Awwwwww yeeeeeaaaahh. Gettin some love from Beantown 
American auto makers enjoying a classic comeback - BostonHerald.com
American auto makers enjoying a classic comeback - BostonHerald.com
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
The Boston Herald publishes Top 10 U.S. cars. Model S ranks #1
- Thread starter CapitalistOppressor
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model S
Model S in the #1 slot, too!
The Herald is the blue-collar paper in town, with strongly conservative anti-management views. Republican in a pro-union way. So I'm frankly surprised by this choice. From the Globe, easy, but they wouldn't bother writing up a top US cars article.
The Herald is the blue-collar paper in town, with strongly conservative anti-management views. Republican in a pro-union way. So I'm frankly surprised by this choice. From the Globe, easy, but they wouldn't bother writing up a top US cars article.
That's kind of a strange list, IMO, other than the Model S. I'm very excited, though, to see that Model S is getting the recognition that it deserves.
Why do they keep parrotting this?
'It may be unsuccessful in the marketplace, but the Chevrolet Volt remains “an achievement General Motors should be proud of” '
It is now outselling half the GM range and every other hybrid and EV except the normal Prius.
'It may be unsuccessful in the marketplace, but the Chevrolet Volt remains “an achievement General Motors should be proud of” '
It is now outselling half the GM range and every other hybrid and EV except the normal Prius.
Three reasons. First, it's just a meme at this point and it will take a lot of contrary evidence to turn it around. Second, the Republican party has an interest in seeing the Volt fail, so they continue to actively countermessage any positive sales numbers or stories about the Volt. Third, even though the Volt is clearly a success for GM on many, many levels, it still is not selling as much as GM hoped.
The Volt assembly line at the Hamtramck facility and the upstream suppliers are capable of REAL volume production, and it's nowhere near to being utilized the way it should be. Nobody likes to see large amounts of underutilized capital sitting around depreciating and from that standpoint the Volt has been disappointing so far. This kernel of truth is at the root of many of the critiques you see.
However, that is a different argument than "unsuccessful in the marketplace". As you pointed out it is successful and it continues to show a strong upward trend in sales. That by itself supports a business case for GM, especially because the Volt was introduced into the worst market in generations. But the halo effect is probably even more valuable in the long term. GM is making real gains in important markets like California as a result of the Volt. Plus the technology will migrate into other product lines and give GM a strategic advantage as the new CAFE standards get implemented in the next decade. But all of those arguments are complicated and nebulous and aren't as easy to grasp as a story about Hamtramck getting idled a few times a year.
All points correbt. A group relentlessly bashed the Volt, sales drop and that same group gets to gloat that it's not selling.
Glad the bashing was stopped but it wll take a long time to fully crawl out. Having the EV adulation by owners is it's saving grace. Any other car would be dead by now.
It is only successful in the marketplace if it is allowing the company to make a profit on it. Here is the question: if the Volt were the only car produced by the company offering it, would that company be able to stay in business? Reports are the answer is "no" because the car is not profitable (yet). My local dealership still has the same two Volts it received at the beginning of the campaign - the one demo car and the one for sale. Even if it *IS* selling more units, if you're selling at a loss, you can't "make it up in volume".
Furthermore, can we keep political crap off this board? Everyone who has ever voted Republican isn't an emotionless money-focused machine who wants Tesla and GM to fail, just like everyone who has ever voted Democrat isn't a tree-climbing, stinky, hairy hippie. I'm a fiscal conservative who wants Tesla to succeed because it's the first _real_ alternative energy car that meets my range needs. I want every company, including Tesla, to succeed in changing the entire business model of transportation, and yet I've voted Republican.
Furthermore, can we keep political crap off this board? Everyone who has ever voted Republican isn't an emotionless money-focused machine who wants Tesla and GM to fail, just like everyone who has ever voted Democrat isn't a tree-climbing, stinky, hairy hippie. I'm a fiscal conservative who wants Tesla to succeed because it's the first _real_ alternative energy car that meets my range needs. I want every company, including Tesla, to succeed in changing the entire business model of transportation, and yet I've voted Republican.
Sadly, Republicans haven't been fiscally conservative in decades. If you think Telsa's best chance is under the more fiscally conservative party, they it's not the GOP you'd want to have in power.
I considered myself conservative for fiscal reasons in my youth, but the GOP doesn't embody that (they talk about it endlessly, but they don't walk the walk) and consequently I don't vote for them.
Ten Largest Annual Percentage Increases in Total Regulatory Budget in the Last Fifty Years | Intellectual Takeout (ITO)
Fiscal Fact Checker: How Much Has Spending Increased Under President Obama? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
Last edited:
@FlasherZ
The car is profitable on a per unit basis. Any claims to the contrary are including NRE which every new product has to amortise. As they sell more Volts, each car's share of that NRE will eventually be under the margin GM makes on it and the whole program will be profitable. By your own logic, Tesla is in a much worse position. That's why you either need investors with deep pockets and patience, or a government that is prepared to provide seed funding for a new industry it wants to develop.
As for your second comment, I don't see any 'political crap' here except yours. There is tacit acknowledgement that much of the FUD about this car has come from media of a certain leaning. By making that overt, it appears a raw nerve has been touched.
The car is profitable on a per unit basis. Any claims to the contrary are including NRE which every new product has to amortise. As they sell more Volts, each car's share of that NRE will eventually be under the margin GM makes on it and the whole program will be profitable. By your own logic, Tesla is in a much worse position. That's why you either need investors with deep pockets and patience, or a government that is prepared to provide seed funding for a new industry it wants to develop.
As for your second comment, I don't see any 'political crap' here except yours. There is tacit acknowledgement that much of the FUD about this car has come from media of a certain leaning. By making that overt, it appears a raw nerve has been touched.
In this very thread:
I'll give you a pass this time because you might not have seen it, but I'll tell you that if you use the forum's "search" function for "republican" or "democrat" or "romney" or "obama", you'll find plenty of "political crap".
Nerve with my observation seems to have been yours. Thank you.
I've been "nudging" for some time Bill Griffith who articles appear frequently in the Globe's automobile section to have some coverage of the model S and Tesla. Based on his responses back he is clearly not a fan of EV's yet. Probably explains why the Globe has been relatively silent.
Made sure he was aware of the Herald link:smile:
Made sure he was aware of the Herald link:smile:
However that comment in question seems to have plenty of evidence to support the observation. Not least the tag of 'Obamacar'. I doubt that came from his own party.
This appears to be an objective source What The Presidential Elections Mean For Tesla Motors And The EV Industry -- Trefis
Swallowing some FUD here. Companies invest billions to develop new cars. It takes time to pay that back from vehicle sales. You can't arbitrarily allocate development costs to sales in a certain time period - it's silly. By that logic the first car sold lost billions of dollars, and every one sold since has made a profit.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Great, except you can't deny the reality that the Republican party has been anti EV and anti Volt in the extreme, so much so that people like Bob Lutz has to chastise them for their irrational stance. Unfortunately EV's, hybrids, and alternative energy have all become political issues, so no we can't keep political crap off this board, as much as we'd like to. It's a simple fact that irrational attacks have mostly come from the Right on these issues. Your anger should be with your party, not with us.
Arnold Panz
Model Sig 304, VIN 542
+1!! And it's really important for Republicans to be vocal inside the party. Out best politician in Tallahassee for EVs is a Republican from Boca Raton. Mitt Romney as governor was great for alternative energy issues and support for businesses. This never was a partisan issue until recently, and it would be hugely helpful for rank and file Republicans to let the party leadership know that they don't want this issue politicized anymore, at least when it comes to EVs/Tesla.
And, of course, the Boston Globe is owned by the New York Times. Clearly the NYT doesn't have the same anti-EV bias. I dropped my Globe subscription years ago, just subscribing to the NYT and WSJ these days. (Interesting counterpoint, reading about the same event in those two papers -- about the only thing they agree on is that the Model S is a great car.)
Except I don't associate with a party. I'm not one of those party-line sheeple. I just prefer to talk about Tesla and the model S without hearing the typical BS drivel I see on every other board out there.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
People here are not 'sheeple' and have a right to opinions. Not sure why you're wound up over this, there wasn't a political discussion going on (yes, there was a quote ... waaaay back there) until you got it going. Time for everyone to stop and get back on topic.
