Featured Another VW claim on EV

Sorry, I disagree with that statement. IMO..Bob Lutz is a great spokesman for Bob Lutz. But....I often find myself in severe disagreement.

The bottom line is....Giant, established automakers, at this time have an infrastructure for the mass production of automobiles, that Tesla simply doesn't have.
I have no doubt, if any of them decided to commit to a "Tesla" quality, electric vehicle, they would have the means to execute mass production that Tesla simply does not have. And I don't think it would take them that long to get rolling.
However, I'm projecting a non-existent and hypothetical future that doesn't exist at this time. So, hey, I could be wrong.

 

(Not a perfect analogy)
Remember the PC market and how it started? All the established players wanted to protect their mainframe and minicomputer business. IBM even created the standard. And yet today none of the established companies own much of the PC market...except maybe if you count HP.

Mike

 

Well, one thing..HP IS an absolute giant. You have to count them.

The PC market in it's early days, is a flawed analogy.
Because I think it's relatively unique in that "established companies" at the time, really misjudged the future.

My analogy is, I think you had a LOT of people at genesis of the technology, knowing a huge wave was breaking. But the winners or losers were divided by those that got on top of it, and those that ended up underneath it.

Giants..absolute giants were created but maybe uniquely and uncharacteristically it was the young guns that understood or quickly learned that Software was the key as opposed to hardware, that rode that wave to iconic and monumental success.

With the auto industry, we are talking about change, and innovation, and projecting the trend of the future. But "vehicles" and vehicle ownership, is a vetted action.
The evolution whatever form it takes at every evolutionary step, is about "transportation".

I don't think whatever the future holds that you are going to have a Software vs. Hardware moment.
That is...ICE, Fuel Cell, EV's, Hybrids...aren't going to be blindsided by irrelevancy by sudden adoption of "Star Trek" like transporter technology.

Therefore, I still project that IF auto giants really commit to products that REALLY compete with Tesla...that's a real threat to Tesla.

Whether they do or not? Whether they recognize this as "profitable" enough to garner the investment? Or inevitable enough to not deny? Who knows?

Tesla's advantage in this regard, IS being smaller, and different. More flexible.
The auto giants advantage...they are production giants....but have to make most of their decisions based on immediate profitability, therefore are often less flexible. Which is why you have Tesla selling a $74,000 vehicle-(Which IMO is an absolute marvel) and Toyota selling a mass produced, Prius Prime at 1/2 the cost, which appeals and is attainable to a much larger market.

 

I agree that the aged auto manufacturers have production capabilities well beyond Tesla’s.
This has been a threat to Tesla, in the past. Each year that goes by, it is less and less of a threat.
Tesla is outselling a number of brands now, and I don’t see that changing.
Tesla’s growth may be slowed if the other manufacturers finally get on board, but it poses no threat to their existence.
Once Tesla opens their second factory (work started now) I don’t even see a CA earthquake at Fremont taking them out.

Tesla makes batteries, PowerWalls & Powerpacks that have been wildly successful.
They don’t have dealers (lots of people love this).

Tesla sells and services their cars in a way others don’t, and will have difficulties replicating. This also gives Tesla a competitive advantage.

And once again, the market for EVs is growing faster than the planned additions. It is no threat to Tesla having 200,000 more EVs in the market, as the market will grow by more than 200,000 by the time VW manufactures them.

 

i think the mainframe/pc analogy is the perfect one. there isn't an automaker out there who believes ev is the future except tesla.
'by their fruit, they shall be known'

 

They have the infrastructure, but it is designed and used to make ICE cars. Switching over won't be an easy thing. Making motors is completely different than making engines for example. Then supplies for batteries to meet the car production they have ICE cars now need to be lined up.

Tesla has sold about 130k cars this year. GM hasn't even sold 30k plug ins yet. While GM could ramp up Bolt and Volt production faster than Tesla could build new factories, doing so means no problems in their supply line for batteries and motors, and shifting production away from the ICE models also made in those plants. Closing that 100k gap isn't an easy or quick task. Neither is Tesla stopping at those levels of production. The Fremont factory isn't at its max production level when it was NUMMI, and new factories are being built.

 

Nissan is actually putting a lot into their electric program.
Up until this year, they (Nissan-Renault) have sold more plugin vehicles globally than anyone.
Tesla is driving harder than anyone, but others are definitely getting prepared.

 

i only pay attention to nissan usa. a half hearted attempt so far, but half a heart more than any other legacy maker.

 

Cheap gas made BEVs a hard sell in the US, so they focused more on Europe and Asia.

 

what is their best product?

 

Low gas prices aren’t much of an impediment to BEV sales. There are too many other advantages.
The big challenge was to get people to take a chance on a new fuel source. That and their narrow marketing.

The Leaf and the Renault version of the Leaf are, I believe, their biggest seller worldwide.

In the US, Tesla hit their 200,000 vehicles in July. GM looks to be hitting it in December and Nissan sometime next year.

 

the same half hearted leaf we get?

 

It was more the high price for sub 100 mile range with performance not far off of other small hatchbacks.

Yep, most of Europe and Asia have far shorter daily drives, and less annual miles, than seen in the US. Renault did battery lease only to keep the car price low.

 

what is holding nissan back from making a 300 mile liquid conditioned tesla competitor, if it is that easy to do?

 

They aren’t shooting for that end of the market?
Board members are stuck in the ICE age?
The aren’t willing to move into an EV world any faster than they are?

Your guess is as good as mine. But there are a lot of people out there for whom a Leaf is a great car. I certainly wouldn’t call it ‘half hearted’. They did a much better job than GM of getting their dealers on board.

 

the new one looks attractive, but it isn't doing much for sales. i call it half hearted because they must have the capability after all these years to compete with tesla as electric me was saying, yet seem disinterested.
as for dealers, you may be correct, but that isn't helping sales either. even bolt is ahead of it slightly

 

Nissan was slow to get their second generation out. GM and Tesla beat them to the punch. However, Nissan isn't, and never has tried to compete with Tesla. They are at opposite ends of the market.
Nissan does need to get their act in gear, otherwise many other manufactures will be happy to gobble up the market share Nissan currently owns.

 

Oh I am sure they do have taken some as trade-ins. I don't believe they resell any of the non-Tesla cars they take in, except to companies that will do the reselling (e.g. Carmax, etc).
In my case a Gen2 Prius was my gateway to Tesla. They do seem to be getting a wide variety of cars as trade-ins though.

 

pip could be my trade in for y, if the stars and moon align rightly