GM announces plans to build nationwide fast charging network

[bro1999]

You can bet these fast charging stations will be CCS only.
First on CNN Business: GM and Bechtel plan to build thousands of electric car charging stations across the US - CNN

 

[GSP]

Great to read that GM will install and maintain a planned fast charging network. Relying on haphazard unplanned, underfunded, and unmaintained third party chargers to support a flood of new EVs would have been a disaster. This should help GM on the ASP, allowing them to build more EVs.

Hopefully they will move quickly on this, like Electrify America is doing.

GSP

Edit: I read a GTM article before posting. The CNN article linked said GM does not plan to contribute any funds to build this network. What could go wrong?

 

[gnuarm]

GM is a typical, conservative blue chip company that sticks their toes in the water until they have some level of confidence. They produced a very good hybrid and produced an affordable battery EV a year before Tesla produced barely any volume at all of the model 3. I took a serious look at the Bolt. It's not a bad car at all. But when I asked about charging, I just got a dumb look and essentially the response was "charging happens".

Now they seem to be taking it all more seriously and if they plan to have a bunch of EV models on the road by 2023, they realize they need a significant number of chargers in place by then. Three years is time enough to build a country wide network in the US along with more charging in urban areas to allow apartment dwellers to use EVs.

I see this as a not unexpected, but serious threat to Tesla. The only real advantage they have is the network of charging stations. Yes, Tesla makes a great car, but for the most part, people aren't really looking for "great" cars. There are a dozen other aspects much higher on the list of what people want. Good service is not at the bottom and Tesla is getting a bad rep on that. Price is always important. A physical presence is important to many people. It is also important for the company selling the car to be a significant contender in the market and have some history. Heck, GM employs nearly as many people as the number of model S owners.

Tesla is a start up who is constantly spawning situations that are reported in a negative light. Tesla barely has stores with many states having no presence at all other than the glowing, red chargers along the highway. Tesla simply has not been visible on the highways long enough for most people to have any confidence in them.

In other words, other than the cars scattered along the highway, the Tesla charging network is the only visible sign of Tesla's significance to most of the US. This is a branding issue that should not be diminished by the green glow of the competitors.

 

[S'toon]

GM is a typical, conservative blue chip company that sticks their toes in the water until they have some level of confidence. They produced a very good hybrid and produced an affordable battery EV a year before Tesla produced barely any volume at all of the model 3. I took a serious look at the Bolt. It's not a bad car at all. But when I asked about charging, I just got a dumb look and essentially the response was "charging happens".

Now they seem to be taking it all more seriously and if they plan to have a bunch of EV models on the road by 2023, they realize they need a significant number of chargers in place by then. Three years is time enough to build a country wide network in the US along with more charging in urban areas to allow apartment dwellers to use EVs.

I see this as a not unexpected, but serious threat to Tesla. The only real advantage they have is the network of charging stations. Yes, Tesla makes a great car, but for the most part, people aren't really looking for "great" cars. There are a dozen other aspects much higher on the list of what people want. Good service is not at the bottom and Tesla is getting a bad rep on that. Price is always important. A physical presence is important to many people. It is also important for the company selling the car to be a significant contender in the market and have some history. Heck, GM employs nearly as many people as the number of model S owners.

Tesla is a start up who is constantly spawning situations that are reported in a negative light. Tesla barely has stores with many states having no presence at all other than the glowing, red chargers along the highway. Tesla simply has not been visible on the highways long enough for most people to have any confidence in them.

In other words, other than the cars scattered along the highway, the Tesla charging network is the only visible sign of Tesla's significance to most of the US. This is a branding issue that should not be diminished by the green glow of the competitors.

...except for the fact that GM and their partner are putting 0 money into the project. They're looking for a third party to finance the venture. So they're just half-assing it.

 

[jerry33]

...except for the fact that GM and their partner are putting 0 money into the project. They're looking for a third party to finance the venture. So they're just half-assing it.

Press releases are cheap.

 

[cpa]

...except for the fact that GM and their partner are putting 0 money into the project. They're looking for a third party to finance the venture. So they're just half-assing it.

Yep. Investors will want a return on their investment. GM and its partner might allocate some payroll costs to develop the engineering and formatting of these stations, but those costs won't even be a rounding error on their financial statements.

We know the approximate costs to build a ten-stall Supercharger station. This project will take tens, if not hundreds of millions to implement nationwide. Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

I think L3 charging will evolve in a more localized fashion with local, regional, or utility ownership.