Chevy Bolt - 200 mile range for $30k base price (after incentive)

[wdolson]

This is why I think the other makers need to have their own fleet of Tesla's and make their execs use them as their primary vehicle for a few weeks, maybe even a couple months. They just don't know what they don't know, and most of what they think they know is wrong.

Tesla's upper management eats its own dogfood (term from the tech industry for a company that uses its own software), but few execs at other car companies are driving their EVs.

- - - Updated - - -

My rule of thumb for echo chamber detection is whether the forum members believe that a company can do no wrong. I've seen some pretty bad examples of this in Apple Mac related forums, where everything Apple did was gold, "Windoze" was for bozos, and Steve Jobs was unquestionable.

I don't get that sense here at TMC. Most of the Tesla owners here are straightforward with their critique of Tesla hardware and service, because they know that the feedback is vital to the company's future. There is strong resistance to "Elon worship", and I've seen people remind each other that Elon is human, can make mistakes, and does get tired after working so much at Tesla and SpaceX.

As for myself, I have called out Tesla (and Elon) numerous times for what I viewed as stupid decisions. The decisions that made Model X a difficult car to build, as well as the weird hidden option for the 72A charger upgrade, were bad moves IMO. Customer communications continues to be a problem.

That being said, I have worked in a startup environment and mistakes and stupidity are a part of the game. No company ever gets it right all the time every time.

I agree. Tesla has made many mistakes and Elon is far from perfect. Elon is brilliant and one of the most innovative industrialists alive today. However, he can and does make mistakes. So do other people in his companies.

My problem is with people who arrive at TMC and deliberately make misleading statements in order to further their agenda, which may be political or for profit. In my view this is worse than generic trolling, as trolls usually just try to rile people up for entertainment, while people deploying FUD tactics in an investor discussion are actively trying to cause economic damage to others through dishonest means.

True. Deliberately manipulating stock prices this way may be illegal in some jurisdictions too.

 

[tftf]

You must be new here...

Look at this very thread. The first 40 pages were generated in the first week after the announcement.

But, don't let facts in evidence stand in your way.

And most of it was purely negative, along the lines of "this is just a concept, will likely never make it into production", "remember how GM killed the EV1", "this will be a compliance car", "will the 200 miles be real range, probably just artificial range", "GM has no real DC charging network and will never have one", "the Model3 will be a more upscale BMW 3-series competitor, this car is nowhere as good" (the last point is the most surprising assuming that Tesla can offer the base car in the same price range, Tesla is somehow supposed to make a profit and doesn't enjoy the economies of scale of GM).

The fact remains that GM is much further along builing a longer-range, mass-market car than Tesla as of late 2015.

- - - Updated - - -

tftf is a publicly acknowledged TSLA short trader.

I'm an investor, not a trader. Yes, I have openly disclosed many times that I'm short Tesla (and using the same user name on SA).

Look, I could have registered under a separate user name on this forum. I didn't. And why do you use the FUD hammer again? Many people on this forum are long TSLA. Should we also ignore their posts because they keep painting a rosy picture?

Some went as far to discourage others from posting issues (including safety issues with the car!) too often on this forum for fear that it could drive the stock price down.

Besides, Tesla is not a small penny stock and is heavily held among institutional investors. If you think a few posts on this forum (or most Tesla content at SA, Fool or similar sites) can significantly alter the TSLA stock price you are mistaken.

 

[AnOutsider]

And most of it was purely negative, along the lines of "this is just a concept, will likely never make it into production", "remember how GM killed the EV1", "this will be a compliance car", "will the 200 miles be real range, probably just artificial range", "GM has no real DC charging network and will never have one", "the Model3 will be a more upscale BMW 3-series competitor, this car is nowhere as good" (the last point is the most surprising assuming that Tesla can offer the base car in the same price range, Tesla is somehow supposed to make a profit and doesn't enjoy the economies of scale of GM).

The fact remains that GM is much further along builing a longer-range, mass-market car than Tesla as of late 2015.

Well said. I know this is a tesla forum, but we shouldn't dismiss things just because they didn't come from the home team.

I really look forward to what GM brings to the table. With Model 3 unveiling in March, things are just heating up

 

[Yggdrasill]

And most of it was purely negative, along the lines of "this is just a concept, will likely never make it into production", "remember how GM killed the EV1", "this will be a compliance car", "will the 200 miles be real range, probably just artificial range", "GM has no real DC charging network and will never have one", "the Model3 will be a more upscale BMW 3-series competitor, this car is nowhere as good" (the last point is the most surprising assuming that Tesla can offer the base car in the same price range, Tesla is somehow supposed to make a profit and doesn't enjoy the economies of scale of GM).

The fact remains that GM is much further along builing a longer-range, mass-market car than Tesla as of late 2015.

Some are negative, others are not. I think most would agree that if GM brings the Bolt to market with the suggested price and capabilities, with significant volume and workable long range driving capabilities (requiring a network of 100+ kW DC chargers), that is a good thing. But I don't blame people for doubting in one or more of those factors. Over the years there have been a lot of press releases and concept cars that haven't materialized.

I think the Bolt looks mostly good (again, *if* GM lives up to the expectations). I think I would doubt the DC charging first, then price and then availability. If GM delivers on those points as well as making a good car, I would definitely consider buying a Bolt once it comes to Europe. Of course, I will compare it to the Model 3.

 

[stopcrazypp]

And most of it was purely negative, along the lines of "this is just a concept, will likely never make it into production", "remember how GM killed the EV1", "this will be a compliance car", "will the 200 miles be real range, probably just artificial range", "GM has no real DC charging network and will never have one", "the Model3 will be a more upscale BMW 3-series competitor, this car is nowhere as good" (the last point is the most surprising assuming that Tesla can offer the base car in the same price range, Tesla is somehow supposed to make a profit and doesn't enjoy the economies of scale of GM).

The fact remains that GM is much further along builing a longer-range, mass-market car than Tesla as of late 2015.

Unless you are reading a different thread than I am, most of the initial reactions were positive. While there was doubt (for good reason, given GM's track record), the reactions are very balanced especially for a Tesla enthusiast forum. For example, I doubt fan forums of other luxury makes reacted in such a balanced way to Tesla's launches.

As for the other criticism, they remain true. GM is planning a much smaller volume and they are aiming at a different market segment (they themselves said they don't plan to have much overlap with Tesla). Their long distance charge network remains non-existent. Their dealer network has huge gaps in the way they sell plug-ins. They still have much work ahead of them.

 

[mknox]

The point of Model 3 was never to compete with the likes of a Toyota Camry. It was always envisioned as a premium product. Mass market does not exclude premium products.

What is your source for that? I heard Elon speak to this very question in person at TMC Connect in 2013 when someone asked (complained, really) about introducing a "mass market" car and how it was going to "dilute" the brand. Elon actually sounded a bit miffed when he replied that Tesla was not concerned about brand status and that it's mission was to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles, period.

 

[Krugerrand]

And most of it was purely negative...

Well, that's a goal post move if I've ever seen one. Your original comment was that the forum goes silent whenever a competing company/vehicle is revealed. Once it was pointed out that that statement was false you change your tactic. Can't possibly take someone's argument seriously when conducted in that manner.

 

[scaesare]

And most of it was purely negative, along the lines of "this is just a concept, will likely never make it into production", "remember how GM killed the EV1", "this will be a compliance car", "will the 200 miles be real range, probably just artificial range", "GM has no real DC charging network and will never have one", "the Model3 will be a more upscale BMW 3-series competitor, this car is nowhere as good" (the last point is the most surprising assuming that Tesla can offer the base car in the same price range, Tesla is somehow supposed to make a profit and doesn't enjoy the economies of scale of GM).

The fact remains that GM is much further along builing a longer-range, mass-market car than Tesla as of late 2015.

Of course, that's not what you wrote that I was responding to. What you said was:

This forum usually becomes very quiet whenever there's a real longer-range EV being announced.

Which is not supported by this very thread. If you would now like to spin your comments to instead suggest that the ratio of positive-to-negative comments is low, that's probably not a surprise to anyone who's participated on an enthusiast forum before.

For the record, I actually felt like one of the lone voices supporting the Bolt announcement in this thread...

 

[Krugerrand]

What is your source for that?

Does there need to be a source? We all know based on size, features, pricing and previous information and experience with the S and soon to be X that the 3 isn't and never was intended as a straight up comparison to a Camry. That's just common sense and knowledge. That Tesla doesn't concern itself with brand status per Elon, or has a mission of accelerating the adoption of EVs, or that people may cross-shop a Camry and 3 is irrelevant to the point.

 

[mknox]

Does there need to be a source? We all know based on size, features, pricing and previous information and experience with the S and soon to be X that the 3 isn't and never was intended as a straight up comparison to a Camry. That's just common sense and knowledge.

I don't think it actually is common sense or knowledge. Tesla / Elon's own "secret plan" blog post, at least to me, suggests that they want to move from premium products "downmarket" to a kind of "everyman/woman" car. Like a Camry or Ford Fusion type of thing. I guess we'll see, and maybe it will be the "Model 4" that makes that leap, but I don't believe there's anything to suggest that Tesla even wants to remain an "exclusive" brand of car.

 

[Discoducky]

Well, that's a goal post move if I've ever seen one. Your original comment was that the forum goes silent whenever a competing company/vehicle is revealed. Once it was pointed out that that statement was false you change your tactic. Can't possibly take someone's argument seriously when conducted in that manner.

Unless you are reading a different thread than I am, most of the initial reactions were positive. While there was doubt (for good reason, given GM's track record), the reactions are very balanced especially for a Tesla enthusiast forum. For example, I doubt fan forums of other luxury makes reacted in such a balanced way to Tesla's launches.

As for the other criticism, they remain true. GM is planning a much smaller volume and they are aiming at a different market segment (they themselves said they don't plan to have much overlap with Tesla). Their long distance charge network remains non-existent. Their dealer network has huge gaps in the way they sell plug-ins. They still have much work ahead of them.

SebastianR said it in the BEV competition thread....but this is IMO another circular argument that tftf seems to be weaving. The conversation is not moving forward; it is shifting. For me it is distracting since the points feel easily refuted or have common rebuttals. And finally, it is not stimulating interesting conversation...again IMO. A few days ago I thought tftf was going in a different direction, but I see post tone, language and structure have changed as pointed out by the above.

Circular arguments/reasoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

I truly wish we could continue the conversation without distraction and only engage when new information or insights are brought to the table. This goes for good, bad and neutral information as without conversation, discussion and a bit of healthy conflict we won't know the difference.

tftf is welcome to do that as is anyone else.

 

[JRP3]

You seem real bitter for some reason. We're all on the same side here. There's no need to lash out at Tesla supporters.

Make no mistake, we are not all on the same side. Tftf wants Tesla to fail, period, and has invested accordingly. Thus everything he posts is twisted by this, because his vision is equally twisted. That's why he can claim things like "the forum goes silent" when that is completely, obviously false. I have no problem with tftf posting whatever he wants here because he's not going to fool anyone in this crowd, but always remember he is the enemy, just like Petersen, Santos, Wahlman, etc.

 

[ggies07]

Make no mistake, we are not all on the same side. Tftf wants Tesla to fail, period, and has invested accordingly. Thus everything he posts is twisted by this, because his vision is equally twisted. That's why he can claim things like "the forum goes silent" when that is completely, obviously false. I have no problem with tftf posting whatever he wants here because he's not going to fool anyone in this crowd, but always remember he is the enemy, just like Petersen, Santos, Wahlman, etc.

Yeah, I've stayed out of all this back and forth commenting, but he has a date of 2013 on his profile. Since then, the company has only flourished and gained more traction, so for him to still be as negative as he is and for him to short the stock signals that he will never understand from anyone else what we are thinking. The last part of Tesla's "secret plan" is coming to fruition in March. The company is doing what the company said it was going to do. No reason to not believe.....

 

[Discoducky]

I don't think it actually is common sense or knowledge. Tesla / Elon's own "secret plan" blog post, at least to me, suggests that they want to move from premium products "downmarket" to a kind of "everyman/woman" car. Like a Camry or Ford Fusion type of thing. I guess we'll see, and maybe it will be the "Model 4" that makes that leap, but I don't believe there's anything to suggest that Tesla even wants to remain an "exclusive" brand of car.

Agreed and while the ASP of the 3 might be in the upper-mass to lower-luxury if you look at the base price (which folks will buy) and then factor in energy cost savings (oil continues to its historical overall upwards march in the next 3 years) and maintenance cost savings (I'm assuming will be much less than Model S) then, even though you are buying a car that competes head to head with a BMW M3, you might actually just be buying into a TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) that is more inline with a Toyota Camry.

To date, this has been my experience with Belle (60kWh S for $78K) which is nearing its break even point (50K miles should do it) with the Honda Odyssey Touring that I didn't buy for $44K.

It is interesting to think about the predecessors to Model 3 though and I hope TM takes the 3 and just puts kaizen (method of continuous improvement) into hardcore KPI (Key Performance Indicator) and drives up overall profit margin while increasing owner value (i.e. mass reductions, design for manufacturability, supply/delivery chain improvements...etc). If vehicle engineering is designed, built and implemented with this in mind you could do a whole lot more with the fundamentals of the vehicle than just a few variants.

 

[Panoz]

I believe the Chevy Bolt is vaporware. Do you know how many manufacturers are saying "me, too!" in electrics? Every one of them! How many actually produce a viable EV? Few! With the exception of Tesla, how many manufacturers would continue to make EVs if the compliance part was not present? None of them!

I don't mean to be testy but I'm not so willing to believe miles-per-charge promises from a car company that killed their own electric car 20 years ago.

 

[Discoducky]

I believe the Chevy Bolt is vaporware. Do you know how many manufacturers are saying "me, too!" in electrics? Every one of them! How many actually produce a viable EV? Few! With the exception of Tesla, how many manufacturers would continue to make EVs if the compliance part was not present? None of them!

I don't mean to be testy but I'm not so willing to believe miles-per-charge promises from a car company that killed their own electric car 20 years ago.

You might be right, but it is looking like GM is going to ship it (thus not vaporware), but they might choose to sell only in a few 'halo' states at first (which might feel like vaporware for other states).

To me it seems that Mary is serious and will push GM to a wider release and ramp sooner assuming there are positive reviews from journalists and consumers.

 

[Krugerrand]

To me it seems that Mary is serious ...

I find this super funny. Oh, she's serious all right...about being first to market. Claim to fame and all that. She isn't serious (that I've been able to discern) about moving her fleet to electric.

 

[Discoducky]

I find this super funny. Oh, she's serious all right...about being first to market. Claim to fame and all that. She isn't serious (that I've been able to discern) about moving her fleet to electric.

Assume the Bolt is a hit with consumers and journalists...You don't think she'll go to where the eventual money is? The ramp for her/GM is very long, might be a longest as GM is so entrenched in ICE.

 

[Krugerrand]

Assume the Bolt is a hit with consumers and journalists...You don't think she'll go to where the eventual money is? The ramp for her/GM is very long, might be a longest as GM is so entrenched in ICE.

What are we defining as constitutes a hit? They aren't planning on making enough of them, imo, to determine if they are a hit or not. By the time they can make enough, as I've mentioned a few times before, there's very few logical reasons for anyone to purchase a Bolt over a Model 3... the value proposition is so lopsided that only a brain fart, unrealistic, makes-no-logical- sense reason, or 'I need a car yesterday and there are no used Model 3's/floor models today that allow me an immediate purchase, would have someone purchase a Bolt over a Model 3 - because to date we are expecting only two features to be similar; range and pricing (though Model 3 is expected to have a lower base price and I'll believe the Bolt range when it actually happens in the real world with real drivers). All the rest of the vehicle features have the Model 3 ahead by a landslide; charging network, safety (yes, I expect Elon to insist on 5* rating across the board and in every sub-category), OTA updates, cargo space, business model (shopping, buying, customer service), looks (yes, I'm pretty sure the Model 3 isn't going to look like a rectangular box on wheels), etc...

And I'm not even sure that GM can produce the Bolt at any significant profit, at least and until they are producing 100,000s per year. I actually am expecting them to lose money on every Bolt initially. So, even if the Bolt sells out their first year of production in a week...will that handful of cars convince her that GM can make money on them? Uh....not holding my breath. Happy to be wrong.

 

[ecarfan]

I believe the Chevy Bolt is vaporware... I don't mean to be testy but I'm not so willing to believe miles-per-charge promises from a car company that killed their own electric car 20 years ago.

It seems clear to me that GM is going to ship Bolts next year. How many, I don't know, but the car clearly is not "vapor ware".
I think it is important to recognize that auto companies can evolve over time, even GM. It's a very different company from what it was when the EV1 program was scrapped (literally).
Obviously GM is not going to transition to all EVs any time soon. But don't exclude the possibility that Mary Barra sees the eventual inevitability of EVs for passenger cars and has realized that GM has to get started now, at least on a small way.
And I give GM credit for sticking with the Volt, despite the somewhat disappointing sales, and continuing to work to improve it. It's not a car I would buy, but it is incremental progress towards using far less gasoline than in the past.