (and self-driving sounds more stressful), why pay extra for that 'privilege'?
        • Re: Why GM failed (Score:4, Informative)

          by shipofgold ( 911683 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @09:57PM (#64915471)

          I have a model Y and they are currently giving me a trial of full self driving. Gotta say it is pretty cool handling things like speed bumps and roundabouts very smoothly.

          The only corrections I have needed to make are because of other driver mistakes on the road.

          Would I go to sleep? No....but I can look at messages or a map and not fear straying into oncoming traffic. Tonight the car drove me to and from my destination about 20 miles away without problem...very cool!

          I am looking forward to the ubiquity of the tech. It is the future.

          • Re: Why GM failed (Score:5, Insightful)

            by superdave80 ( 1226592 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @11:56PM (#64915549)

            but I can look at messages or a map and not fear straying into oncoming traffic.

            Well, hopefully nothing happens while you are doing other stuff, because Tesla will 100% blame you for not paying attention and being ready to take over.

          • I seriously hope they are close. I would love to ditch driving. But the model 3 I was in failed to navigate a 2-lane righthand turn situation and nearly drifted into another car. It was awesome for 10 minutes, and then things went from good to bad in under a second. The driver had to react quickly to prevent a sideswipe crash. Very tense moment. Did not inspire confidence. Maybe the tech is getting better quickly.
      • Waymo is geofenced, and they do deep detailed mapping of a city before they begin operations, and they still have banks of people monitoring (and aiding) the driving performance in near real time. It is good, but as you mention, it is still not good enough.

      • The latest Tesla FSD is significantly better than last years. I drove a 600 mile road trip and was on hands free FSD most of the time. The biggest problem now is that it is not aggressive enough with following distance, leaving far too much space between cars to the point that you become the cut-off / merge target in the lane. The second biggest problem is that although it's not aggressive enough in following distance, it's far too aggressive in holding the middle of the lane, to the point that you can reac

    • Re:Why GM failed (Score:4, Interesting)

      by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:48PM (#64915261)

      I would be very happy if a fully autonomous car is available for my mom in the next five years, since she may need it if she wants to keep "driving"... but I can't say I'm gonna make any personal buying decisions based on that, because I don't particularly care about it myself, one way or the other. I do find the more advanced cruise control options helpful, but those have been widely available for a while.

      However any Telsa fan's comment on how close they are to full self-driving needs to be taken with a very, very large grain of salt... followed by a salt chaser. Musk has a well-established track record of misleading people - and even of outright lying.

    • Re:Why GM failed (Score:4, Interesting)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:49PM (#64915263)
      I don't know how exciting I want my car to be. I have a Malibu and my whole family really likes it, including me. Nice size, drives nice, fine power, and basic services and repairs are easy to do and parts are cheap. It's a 2014 and has no touchscreen display. It's not the most exciting but it's not a dog, and not flimsy, or overly gee-whiz.

      I'd like an electric car like that!

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Slashdot 2004:

        "I built this cool carputer and I've got a touchscreen in my car!"

        Slashdot 2024:

        " I have a Malibu and my whole family really likes it, including me...has no touchscreen display"

        This place has become a sad shell of its former self.

        Why are you even here? Go hang out in r/lawncare with the other boomers where you belong.

        • Re:Why GM failed (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Sunday November 03, 2024 @01:43AM (#64915623) Homepage

          This place has become a sad shell of its former self.

          Why are you even here?

          There's no rule that says your car has to look like the bridge of the starship Enterprise just because you're into technology. In fact, it's actually pretty common for geeks to have an appreciation for old fashioned simplicity in cases where "if it ain't busted, don't fix it" applies.

        • All the new tech and infrastructure required for a renewable energy actually is very interesting and exciting to me. It's the great technical challenge of our era.

          But if done very well, it could result in a car that is not so different to use - just safer, swifter, more comfortable, and more economical.

          I don't want gull wings, or a big ipad on the dashboard, or subscription services, or the ability to play video games when parked, or the car suddenly jerking the steering wheel or slamming on the brake

    • Re:Why GM failed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @07:13PM (#64915303) Journal

      I know you people don't like autonomous self driving cars

      I think you misread "skepticism that the technology works as promised to be "don't like self-driving cars."

      Fully autonomous self-driving cars would be amazing, but the current capability has been massively overhyped. Apparently you think Tesla is quite close, for some reason.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Fully autonomous self-driving cars would be amazing, but the current capability has been massively overhyped. Apparently you think Tesla is quite close, for some reason.

        In my city, Waymos have recently started pickups and drop offs at the airport. This is truly amazing to watch.

      • Fully autonomous self-driving cars would be amazing

        The technology itself is fascinating, but potential impact on the job market for folks who work in the transportation industry, and pushing the marketplace towards a "cars as a service" (where you'll own nothing and like it) future isn't quite as amazing. It's pretty much the same deal with LLMs. When it works, it's an impressive thing, but thinking about the greater societal implications of the technology is kind of frightening.

    • I know you people don't like autonomous self driving cars.

      Who people? I for one can't wait for them.

      Well ... I can wait for them to achieve higher safety records than humans. Waymo is getting there. But Tesla? They have a whizzy autopilot that is impressive, but not ready to drive a car without human supervision.

      Tesla can be "cool" all it wants, but I'm not getting in the back seat of any of their vehicles to let them drive me somewhere without a driver. Not yet anyway.

    • by short ( 66530 )
      I am a fan of Tesla and I dislike any autonomous cars - it would be great but the current technology has no chance to drive acceptably safe (unless human drivers are forbidden by law - that would be the safest, fastest and most simple solution). So far nobody else make a car in all aspects the same or better than Tesla Performance models (AWD, range, acceleration, price, charging speed).
    • GM isn't doing anything cool. GM isn't doing anything exciting.

      Yep, and that's why both my partner and I bought Chevy Bolts instead of anything Tesla had to offer. Neither of us wanted a "cool" or "exciting" car, we just wanted something that worked and drove like a typical ICE car but ran on electricity instead of dinosaur soup. There's a huge market out there of folks who aren't buying into the idea that owning an EV has to be some sort of paradigm shift with all sorts of learning curves because of things such as: the accelerator pedal doesn't behave like what you'

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      GM has better self driving tech than Tesla. While they don't have a janky "full self driving" beta system that only tries to kill you every 10-15 minutes, they do have hands-free cruising on highways. So do a few others.

      For drives that is far more useful, because they can actually relax and be confident that they won't have to suddenly take over with fractions of a second to spare. It's got a much better UI as well, with a nice big green light on the wheel that makes it really obvious what mode you are in.

    • My colleague at work has a 2023 vintage Model 3, and he has had three promo months of FSD.

      Last week, we drove to lunch and he wanted to show off how much better it has become. We drove 0.8 miles, North San Jose, and it required him to grab the wheel 3 times, and once it was trying to drive onto the light rail tracks. Returning to the office, I got him to just drive manually.

      I am not bullish on Tesla's FSD ever actually working.

    • Will Tesla actually have full self driving?

      No. Not without adding radar and lidar. Who knows? Now you do. As well as anybody else with even basic understanding of how safety-critical systems are desgined.

    • GM should already be reduced to a chapter in American history books.

      The actual failure, was assuming that fucking failure was Too Big To Fail.

  • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:32PM (#64915233)

    can't beat that if it continues...

    My abuse of statistics can beat yours any day of the week.

  • by olddoc ( 152678 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @06:56PM (#64915273)
    Sales are nice but profits are even better and GM isn't making any on EVs. Yet.
    • Profits are nice for GM, not for the rest of us. As long as GM doesn't go out of business, I don't care if their stockholders are making money.
      • If they are not making profits, they cannot invest, so they have to lay off and close the very EV factories that were intended to build 35,000 vehicles every fortnight, not have them sitting in lots being sold below market value just to get them off the lot.

    • Tesla didn't make any money on their cars for many years, it takes time to ramp up.

      "GM is about to start making money on its electric vehicles by the end of this year, right on schedule, CEO Mary Barra told The New York Times."
      https://www.theverge.com/2024/... [theverge.com]

  • by habig ( 12787 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @07:34PM (#64915321) Homepage

    Mostly

    They made an almost affordable (certainly cheaper than the competition) car with decent range

    So of course they'll sell more. And even if they're not making profit on it, they'll establish themselves as the "go-to" brand for the regular guy. That's always been Chevy's niche. Then profit once volume is up and costs are down.

    • $33,000 for a range of 315 miles. Also has a really nice looking design, but of course that's an opinion.

      https://www.chevrolet.com/elec... [chevrolet.com]
    • They already closed factories and laid off the people in these segments. The only reason they are moving is they are being sold well under value and a quarter of it is paid by the government. Go look at the dealership, they are currently selling the same model that was at $50k this summer for $33k, they are sitting on the dealer lots and they need to make room for next models, it is a huge loss and unlikely to continue once GM stops getting funding from the government to build them.

      • by habig ( 12787 )

        The first models out this summer were the high trim lines that still cost you $50k. The base models at $33k came out later, because why not sell the expensive ones first to the exited people who would go buy something when it first comes up. Haven't heard that GM is getting govt money directly to build them: but these are one of the rare EVs that actually qualify for the $7500 federal rebate: so the consumer is paying in the $20k's for them (and GM gets the $7500).

        The reason my EV6 (and most other EVs) do

        • Seems like the govt funding is doing what was intended.

          You'd have to prove that a meaningful number of the EVs were purchased because of the credits and wouldn't have been purchased otherwise. Since EVs lose value even faster, the adoption rate maybe a wash that's only compensating for the lost value to borderline or fully luxury vehicles. Maybe you think that's living up to the spirit of these credits, I don't.

          And why are we trying to speed the adoption of EVs? For the environment. That would be much for meaningful if we were subsidizing the kinds of cars

          • Generally folks driving around in 20-year-old clunkers are doing so specifically because they can't afford anything better. You'll only get those vehicles off the road if you either force those people to give them up (which would be politically unpopular) or if you increase the supply inventory in the used car market so that prices drop. Guess where used cars come from? Yep, they're typically trade-ins when people who can afford to do so upgrade to something new.

            So while the EV subsidies aren't directly

            • > You'll only get those vehicles off the road if you either force those people to give them up (which would be politically unpopular)

              Are you SURE about that? My cell phone has a number on speed dial here in Colorado where I can report these smokers to the police and DMV. If it's politically unpopular, why is the state advertising this number? It's only unpopular for those who are reported. Ever drive behind one of these heaps?

              >Generally folks driving around in 20-year-old clunkers are doing s
        • The first models out this summer were the high trim lines that still cost you $50k. The base models at $33k came out later, because why not sell the expensive ones first to the exited people who would go buy something when it first comes up.

          Is there REALLY still that level of excitement about a new EV? Short of making and selling the next EV rocket ship (which is already starting to push the boundaries of human safety), I don’t see too many getting all that excited about an overpriced MSRP-plus price tag on a product that’s been on the market near two decades.

          Especially a damn Chevy.

      • ..it is a huge loss and unlikely to continue once GM stops getting funding from the government to build them.

        Stop getting funding? Why they’re Too Big To Fail now! There’s no such thing as no more suck, er I mean taxpayer funding.

        (Our biggest mistake, was assuming anything is Too Big. Including government. Hell, especially government.)

  • by fred6666 ( 4718031 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @07:46PM (#64915333)

    They don't have a minivan. They don't have any sedan. They only have 2 SUV (one small and one medium) and a pick-up truck. They no longer sell the Bolt.

  • Not much of a Fire (Score:4, Informative)

    by Mirnotoriety ( 10462951 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @07:49PM (#64915337)
    GM: Market Cap £43.07 Billion
    GM: Net income 3.06B
    GM: Net profit margin 6.27%

    Tesla: Market Cap 780.17 Billion
    Tesla: Net income 2.17B
    Tesla: Net profit margin 8.61%
  • by Wokan ( 14062 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @08:13PM (#64915369) Journal

    All ties to onstar / gps need to be completely disabled.

  • They know what sensationalism is though.

  • by ZipNada ( 10152669 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @09:05PM (#64915437)

    I went to look at the GM website and what I am seeing there are Equinox EV's that are in the mid $40's. Is the $35k version actually available yet?

    https://www.motortrend.com/rev... [motortrend.com]

    "we’re making some assumptions about how a $35K Equinox compares to a $27K Bolt. We haven’t yet driven the base Equinox EV 1LT or even seen it in person, so there’s still a chance it shows up with milk crates for seats and a dashboard made of compressed cat hair. The price-leader Equinox “will be available for ordering later in the year,” according to Chevy, which implies deliveries won’t happen before 2025."

  • by superdave80 ( 1226592 ) on Saturday November 02, 2024 @09:40PM (#64915463)

    The more affordable Chevy Equinox, which starts at about $35,000 before any federal tax credit,

    Just checked the Chevy website. Equinox starts at $41,900. Do journalist even bother to research basic stuff before writing it?

    • I checked it, too.
      And it starts at $33,000

      Perhaps different price shown based on your location, you are browsing from? Or including VAT or excluding?

    • It mostly seems like they got a little confused over the tax credit, which happens quite a bit when looking at EV prices. To be fair, Tesla plays that game too.

      • The writer clearly stated 'before tax credits', and the Chevy website clearly states 'starting at $41,900', so I don't know how they could get confused.
  • I think what really helped GM was they were able to overcome the massive fiasco with the Blazer EV when the Equinox EV came out several months ago, which was a vastly better-sorted vehicle that was actually a nice car. A lot of people are waiting for the revamped Bolt EUV, which is coming (I believe) spring 2025 with a new motor and battery pack with much longer range than the old model.

  • See, you need a larger sample base.
  • by q_e_t ( 5104099 )
    Many commenters here keep telling me no one wants EVs.
    • Many commenters here keep telling me no one wants EVs.

      ”Don’t Look Now”, but marketing has been known and proven to be COMPLETELY full of shit.

      If people here are skeptical, I’d call that intelligent.

  • by sinij ( 911942 ) on Sunday November 03, 2024 @08:10AM (#64915927)

    GM delivered almost 32,000 all-electric vehicles in the third quarter

    To put this number into perspective. ICE deliveries in 2023 Q3 (number that was easy to find) was 674,336 total delivered. How is that on fire?

    GM originally planned to manufacture 200,000 EVs in 2024.

    So the plan was to deliver 50K per quarter, but they delivered "almost 32,000". How is that on fire?

% "Every morning, I get up and look through the 'Forbes' list of the richest people in America. If I'm not there, I go to work" -- Robert Orben

Working...