Summaries:
 

Lots of EV demand is increasing supply chain demand, which is constraining supply chains and driving up prices for Mercedes. That is hurting their profits. EV sales are up for them, now making up 15% of their vehicle sales, and they are producing 11% of all EV sales in the market, up from 6%, so growth and demand is strong. They are committing to 50% EV and hybrid by 2025 and only EVs after that.


Hertz is rolling back Tesla purchases because the price of EVs (Teslas specifically) keep dropping, and because they are getting cheaper, it is hurting their resale ability and bottom end. This probably means they will wait for prices to stabilize before buying more, and it is overall good news that prices are dropping.

Hertz also said repair costs are higher than expected, but this is another growing pains problem. Supply and demand of mechanics and places to service Teslas make costs higher. It would be nice if the article explained more about the type of repairs like if it is powertrain or wear and tear from customers.


Ford is cutting back the speed of investment on EVs based on over-projection on EV adoption rate and over-projection on the premium it believed customers were willing to pay for EVs. Even though revenue was up, profit was down because of increased costs and increased investment.

The Hertz change really isn't a big surprise. As Tesla continues to price adjust it completely messes with Hertz' ROI model. Hertz (and other rental companies) depend a lot on resale value of their cars as part of their price structuring. EV prices need to come down, but that doesn't play well in their financial models where resale value is baked in at purchase.

Toyota Six Steps to BEV Transformation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZCTp06PvUU

Decent video although it felt a bit like a jumping on the "not EV" bandwagon because they read all their fellow industry pundits doing that.

The Mach E is the first EV I personally drove. I reviewed that drive on here somewhere. Ultimately, I as underwhelmed. I agree it definitely felt forced.

A lot of this video seemed to be saying "never mind the cost of building this vehicle it needs to either be a $30K priced tag as is, or it needs to be a $100K level vehicle they are selling for $50K."

I admit, I have a Cadillac LYRIQ on order that is now headed to production. I expect it to have some issues, but that's because I've been in the computer game for 40 years. However, the LYRIQ, at my net cost of about $60,000, is a LOT of car for the money. I would expect it to cost the same if it were the exact same car with a V6 twin turbo in it. I've driven one as a test drive for about 250 miles, and it's a great car. SuperCruise is amazing.

If they built an ICE version, I'd probably buy it instead, but they don't and not much else in that price range interests me.

Sales of EVs are down?
 

California report shows electric vehicles make up over 20% of sales, doubling over two years
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ling-two-years
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/03...20at%2016.4%25.

Yikes
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/07/new-...generator.html

So, basically a Volt with a bigger battery.

Honestly, I may very well consider this. What I've always wanted was a hybrid with a 200 - 300 mile of EV range. Yes, I know all the arguments against it. This is probably about as close as I'll ever get.

So the range extender on the BMW i3 was enough to maintain the charge of the battery, so the car could be driven off the electric motors. The range extender wasn't connected to the drive wheels. The difference, the motor wasn't large enough to keep the battery charged at high duty like going fast or going up steep hills. It also didn't charge the battery. It was only enough to get to a charger, so it would minimize its impact of using fuel.

This is different. It can charge the battery, and it can probably operate on higher duty, but there will be a weight and efficiency penalty to have a larger engine and larger fuel tank, but it is a good solution for people with range anxiety or who are atypical in their use by towing far and towing often or with commuting far.

Hadn't thought about towing but this does certainly solve that problem (assuming as you say it charges the battery enough to meet the need). My guess would be this doesn't wait for a 0% SOC but clicks in at a point where the charging efficiency is there (say 20% SOC).

I don't tow anything, but if I did that would be another check box in favor of this RAM solution.

This is not unlike the way a diesel/electric train works, but without the battery storage.

I believe the i3 turned on automatically at a certain low charge, and it could be turned off entirely, so someone wouldn’t use the range extender if they were close to home to avoid emissions. I don’t think someone could activate it to always be on or to activate at 75% charge or something.

The Ram might do the same: turn off completely or toggle to activate in high demand situations or activate to recharge on demand. We will see how the EPA accounts for this in MPG ratings.

The big question is how much. 92kWh is a big battery, and though the Pentastar isn't expensive and comes without a 'box, that truck is bound to carry a big price tag.

That being said it might fare quite well, being that it addresses pretty much all arguments against EVs. Granted, it won't attract cummins buyers, but those buy larger trucks anyway (and they've gotten somewhat expensive too).

So the V6 "mild hybrid" Ram 1500 started at $31,305 in 2021 (Link). Take out the conventional transmission, driveshaft, rear diff, transfer case, and then add in a battery ($$$), EV motors ($), and I would expect a premium, but not gargantuan. The Lightening with its smallest pack starts at $50k. This will have turbo diesel power and then some in feel and performance.

https://images-stag.jazelc.com/uploa...Callouts_2.jpg

My money is on 65-70 grand in base trim, and 75-80 in common configurations. Which, at the current interest rates, might be a bit of a tough sell.

I guess the base 1500 is more like $38-40k, where the classic in RWD, V6, single cab is $31k, but if you want to add a larger engine, crew cab, 4x4, etc then the price starts at $45k for the V8. This thing is going to have AWD, 660hp/615tq, 0-60 in 4.4 seconds, 14k tow capacity, etc. with probably crew cab as standard and a nicer interior than the base tradesman. I think you are probably right. That seems to be similar to what they are offering in gas powered options.

As a mechanic my mind looks forward to when the warranty expires. In my experience, chrysler products are such pieces of shit in basic ice specification that adding the hybrid aspect will put food on the table of many service writers.

I agree that most of the reservations were for folks looking at the low end range (basically a Bolt replacement because at the time GM had not announced Bolt 2.0).

But, if I was going to spend $50K on the Tesla I would buy the high end of this instead. Primarily because of the Cabin configuration, although I do like the external design better as well.

There's no free lunch. Got to pay up for the good stuff.

Exactly. I will have to say I think a base Cadillac LYRIQ Tech at about $60,000 is a much better deal than the top end Equinox for that very reason.

Lucid Gravity 3 row SUV. Looks like it has potential, but as with the Air not digging the style. I was all hot for the Air until I saw one on person vs photos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuTtLwqdPk8

So I've seen a few Airs, and it looks much better in certain colors than others. It's strange. Could also have been the lighting.

I'd totally try to convince my wife to let me buy one if I had a few extra garage spaces lol.

Probably. Every one I've seen in my area (I've seen 3 unique specimens) have been 70's Buick Goldish brown.

That's the color that looks the worst! I saw it in brown first and thought it looked bad. Then I saw it in silver while I was in CA and thought it was much better. I think brighter colors work better.

I rove by an EQE on the road yesterday....good god that thing does NOT look anywhere near close to a 100 thousand dollar car.....

Its got size...but its a blob. Looks like any cheapo mainstream economy car from various angles.
The lightbar taillights work on the rounded bubble butt, i'll give it that.

I looked at it from my rear view mirror (was driving) and it literally looks like the 8th gen civic when they brought the weird rounded off wedge shape with he 2 tier spaceship dash....It was pretty awful.

Then there was a Merc E class that drove past it and...yup the Merc looks like a Merc and much more premium looking in comparison to the awful EQE.

What was MB thinking with their EV lineup......

Cadillac drops some details on the Optiq, their "entry level" coming soon. This is basically an upscale Equinox.

https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/8A...t-9-am-et.webp

Their EV nomenclature is a bit...interesting.

Celestiq, Lyriq, Optiq....
What other words could they "iq"-ify?
Rustiq? Solariq, Performiq?

Somehwat tricky to find a word that you can add "iq" to the end and not make it sound goofy lol.

Yea. That's why the king will be the Escalade IQ and not the Escaladiq.

Ricardo Montalbon-ick

Cadillac Alcoholiq with Full self driving,
for those boozers who are too drunk to drive!

The CEO is probably going to kill the company. They made 1,550 cars, which isn't a lot for the investment, but they could grow to a Tesla/normal sized manufacture someday. Tesla was in the red and so was Amazon for years before they had a return on their investment. Everyone was talking then how each Tesla sold was losing tens of thousands of dollars.

Tesla burns cash, loses more than $4,000 on every car sold (2015 article)
https://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/10/tesl...-car-sold.html


Lucid Air CEO might be to blame for this one:

Lucid Built Just 1,550 Airs In Q3, Is Said To Be Losing $338,000 On Each EV Sold
https://www.carscoops.com/2023/10/lu...each-car-sold/

Lucid CEO’s $379 million annual pay draws criticism from billionaire Elon Musk: ‘Beware any company where leadership compensation is not linked to performance’
https://fortune.com/2023/09/05/lucid...-compensation/

$338,000 x 1,550 = $523,900,000.... that - $379,000,000 = $144,900,000 left, so maybe not as much as $338,000 on each car, actually. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the losses are coming from payouts to the C-suite executives. I would imagine the company has plenty of room to lower prices without actually affecting their bottom line.

Oh wait, here we go for 2021. I wonder what the 2023 packages are in total for top executives...

https://www.lucidinsider.com/2022/06...tive-officers/

https://www.lucidinsider.com/wp-cont...-motors-58.png

You're comparing Q3 builds with his yearly package ;).

Also, his 2021 package was 98.3% stock. So:
-it is absolutely linked to company performance despite what Musk says
-it is not cash and has no bearing on the loss per vehicle

Still, this is a huge package for a company that has few actual sales. 380x times the compensation of Rivian's CEO !

That's also the year Rivian went public so likely this is the result of his private shares gaining a monetary value.

Was the same last year. $379M including $372M stock.

Basically same answer though, and as you said, tied to company business so not really any real dollar value unless he immediately cashed it out.

I think you are confused. The stock awards are currently valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is like them giving him a hundred houses or a small island. The property values can go up if he develops them further, but they are already valued at a lot of money, so yes, the stocks can go up, and he is incentivized to develop the company to perform, but he also could just cash out his stock each year and pay himself from that stock award.

The company can sell their own stock instead of giving it to him, so they can use that investment revenue to balance their books, so to say, so it kind of is tied to the loses.

Also, compare Musk’s stock options/awards at the same point in time in Tesla’s development/sales volume. Big difference.