Featured GM did 200,000 EVs wrong

Figures.

 

Tesla lowered the prices of their cars to ease the pain of the phaseout, so who says GM won't do the same thing.

 

No one in this thread stated that.

What was stated is that GM didn’t work to maximize the number of people that could get the full rebate.
Part of this is that GM apparently has no plans to have the inventory to sell a large number of Bolts or Volts. As such, slowing inventory in the US in the 4th quarter would only drag out the number of people that would have been eligible for the full rebate, not increase it.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see GM lower prices, however I also wouldn’t be surprised to see them not lower prices.

 

It may not have been a very bright thing to do, but maybe they just wanted it to coincide with the end of the Volt, for some reason.

 

Don't turn a blind-eye to the hundreds of times someone else has said that somewhere else. You know all too well the "Tesla lowered the prices of their cars to ease the pain of the phaseout, so who says GM won't do the same thing." was an expectation scores of die-hard enthusiasts claimed on a regular basis.

We had to deal with never-ending attacks on Prius PHV & Prime from allegations that Volt was already making a large enough profit to absorb the loss of the tax-credit without interruption. Those "in this thread" knew it was a red herring, since the goal was to grow sales significantly, not just to maintain the niche level. So, even with the discount, it wouldn't be enough. Regardless, that was stated.

Now that we are in a hindsight situation, it is clear the GM disaster called Volt wasted opportunity... a point I made hundreds of times as a counter-measure. Conquest sales did nothing to achieve change within GM's own customer base. As a result, there is no successor establish... or even announced... for their dealers to embrace. Showroom shoppers are flocking to the Trax, Blazer, and Equinox offerings instead... all without a plug or even a hybrid option.

As for GM's choice to squander what they learned from Volt-1 to make an even less appealing-to-mainstream Volt-2, it explains the abrupt shift to Bolt instead. Competing with Toyota was a big mistake. Profit was totally unrealistic. Seeing initial sales disappointment of Bolt should have made the need to promote their solution change for "range anxiety" by a plug-in hybrid to now instead an electric-only obvious. They didn't bother competing with either Nissan or Tesla though. That opportunity was wasted too.

This is why the "Who is the market for Volt?" question got asked so often. GM started with a frustration to beat Toyota, but could not deliver something affordable. Switching targets didn't make any difference. Affordability would be key regardless of who. A compelling reason to draw interest from guzzlers to plugs must be an appealing stick-price... as the tax-credit loss clearly confirmed.

Whether or not you want to accept that big-picture analysis doesn't change the outcome. Exactly as this thread topic states, GM "did wrong" with their approach. The question now is how Toyota will handle the spotlight. They carefully preserved tax-credits, a move often criticized prior to Volt's demise. It already sheds new light on the market opportunity Toyota patiently waited for.

 

gm will lower the price of their ev's, how else will they sell them?

the next bailout isn't that far over the horizon

 

(mocking ahead) truth be told, it'll be more likely they'll stop production of the
Volt . . . . . . . whoops never mind - that's already begun. Leave it to GM to follow suit with another little EV car & with compact car styling instead of something more sporting & more get up and go - which evidently people want - considering the model 3 waitlist. Yea .... & maybe GM will build an EV pickup truck next. LOL
.

 

I watched a YouTube video a while back on the Chevy Bolt and the guy said you can buy this vehicle right now ( The Tesla 3 wasn't released yet) he continued, but there is only one thing holding it back. Then he pointed at the BowTie emblem on the grille of the car. I will see if I can find the video.

Here is the video. The part I mentioned starts at 14:30

 

Tesla better let those people on the waitlist know that their waiting is over.
Tesla shares plunge as price cuts cause profit concerns

 

looks like the Tesla shorts did an early April fools on you.



.

 

About 2/3 down in the article is what I'm referring to.

 

With independent dealers in the equation, how much control did GM really have over when the 200k car was sold? Could they have told dealers not to release cars already on the lot?

 

Nah, Chrysler is a disaster in the EV world and hasn’t gone out yet.

By making a game of EV sales it means we can just expect stagnation and more compliance cars.
Also means those of us outside Carb will have even fewer economical car choices

At least until the playing field levels again

 

there is no more Chrysler, remember? The parent company is now called Fiat. Maker of the 500e? Those seem to do well here in Cali - where most cars are sold, much less plugins. As for fiat's subordinate/sister company Chrysler, no other company out there making a 33 mile plugin w/ the cargo & passenger capacity of their Pacifica minivan. It's gotten good reviews in all the Publications, causing us to buy one - just a few weeks ago $5k below msrp + Cali & fed $$ to boot - pretty much making it cost about the same as their minivan that gets mileage in the teens around town, instead of 34 MPG like they're plugin version. And isn't that what's selling now? The bigger land barge stuff?

the shameful part of the op article is right there. GM quit making the volt, then begs Congress for more money, after sucking the taxpayers dry to bail them out of their prior bankruptcy folly.
.

 

Isn't it a good thing they put 200,000 EVs on the road faster? You snooze you loose.

 

For smog purposes, yes. But for money in the purchasers pocket? That I believe is the point of the article, GM not being able to strategize well.

iduno john - before making such hindsight damnation towards the volt, what if we put, instead of plugin volt versus plugin Prine. If we change the 2 vehicles from prime v Volt - over to the Prime vs The Clarity plug-in. After all, there have been more clarity sales for the year than Prime, even though the clarity got a much later start in production. Wouldn't phev clarity selling more cars than Prime be an argument against keeping the Prime in production? - because Prime's sales are smaller than the clarity? If it's all about higher mileage in CS mode, Prime should be killing Clarity if that's the end all beat all of the game. The difference between the two vehicles, the prime only has four seats and less room, the clarity bigger and more electric miles. iow - no one can say other than GM leadership why they are cutting out the volt - unless it's simply land barges have more profit (Take the Toyota Tundra as an example.). After all there are a good dozen other plugin vehicles with lower sales than the Volt - which as I understand will still be made for overseas markets.
.

 

When has quantity over quality ever been the better choice?

And what is there to lose? We aren't even out of the early-adopter stage yet.

You can't just pretend nothing has changed and hold back hindsight observations. Using the "what if" and "change focus" tactics in the same reply only makes it worse.

​

 

As compared to Toyota and Honda...GM and quality don't even belong in the same sentence.