Tesla, EVs, and the auto industry's response

[RenMan68]

I'm not sure where to put this question but this forum seemed the closest.

I am wondering why conservatives hate EVs so much. I had no idea before buying a Model 3 how much politically conservative people hate electric cars. A 70-year old guy in my father's neighborhood railed against them, saying that ICE cars are perfectly good, and thus wondering why people are trying to make electric cars. This was not just intellectual curiosity on his part, mind you, because he continued on with an expletive-ridden rant about how liberals are set on destroying the country and EVs are just one more front in the war. The negative reactions I have experienced range from that kind of thing to, at best, my friends refusing to say anything about my car and just pretending I never bought one to avoid the shame. So, what is it that bothers them so much? Is it as simple as, "Gas cars are the way we get around so don't try to change it."? That's a progressive idea and thus bad? I've read some stuff about how it's an assault on big oil. Is their complaint there that Big Oil is a cherished institution and thus not to be attacked? Isn't that how capitalism works? (There is some complaint about the tax credit which, while I disagree, is at least a position I can understand (not agree with) and thus talk about.) And then the vitriol thrown at Musk baffles me. They accuse him of being a threat. This guy came to the U.S., started two successful companies, and became a billionaire. Isn't that the dream? Is it because he's an immigrant? His car company is in the US, employing Americans, making money here. (And exporting a product too!). I just don't get it. Is it about the environment? Does EV ownership present a challenge to them in terms of it being heard as a condemnation of their ICE ownership on grounds of global warming?

Love to hear people's thoughts on this.

If you do consider yourself politically conservative and you're on this forum your perspective would be particularly of interest.

I just want to understand.

 

[FlatSix911]

I'm not sure where to put this question but this forum seemed the closest.

I am wondering why conservatives hate EVs so much. I had no idea before buying a Model 3 how much politically conservative people hate electric cars. A 70-year old guy in my father's neighborhood railed against them, saying that ICE cars are perfectly good, and thus wondering why people are trying to make electric cars. This was not just intellectual curiosity on his part, mind you, because he continued on with an expletive-ridden rant about how liberals are set on destroying the country and EVs are just one more front in the war. The negative reactions I have experienced range from that kind of thing to, at best, my friends refusing to say anything about my car and just pretending I never bought one to avoid the shame. So, what is it that bothers them so much? Is it as simple as, "Gas cars are the way we get around so don't try to change it."? That's a progressive idea and thus bad? I've read some stuff about how it's an assault on big oil. Is their complaint there that Big Oil is a cherished institution and thus not to be attacked? Isn't that how capitalism works? (There is some complaint about the tax credit which, while I disagree, is at least a position I can understand (not agree with) and thus talk about.) And then the vitriol thrown at Musk baffles me. They accuse him of being a threat. This guy came to the U.S., started two successful companies, and became a billionaire. Isn't that the dream? Is it because he's an immigrant? His car company is in the US, employing Americans, making money here. (And exporting a product too!). I just don't get it. Is it about the environment? Does EV ownership present a challenge to them in terms of it being heard as a condemnation of their ICE ownership on grounds of global warming?

Love to hear people's thoughts on this.

If you do consider yourself politically conservative and you're on this forum your perspective would be particularly of interest.

I just want to understand.

All of the conservative people I know in Silicon Valley support EVs and many drive Teslas.

It really depends on your geographic location within the US... we are very open minded and live and work next to Tesla HQ in Palo Alto.

 

[2012MS85]

I'm not sure where to put this question but this forum seemed the closest.

I am wondering why conservatives hate EVs so much. I had no idea before buying a Model 3 how much politically conservative people hate electric cars. A 70-year old guy in my father's neighborhood railed against them, saying that ICE cars are perfectly good, and thus wondering why people are trying to make electric cars. This was not just intellectual curiosity on his part, mind you, because he continued on with an expletive-ridden rant about how liberals are set on destroying the country and EVs are just one more front in the war. The negative reactions I have experienced range from that kind of thing to, at best, my friends refusing to say anything about my car and just pretending I never bought one to avoid the shame. So, what is it that bothers them so much? Is it as simple as, "Gas cars are the way we get around so don't try to change it."? That's a progressive idea and thus bad? I've read some stuff about how it's an assault on big oil. Is their complaint there that Big Oil is a cherished institution and thus not to be attacked? Isn't that how capitalism works? (There is some complaint about the tax credit which, while I disagree, is at least a position I can understand (not agree with) and thus talk about.) And then the vitriol thrown at Musk baffles me. They accuse him of being a threat. This guy came to the U.S., started two successful companies, and became a billionaire. Isn't that the dream? Is it because he's an immigrant? His car company is in the US, employing Americans, making money here. (And exporting a product too!). I just don't get it. Is it about the environment? Does EV ownership present a challenge to them in terms of it being heard as a condemnation of their ICE ownership on grounds of global warming?

Love to hear people's thoughts on this.

If you do consider yourself politically conservative and you're on this forum your perspective would be particularly of interest.

I just want to understand.

I’m conservative. Love EVs; drive one every day. And live in Iowa. Love corn, too!

 

[Electroman]

I’m conservative. Love EVs; drive one every day. And live in Iowa. Love corn, too!

I think you need to get yourself gets checked with a doctor. Your condition seems to be in an advanced stage.

There is specific name for this syndrome: Conserationalism. Some conservatives don't know they are suffering from that.

 

[Brando]

Which country might have first bankrupt auto makers?
UK, Germany, Sweden (already Saab -Volvo sold to Ford then Chine Geely), Italy, Japan, USA We have many in the race - Wall St. and Banksters all have learned to privatize profits and socialize (bail outs) losses.

And as upper management all become millionaires they loss touch with common people - and as the middle/working classes get ground down (they lack the money to buy new + 1 or 2 billion vehicles may not be sustainable anyway. How expensive can transportation get? how much longer will "professional drivers" last?

Many problems on the horizon, elites have plenty of money, so they don't see/care/empathize and they own the politicians & press.
Therefore all the trends tend in the wrong direction, IMHO, so I worry about the future. not just transportation

 

[wdolson]

I'm not sure where to put this question but this forum seemed the closest.

I am wondering why conservatives hate EVs so much. I had no idea before buying a Model 3 how much politically conservative people hate electric cars. A 70-year old guy in my father's neighborhood railed against them, saying that ICE cars are perfectly good, and thus wondering why people are trying to make electric cars. This was not just intellectual curiosity on his part, mind you, because he continued on with an expletive-ridden rant about how liberals are set on destroying the country and EVs are just one more front in the war. The negative reactions I have experienced range from that kind of thing to, at best, my friends refusing to say anything about my car and just pretending I never bought one to avoid the shame. So, what is it that bothers them so much? Is it as simple as, "Gas cars are the way we get around so don't try to change it."? That's a progressive idea and thus bad? I've read some stuff about how it's an assault on big oil. Is their complaint there that Big Oil is a cherished institution and thus not to be attacked? Isn't that how capitalism works? (There is some complaint about the tax credit which, while I disagree, is at least a position I can understand (not agree with) and thus talk about.) And then the vitriol thrown at Musk baffles me. They accuse him of being a threat. This guy came to the U.S., started two successful companies, and became a billionaire. Isn't that the dream? Is it because he's an immigrant? His car company is in the US, employing Americans, making money here. (And exporting a product too!). I just don't get it. Is it about the environment? Does EV ownership present a challenge to them in terms of it being heard as a condemnation of their ICE ownership on grounds of global warming?

Love to hear people's thoughts on this.

If you do consider yourself politically conservative and you're on this forum your perspective would be particularly of interest.

I just want to understand.

First off, cool avatar. I was always more into WW II aircraft than cars. Can't tell from the angle, but the nacelles look like an earlier P-38, is that Glacier Girl before it got repainted?

Anyway, this might get moved to Market Politics by a mod, but it probably has to do with what conservative media has been saying about electric cars. The loan that Tesla got from the government has been compared to the loans given to Solyndra about the same time. It doesn't matter that Solyndra went out of business because the underlying technology for solar panels changed and the Chinese started flooding the market with cheap solar panels and Tesla paid back their loan. These outlets never let facts get in the way of a good story.

The conservative media line is Tesla is completely propped up with government money, even though it isn't. It has benefited indirectly from the tax credit, but Tesla will be the first car company to compete without a credit. The meme is that electric cars are a fad and economically unviable and Tesla will go bankrupt any minute now. This is aided by the big three car companies who largely don't want to electrify because they see no course through the transition that doesn't involve a high risk of bankruptcy. Due to battery shortages and new EVs are going to be limited production and if the public suddenly decides it want electric cars, they will quit buying ICE and the car companies will have done something akin to Osborning themselves.

The oil companies don't see electric vehicles as such an existential threat now, they can keep going for decades with a declining market. But they are naturally more allied to the car companies. Some oil related business owners, like the Koch family, see anything that disrupts their markets in any way, even if its going to take a while as an existential threat and go after them. They also go after anything that liberals seem to like. So electric cars are also a target.

There are people who are conservatives for the classic reasons, like my father has been. He was a small business owner and has voted Republican since the 40s. His primary source of conservative leaning news has been the Wall Street Journal, which is business conservative, though the editorial page has become ultra conservative. These people have largely written off the Fox News world as tripe and don't watch. They have generally been more neutral to positive about electric cars.

But those who consume large amounts of conservative media have usually drunk the Kool Aid and spout what those sources have to say. Some live in a world where they are confronted with a different reality that tempers the conservative media spin, but some others are immersed in that world and don't realize that it's a skewed picture of what's really going on.

And Elon Musk hasn't just started 2 successful companies, he's started 3 or 4 depending on how you classify it. His first company established the way online maps work, though it got bought out and disappeared. His second start up became Paypal. Then he started SpaceX and joined Tesla.

Sorry mods, I couldn't answer the question without bringing in politics.

 

[RenMan68]

I’m conservative. Love EVs; drive one every day. And live in Iowa. Love corn, too!

Thanks for replying!

 

[RenMan68]

First off, cool avatar. I was always more into WW II aircraft than cars. Can't tell from the angle, but the nacelles look like an earlier P-38, is that Glacier Girl before it got repainted?

Anyway, this might get moved to Market Politics by a mod, but it probably has to do with what conservative media has been saying about electric cars. The loan that Tesla got from the government has been compared to the loans given to Solyndra about the same time. It doesn't matter that Solyndra went out of business because the underlying technology for solar panels changed and the Chinese started flooding the market with cheap solar panels and Tesla paid back their loan. These outlets never let facts get in the way of a good story.

The conservative media line is Tesla is completely propped up with government money, even though it isn't. It has benefited indirectly from the tax credit, but Tesla will be the first car company to compete without a credit. The meme is that electric cars are a fad and economically unviable and Tesla will go bankrupt any minute now. This is aided by the big three car companies who largely don't want to electrify because they see no course through the transition that doesn't involve a high risk of bankruptcy. Due to battery shortages and new EVs are going to be limited production and if the public suddenly decides it want electric cars, they will quit buying ICE and the car companies will have done something akin to Osborning themselves.

The oil companies don't see electric vehicles as such an existential threat now, they can keep going for decades with a declining market. But they are naturally more allied to the car companies. Some oil related business owners, like the Koch family, see anything that disrupts their markets in any way, even if its going to take a while as an existential threat and go after them. They also go after anything that liberals seem to like. So electric cars are also a target.

There are people who are conservatives for the classic reasons, like my father has been. He was a small business owner and has voted Republican since the 40s. His primary source of conservative leaning news has been the Wall Street Journal, which is business conservative, though the editorial page has become ultra conservative. These people have largely written off the Fox News world as tripe and don't watch. They have generally been more neutral to positive about electric cars.

But those who consume large amounts of conservative media have usually drunk the Kool Aid and spout what those sources have to say. Some live in a world where they are confronted with a different reality that tempers the conservative media spin, but some others are immersed in that world and don't realize that it's a skewed picture of what's really going on.

And Elon Musk hasn't just started 2 successful companies, he's started 3 or 4 depending on how you classify it. His first company established the way online maps work, though it got bought out and disappeared. His second start up became Paypal. Then he started SpaceX and joined Tesla.

Sorry mods, I couldn't answer the question without bringing in politics.

Thanks wdolson, for your thoughtful reply. First, so cool to hear that you like WWII aircraft- I become immersed in P-38 history and read many great books, including the one by Warren Bodie which is exceptional. Anyway...

OK, that adds some context to the shade I get for buying a Model 3. It seems the big 3 are part of it and I get what you're saying about their reluctance to go electric as it might present a risky path. But I read a lot about how most of the major car companies are getting heavy into electric - for example Daimler just pledged $10billion for electric development.

I think your third point, about conservatives for classic reasons, is really on point in that there's an inertia to that mindset. That idea that, "we have cars that work - don't mess with it!" is hard to change. I guess that's what's difficult (and confusing) for me is that I have not told *anyone* that they should buy an electric car. For any reason. I just LOVE my Model 3 and feel a bit hurt by the criticism. I also have an ICE that I drive once or twice a month (1968 Camaro); however, the bulk (about 95%) of my driving is now electric. It just shocked me that my conservative friends were practically disgusted that I had bought this car. I thought (and continue to think) that it's coolest car I've ever had and wished they'd share some of my enthusiasm. (my liberal friends, on the other hand, constantly want me to drive us to lunch.

Again, thanks for your reply.

 

[Brando]

- for example Daimler just pledged $10 billion for electric development.

side note: TESLA TOTAL R&D from 2010-2018 <$5 billion Model S/X/3 (Y/SEMI) powerwall, batteries
research for yourself

 

[FlatSix911]

Which country might have first bankrupt auto makers? UK, Germany, Sweden (already Saab -Volvo sold to Ford then Chine Geely), Italy, Japan, USA We have many in the race - Wall St. and Banksters all have learned to privatize profits and socialize (bail outs) losses.

And as upper management all become millionaires they loss touch with common people - and as the middle/working classes get ground down (they lack the money to buy new + 1 or 2 billion vehicles may not be sustainable anyway. How expensive can transportation get? how much longer will "professional drivers" last?

Many problems on the horizon, elites have plenty of money, so they don't see/care/empathize and they own the politicians & press.
Therefore all the trends tend in the wrong direction, IMHO, so I worry about the future. not just transportation

Interesting question... what if you are part of the 1% and still want to promote sustainable transportation for the masses?

 

[wdolson]

Thanks wdolson, for your thoughtful reply. First, so cool to hear that you like WWII aircraft- I become immersed in P-38 history and read many great books, including the one by Warren Bodie which is exceptional. Anyway...

When my father was at Tacloban he said he saw Tommy MacGuire, Richard Bong, and George Kenney at the next table in the mess one day. At the time he was attached to a B-25 unit that was there and the only other planes on the base were P-38s. I got my love of WW II aluminum from him.

OK, that adds some context to the shade I get for buying a Model 3. It seems the big 3 are part of it and I get what you're saying about their reluctance to go electric as it might present a risky path. But I read a lot about how most of the major car companies are getting heavy into electric - for example Daimler just pledged $10billion for electric development.

The Europeans are in a different place than the American car companies. The Europeans know their governments will probably bail them out if they hit the ropes and they have a double incentive to go electric. Tesla kicked their tails far harder than they kicked American car makers with the Model S and X, so they know they need to compete with Tesla. Plus most European governments are strongly discouraging ICE vehicles banning them in city centers starting next decade and in some cases they will be banning the sales of new ICE entirely. So there will be a strong domestic market for electrics in Europe, even if the US rejects them.

In Europe most places are closer together and shorter range EVs are more acceptable. London to Berlin is a little less than 700 miles driving distance (with the tunnel train across the channel). That's Portland, OR to the Bay Area in the US. A rather short road trip by US standards.

I think your third point, about conservatives for classic reasons, is really on point in that there's an inertia to that mindset. That idea that, "we have cars that work - don't mess with it!" is hard to change. I guess that's what's difficult (and confusing) for me is that I have not told *anyone* that they should buy an electric car. For any reason. I just LOVE my Model 3 and feel a bit hurt by the criticism. I also have an ICE that I drive once or twice a month (1968 Camaro); however, the bulk (about 95%) of my driving is now electric. It just shocked me that my conservative friends were practically disgusted that I had bought this car. I thought (and continue to think) that it's coolest car I've ever had and wished they'd share some of my enthusiasm. (my liberal friends, on the other hand, constantly want me to drive us to lunch.

Again, thanks for your reply.

There are different types of conservatives. There are the more old school Eisenhower Republicans who are generally fiscally conservative, business oriented, and might be pro-strong defense, but generally aren't caught up in the culture wars or social conservatism. They are much more open minded about electric cars because they generally aren't soaking up all the negative memes pumped out by conservative media.

Those people are the old school of the Republican party and are increasingly feeling like they are being shoved out. The new breed of Republican are much more ideologues and into the culture war between conservatives and anything with a whiff of liberalism. They tend to reject anything liberals seem to like. If lots of liberals suddenly came out in favor of guns, some would probably want to do away with the 2nd Amendment. They hate solar and electric cars because the voices on their TV tell them they are liberal plots to harm them and they make their diesel pickups spew more smoke and champion more coal power plants because liberals are trying to stop them.

Some conservatives who were at the center of the Republican party got shoved out for being too liberal like David Fromm and Michael Steel. A lot of those former Republicans are making the case that the Republican party has turned into a cult.

 

[Kandiru]

The evolutionary problem of H sapiens surviving past age 40 is that dementia takes over.

Fierce resistance to progress and fondness of things from the past is one of the early signs.

 

[renim]

Nissan IMs concept key dimensions and specifications | Nissan News

Fwiw, its a concept vehicle, so reality will look nothing like, apart from styling cues.
But the battery pack size is very precise 115kWh.

 

[renim]

EV Sales: Global Top 20 - January 2019

The top 5 vehicles are all really different fromeach other. Not copies at all.

 

[renim]

a range of battery capacity, note that 24kWh class is still well represented (2 BEVs and 1 PHEV)
less than 20kWh is now PHEV only
40 kWh class is with 3 BEVs, one is transitioning to 60kWh class this year
there is a single 54kWh BEV
there is a single 60 kWh BEV
there is a single 70ish kWh BEV


the other standout is that BYD e5 sedan with 60 kWh sold at 40% the rate of its Yuan CUV sibling with only 42kWh.....

 

[Uncle Paul]

I'm a conservative. I love and champion Electric cars...Now get off my LAWN!

 

[ChadS]

I started this thread in 2015 to talk about how the auto industry is reacting to Tesla - Tesla's mission, after all, is to change the whole industry because Tesla can't build enough EVs by themselves.

As has been repeatedly noted, progress is very slow, which I find frustrating. However, given the business environment that the automakers and dealers are in (described above), it's not really surprising. We don't have to assume a conspiracy; risk aversion and self-interest are enough to make the transition to EVs a slow one.

There have, however, been some positive developments. And I believe the developments can indeed be traced to Tesla's influence. Even some of the competition's executives occasionally point out that Tesla is indeed moving the needle.

A SECOND VOLUME CAR APPEARS

One development (not terribly new, but at least newer than the thread) is that Tesla is no longer the only automaker following the "Volume" strategy with an EV. As I suspected earlier, the 2nd-gen Nissan Leaf also appears to be a volume car.

The first-gen LEAF primarily followed the conquest strategy; and in fact Nissan bragged to its dealers about how well the strategy worked to bring new buyers to the brand. However, they sold a ton of them, and in fact I have heard through a back-channel that Nissan actually considers themselves to have directly made money on the first-gen car. Of course, part of that depends on how much of its development cost they attribute solely to the gen-1 LEAF, and how much they apportion to other cars. Despite the large number of cars they sold, I still find it a little hard to believe it succeeded at volume, largely because of how much they seemed to subsidize leases to move cars with very low lease rates. The resale value certainly didn't seem to coincide with lease costs.

But in any event, Nissan for a long time spoke of the need for the second-gen to be a Volume car, and in fact said that better looks, longer range and more accessible DC charging were the key components they needed to get there - I agree with that assessment. The 2nd-gen LEAF is still not a beautiful car, but it does look like a typical volume Nissan, and they seem to be pushing it as a volume car. I see this as a very positive development, and I believe Tesla's success helped push Nissan to this point. (Although as I noted before, Tesla may also have inadvertently slowed Nissan down with the Model S, which made Nissan cancel their ~2012 plans for a versioned Infiniti with the gen-1 LEAF powertrain).

The sad part to this news is that 2nd-gen LEAF sales, while OK, are not great. But I think that's more about implementation and competition than strategy. I think Nissan was really trying for a volume car, but the competition (not just the Model 3, although that is big - also consider the Bolt and Kona/Niro) has really advanced, and Nissan is still partly held back by heat degradation of their original batteries.

THE RISE OF THE CANNIBALIZING CONQUEST (/DEFENSE) CAR

Unfortunately, the second-gen LEAF is still the only other EV I see following the volume strategy in the US. But there is other good news. Conquest cars, while not high volume, can be good mid-volume cars. But earlier in the thread we bemoaned the fact that the conquest cars were all of the "non-cannibalizing" (read: intentionally unattractive) variety to avoid cannibalizing sales of higher-margin ICE vehicles; this of course keeps sales on the lower end. But this is no longer true!

Jaguar iPace:

Jaguar, Audi, Porsche and Mercedes, at least, are all bringing out conquest vehicles that don't appear to be purposely handicapped to avoid cannibalization. Why are they now willing to cannibalize their own sales, when they weren't before? Because Tesla was doing the cannibalizing for them! Essentially, the other automakers are now combining the Conquest strategy with the Defensive strategy, to try to keep their customers from switching over to Tesla. A "defense" car doesn't have to be as good as the conquest car it is defending against (I believe Tesla is internally following the Volume strategy, but in terms of their effect on other automakers, it is very much like a bombshell Conquest car), but the other automakers already don't have the range, performance, overall utility, or charging network that Tesla has, so they can't afford any intentional handicaps like appearance. They have to switch some of their ICE sales to EV sales in order to keep their market share.

Unfortunately none of these new cars are volume cars; if for no other reason, the automakers don't have access to enough batteries to make them so. But their messaging appears more serious about getting people to consider the cars, so we are well beyond "Compliance" level work here. And while they are all expensive, they fit in fairly well to the portfolios of these premium manufacturers and do not appear to be handicapped in terms of utility, comfort and visibility, so I don't think they fit the "Halo" strategy either.

Audi e-Tron:

Porsche Taycan:

Mercedes EQC:

No single one of these cars will sell in enough quantity to make a difference to the industry by itself. However, as a group they can move the needle on EV volume; more importantly, I think they portend more changes to come. If they sell all they build (most likely battery-limited) it may help convince the automakers and dealers to try a real volume car next. Not to mention...a bunch of high-end EVs will help spark consumer interest in EVs in general. Good news all around.

 

[FlatSix911]

I started this thread in 2015 to talk about how the auto industry is reacting to Tesla - Tesla's mission, after all, is to change the whole industry because Tesla can't build enough EVs by themselves.

As has been repeatedly noted, progress is very slow, which I find frustrating. However, given the business environment that the automakers and dealers are in (described above), it's not really surprising. We don't have to assume a conspiracy; risk aversion and self-interest are enough to make the transition to EVs a slow one.

There have, however, been some positive developments. And I believe the developments can indeed be traced to Tesla's influence. Even some of the competition's executives occasionally point out that Tesla is indeed moving the needle.

A SECOND VOLUME CAR APPEARS

One development (not terribly new, but at least newer than the thread) is that Tesla is no longer the only automaker following the "Volume" strategy with an EV. As I suspected earlier, the 2nd-gen Nissan Leaf also appears to be a volume car.

The first-gen LEAF primarily followed the conquest strategy; and in fact Nissan bragged to its dealers about how well the strategy worked to bring new buyers to the brand. However, they sold a ton of them, and in fact I have heard through a back-channel that Nissan actually considers themselves to have directly made money on the first-gen car. Of course, part of that depends on how much of its development cost they attribute solely to the gen-1 LEAF, and how much they apportion to other cars. Despite the large number of cars they sold, I still find it a little hard to believe it succeeded at volume, largely because of how much they seemed to subsidize leases to move cars with very low lease rates. The resale value certainly didn't seem to coincide with lease costs.

But in any event, Nissan for a long time spoke of the need for the second-gen to be a Volume car, and in fact said that better looks, longer range and more accessible DC charging were the key components they needed to get there - I agree with that assessment. The 2nd-gen LEAF is still not a beautiful car, but it does look like a typical volume Nissan, and they seem to be pushing it as a volume car. I see this as a very positive development, and I believe Tesla's success helped push Nissan to this point. (Although as I noted before, Tesla may also have inadvertently slowed Nissan down with the Model S, which made Nissan cancel their ~2012 plans for a versioned Infiniti with the gen-1 LEAF powertrain).

The sad part to this news is that 2nd-gen LEAF sales, while OK, are not great. But I think that's more about implementation and competition than strategy. I think Nissan was really trying for a volume car, but the competition (not just the Model 3, although that is big - also consider the Bolt and Kona/Niro) has really advanced, and Nissan is still partly held back by heat degradation of their original batteries.

THE RISE OF THE CANNIBALIZING CONQUEST (/DEFENSE) CAR

Unfortunately, the second-gen LEAF is still the only other EV I see following the volume strategy in the US. But there is other good news. Conquest cars, while not high volume, can be good mid-volume cars. But earlier in the thread we bemoaned the fact that the conquest cars were all of the "non-cannibalizing" (read: intentionally unattractive) variety to avoid cannibalizing sales of higher-margin ICE vehicles; this of course keeps sales on the lower end. But this is no longer true!

Jaguar iPace:

Jaguar, Audi, Porsche and Mercedes, at least, are all bringing out conquest vehicles that don't appear to be purposely handicapped to avoid cannibalization. Why are they now willing to cannibalize their own sales, when they weren't before? Because Tesla was doing the cannibalizing for them! Essentially, the other automakers are now combining the Conquest strategy with the Defensive strategy, to try to keep their customers from switching over to Tesla. A "defense" car doesn't have to be as good as the conquest car it is defending against (I believe Tesla is internally following the Volume strategy, but in terms of their effect on other automakers, it is very much like a bombshell Conquest car), but the other automakers already don't have the range, performance, overall utility, or charging network that Tesla has, so they can't afford any intentional handicaps like appearance. They have to switch some of their ICE sales to EV sales in order to keep their market share.

Unfortunately none of these new cars are volume cars; if for no other reason, the automakers don't have access to enough batteries to make them so. But their messaging appears more serious about getting people to consider the cars, so we are well beyond "Compliance" level work here. And while they are all expensive, they fit in fairly well to the portfolios of these premium manufacturers and do not appear to be handicapped in terms of utility, comfort and visibility, so I don't think they fit the "Halo" strategy either.

Audi e-Tron:

Porsche Taycan:

Mercedes EQC:

Excellent summary of the changing market dynamics. BTW, your photo shows the Mission-e concept, not the Taycan.

 

[FlatSix911]

Another change to the Sales plan... Tesla ends sale commission, increases salaries and stock bonus after compensation cut - Electrek

Tesla is reversing most of its “online sales only” strategy launched earlier this year. The automaker is going to hire more sales and delivery staff, end sales commission for Tesla Advisors, and increase salaries and stock bonuses, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Earlier this year, Tesla launched the long-promised $35,000 version of the Model 3 and CEO Elon Musk said that they plan to make that price viable by moving all sales online-only, closing stores, and reducing retail headcount. It resulted in Tesla slashing retail employee compensation and closing a first wave of stores.

Later, the automaker ended up reversing some of those changes, especially when it comes to closing retail locations and bringing back some compensation through sales commission. Now Tesla is reversing even more of those original changes. As we reported yesterday, Tesla is planning to open a new type of retail location called ‘Tesla Centers’ to avoid dealership restrictions and increase deliveries.

 

[ajdelange]

I'm an old geezer (74), have been called politically to the right of Atilla the Hun and have been conservative all my life. The two main influences, I think, were common sense (with which I have been unusually blessed I feel) and reading Ayn Rand at a young age and then re-reading her from time to time throughout the rest of my life. I was also an engineer and will observe that most of my colleagues were conservative too because engineers rely on common sense in everything they do. There were exceptions, and some of them pretty smart guys too, who could turn common sense off completely when the subject turned away from work.

I thing Tesla's, EV's in general, solar panels, wind, fuel cells - all that stuff are just great. Frankly I don't care one whit about the carbon emissions (though I agree that less has got to be better than more). It's that the tech is cool. As an engineer I see the advantages multiplying.

The Rush Limbaugh conservative is incapable of thinking for himself anymore than the Bernie Saunders liberal is. Both follow what the current darling of the moment as elected by the press spews. Just now, WRT to things like those under discussion, that's some poor little mentally disturbed Swedish teen age girl. "BS" says Rush. "BS" echoes his followers and as she espouses green anything that is associated with green is bad in their minds. They have no idea what owning or operating a BEV is like. Many of them eventually get a ride in one and then become converts.

Of course folly is human nature. Just saw an interesting documentary on wind power in Vermont. The left cried out that we have to do everything to save the planet from the ravages of fossil fuel EXCEPT build windmills which interfered with their view (literal - what they saw out their windows). Most amusing.