Ford sees another $1B EV loss, lowers guidance and its stock falls 6%
marketwatch.com
marketwatch.com
Even in China non-T1 city purchasers are leaning towards hybrids due to a mix of range anxiety and worries about xharging resources [0]
EVs today are in the same position that hybrids were 20 years ago. They will eventually become more prominent, but the current iteration of EVs is still early in the life cycle, and big budget purchases like EVs still need more time in order for consumers to understand how EV depreciation works.
[0] - https://www.ft.com/content/5efcef9f-645d-44cb-96cf-9cd19719d...
Why do words no longer mean anything when people want to deny a reality they find uncomfortable?
When any company makes significant CapEx investment like retooling ICE factories for EV manufacturing, the AOPs are generated based on certain assumptions of industry rate of growth.
The recentish rush of ICE manufacturers into EVs thanks to global subsidizes (something I support because battery supply chains have dual use implications) was predicated on the assumption that the rate of EV adoption and new car sales would be consistent with 2019-23, but these projections didn't take into account that overall automotive consumer demand would shrink rapidly (ICE and EV) or the fact that ESG financing would lose relevance due to external shocks from the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.
What this means is a number of very new players in the EV space got burned really bad because their AOPs have fallen apart.
Companies like Tesla and BYD weren't as badly affected because they had been investing in EV manufacturing for over a decade, unlike more recent entries who only began these investments in the 2019-23 period.
Adoption is happening, but it's not going to be as fast as EV fanatics say, but it's not going to be as slow as ICE fanatics say either.
That said, for most manufacturers who entered the EV space without a cohesive strategy, they are in a world of pain now because they have financial obligations to make whole.
> Why do words no longer mean anything when people want to deny a reality they find uncomfortable
Frack off.
I'm not making a moral judgement on EVs or biasing in favor of ICE vehicles.
Really needed to subsidize / give a premium per kwh dispersed at a charger instead of just paying them to make them. The current incentives meant we got a ton of chargers but not that they stayed in working order which is pretty much the worse situation. It's better to know that the few chargers work than have many options to charge at but not know if they work (or they work poorly).
Tesla's Supercharger system is fairly comprehensive and well maintained, but other systems like Electrify America isn't at the same level.
American EVs are increasingly consolidating under Supercharger (IRA benefits also played a role) but the interoperability rollout only began this year.
This better not be Elon-ware.
VW tried also and failed miserably
Ford and GM are truck companies; just look at what they actually sell and where they are actually getting margins
VW, Ford and GM operate their EV businesses now as a loss-leading marketing facade and not much else
https://insideevs.com/news/714104/hyundai-range-extender-int...
I own a Kia EV6, and my wife has a VW ID4. Obviously I'm biased by the car I drive every day, but my car feels so much more intuitive and thought out.
Elon has spoken positively about them (https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1537870974703607810) and met with the Hyundai CEO during the Paris Olympics.
So far I've not seen anything that suggests Tesla is getting better at "V" faster than others are getting better at "E" so I have no idea who is going to first make an EV that I'd actually.
Fortunately I'm not under any serious time pressure. My current car is a 2006 Honda CR-V with around 83k miles on it and I've kept up reasonably well with maintenance. That was one of the good years for CR-V reliability, and with reasonable maintenance should be good for 250-300k miles.