The begining of the end of the Prius - Time

also, pip is only sold in 15 states compared to volt 50. and volt has netted out as low as $19,000. in some areas after tax rebates.

 

Business purpose has always been very, very different.

Long before PiP was rolled out, there was a major effort to determine what a sensible price would be, something actually competitive in the traditional market. That meant careful design consideration to keep cost low. Toyota worked hard to deliver an option complimentary to the Prius offerings.

Rolling out a low-volume choice mid-cycle fit into that goal well. HSD would be getting an upgrade in a few years, delivering even higher HV efficiency along with new opportunity as a result of NiMH patents expiring. That left the door wide open for greater battery augmentation with the plug-in model, especially with the knowledge gained from initial PHV rollout.

The business approach for Volt was entirely different. There was no plan for any type of second model. There wouldn't be one with a smaller battery-pack or one without a plug. It was always a vehicle with very high production-cost. GM was targeting an entirely different audience.

As for the sales themselves, Volt gets triple the tax-credit and is offered in over triple the number of states. It certainly should sell better with such an advantage.

 

Well no handicap for the pip. Toyota chose to cancel the roll out, failed to train dealers, then delayed a replacement until the end of 2016. You can see there isn't much love for this car from toyota corporate or most of the dealers. Even the i3 was killing it in sales at the end of the year.

2016 that prius phv has to compete with a 20 mile aer sonata, a gen II volt, and a outlander phev. It can sell some now while people are waiting for them, but technical leadership for plug-ins just is not in the cards for toyota, and IMHO this along with the delay in the redesign of the liftback (6.5 years is a long time for a redesign of tech car, its more economy car territory), and the whole mirai hype cycle hurts. Toyota marketing is going into damage control mode with the mirai (did we mean ready now, no we meant mainstream in a century). I hope that toyota is investing behind the scenes and will have a much improved plug-in in 2 years.

All will probably be forgiven if the liftback is a really good redesign at the end of the year, and the phv is at least supported. Low gas prices do hurt, as this should continue the shift to bigger thirstier hybrids and plug-ins. That is not entirely bad news as the cmary/avalon/Lexus ESh hybrid family will get a high percentage of the shift. I expect in a low gas price environment (sub $3.00/gallon) plug-ins will outsell hybrids in 7 years.

 

It's sad how "technical leadership" continues to be represented only in terms of racing to market. Blatant disregard of the goal for profitable high-volume sales, competing on the showroom floor without tax-credit dependency, speaks volumes.

As for the drawing of conclusions of "hurt" and "damage control", that's called not understanding audience. The debates of the past are over. It's not worth posting unless there is clear acknowledgement of who the customer for Prius PHV will be.

And now that gas prices are so low, it's more important than ever to finally address the sensible business choices Toyota has made. Whether they make those who want "technical leadership", you have to admit the decision to not push has worked out well. You don't become the top-seller of vehicles in the world by not planning well.... which includes the flexibility to adjust as the market changes.

Personally, it is no surprise to me that the trophy-mentality makes it difficult to be constructive about business approach. The accounting part of automotive sales rarely gets the attention it should. People don't find the high-volume cars exciting. Being common isn't what stirs discussion. But that ultimately is what pays the bills.

 

Toyota has traditionally been a fast follower, waiting for others to prove a technology, then stepping in and improving it.

That changed with the hsd, which though it had a lot of fathers, toyota was the first to place it in a production car, and proved the technology in the gen II prius. This set up toyota to lead with innovation in plug-in vehicles. Instead they seem to be dragged kicking and screaming "it won't work". They are doing the minimum. That is not leadership. This has nothing to do with tax credits. Anyone that understands technology should understand that. Leadership in plug-ins.

1) Tesla - proved that not only are long range bevs possible, but that they can be profitable. Next year Tesla should lead the world in dollar volume of plug-ins.
2) Chevy - saw the possibilities in the tesla roadster, and the cost of batteries. Pushed the EREV concept though despite bankruptcy, being a political punching bag, and doubters. Like the first gen prius the car had more promise than mainstream appeal, but already we have bmw jumping on the erev bandwagon. It looks like with low gas prices its the gen III that will be mainstream if at all. At the same time they are developing a 200 mile bev, again following tesla's leadership.
3) Nissan/Renault - despite a questionable market, they pumped $5B betting eventually bevs will go mainstream. After some major missteps and writing off a lot of R&D, the leaf is the number one plug-in in terms of unit volume, and Nissan/Renault leads in all models. Nissan knows it needs to increase range, and promises to in the next generation.

I'm sure akio toyada understands where his company is here, and he does want to have leadership, but there is a lot of dead wood at toyota. Still this is the long game, and toyota can go back to their traditional role as fast follower. Part of this may be anouther car built with tesla. I'm sure toyota has now lost money on the prius phv project, trying to prove that people are keyed into efficiency with plug-ins and not the electric driving experience.

 

I agree that pushing hydrogen onto the US market and CA taxpayers is foolish. This thread is about the Prius though

You use thes vague, nonsensical terms such as "understanding audience".

The goal of any manufactured product, by any company is to make a profit.
This could be an immediate profit, a long term profit.
Long term profits can be gained in a number of ways. A gain in market share over time, leading technologies that loose money, but allow engineers to learn how to make a profitable second generation (such as was done with the Prius).

You don't have to "understand the audience" in as much as build a desirable product. If that is what you mean, great.

The Prius has a select number of advantages, which led to a controlling corner of the hybrid market.
Unfortunately, the market for hybrids seems to have topped out around 4%.

Plugin makers are going after additional aspects which should lead to a market share much larger than 4%. Toyota does not seem to be trying to broaden the advantages of their Prius line.

No question Toyota is successful. That doesn't rely all that much on hybrids.
We want efficiency, and we want that to hit the mainstream. Hybrids seemed to have topped out around 3-4% and I see no plans from Toyota that will lead to an expansion of that.

Thus the question, the end of the Prius?

The question is a bit over the top. Even if it's market share never grows, it is profitable at current levels.

 

A question for those who have commuted 20 or 30 miles one way in a PiP and a Volt:
If you had a fully charged PiP and a fully charged Volt, which would you rather drive to work?

Q2 - If on freeway commuting in Volt, would you run it as an EV?

Q3 - Do plugin drivers (BEV, PHEV, EREV) tend to prefer an EV driving experience instead of a 'super hybrid ' experience of a PiP?

signed,
curious

 

it's a mix, i prefer as much ev experience as possible. if i had a commute like that, i would ev the back roads and hv the highway.

it's not about handicapping, it's a reply to cycledrums question about why so few pips are being sold compared to volt. it's a fact, and the fact that toy chose to approach it as you say, doesn't change the reason the sales numbers are what they are. also, i'm not so sure toy built the pip to compete with volt as cycle speculates.

 

I would wrap it up as poor marketing by toyota of the plug-in. When the prius phv first came out people were talking about it catching up to the volt and exceeding it when toyota rolled it out nationally and dropped the price. Toyota did drop the price but decided to cancel the nationwide roll out. This was a conscious decision by toyota. I'll leave it to the group to decide the motivations. Toyota seems to be claiming the roll out would not help much, as they need the extra $1500 in california tax credits and the hov stickers to sell. I don't believe them.

 

i'm not disagreeing with you, i'm just saying that's the reason for the numbers. toyota chose not to compete. head to head numbers would be better calculated in cali, where both are sold, and it's the majority of sales anyway.

 

Oh I know you are not, but I am reflecting the opinion that you can't play this awful toyota game. No handicaping, toyota has chosen to play carb politics, so it has greatly undersold the volt.

You can ask, if toyota picked say the best 15 states instead of the 15 carb states, sales would probably be higher ;-) Not many volts sold in the worst 35 states either, but toyota chose the ones for compliance which also sends a message to buyers. Of course the prius phv sells well in california. It gets $4000 in tax credits and HOV stickers, it likely variable cost to toyota is less than $3000 more than the liftback, so if priced to the same profit and with the options buyers wanted, the prius phv should be doing even better in california.

 

i think this answers cycle's question perfectly. ^^^

 

Not really. The PiP is the #1 choice for California drivers who want HOV lane access. That advantage doesn't exist nationwide.
No doubt ONE reason for the sales numbers is the lack of availability. Marketing is another.

Since you mentioned all plugin drivers in the third question, I'll take a shot at that one.

The EV driving experience has spoiled me and I won't be going back to ICE (hybrids included), or PHEVs.

It's smoother, quieter, more responsive, and I must admit the city/hwy performance is unmatched by any blended hybrid.

Here is what it comes down to...

Hybrids as a group have these marketing points:
1.5x to 2x standard car Fuel efficiency

EVs as a group have these marketing points:
3x to 4x standard car fuel efficiency.
More convenient fueling for 40-60% of the population.
Superior performance.
Superior quality drive.
Lower cost fueling for most Americans today.
Lower maintenance.
Newest technology
Smart phone connected.

The lists are why I believe the hybrids will stay in the 3-4% range and the electrics will continue growing as quickly as, if not faster than, the hybrids did, but continue past the 3-4% market share of hybrids.

 

i would call that choosing not to compete.

 

Same old rhetoric. No amount of excuses will change the reality of automakers being in the business to make sustainable profit. Stop wasting our time. Stop being so impatient too.

 

Was that in response to my post?
I thought it was a very factual, broad scale list of marketing points.
The larger the market, the higher the quantity, leading to profits.

If you disagree with any specific parts please share.

 

Yep,

I can see threads in the very near future commenting on "remember the Volt?" This is when the Prius is alive and strong, serving the UNDERSTOOD audience extremely well - minus any tax credits. The Volt treads will be asking questions of what went wrong with the Volt and GM. No surprises here.

DBCassidy

 

We've been through this countless times already. The never ending repetition in each new thread is counter-productive. So, one last time, but in bold & caps with the hope it won't be forgotten and is easy to refer back to later:

THE AUDIENCE IS CONSUMERS SHOPPING FOR OTHER VEHICLES ON THE SAME SHOWROOM FLOOR.

THAT MAINSTREAM MARKET IS WHAT EACH AUTOMAKER MUST OVERCOME TO ACHIEVE GROWTH.

NO AMOUNT OF "WHAT OTHER AUTOMAKERS ARE DOING" BANTER WILL CHANGE THAT REALITY.

It's very clear that much of the nonsense we have to deal with comes from the unwillingness to see beyond enthusiast interest. The amount of time wasted not recognizing that is real problem. The disregard for economic well-being and the disconnect between want & need makes it worse. Not understanding who means being unsuccessful.

 

John, you are stating exactly what I am.

Any manufacturer needs their product to appeal to a large enough part of the market to remain profitable.
Some manufacturers can remain profitable by selling to a small section of the market (Porsche, Rolls Royce, etc).
For our goals of replacing as many gas guzzlers as possible, let's ignore those.

Moving "beyond the enthusiasts", as you say, is exactly why I am suggesting EVs have more potential than hybrids.

Tell me, what do you think will allow hybrids to move beyond 4% market share?

 

Sure, other than enthusiasts, people will buy millions of EVs and some will rely on public chargers in freezing cold, snow and bad weather to wait for a charge.