I never thought I'd like EVs as I've had a gas car since 1989 and found the Tesla completely weird to drive comparably. This year I was lucky enough to get a KIA EV6 Wind and love it as it has 3 selection modes (Similar to the VW ID.4) for the regenerative brakes that at least in mode 1 feels like a car. It's allowed someone like me to transition to an BEV gracefully and I now drive at mode 2 with more breaking force when you let off the pedal.

They're not for everyone, especially the damned price, but that's slowly coming down too.

Great to see the market coming along!

I mean yeah from virtually 100% to anything less than that. Don't get me wrong I'm thrilled to see entrants into the market, I just think the headline could use a little more effort.

Any shareholder that didn’t see this coming deserves their losses. Tesla has been overvalued for a long time, is run by an idiot megalomaniac, and has poor quality control and shoddy workmanship. And that’s all just Tesla being Tesla.

Of course other automakers are going to produce EVs. That has been inevitable for a long time. They’ll be more affordable, better-built, and consumers will soon have plenty of makes and models to choose from.

This is fully expected as the EV market is growing faster than Tesla’s 50% growth

Boycott musk

Elon’s Demise taking down Tesla. EV’s will catch up and no one will care about that petulant son of a slave owner rich boy.

Aren’t you already been doing that for years now?

Seldom does the first to market emerge as the leader in an established industry. There will soon be better performing and better looking EVs than anything Tesla has to offer.

Loss of market share isn't bad news if number of vehicles produced is growing. It just shows the EV market is growing at such a breakneck speed that production can't keep up.

Spread the good news

They will likely not be more affordable. Tesla’s vertical integration makes it really difficult to win on price.

Yeah, I haven't launched a single satellite with SpaceX.

How much of Tesla is still dependent on gov’t subsidies? I remember they were receiving lots of help to keep in business in the beginning.

The other car makers have been shilling this site to death since Tesla broke records on the stock market. I don’t care for anything negative posted about Tesla when the vast majority of EV makers aren’t remotely competitive or competent in their offerings.

Losing ~7-8% of market share per year is pretty devastating to Tesla.

Then again, as everyone has been saying for the past decade, Tesla is a business that only exists because the market for EVs was tiny and populated by a handful of deep pocketed early adopters.

Now that the worlds major automakers are in the game, Tesla will be relegated to the 3rd string…if lucky.

I’m awaiting the Audi A6 Etron Avant.

Lol r/technology historically has a horse in this race for some reason. It’s not worth it dude.

[removed]

What's a base Model 3 right now? 46k for 272 miles of range while Chevrolet was pushing their Bolt EV down for 2023 to 26k for about the same range. How many other competitors are already hitting right in Tesla's price range today; Kia EV6 48.5k, VW ID4 43.5k, Nissan Ariya 43k, Volvo S60 42k, I mean a BMW 330e is listed at 43k MSRP. As traditional car manufacturers begin to shift their product lines they will push those prices down with more bare bones offerings. At the same time also filling in the premium and luxury market gaps with a wider range of options that are familiar to brand loyalists wanting to make the switch. You see it with the Mach E and the Lightning, BMW and Cadillac. Tesla is going to have to do better on price, improve quality, and start offering more differentiation than they do today. They're still far to much of a premium priced product.

Bring unable to fill orders isn't helping tesla. When their two new giga factories come online we can get a good idea of their abilities.

About 80% in 2018-2020 and then dropped to 71% in 2021 and projected to continue dropping, in the article it says approximately 65% of the electric cars sold in the first 9 months of 2022 were Teslas. That being said the market is also growing so even with rapidly losing market share it’s clear Tesla will see sales continue to grow for the foreseeable future I think.

It wasn’t really close to 100% before (I think 80% is distinct from 100%) and the drop is significant enough that it’s worth calling out, a drop from 80% to 71% market share in a single year is going to make some headlines and then continuing that trend down to an estimated 65% in 2022 is a pretty big 15% drop in market share over just 2 years especially when the market is growing so fast. It means other manufacturers are late to the game but picking up market share even as the market grows which is impressive and something to look out for if you are a Tesla investor since their market valuation seems to be based on electric vehicles growing a lot and Tesla retaining their market share.

[removed]

Which is great and was the intention from the beginning, the more the merrier.

No auto companies would touch EV with a ten foot pole 20 years ago, as bad as the media makes it all sound, some things are getting better and the future is bright

I feel with the popularity of the sub, it is a given that each company will have shills in it

Business Insider for sure does, they are a tabloid and their articles always reach the top despite the content being typical tabloid content and only vaguely related to technology (more focused on people)

I was already used to engine braking from driving a manual, but I spent a few hours "learning" to use the max regeneration in one of our company cars, and man oh man do I love one-pedal-driving. Nothing to really think about, just adjust the pressure on the pedal to fit your needs, and only rarely do I need to actually use the brakes.

My current car is an old (paid out) diesel who refuses to die, but when I finally get around to changing it for something newer I'm definitely getting an EV, and one that doesn't have that stupid "creep forward" too.

I’d imagine all companies making EVs get the same subsidies, is that not the case?

Apple iPhone and iPad

Don’t worry. The CEO is laser focused on burning down his billion dollar toy.

This reads like a commercial written by their marketing team lol, awesome.

Misleading since you need to pay massive dealer markups on top of MSRP to actually get any of those other vehicles. Whereas Tesla instead built that into their MSRP. The Model 3 started at $38k just a year ago.

Also, the Bolt is a much lower tier vehicle than the base Model 3 in every way other than range (which is still slightly worse). Especially if you go for the base $26k version of the car.

Edit: Do the people downvoting this think that yes, you can buy the listed EVs at MSRP? No dealer markups required? Good luck with that.

Better performing? Do you mean like 0-60 acceleration? Range? Tesla still has a pretty big lead over competitors in both areas.

"We've got to go to non-negotiated price. We've got to go to 100 percent online. There's no inventory (at dealerships), it goes directly to the customer. And 100 percent remote pickup and delivery,"

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/06/ford-wants-to-sell-evs-online-only-with-no-dealer-markups-says-ceo-farley/

They've taken a similar approach to Tesla, the MSRP of the F150 Lightning is massively up. So sure, technically no dealer markup but instead a markup directly from the manufacturer.

Also, the dealer markups aren't just arbitrary right. They can get away with those because there are shortages. Meaning that even if Ford sells cars online without markups, that doesn't mean you just get to buy a car at MSRP. You'll be waiting a very long time. They had to stop taking Mustang Mach E orders recently.

They had to stop taking orders because of low pricing, super high demand, and supply chain issues. They’re not having people wait for orders as some sort of punishment. They offered the Maverick, a hybrid truck, at a base price of 20k. Of course they were going to get flooded with orders.

Charger networks. Tesla wins as long as they have their massive charging network that they can share or keep to themselves at a whim. It’s all cute chipping at the edges of their share as long as they dominate the charging network

Right, so because of shortages caused by those things. That’s what I said. The point is that just comparing the MSRP of other EVs with the current MSRP of the Model 3 isn’t telling the whole story. Those cars are either way more expensive than their MSRP suggests or are basically unavailable.

Well, I know at least 4 people looking to buy EVs in the next couple years. 3 of them won’t buy a Tesla cause they are embarrassed to drive a car made by Elon Musk. Really. I’m sure GM, KIA and BMW are run by assholes too but those cars don’t advertise it.

Tesla are trash. Brothers brand new model 3 or whatever had its windshield wipers stop working in a snow storm. Couldn’t make it home.

You also tried to paint it as manufacturers marking up high because they can. That’s generally not happening.

Having to wait for orders due to having a ton of orders is a pretty good indicator that as supply chain issues clear up, it’s going to put a lot more of a squeeze on Tesla.

No, I think with the BBB the American EV’s get incentives not euro or Asian brands made in Europe or Asia.

Oh. Well yes, I’m still saying that. Because it definitely is happening in the cases where manufacturers are doing direct sales. So Ford and Tesla. Look at the F150 lightning configurator, those are not the prices it launched at. Cars not being sold directly are getting dealer markups. I’ve been saying that one or the other is happening.

Where in the US do you think manufacturers are selling directly to consumers, exactly? Even Tesla barely gets away with that in many states.

Dealer markups aren’t MSRP markups. Dealerships suck. So do the laws requiring them.

Ford could have sold the Maverick with a base of 30k, easily, but went with a MSRP of 20.

Which nestle products do those 3 consume?

Actually, at least one of them calls out how abhorrent nestlè is regularly!

Still better then ford and gm quality

That is fine, tesla was the beta test. Now the big companies will be pumping out affordable EVs.

I like the looks of the Audi but then remembered that Audi/VW are notorious for electrical issues on even their non-electric cars. Hard pass.

I doubt Ulf Mark Schneider embarrasses himself on Twitter on a daily basis, and even if he did, I doubt it would affect Nestlè negatively because 99.99% of all people have no idea who he is.

Oh I know. I’ve been down this road before. The bias is insane.

It’s desperate. Reddit is night and day since it was realized you can use this platform to persuade people. From crowd funding to under the table “understandings with mods”. This place fell apart. Nothing is rocking like that anymore.

>Where in the US do you think manufacturers are selling directly to consumers, exactly? Even Tesla barely gets away with that in many states.

I already said it's Tesla and Ford. Clearly you're aware that Tesla sells all their cars this way. As for Ford, I guess they don't yet. But they've said they intend to sell all their EVs direct to consumers in the near future as well. There is an article posted in this exact comment thread discussing that. Regardless, they have significantly marked up the F150 lightning themselves, like I've pointed out several times.

>Dealer markups aren’t MSRP markups

Yes, that is my entire point. I'm saying you can't compare Tesla's MSRP with other cars' MSRPs because Tesla has a markup built in whereas others don't and instead get a markup added at the dealer.

>Ford could have sold the Maverick with a base of 30k, easily, but went with a MSRP of 20.

This is a discussion about EVs. But also yeah, affordability is a big selling point of the Maverick. I think having the base model hit the $20k price point was important for them.

Chevy loses money on each bolt.

For the other automakers, they are all priced right around the base model 3 price. They battery is most expensive part of the vehicle. Tesla’s estimated battery costs are about 20% lower due to vertical integration.

Tesla’s have been the number one selling car in each category they’ve entered, so it’s going to be a lot easier for Tesla to move downmarket, than for others to move upmarket.

According to JD Power, Tesla’s build quality is still above Volkswagen, Audi and Volvo.

I’ve noticed a huge shift in the last couple of years. You will get downvoted in this sub for saying anything neutral or positive about Tesla even if it is factual. Economics and Economy have become subs where you get downvoted into oblivion for actually talking about economic principles, and anything that doesn’t go along with the “eat the rich” narrative.

I got banned from r/Math because my hypothetical question devolved into ideology and a pissing contest lol…

Tesla sales are growing at an incredible rate, something like 50% per year growth. By far the fastest in the industry. By comparison, many manufacturers’ sales are falling.

Tesla’s falling “market share” is simply the result of the fact that EV market growth is even faster than Tesla market growth. Most of the growth is in lower end vehicles where Tesla doesn’t compete.

If that’s not a sin that things are going downhill, I’m not sure what is.

Also, that’s pretty awesome. Haha.

Definitely not

Look at how many recalls ford has they produce heaping piles of shit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/z29pop/just_towed_to_the_shop_2022_lincoln_navigator/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Ford is one of the largest and oldest manufacturers on the planet. They have recalls like any other auto maker, Tesla does too. Ford’s makes some of the most durable and long lasting vehicles, especially their work trucks.

That doesn’t mean anything, when I see $70k suvs with 20 miles on them needing new transmissions and it’s a common occurrence. Ford trucks are far from the “best” they’re trash

You're right. 80% is significantly different from "Virtually 100%." Thanks for looking that up. I think my point still stands about how much of the market Tesla owns, but I was lazy and overstated the position.

It’s not a common occurrence at all. And unlike Tesla’s, ford’s don’t catch fire or kill people on autopilot. Sorry pal, you’re losing this…

It most definitely is common why don’t you just browse r/justrolledintotheshop Lincoln/ford has major quality issues right now. You’re delusional if you think ford is “quality” millions of recalls on newer vehicles 2022 models. Funny how teslas recalls are merely a software update!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/z29pop/just_towed_to_the_shop_2022_lincoln_navigator/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

He means he doesn’t like Musk. The rest follows.

>it's Tesla and Ford

I'm not aware of Ford selling direct to consumer in any state. Where do you see that happening? And I didn't dispute that Tesla does it - I clearly stated that they have issues with it and can't sell direct in all 50 states - and they have to employ a lot of loopholes that will likely soon be closed in order to sell in some of those states.

>Tesla has a markup built in whereas others don't and instead get a markup added at the dealer

Tesla's prices are just needlessly high. When and if the dealership lobby gets put in its place and manufacturers can start selling DTC, do you really think they're going to jack up their prices so they stay the same as at dealerships? Hell no - that would just be sending customers to the competition in droves. Ford's CEO has even mentioned how consumers would be able to save thousands by buying direct. Most manufacturers would likely sell DTC at or near the prices the dealerships are paying.

>This is a discussion about EVs

Fair point, but a $20k hybrid is crazy. A $20k truck is super crazy. A $20k hybrid truck is just not something I'd have expected to see before 2030. And their fully gas models of the Maverick are actually considerably more expensive. This makes me wonder if when they do put out a fully electric Maverick that it might not be even cheaper. But the point is that Ford could have easily set the base at $25k, or $30k, and still gotten plenty of orders.

Yeah, the manufacturers are in it for money. That's how business works. But they're not trying to completely screw the consumers like the dealerships do.

What a dumb title. If you have a 100% marketshare and someone produces 1 item your marketshare has gone down even if you triple your total sales.

The important metric is the Tesla's share of the total automarket and that continues to rise very quickly.

Tesla is more profitable than Ford or GM without any government subsidies at all.

If Tesla had its shit together and had offered the Cybertruck when they were supposed to, I'd have absolutely ordered one. I'm glad it all fell apart as it gave me time to read into how bad most Teslas are constructed and to see how big of a douche the CEO is.

I personally think it looks awesome, but I'll hold out for something else from someone else down the road. Meantime, I did order a Ford Maverick.

A lot of folks will look at any criticism of Tesla and immediately scream, "SHILL!"

I don't have any skin in the game - I sold all of my auto stocks a while ago - but I'll absolutely state my negative opinions about Tesla when it comes up because they're poorly made, overpriced, and Musk is an asshole.

Ford is somewhere around the middle out of all the manufacturers as far as recalls go. Not great, but not terrible. But if you think their trucks are trash, you either have never owned a truck, talked to anyone about trucks, or read anything about trucks. F-150s are the go-to, absolute best trucks out there. If you treat a F-150 right, you can easily get 300k+ miles on it. With any other truck I've owned, I always started getting nervous around the 150 mark because shit started falling apart in a hurry.

I might live in a different reality. But I see more teslas than ice cars OFTEN.. so yes they are too expensive but they are way more popular and appreciated than many want to give them credit for…

Edit: word

> I'm not aware of Ford selling direct to consumer in any state. Where do you see that happening?

I already said they're not yet but that they intend to. Again - the point there was really that they have marked up the F150 Lightning significantly themselves.

> And I didn't dispute that Tesla does it

Yet you responded to me with "Where in the US do you think manufacturers are selling directly to consumers, exactly?"

> Tesla's prices are just needlessly high.

Except, they're not. The current MSRP of the Model 3 compares pretty favorably with the MSRP + dealer markup you pay for similar EVs.

> When and if the dealership lobby gets put in its place and manufacturers can start selling DTC, do you really think they're going to jack up their prices so they stay the same as at dealerships?

In normal times? No. When there are extreme shortages? Yes. Tesla and Ford have significantly increased the prices of their EVs in response to shortages.

>But the point is that Ford could have easily set the base at $25k, or $30k, and still gotten plenty of orders.

I mean, I'd imagine that most Maverick orders are spec'ed to $30k+. I think on some level, the positive press generated by the $20k starting price is selling more expensive versions of the maverick.

Worth noting that the $20k Maverick is pretty stripped down inside and isn't AWD.

> Yeah, the manufacturers are in it for money. That's how business works. But they're not trying to completely screw the consumers like the dealerships do.

Agreed. But clearly they're not above jacking up prices when there are extreme shortages.

The genius of Tesla was that it offered EVs before anybody else took it seriously (and this was happening far before Musk ever came along).

But under Musk's leadership, all they had were unrealistic ambitions and empty promises. The quality started suffering. Deadlines weren't met. Blah blah blah.

The other manufacturers are slow to the game, but they're going to offer quality EVs for a hell of a lot less than Tesla does. I would even venture to say that it's not too late for Tesla to stay on top of the EV game, but it's not going to happen because Elon would ride a sinking ship all the way down before actually listening to the intelligent people who know how to run companies.

OH NO! How will Tesla survive with only 50% growth year on year?

Seriously this sub is so divorced from reality.

This. Comments on this thread make me realize it’s filled with idiots. No wonder this subreddit is shit. For someone calling themselves “technology” all this subreddit does is shit on tech companies.

Save that comment and look at it again in a couple of years. Tesla is going to start declining pretty rapidly. The only way it'll possibly survive is to get Elon out from behind the reins and let someone that actually knows how to run a company take charge.

This is exactly right. The title of the article should be: EV market growing faster than Tesla. However, I guess a negative connotation brings in more clicks.

Couldn't have said it better.

When you are only selling ~200,000 vehicles a quarter, the yoy growth rate is immaterial. VW (for example sells ~2.3 million vehicles per quarter.

> I don’t care for anything negative posted about Tesla when the vast majority of EV makers aren’t remotely competitive or competent in their offerings.

Have you not been paying attention at all? The Hyundai Ioniq and Ford Lightning are both very clearly better cars, made from actually respected brands, for less money. How exactly can you say that Ford isn't competitive with Tesla when Ford is making cheaper vehicles of better quality?

Considering that literally every single other EV agreed on a standard charging port that Tesla refuses to use, "dominating the charging network" is just anti-competitive garbage.

It is what it is.

This was inevitable BUT I would make a big bet that in 10 years all these EV companies will be licensing the self driving software from tesla.

Decline on what metric? Their production and sales have risen by 50% for 3 years running. They have two gigantic factories just beginning to ramp production meaning they will continue to increase production by 50% for at least the next 3 years. They have two new product lines coming in the next 6 months.

What has happened is though is that Tesla has gone from the underdog upstart to an existential threat to several markets. Hence the astroturfing and the divorcing from reality in this sub.

Yeah, you really, really need to think long-term. Big growth for a couple of years doesn’t mean it’s going to last. Tesla having a couple of factories and a couple of upcoming products (not that they deliver on those promises) doesn’t mean shit when you consider that soon people are going to have all kinds of EV options from Ford, GM, VW, and pretty much every other big player in the auto industry. And they’re going to deliver vehicles with much better quality control and much lower prices. Tesla is fucked.

And that’s all before even mentioning that many folks won’t buy from anti-union companies, or that people won’t buy from Tesla simply because Musk is a huge tool, or because Tesla treats its workers like shit.

They weren’t the first smart phone, blackberry or Nokia were. Apple did reinvent it though. Before that, the iPod wasn’t the first mp3 player but they were the dominant player once the market matured. Tablets existed before the iPad but weren’t successful or popular until iPad.

I have a Tesla which I bought in 2019 before I knew Elon Musk was a fucking nazi. My next car will certainly not be a Tesla. I do not want any more of my money going towards nazi causes like funding the Republican party or buying Twitter so all the anti-Semites could once again have a worldwide megaphone. Fuck Elon Musk. He ruined Tesla for me.

Your claim was that the decline was devastating to Tesla. As to that claim, Tesla’s fast growth is highly material. Whether VW makes more money is irrelevant to whether Tesla is earning money.

To add to this, his ultra right-wing positions are going to alienate his customer base, which skews liberal. Conservatives HATE EVs.

300M quarterly is government subsidies across an average quarterly revenue of $3Bn. So about 10%. That drops to 6.7% when averaged across the entire year. This number over the last 2-3 years has been progressively declining.

The irony of the government subsidies is that basically Tesla has excess EV credits, because they don't have any ICE vehicles, being an EV company, under present wording of the subsidy law. Meanwhile, Ford, GM, etc. All didn't make enough EVs YoY to meet that subsidy.

So what happened? Ford and GM bought the EV credits from Tesla for cash. Those credits were turned in and Ford/GM got some added tax breaks or assistance in sales of their products for investing accordingly.

Fun fact: this cash Tesla got from GM and other legacy automakers via EV credits sales ended up paying for Giga Austin and Giga Berlin. Yeah, that's right. Tesla build their two newest factories across two continents based off of cash from selling EV credits they got automatically from being enrolled in the program to their competitors who didn't make enough EVs to qualify.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a32346670/other-automakers-paid-tesla-record-354-million/

> but last summer, it was revealed that GM and FCA had agreed to buy credits from Tesla.

...

> UPDATE 7/22/2020: Tesla reported that it had earned $428 million in regulatory credits during the second quarter of this year, besting the $354 million posted last quarter.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/tesla-electric-vehicle-regulatory-credits-explained.html

> In a push to reduce carbon emissions, governments around the world have introduced incentives for automakers to develop electric vehicles or very low-carbon emitting cars. Credits are given to carmakers that build and sell environmentally friendly vehicles.

> In the U.S., California and at least 13 other states have rules surrounding regulatory credits. They require auto manufacturers to produce a certain number of so-called zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) based on the total number of cars sold in that particular state.

...

> These carmakers are required to have a certain amount of regulatory credits each year. If they can't meet the target, they can buy them from other companies that have excess credits.

> Because Tesla only sells electric cars which come under the ZEV category, the company always has excess regulatory credits and can effectively sell them at a 100% profit.

Emphasis mine.

> Last month, Reuters reported that a joint venture between German automaker Volkswagen and Chinese state-owned manufacturer FAW, agreed to buy credits from Tesla in China.

...

> Since Tesla receives all these regulatory credits for free, it can essentially sell them for a 100% profit. This has been behind its recent profitable quarters.

...

> One example is Stellantis, a company formed through the merger of France's PSA Group and Italy's Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. Stellantis bought about 2 billion euros ($2.43 billion) of European and U.S. green credits from Tesla between 2019 and 2021, according to Reuters.

Emphasis mine.

While it's true that these credits are going away as others are making EVs too, Tesla is uniquely advantaged because they don't have an albatross around their neck involving their legacy ICE business. Additionally, once Austin and Berlin fully ramp, they'll hit 2M vehicles a year and they're talking about announcing their next Gigafactory build location by year's end, which will either be Canada or South Korea.

Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota are all talking about hitting run rates of production of around 4-500k/year by 2025. Tesla will achieve 1.2M by the end of this year, 2M by end of next year, 2.5M by 2024, and 3M by 2025. Even with all of legacy auto firing on all cylinders, Tesla's manufacturing advantage puts them at around 1M+ year delivery excess of its competitors.

And all of this before you consider the IRA act and all the free cash Tesla is going to get based on everything it already does:

• In house battery = cash
• V2G if enabled = cash
• Supercharger/Megacharger Network = cash
• Megapacks & Powerwalls = cash
• Solar roofs = cash

And that for the next 10 years. There's a reason why GM announced that it's going to get into battery storage business. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/11/gm-energy-launches-to-connect-homes-businesses-with-ev-chargers-energy-storage.html

They did the math and realized how much $$$ the gov is going to give out via IRA for the next 10 years to Tesla (by the virtue of simply existing) because they're already in this space and already have sold close to 20GW of capacity that they can capitalize on, and GM wants some of it going forward too.

Tesla doesn't need the government subsidies. It gets them at 100% profit, because these subsidies exist for Tesla's competitors so that they can catch up to Tesla. But, you can't discriminate subsidy grants, so it gets them all the same. And that free capital is applied to further expansion.

Which. Further. Widens. The. Moat.

>No auto companies would touch EV with a ten foot pole 20 years ago,

Because the batteries needed didn't existed yet.. making them out of lead acid was just impractical.

> I guess a negative connotation brings in more clicks.

The negative connotation comes from the expectation for Tesla to dominate the market, without it the market cap is unjustifiable.

>Your claim was that the decline was devastating to Tesla.

To be fair, it's devastating to stock valuation.. how much that matters is relative.

Car buyers are increasingly using the internet to find dealerships that go at or below MSRP especially with EV's lately. Manufacturers are also leaning toward direct to consumer to cut out those markups and take more of the profit for themselves. Dealers are seeing the writing on the wall.

Your main argument was about affordability not margin, not profit, not features, affordability.

About a year and a half ago now I bought the 2022 Bolt EV 2lt. This was before the price drop. I got it for 4k below MSRP. At the time I was also looking at the Model 3 which was significantly more than the Bolt for not a lot of added value for me. Range was my biggest concern. The Bolt gets 269 miles. The Model 3 gets 273 miles. 4 miles difference for isn't worth 10k or more to me. I don't care if Chevrolet is taking a loss to get a foothold in the market. I care about what comes out of my wallet. That's what most consumers care about.

Companies like Chevrolet will start having more vehicles in that just under 30k market space trying to work their way down to the subcompact market eventually. At the same time they're improving their profitability in the premium and luxury markets by offering their best selling models as updated EV versions and having a hard time keeping up with demand. That means they have some room for going higher on price on those models and finding space for manufacturing improvements to get to market faster at lower cost. That's a constant process within the automotive industry. Companies are investing in their own battery tech, finding strategic partnerships, figuring out recycling, and looking at all the ways they can significantly reduce costs by switching to EV manufacturing in the long term. So prices will be driven down.

Most EVs are definitely not going for MSRP. Yes you can find dealerships that will allow you to order for MSRP, but you’re going to be waiting for a very very long time for that car to arrive if it’s a desirable model like the Ioniq 5. As in, a year or more.

Yes, I am talking about affordability specifically for vehicles comparable to the Model 3. The Bolt is in a different category. It’s much smaller, is pretty low performance, and has a spartan interior. Say what you want about Tesla QC, but their interior is obviously more upscale.

The Bolt was also much easier to find around the timeframe you’re talking about because of all the battery fire issues. So, that’s a thing.

> I care about what comes out of my wallet. That's what most consumers care about.

It’s what some consumers care about. If all consumers were like you, the average new car value wouldn’t be $46k. The Bolt is not a new car, it’s been around for a while now. Tesla has massively outsold it despite being more expensive. Cost is definitely not the top priority of a good chunk of consumers.

> Companies like Chevrolet will start having more vehicles in that just under 30k market space trying to work their way down to the subcompact market eventually

Have you seen their pricing on the Silverado EV and the Hummer EV? GM makes a cheap EV yes, but I don’t think that’s where their focus will be moving forward. Their whole business is centered around selling huge expensive vehicles currently.

You can find anecdotes like this about literally every car on the road. It just so happens that people are especially eager to post and upvote them on Reddit lately.

That’s kinda an insane stance to take considering a) Tesla began building their charging network long before anyone else and b) they offered to allow other manufacturers to use their connector. I can see why other manufacturers didn’t take them up on it, but calling Tesla “anti-competitive” over this situation is beyond delusional.

I didn’t look it up lol it was in the article with those numbers and pretty much the exact wording. Even the 65% in first 9 months of 2022 is in the article, that’s what the article is about and they give more detail than the headline in the body of the article.

I’m sure that’s true, my pop’s model 3 has not had any issues and he’s had it for years now.

It also helps that other companies have a better track record of repairability and actual ownership (not you, Mercedes). Tesla does all the shit most people dislike Apple for in terms of whether you actually own your car or not.

This is dumb their car quality has gone down and then there is the auto pilot shit. That and all the recalls.

I get when it comes to things you like words like astroturfing or whatever bullshit are attractive but you have to accept one thing. Tesla will always be the toys of the upper middle class and nothing more

I agree with the last sentence, but the first sentence has been written so many times over since 2010, I've lost count.

Because literally every single other manufacturer has agreed on a standard which Tesla refuses to adopt. They built their charging network without allowing other manufacturers to use it in hopes to completely monopolize the electric car market - once they failed that, they "offered" other manufacturers to completely abandon everything and use theirs so taht they could save face. It's astounding that this sub can see why this is awful with Lightning/USB-C, but somehow it's different when Tesla does it.

The second generation GM EV1 from 1997 had the same range as an early Nissan Leaf and used NiMH batteries.

Power electronics and production facilities would have been limiting factors, but mostly politics killed early EVs.

EVs were really looked down on back then, even if they could have worked.

Tesla still represents a larger portion of the EV market than all their competitors combined though. They built their charging network first. I don’t think they should be expected to abandon the existing connector, that’s insane. It looks like Tesla will be allowing other EVs to use their charging network via adapters anyway so it’s hardly an issue.

I also think you’re wrong - I’m pretty sure it was very early on that Tesla offered to allow others to use their charging connector.

Tesla's also have these settings. I personally love 1 pedal driving and don't ever want to go back.

Yea, but Tesla is 10 years ahead of all manufacturers.. motors, batteries, manufacturing processes/practices.. no comparison.

Estimates vary, but most I can find peg the EV1's at $80k+ in production cost per car, which would be more like ~$150k+ today.

Are you going to pay for $150k for an early Nissan Leaf with even worse battery longevity? Probably not.

Now, you can argue that the cost would have come down somewhat further with bigger production scales, but it's still quite far from where it needed to be for what they had to offer.

Ford just recalled half a million cars that could catch on fire. Sorry pal, you lost.

You're talking in circles. The conversation was about affordability. That's where you started and now your propping up why it's okay that the Tesla isn't affordable and should be in the premium space. Cost is absolutely a huge driver for tons of consumers. Discounting that is just stupid. A huge argument happening right now against EVs is about affordability to the budget minded segment of the population looking to replace their current vehicles.

Then you go on to ignore everything I said about how traditional car makers will fill up both the budget end and the premium end of the market with their vehicles (e.g. the Silverado EV and Hummer EV are in that premium part of the market). You're not even listening, you're just responding. Good luck talking to yourself.

[removed]

Yeah, though I still think the battery itself wasn't the issue. The EV1 was only manufactured in around 2000 units and thus never warranted cost optimization, and its demise just screams politics. All cars were hand built in a facility that built specialty cars, which is very expensive to do.

Even today, tiny electrics with mediocre specs that are hand built, are crazy expensive.

Say Tesla had started everything 7 years earlier, developing the Roadster between 1998 and 2003.

They would have been more limited by the power electronics early on than the batteries. It would have been more expensive, but would have been better positioned for cost optimization, even though it was also hand built.

Power electronics development today is continuing and helps to make modern EVs cheaper and with better specs.

The Cybertruck doesn't appeal to the greater truck market in any way. The Rivian, F150 and Silverado will all dominate it.

I'm talking about affordability within the same product category. The Bolt is clearly not in that category. Your argument here is akin to complaining that the Mercedes S Class is overpriced because the Toyota Corolla is cheaper.

I think I responded to your argument, I didn't ignore it. Disagreeing with you is not the same thing as ignoring you.

>EVs were really looked down on back then, even if they could have worked.

That has never been true, electric cars have always been the "future". The problem has always been the batteries. Tesla just came at the time when the right technology/price point came to market.

I was there, 3000 years ago.. Ok, I'm not that old, but old enough to remember electric cars in the 80s and 90s, concept cars that is.

He's been running it since 2008, when they were selling less than 1000 a year, they sold almost a million in 2021, what metrics will you use to judge this hypothetical 'knows how to run a company' successor

Other manufacturers have been making EVs for a long time. Tesla only had a free run at the US market but every traditional US manufacturer being asleep at the wheel doesn't mean Tesla were going to get that market for free.

It was all predicated on Tesla being able to dictate standards that were enforced by legal mandates in the US. It would give them a huge advantage over European and Japanese competition. That has never materialised and they've been overvalued ever since.

> That and all the recalls.

Yet they issued less than half the number of recalls Ford has and Ford is supposedly one of those experience car makers yet they can't figure out how to install spark plugs.

> They built their charging network without allowing other manufacturers to use

Unless they helped build it too. Tesla wasn't going to build a network with their own money and then just give away access for free.

You are reading it wrong. No one can fulfill EV demand right now. Tesla actually seems to have the shortest waiting list and as you pointed out they have two new factories are are still ramping up.

Elon musks reputation has turned into a massive anchor pulling Tesla down.

> they will continue to increase production by 50%

supply sider bs

>Losing ~7-8% of market share per year is pretty devastating to Tesla.

Only if you think EVs are not cars. Look at year over year sales across all brands and you'll see them mostly falling. A few are holding ground, or show slight gains. Then Tesla with 50% YoY growth.

They're using the wrong metrics to trick you. Don't let them.

Tough to measure the extent just yet, but it sure as hell ain't helping.

Tesla's market cap has always been an asspull. There's no way a car company that's only just now poised to crack the 1 million units/year mark is worth more than the top three auto manufacturers in the world combined.

It's pure financial skullduggery.

VW really messed up their software in the iD launch, its still bad even a year later.

VW is also the same company that had to be forced to build out their charging infrastructure as a result of Diesel gate where they found them cheating emissions testing via software, imagine that good enough to cheat emissions with software but bad at actually making a decent UX infotainment software.

> old enough to remember electric cars in the 80s and 90s, concept cars that is.

I remember the Hope Whisper from 1983. It really ruined a lot of the reputation of EVs and never made it to the production stage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVYX80ZfeU8

There’s quite a bit to it, but that is a bold question considering what is happening to Twitter at the moment.

It's not really a bold question, sure he's running twitter into the ground, overestimated his own competence( believing his own hype) going Into the twitter bid, that doesn't mean Tesla has not been a success under him.

Elon has a history of jumping into young companies at the right time and riding that momentum. That had also previously given him clout, so that his investments were blindly followed by other investors on name recognition alone. But considering what he’s done with crypto and Twitter and how he’s running his personnel and so on, his name is starting to have the opposite effect and people want to get away. Elon isn’t some brilliant leader or inventor. He’s an investor with a simple physics degree.

Tesla was bound to take off, and I’d argue that it would be a lot further along if Musk had just invested and not interfere with shit.

A technology doesn’t just get better on its own. There has to be some driving force pushing it forward. Auto makers could’ve been investing and researching more to make better battery, but they decided not to because it wasn’t profitable enough.

And battery technology alone isn’t enough. You have to take into account thermal and weight and all sorts of things to make the vehicle as a whole as efficient as possible. Not to mention mass production and cutting cost wherever you can. It requires a whole new mindset and going all in. Doing things half-heartedly would not have worked.

I plan to buy an EV in the next few months (I'm on the waiting list for the Nissan Ariya). I'm mainly skipping a Tesla because of the complaints about their build quality, but the Musk stuff definitely sealed the deal.