Planet-9 Porsche Forum banner

1321 - 1340 of 1457 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,452 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,321

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,467 Posts
It probably should be, and P3 could still beat a GT3 and other cars in the new class. I absolutely spanked other cars at the autocross this past October with nothing more than good tires...
Interesting, do you still have you GT4?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,452 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,323

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,452 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,324
Interesting, do you still have you GT4?
Yes I do and in a tight autocross course the GT4 is faster in the corners, but cannot get out of the corner or accelerate in straights as fast as the Tesla can, so they are two completely different driving styles, but two very comparable cars in terms of lap times and auto cross runs. Of course one is a dedicated sports car and the other a 4 door family sedan, as we all know the Tesla Roadster V2 would smoke either car. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,467 Posts
Yes I do and in a tight autocross course the GT4 is faster in the corners, but cannot get out of the corner or accelerate in straights as fast as the Tesla can, so they are two completely different driving styles, but two very comparable cars in terms of lap times and auto cross runs. Of course one is a dedicated sports car and the other a 4 door family sedan, as we all know the Tesla Roadster V2 would smoke either car. :)
The electric motor torque in a tight course would certainly have the advantage and I am sure that the announced Roadster V2 would be incredible and with published pricing of $200-250K certainly smokes them in the price department! :eek:

Sounds like you are still enjoying the GT4 then?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
@chows4us Weren't you just saying something about EV demand being down? Something about irrelevant Chinese golf cart manufacturers? :) Might want to check these numbers: Tesla destroys expectations, announces record deliveries of 112,000 cars - Electrek

Hope you aren't shorting TSLA stock like the oil and gas industry is... :)
Have they made a profit for any full year? Or still a black hole money goes in and never comes out?

Although it might not sound like it, I hope Tesla becomes the old GM in terms of size and profitability. I remember being in graduate eco classes them talking about how huge, profitable, and the largest company in the world - GM. There was nothing like it at the time. Now its a pale imitation of its former self.

If Tesla could actually turn a profit, if more American consumers buy the car, thats good for the GDP and good for America. A deep, endless blackhole where money goes in and no profit comes out is not good for anyone other than the fact the R&D is being done.

SEC filing

 

·
Incurable Gearhead
Joined
·
953 Posts
It probably should be, and P3 could still beat a GT3 and other cars in the new class. I absolutely spanked other cars at the autocross this past October with nothing more than good tires...
TQ & CoG FTW! Some great comments on the Grassroots page.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
@chows4us Weren't you just saying something about EV demand being down? Something about irrelevant Chinese golf cart manufacturers? :) Might want to check these numbers: Tesla destroys expectations, announces record deliveries of 112,000 cars - Electrek

Hope you aren't shorting TSLA stock like the oil and gas industry is... :)
Well, Well, Well, I should have known better than to just read what an EV blog says. Look here.


"Nothing motivates a new car buyer to purchase an electric car more than the knowledge that an existing tax subsidy is about to be reduced. That's what happened to EV sales in The Netherlands in the second half of 2019, and especially the month of December. ... the stringent European regulations kick in starting January 1, 2020. You can be fairly certain that December 2019 was Tesla’s high water mark in The Netherlands - and by extension, probably in all of Europe too. ... The third item of note in the December sales number for The Netherlands is that the Tesla Model X and S are nowhere to be seen."

Funny how the EV blogs don't mention where the boost in sales comes from. :unsure: And more


Ignore his predictions, just the data

"I expect a Q4 profit. However, the Q4 profit won’t be nearly enough to cover the loss over the first three quarters. So, write it down: 2019 will be Tesla’s 10th consecutive year of losing money since going public." ?

"That has to be a record" ?

"2019 saw a dramatic decline in sales of the Model S and Model X, despite continuing price cuts and declines in the ASPs of those cars. 2020 will be worse as more luxury EV competitors arrive." ?

"Tesla will achieve record Q4 deliveries thanks to an impending major change to tax laws in The Netherlands, where Tesla delivered 16,289 Model 3 cars during the quarter."

Now we understand. No more bribes? Uh oh ? So what is this Netherlands Tax Incentive? Read


"BiK for BEVs:
  • 2018: 4%
  • 2019: 4% up to a maximum of €50,000 (22% for the amount above)
  • 2020: 8% up to a maximum of €45,000 (22% for the amount above)
  • 2021: 12% up to a maximum of €40,000 (22% for the amount above) ...
Higher BiK means that the popular company car — used by employees but also for private purposes — will be gradually taxed higher."

But wait, the EV blog is whining about it too!


"Tesla’s sales are surging in the country [Netherlands] ahead of the end of an EV incentive. ... What could partly explain the surge in demand for the Model S is that it is a popular company car due to the significant tax break on the Benefit-in-kind (or BIK) ending for vehicles that cost more than €50,000, which is the case for Model S and Model X. ... We have seen similar situations happen with the end of EV incentives before. The best examples being Denmark and Hong Kong which used to be two of Tesla’s best markets. But now they dropped down to be some of the worst markets in terms of sales since they killed their incentives. ... We expect a similar albeit not as drastic situation in the US with the likely end of the federal tax credit"

Didn't the US Tax credit end 1/1/20? How much will the drop in US sales been from 4 QTR,19 to 1 QTR,20? Uh oh.

He then jumps to Norway sales. Uh oh. Looks poor. You need to go to the Norway site to see the graph. Norway Model 3 registrations.

Tesla Registration Stats

March 19, 5,315
June 19, 3,012
Sept 19, 2,341
Dec 19, 1,251

Which brings us to those pesky EU carrots and sticks. Behind a paywall except for the summary


This we know. 1/1/20 the Draconian fines kick in. Here's the killer line.

"there's not enough demand for all the new BEVs and PHEVs, manufacturers could sell them below the real cost of production just to avoid the penalties."

Why is this important? What did CinciOH say?

Chow, it is not that masses do not WANT them, they even might want them. The problem is it is very hard to have them realistically.

Been saying that like a parrot for quite some time.
Sometimes things aren't always as they seem? Were these cars bought simply because foreign and US incentives to buy them end or where ending?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
@chows4us Weren't you just saying something about EV demand being down? Something about irrelevant Chinese golf cart manufacturers? :) Might want to check these numbers: Tesla destroys expectations, announces record deliveries of 112,000 cars - Electrek
From that article:

Who? Tesla
What? record 2019 deliveries
When? 2019
Where? Worldwide
Why? :unsure: No why. Read. It reads to me to be advertising. Here's The Drives POV


Now to the actual data about demand. Lets check those US numbers :) Updated 1/3/20


Model 3, Dec, year to year Down - 38.35% yearly Up 14.8%
Model S, Dec Down -62%, yearly Down -42%
Model X, Dec, Down 56% yearly Down -28%

This is consistent with the Netherlands report, S and X sales are dismal. Why isn't the EV blogs reporting this? Model 3 is up. Could that be because they are much cheaper?

Now to Inside EVs.


Updated 1/3/20, worldwide sales and USA sales

2018 1,936,247 349,298
2019 1,780,679 308,339

Lets see. hmm. Thats down - 8% worldwide, and down 11.7% in the USA. There could be holes in there in reporting but the general trend is still down ... Why this slump? What does Forbes say?


"The pronounced drop in sales, along with a similar decline in China, has prompted concern that future sales may fall short of expectations. ... Recent growth in US EV sales is almost entirely due to the Tesla Model 3. ... There is general agreement that the sales slump in China is due to cuts in subsidies and a slowing economy

Incentives matter – a lot"

Ahh, the old bribe them to get them to buy them. :) Look the Netherlands pops up again!

The effect of incentives is illustrated by a characteristic pattern of a spike in sales before the incentives expire and a sharp drop afterwards. This is illustrated for the Netherlands PHEV incentives below. The current slump in China is another example.

Lets go to that source


"Almost half of Nissan Leaf buyers and 40% of Chevrolet Volt buyers said that they would not have purchased their cars without the credit incentive."

"the Netherlands decided to focus their incentive on only all-electric vehicles, removing support for plug-in hybrids. Plug-in hybrid sales dropped precipitously the following year."

"... in the state of Georgia. When the state purchase rebate was removed at the end of 2015, the federal tax credit remained as the only EV purchasing incentive. This was not enough to sustain the budding EV market, and sales plummeted as a result."


Statistics. What do they say about statistics? Oh yeah, "Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
OMG, WAPO is bashing EVs? No!!! An opinion but still WAPO


" electric cars will be a niche product for upper-income folks. ... government subsidies for them will be a regressive transfer of social resources in return for little climate benefit ... as of March 2019, there were 1.18 million electric vehicles on the road in the United States — less than one-half of 1 percent of the total. Households earning $100,000 or more per year own two-thirds of EVs, with many of the owners benefiting from a $7,500 federal tax credit. ...

What about recent reports that Volkswagen is making big new investments in electrics? ... a response to regulatory pressure from governments ... than as a response to demonstrated customer demand,"
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
BTW, the fact I had to actually look up the raw data is something I find very disconcerting. The "journalists" don't provide the full story. They "curate" the news to sell whatever agenda they are selling. And thats just sad. :( News curation has migrated into the automotive journals.

Their opinions mean nothing. What matters is the actual data, what is going on, and let the consumers decide for themselves their own opinions. "Their" opinions are no better than anyone else's opinion.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,452 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,333
Chows you do know that SeekingAlpha is run an anti-Tesla site right? If you are going to ding Elektrek as being "pro Tesla" (Actually Elon and the Fred have been butting heads for more than a year now) then you have to admit the bias of SeekingAlpha. That being said, Tesla delivered a record number of cars both in the 4th quarter and in 2019. Model 3 sales up, X and S are down. No different than say 911, Cayman, Boxster, Panamera and Macan sales being down for Porsche in 2019 but Cayenne sales are up. The S and X are older generation cars now, both due for a refresh and they are more expensive so the fact that their sales are tapering off near end of life for this generation shouldn't surprise anyone. Especially with the new drivetrain coming, I imagine some buyers holding off and waiting for the new drive train. Will Q1 sales be lower than Q4? Probably, they were last year and they typically are for every car manufacturer, but will 2020 sales overall exceed 2019 sales? Yes I believe so and the stock market and investors seem to think so as well. So if Tesla is growing but the overall market for EVs came in lower in 2019 what does that mean?

1) Shake out in the market? - Certainly we've seen other EV manufacturers go under or suffer because they were unable to deliver on their promises. That's natural in any new market. Do you remember all the PC makers that existed back in the 80's and early 90's? Firms like Gateway and Compaq don't exist anymore, and other firms like IBM sold off their PC hardware division to Lenovo or other overseas manufacturers. How was that good for the US?
2) New EV's from established car makers didn't surpass Tesla the industry benchmark - Jaguar, Audi, Porsche all released new EV's this year and without exception they came up short as compared to Tesla.
3) Making a Good EV isn't as easy as some predicted - Remember all the news stories 5 years ago, 4 years ago, 3 years ago... well just about every year that would say "Just wait until manufacturer X releases their EV" they will take over the market, etc. etc. People forget that you need a charging infrastructure, you need battery manufacturing capacity, you need good battery chemistry, and if you want to compete with Tesla you need a rolling PC or rolling iPhone as some like to say. A completely different platform and experience from traditional cars.
4) Traditional manufacturers don't want to give up their profitable oil and gas based cars because churning out the status quo is easier and more profitable and when ICE cars flood the market and are sitting around on lots, big incentives start to happen. For a lot of 2019 manufacturers like BMW have been paying people to buy their cars because they can no longer get MSRP for them. So I imagine if someone was looking at say a 50,000 Tesla with a $1,875 tax rebate or a $50,000 BMW with a $5k manufacturers rebate and .9 percent financing and they are basing their purchase primarily on cost, they'd choose the manufacturer that is throwing the most money at them. (PS a friend of mine was able to get over $12k off the price of a new BMW 3 series)
5) You criticize the govt for giving incentives which expire on EVs but you don't criticize car makers that give incentives that come from profits they've reaped for a hundred years. You cannot expect a brand new manufacturing industry to be instantly cost competitive to a 100 year existing manufacturing industry. The only way you get people to invest in new technologies is with incentives that society creates through government for philanthropic programs designed to foster new ideas. As incentives go away, sales will suffer, whether it is government incentives or manufacturer incentives. Instead of wasting their profits subsidizing new ICE cars, ICE manufacturers should be using those profits to invest in new technologies like EVs. If they did, maybe we'd see better EV efforts from them and a better selection.
6) I think it means that delays in coming to market for vehicles like the Mach-E, combined with a shake out of some of the early contenders/pretenders in the EV market that seeing a dip in EV sales in the short term is not really a surprise, but if manufacturers like Ford and VW are bringing their cars to market this year as promised then we should see an uptick in EV sales all else being equal.
7) Sales for cars across the board were down for nearly all auto makers in 2019, so EVs being down may also be indicative of that trend.

Lastly on your point about "Let the consumer decide for themselves" - Ok, but ummm how much education are we giving the consumer? Consumers once bought Round-Up, Consumers still buy cigarettes, what level of education and from what sources are we going to tolerate? I ask this because last night I was give my cousin and her friend a ride home in my Tesla. Her friend is screaming in delight when I demonstrate the 0-60 time. She proclaims that Tesla is her "dream car" and she's wanted one for years but feels like she can never afford one. I asked "Why don't you think you can afford one?" Her answers as follows:
A) Well aren't they all like $100K and over? - No, I inform her that she can buy a Model 3 without incentives for between $35K and $40K and soon she will be able to buy a Model Y SUV for under $40K as well. I did tell her that the average Model 3 is over $50K but she could get into one for less. She had no idea.
I then asked "What about buying a used Tesla?"
B) "Doesn't Tesla buy all the used Teslas so you can't get them anywhere else?" She said that her boyfriend and someone else told her that you can't buy used Teslas because Tesla corners the market on them. No. The reality is that most Tesla owners do not trade in a Tesla on a gas car so you see very few on other dealership lots. More often a Tesla is either sold outright via an online site like cargurus, autotrader, etc. or the Tesla is traded in on a newer/better Tesla so Tesla does have a pre-owned inventory as well, but there is no truth to the rumor she heard that she couldn't buy a used one anywhere but Tesla.

So here we have a woman in her mid 40's that has common misconceptions about Tesla, misconceptions that are being fed by competitors/detractors in the market. So imagine you walk into a stable in 1900 and that stable owner tells you those new horseless carriages catch fire and are expensive to maintain and that what you really need is a new horse. You aren't sure so you go to the next stable and ask the owner there and you get the same story. Pretty soon you start to believe that horses are the way to go. It's the same thing today with traditional auto dealerships. Even at dealerships like Chevy that sells the Bolt and Nissan that sells the Leaf, they typically have "one guy" who is the salesperson for electrics and he works part time, everyone else you get wants you to buy a Camaro or Sentra because that's what they are incented for you to buy.

Your mantra about letting the consumer decide for themselves rings hollow when consumers are inundated with misinformation and preyed upon by those with interests to the contrary.

If you want an EFFECTIVE means of promoting EV adoption you'd simply tell traditional car manufacturers that whenever they bring out a new/revised model that it must be electric. So Honda could have just released a new model Civic last year, but in 4 or 5 years when it is due for a change then it must become electric. So manufacturers have a choice, they could either keep the Civic the same and watch sales slowly dwindle as the cars look the same and drive the same year after year and fall further and further behind, or they suck it up and bring out an electric version. That would be saying to the industry that we respect the R&D you put into the current generation car, great, but guess what, all your R&D needs to be centered on EV going forward and if it isn't then pretty soon your cars become like those in Cuba, nothing new since the 50's :) (Yes that's a generalization but for illustrative purposes) :)

We stopped the sale of Round-Up because it can cause cancer but yet we let exhaust pipes spew out carbon monoxide and dioxide and other contaminents in abundance without seeming to care. Burning fossil fuels is not a good way to meet our energy needs, regardless of whether we call it "clean coal" or "low-carbon diesel" - WTF?

If people aren't switching to a better alternative then it is for one of several reasons, could be economic, could be lack of information, could be ease/habit. Ask yourself, if you are going to buy a car in the next 3 years why wouldn't you buy electric?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,467 Posts
@K-Man S after all of that you must have ditched that gas guzzling old school GT4 by now, it certainly doesn't support your views, after all of your many pro-Tesla posts how could you be seen driving it? Your last sentence clearly tips to your feelings about ICE ownership if you still have any ICE I would be curious to know why you would keep them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,110 Posts
If people aren't switching to a better alternative then it is for one of several reasons, could be economic, could be lack of information, could be ease/habit. Ask yourself, if you are going to buy a car in the next 3 years why wouldn't you buy electric?
Simple reason. Nowhere plug it in. Same issue for the other thousands of people who live in my "neighbourhood" (in my city this means the 85,000 or so people who live in high- and low-rises in the downtown core, 10,000 or more of whom are in residences seen in this this picture taken from my living room). Same issue for millions of people who don't live in suburbia and don't need to drive tens of miles to get somewhere multiple times a day, but can use other forms of transportation such as inner-city trains, scooters, bicycles etc...or even (gasp) walk to the grocery store, pubs and restaurants.

Electric cars are only a potential solution for a specific (and mostly wealthy) segment of the population. I suggest in North America the bigger "energy efficiency" problem is urban sprawl, and people thinking they are somehow "solving" a problem driving an electric car but living completely inefficiently on all other levels in their oversized homes, with independent heating/cooling systems, lawn mowers and other gas-powered tools, and spewing tons more CO2 into the air than people living in communal environments. Most city dwellers are already doing MUCH more to reduce their carbon footprint by eschewing wasteful lifestyles than those who buy into the suburban-living construct and attempt to mitigate the negative effects of their lifestyle choices by putting an electric vehicle in the garage.

View attachment 266268
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
Lets go over your post. I agree with some, disagree with others, and maybe a misunderstanding on some.

Chows you do know that SeekingAlpha is run an anti-Tesla site right? If you are going to ding Elektrek as being "pro Tesla" (Actually Elon and the Fred have been butting heads for more than a year now) then you have to admit the bias of SeekingAlpha.
Yes, but that does not change the data presented. That doesn't change the fact about the Netherlands. And I would not know how deep the agenda is with them without reading the The Drive's article about them. My concern with them is not that they push an agenda. Opinions are opinions. Its what I said:

"The "journalists" don't provide the full story. They "curate" the news to sell whatever agenda they are selling" IOW, by curation of news, they push only what they want their readers to know, not the "entire" story. And that is not cool at all, nor what journalism has traditionally been.

I see them more as a marketing arm, rather than journalism, pushing "an" agenda. Similarly opposing views do the same thing. This leave the consumer to figure out what is really going on.

That being said, Tesla delivered a record number of cars both in the 4th quarter and in 2019. Model 3 sales up, X and S are down. ... So if Tesla is growing but the overall market for EVs came in lower in 2019 what does that mean?
The numbers are the numbers. I reported them above from the EV site that collects the numbers. What does it mean? Let see.

1) Shake out in the market? - Certainly we've seen other EV manufacturers go under or suffer because they were unable to deliver on their promises. That's natural in any new market. Do you remember all the PC makers that existed back in the 80's and early 90's? Firms like Gateway and Compaq don't exist anymore, and other firms like IBM sold off their PC hardware division to Lenovo or other overseas manufacturers. How was that good for the US?
Remember what I said above?

Although it might not sound like it, I hope Tesla becomes the old GM in terms of size and profitability. I remember being in graduate eco classes them talking about how huge, profitable, and the largest company in the world - GM. There was nothing like it at the time. Now its a pale imitation of its former self.

If Tesla could actually turn a profit, if more American consumers buy the car, thats good for the GDP and good for America. A deep, endless blackhole where money goes in and no profit comes out is not good for anyone other than the fact the R&D is being done.


Tesla succeeding is good for America. Right now, its a drag on the GDP. They can't produce a profit. Their profit, year after year, are negative. That's bad. I would hope they become the most profitable US car company. Instead, it looks like they are the least profitable company, a deep red hole.

2) New EV's from established car makers didn't surpass Tesla the industry benchmark - Jaguar, Audi, Porsche all released new EV's this year and without exception they came up short as compared to Tesla.
So far true. That will change with time. The existing auto industry companies, the survivors, have a track record of knowing how to make profits, at least the Japanese. Notice the Japanese aren't playing along? Why not?

Can't say that for American. They used to but fell apart in the last decades.

3) Making a Good EV isn't as easy as some predicted - Remember all the news stories 5 years ago, 4 years ago, 3 years ago... well just about every year that would say "Just wait until manufacturer X releases their EV" they will take over the market, etc. etc. People forget that you need a charging infrastructure, you need battery manufacturing capacity, you need good battery chemistry, and if you want to compete with Tesla you need a rolling PC or rolling iPhone as some like to say. A completely different platform and experience from traditional cars.
True. Tesla has a head start. OK, in a decade the others will catch up. I got no issue with this.

4) Traditional manufacturers don't want to give up their profitable oil and gas based cars because churning out the status quo is easier and more profitable and when ICE cars flood the market and are sitting around on lots, big incentives start to happen. For a lot of 2019 manufacturers like BMW have been paying people to buy their cars because they can no longer get MSRP for them. So I imagine if someone was looking at say a 50,000 Tesla with a $1,875 tax rebate or a $50,000 BMW with a $5k manufacturers rebate and .9 percent financing and they are basing their purchase primarily on cost, they'd choose the manufacturer that is throwing the most money at them. (PS a friend of mine was able to get over $12k off the price of a new BMW 3 series)
Why would they? How would that make sense. Who wants to lose money?

imagine if someone was looking at say a 50,000 Tesla with a $1,875 tax rebate or a $50,000 BMW with a $5k manufacturers rebate and .9 percent financing and they are basing their purchase primarily on cost,

Yes. They do. That is how 95% of American buyers think. They don't care or think about maintenance or the other EV arguments. All they want to know is the monthly payments. That is exactly why the high cost of electric cars is a killer and public generally doesn't buy them. Money talks. People live month by month.

This is all true and a reason why the EV argument fails. Its human nature. This is why all the arguments about service, simplicity, etc don't matter. People are always the same. How much a month?

5) You criticize the govt for giving incentives which expire on EVs but you don't criticize car makers that give incentives that come from profits they've reaped for a hundred years.
Huh? That's apples and oranges.

Governments force you via regulations, banning, fines. Governments come and go. How'd that "Cash for Clunkers" work out? Depending upon the "type" of government, their motives change as policies change or the interests of those in charge change. How's that working out with Pres Obama buying oceanfront property but telling the public the world is going end. Who is walking the talk? [this is history, not politics].

However, companies exist for one reason only, the make profits for their owners, whether individuals, partnerships, or the stockholders. If they cut prices, they are making a business decision. They know exactly how much their margins are and how much they can cut the prices. American car companies have offered rebates for decades. That should tell you how much money they really make.

These are completely different concepts. In one, they take money from ME. Money is taken from me, the taxpayer, and given to YOU. Why should I give you anything? I earned that money. In the second case, the money is taken from potential profits that would have gone to the owners, and not from the general public. These are completely different concepts. EV subsidy is regressive taking money from poorer people giving it to the richer people who can afford EVs.

You cannot expect a brand new manufacturing industry to be instantly cost competitive to a 100 year existing manufacturing industry. The only way you get people to invest in new technologies is with incentives that society creates through government for philanthropic programs designed to foster new ideas. As incentives go away, sales will suffer, whether it is government incentives or manufacturer incentives. Instead of wasting their profits subsidizing new ICE cars, ICE manufacturers should be using those profits to invest in new technologies like EVs. If they did, maybe we'd see better EV efforts from them and a better selection.
Thats only if you buy into the concept electric is needed. You do realize half the country laughs at it. By taking money from me, and giving it to you (philosophically), is the same conceptual idea as the EU Draconian Carrot and stick approach with fine. They are forcing the issue.

Governments come and go.

Yesterday - Subsidies came in
Today --- bye bye subsidies.
Tomorrow - New subsidies "could" be implented
Next week - bye bye again

The pendulum swings back and forth, back and forth (speaking about the US). This is because you have no general buy-in. We've been over this before. Polls (which I hate) show the public wouldn't give $10 to solve any of this global warming problem.


and


43% of Americans won't give $1. Do you know how bad that is? They don't want you to take a single dollar?

No buy-in? No subsidies. I can imagine the public at large doesn't really understand this all.

6) I think it means that delays in coming to market for vehicles like the Mach-E, combined with a shake out of some of the early contenders/pretenders in the EV market that seeing a dip in EV sales in the short term is not really a surprise, but if manufacturers like Ford and VW are bringing their cars to market this year as promised then we should see an uptick in EV sales all else being equal.
Car companies come and go. I said at the beginning of this thread, and still believe, once Tesla actually turns a profit, if ever, one of the big boys will eat them. They won't call it a corporate takeover, just a "merger".

7) Sales for cars across the board were down for nearly all auto makers in 2019, so EVs being down may also be indicative of that trend.
True, except that was not the predictions of those pushing the electric car agenda

Bloomberg, Graph up. Wrong, Sales down

IEA Ditto, graphs wrong

Cleantechnica Ditto

Try to find any 2019 sales analysis from the EV advocates that was right.

Lastly on your point about "Let the consumer decide for themselves" - Ok, but ummm how much education are we giving the consumer? Consumers once bought Round-Up, Consumers still buy cigarettes, what level of education and from what sources are we going to tolerate? I ask this because last night I was give my cousin and her friend a ride home in my Tesla. Her friend is screaming in delight when I demonstrate the 0-60 time. She proclaims that Tesla is her "dream car" and she's wanted one for years but feels like she can never afford one. I asked "Why don't you think you can afford one?" Her answers as follows:
A) Well aren't they all like $100K and over? - No, I inform her that she can buy a Model 3 without incentives for between $35K and $40K and soon she will be able to buy a Model Y SUV for under $40K as well. I did tell her that the average Model 3 is over $50K but she could get into one for less. She had no idea.
I then asked "What about buying a used Tesla?"
B) "Doesn't Tesla buy all the used Teslas so you can't get them anywhere else?" She said that her boyfriend and someone else told her that you can't buy used Teslas because Tesla corners the market on them. No. The reality is that most Tesla owners do not trade in a Tesla on a gas car so you see very few on other dealership lots. More often a Tesla is either sold outright via an online site like cargurus, autotrader, etc. or the Tesla is traded in on a newer/better Tesla so Tesla does have a pre-owned inventory as well, but there is no truth to the rumor she heard that she couldn't buy a used one anywhere but Tesla.

So here we have a woman in her mid 40's that has common misconceptions about Tesla, misconceptions that are being fed by competitors/detractors in the market. So imagine you walk into a stable in 1900 and that stable owner tells you those new horseless carriages catch fire and are expensive to maintain and that what you really need is a new horse. You aren't sure so you go to the next stable and ask the owner there and you get the same story. Pretty soon you start to believe that horses are the way to go. It's the same thing today with traditional auto dealerships. Even at dealerships like Chevy that sells the Bolt and Nissan that sells the Leaf, they typically have "one guy" who is the salesperson for electrics and he works part time, everyone else you get wants you to buy a Camaro or Sentra because that's what they are incented for you to buy.

Your mantra about letting the consumer decide for themselves rings hollow when consumers are inundated with misinformation and preyed upon by those with interests to the contrary.
There is a lot to absorb here.

First, lithium is a terrible chemical for fire. Its been proven over and over again it reignites. I've said this before "If" lithium powered cars become mainstream, say 33 - 50% of the market, they will have a Ford Pinto all over again. Its a matter of numbers.

Second, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. For your story, I read today, can't find the reference, that 40% of people cannot do anything without looking it up in Google. They don't teach simple skills like homemaking and shop in HS anymore. Whose fault is that? Your telling me the public isn't well educated.


30M Americans are illiterate

"On the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress 12th Grade Reading Level Assessment (2015), 46 percent of white students scored at or above proficient. Just 17 percent of black students and 25 percent of Latino students scored proficient."

You are right. The US cannot convince people to stop smoking. I've said that a dozen times, despite the fact its well known it WILL KILL YOU. They don't care. What does that tell you about electric cars and "climate change"? Think about that. Its a good analogy. These people see other actually died. They are dead from smoking, and still start to smoke. With climate change, its too far away. They don't see anyone dead.

If you want an EFFECTIVE means of promoting EV adoption you'd simply tell traditional car manufacturers that whenever they bring out a new/revised model that it must be electric.
Here we disagree and we can continue to disagree. First, you assume everyone agrees with the "world is going to end" line. No, they don't.

Second, that is not a free market. That is a government dictating how capitalism will work in a way that is not capitalism. That's directing what can and cannot be sold. That's what communism countries do. How many other cars than Lada's were sold?

We stopped the sale of Round-Up because it can cause cancer but yet we let exhaust pipes spew out carbon monoxide and dioxide and other contaminents in abundance without seeming to care. Burning fossil fuels is not a good way to meet our energy needs, regardless of whether we call it "clean coal" or "low-carbon diesel" - WTF?
We did? Whats this?


and this?



If people aren't switching to a better alternative then it is for one of several reasons, could be economic, could be lack of information, could be ease/habit. Ask yourself, if you are going to buy a car in the next 3 years why wouldn't you buy electric?
Next post. This one too long
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
If people aren't switching to a better alternative then it is for one of several reasons, could be economic, could be lack of information, could be ease/habit. Ask yourself, if you are going to buy a car in the next 3 years why wouldn't you buy electric?
In three years would I buy one? I am open to electrons for fuel if I lived in an urban area, never drove outside of the city, needed a tiny car for some errands only, I could see owning a tiny commuter $25K Electric car, provided I could plug it in wherever I lived. But I don't. In the suburbs, life is much different. But I can see those that live in inner cities believing the rest of the country doesn't exist.

I am where the blue is deep, deep. Its so deep the earth and sky are the same color. Money (generally county wide) is not an issue. My wildlife sightings of Teslas has maybe gone up 300% in the last year, from maybe 2 to 6. 1 X that lives nearby, the others S. No 3 that I recognize. People just don't buy them. EV parking spots are empty. Why not? Again, gcurnew nailed it. I can't be bothered with spending money on a "charger". finding where to put it, multiple cars, or worrying about it where to charge on the road. OK, I'm lazy. I know there is a gas station everywhere. And I reached a point in life I ain't going to do any unnecessary work, not use a smart phone.

BTW, did you see the countries at COP25 couldn't agree on much of anything?


They can't decide on the rules. They know its a transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor. Its not different than subsidies but subsidies are worse. Who buys the EVs? The rich. They take money earned from the poor and give to the rich. The poor can't afford any new car never mind an expensive electric car. But the rich take advantage of those subsidies. In this case, the "rich" countries said "no".

"Brazil, Australia and Saudi Arabia, defended loopholes and opposed commitments to enhance climate action."

and this? China and India insisted on the delivery of finance and support promised by rich countries

China's GDP, as a single country, is second only to the US. And they are poor?

So all these countries can't even decide on rules from 2015. Sounds pretty bad to me and the US isn't even involved. So you got pushback from US consumers, pushback from the rich countries, where will this end. Telling anyone you are going to take money from them for "a cause" won't end well.

And I said before, since the US is energy independent, none of this will ever happen. There won't be massive penetration into the US markeplace. Nobody gives up independence to become dependent upon another nation.

Iran seizes Oil tankers and no one cares. Top Iran general killed, stock markets barely blip. If this were 1973, what would have happened? Energy, and who owns it, matters. Exactly who owns those Rare Earths and Lithium? I remember, not the US.

Think real hard about your smoking example. Young people know, they have seen, they will die. They don't care. They do what they want. For climate change, there is no dying people in hospitals, no graves, no tangible anything. Just rhetoric.

Its an impossible sell, and thats what you see. They can't sell it. Governments will come and go. Policies will change, back and forth, but until the time comes people see dead bodies they can touch, feel and see "this people dies cause of climate change", and actually see a visible tie-in, not vague rhetoric, nothing will change. People are people and even then, if it happens, just like smoking, some won't care.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
K-Man, looking back at your post, and getting out of the specific and pulling up to 10,000 feet, I see better your POV. I see a POV where this is all a foregone conclusion. Electric cars must happen and its all a matter how "how" to make them happen. My POV is much different. You might think is about denying the earth is getting warmer. Its not. Its this.

First, subsidies are regressive. Poor people and many middle income people never buy a new car. They buy used or CPO cars. EV Subsidies take money from the poor and give them to the rich because the rich or wealthy buy them. I'm not going to look it up. This is easy to find. Its not like food stamps where money is taken from all tax classes and given to the poorest for the betterment of society, not even close. Its the exact opposite.

Second, this concept will never work at the country level. There is no big campfire in the sky, despite the UN, where all nations will sing songs together. They seem to think the rich should pay for the sins of their fathers. Not going to happen. People are emotional, not logical. You can't take from them because they earned it because another set of humans were slower to industrialize. Regardless of US politics, this all changes with time, back and forth. Nothing will ever come together (outside invasion from Mars).

Third, as I say, you can't educate climate change. Its too far out, too alarmist, no one really cares. They might say so when asked but ask for their money and it changes. I believe its because of poor salesmen, too many alarmists. It doesn't matter that the scientists are right. If you can't sell it, no one buys it. The worst thing they can do is get another poster child.

And last is the "logical" arguments for EVs. No one cares about service until the time for service. People think week to week, what is my monthly bill? That's it. Those arguments are weak. And people do not want to be inconvenienced. It is Catch 22. They won't wait to charge and will not pay for a two chargers at their house (two cars or three cars).

Finally there is the natural resources issue. No Lithium, no rare earths? Next war, you die. Its all there in the history books, wars over natural resources. But no one reads history anymore.

You got a very tough sell and the pushback you see is wrapped up in all of this. Particularly the poor sales, and hypocrisy. People might not all have degrees in whatever, but they know hypocrisy when they see. Buying ocean front property? Taking jets to conferences. But the little people? You suffer. Take one for the ball team.

Its a very hard sell, if not impossible, sell. The time frames, despite hysteria from some, are way to far away. Humans do not think, nor understand anything in terms of hundreds or thousands of years. They can't remember what happened 10 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,467 Posts
K-Man, looking back at your post, and getting out of the specific and pulling up to 10,000 feet, I see better your POV...
I just took delivery of my new Porsche, I think I see what you mean... :cool:

266274
 
  • Like
Reactions: chows4us

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,993 Posts
Lastly on your point about "Let the consumer decide for themselves" - Ok, but ummm how much education are we giving the consumer? Consumers once bought Round-Up, Consumers still buy cigarettes, what level of education and from what sources are we going to tolerate? I ask this because last night I was give my cousin and her friend ...

If people aren't switching to a better alternative then it is for one of several reasons, could be economic, could be lack of information, could be ease/habit. Ask yourself, if you are going to buy a car in the next 3 years why wouldn't you buy electric?
I've given quite a bit of thought to the second question here but first the education point in the first paragraph.

I found the study I couldn't find last nite:


"two in five (38%) respondents said they are helpless and unable to fix anycommon household problems (patching up a drywall, fixing a running toilet) without the help of the internet."

Why not? Watch closely


How about something more fundamental?


Why is this all necessary? My theory is that

1. Schools no longer teach shop, home economics, or any other basic life skills
2. For the boys, far too many divorced, fatherless families where fundamental life skills are not passed down from father to son or mother to daughter. That's not being "sexist" thats a reality check into life. Somebody has to teach the young.

This study and these videos are not a fluke. An entire generation has grown lacking fundamental skills. Some time ago I think I was listening to Elvis Duran and an intern was leaving, afraid of life on her own. Didn't know how to do basic household skills like making a grill cheese sandwich.

Why not?

Now you want to educate them on electricity? You want to teach adults about joules. GFCIs, kWh, polarity, anodes, lithium chemistry, how to put out a lithium fire (fire different than a gasoline fire), resistance, etc. when they can't even read a tape rule?

This just isn't going to happen for adults set in their ways or those in HS today because as far as I can tell, they don't teach fundamental life skills never mind set them on the way to an EE degree.

In regards to the concept of moving from horses to cars, its is not the same. Haven't we gone over this? Tesla is not disruptive technology. Its just electrons for fuel, a sustaining technology. People were glad to get rid of the horse :poop:, feeding them, dead horses, etc. Thats is not sure for gasoline cars. Its not even close to being the same thing.

Now onto some analysis to answer your second question.
 
1321 - 1340 of 1457 Posts
Top