oh, you're reductionist? sure. its "inferior" totally inferior. Thats why nobody wants it. Or, do you acknowledge that whilst its absolutely "inferior" in your definition, its selling like hot cakes, worldwide, and so represents a good in itself which is not actually assessed by its relative worth to other things? You can't put a tent and a primus stove in a kelly bag. None the less, its immensely popular
in a specific cohort of wealthy people who value it as a status symbol despite being inferior in every other way from a rucksack.
And as I pointed out, EV take off at the lights as if somebody tied a burning rag to a cats tail. Hard to be reductionist about "inferior" if its actually better at something.
or.. dare I say it, being less polluting?
"less optionality for a higher price" is not actually inferior. "it depends"
here's a theory. I am arguing with a low karma account which seeks to increase its karma by being provocative. I wonder.. is there a model where somehow other than not responding, we can stop that? probably not: I need to police my responses better.