WetEV
Posts: 3749
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm

GRA wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:23 pm
Not so bad? What happened to their inevitable upwards march to dominance?
You expect exactly consistent growth, just exactly why? Hasn't happened in the past with BEVs. Didn't happen in the past with other new technologies. Do you have a reason for this, or are you just trolling again? No need to answer, we all know the answer. Clear, isn't it?

2014 to 2015 had two down quarters. PEV sales were under 1%... until they were no longer under 1%, and I had to keep reminding you of that. I was interested in the next 1%, remember?
Remember that I'm not trying to solve the last 10% of the problem. Only the next 1% and perhaps the 2% after that. The next 1% doesn't need central unmanned recharging. Or retrofitting most of the parking spaces. Or hydrogen. Or self driving cars taking themselves to a central charging location. Or Buck Rogers. Most of the next 1% has a garage they can charge in.
I'm now interested in the next 2%.

GRA wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:23 pm
The need is to grow the market, not just keep selling to the same limited one over and over.
This market is over twice the size it was a bit over two years ago.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:53 pm

WetEV wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:23 pm
Not so bad? What happened to their inevitable upwards march to dominance?
You expect exactly consistent growth, just exactly why? Hasn't happened in the past with BEVs. Didn't happen in the past with other new technologies. Do you have a reason for this, or are you just trolling again? No need to answer, we all know the answer. Clear, isn't it?

Which has been been of my points all along, and I'm glad to see that you are now onboard. Consistent growth doesn't happen, there are always ups and downs. In this case, it also illustrates another one of my points, which is that PEV sales remain dependent on subsidies, perks and mandates. We can hope that won't be the case in a few years, but it sure isn't the case now.

WetEV wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm
2014 to 2015 had two down quarters. PEV sales were under 1%... until they were no longer under 1%, and I had to keep reminding you of that. I was interested in the next 1%, remember?
Remember that I'm not trying to solve the last 10% of the problem. Only the next 1% and perhaps the 2% after that. The next 1% doesn't need central unmanned recharging. Or retrofitting most of the parking spaces. Or hydrogen. Or self driving cars taking themselves to a central charging location. Or Buck Rogers. Most of the next 1% has a garage they can charge in.
I'm now interested in the next 2%.

GRA wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:23 pm
The need is to grow the market, not just keep selling to the same limited one over and over.
This market is over twice the size it was a bit over two years ago.
Uh huh, and has now suffered two quarters of major reductions in both China and the U.S., the two biggest auto markets. Why? Because subsidies were reduced in both countries. See above.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3749
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:35 am

GRA wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:53 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:23 pm
Not so bad? What happened to their inevitable upwards march to dominance?
You expect exactly consistent growth, just exactly why? Hasn't happened in the past with BEVs. Didn't happen in the past with other new technologies. Do you have a reason for this, or are you just trolling again? No need to answer, we all know the answer. Clear, isn't it?

Which has been been of my points all along, and I'm glad to see that you are now onboard. Consistent growth doesn't happen, there are always ups and downs. In this case, it also illustrates another one of my points, which is that PEV sales remain dependent on subsidies, perks and mandates. We can hope that won't be the case in a few years, but it sure isn't the case now.
Higher priced EVs such as Audi and Tesla's sales in Washington State have no state subsidy, no perks and few mandates (cities have to buy some small but growing fraction of city vehicles as EVs, usually buy Chevy Bolts). Lower priced EVs get a sales tax break in Washington State. Tesla has no federal tax credit. Tesla is selling EVs in Washington State.

All models are wrong. Some models are useful. Moore's law, for example. Wrong at high magnification. Very useful.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 1-2018.png

EV doubling sales every 2-3 years is going to be wrong on a day by day basis, a month by month basis, a quarter by quarter basis. So far it looks useful. I predict we will be discussing how EVs have only a 4% market share in a few years.

GRA wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:53 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm
2014 to 2015 had two down quarters. PEV sales were under 1%... until they were no longer under 1%, and I had to keep reminding you of that. I was interested in the next 1%, remember?
Remember that I'm not trying to solve the last 10% of the problem. Only the next 1% and perhaps the 2% after that. The next 1% doesn't need central unmanned recharging. Or retrofitting most of the parking spaces. Or hydrogen. Or self driving cars taking themselves to a central charging location. Or Buck Rogers. Most of the next 1% has a garage they can charge in.
I'm now interested in the next 2%.

GRA wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:23 pm
The need is to grow the market, not just keep selling to the same limited one over and over.
This market is over twice the size it was a bit over two years ago.
Uh huh, and has now suffered two quarters of major reductions in both China and the U.S., the two biggest auto markets. Why? Because subsidies were reduced in both countries. See above.
After two quarters well above trend. Actually look at this graph.
Image
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:35 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:53 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm


You expect exactly consistent growth, just exactly why? Hasn't happened in the past with BEVs. Didn't happen in the past with other new technologies. Do you have a reason for this, or are you just trolling again? No need to answer, we all know the answer. Clear, isn't it?

Which has been been of my points all along, and I'm glad to see that you are now onboard. Consistent growth doesn't happen, there are always ups and downs. In this case, it also illustrates another one of my points, which is that PEV sales remain dependent on subsidies, perks and mandates. We can hope that won't be the case in a few years, but it sure isn't the case now.
Higher priced EVs such as Audi and Tesla's sales in Washington State have no state subsidy, no perks and few mandates (cities have to buy some small but growing fraction of city vehicles as EVs, usually buy Chevy Bolts). Lower priced EVs get a sales tax break in Washington State. Tesla has no federal tax credit. Tesla is selling EVs in Washington State.

All models are wrong. Some models are useful. Moore's law, for example. Wrong at high magnification. Very useful.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 1-2018.png

EV doubling sales every 2-3 years is going to be wrong on a day by day basis, a month by month basis, a quarter by quarter basis. So far it looks useful. I predict we will be discussing how EVs have only a 4% market share in a few years.

Out of curiosity, how many years do you think that will be in the U.S., with subsidies decreasing manufacturer by manufacturer? Most predictions are that we won't hit ICE cost-comparability/capability until about 2025, which is the earliest that mainstream buyers will buy them bar mandates, but do you see 4% being reached before that, and have you allowed for the possibility/likelihood of the longest economic growth in U.S. history suffering a correction before then?

We know that people at the higher end of the income scale can still buy premium-priced cars regardless of subsidy, but in order to grow the market we have to have PEVs that the average car buyer can afford (and want's to). [Edit] IEVS:
UPDATE: AAA Says Owning An EV Costs More Than Having An ICE Car
https://insideevs.com/news/394141/aaa-s ... sts-more/]

Anyway, it also says that ownership cures range anxiety.

Owning an EV is almost $600 more expensive every year than having a combustion-engined car. This is what the American Automobile Association found out with a recent survey. It just failed to mention in its press release what makes the EV experience more costly than that of regular vehicles. If it’s any comfort, the study indicates people are cured of range anxiety when they actually own an electric car.

We have got in touch with AAA to discover why EVs charge more per year but got no reply so far. The association performs this study taking into consideration six factors: financing, depreciation, insurance, registration and associated expenses, maintenance, and fuel/charge costs. Yet, AAA only says that EVs charge less on these two last sorts of charges.

UPDATE: AAA gave us the data that we were missing. It deserved an entirely new article. Have a look at it right here.

The study measured how much a driver will spend on driving for five years and 75,000 mi. That said, the extra cost of an electric vehicle amounts to $3,000 in the period, which is quite a lot. Apparently, you get no relief from the lower expenses for charging ($709 less) or maintenance ($330 less). [chart and discussion about Tesla collision insurance costs]. . . .

AAA says that 77 percent of them [owners] are no longer concerned with range; 95 percent never ran out of charge. On average, 75 percent of their charging needs are solved at home. That leads to a rate of 96 percent of EV owners that would certainly buy or lease another electric car when the time comes.

Will EVs one day be cheaper to own and to drive than a combustion-engined vehicle? When that happens, electric car adoption will certainly get a boost: nothing speaks louder to consumers than saving money.
And also IEVS:
AAA Survey Shows EV Owners Should Be Concerned About Depreciation
https://insideevs.com/news/394513/aaa-s ... v-concern/

High battery pack prices and fast degradation have to be addressed for the sake of EVs.

AAA made a really positive press release on its latest survey about EV ownership. Anyway – and regardless of what the association decided to focus on, we had to cover the most critical info that it brought. As you already know, the survey revealed it is more expensive to own an electric vehicle than a regular car – even with tax credits. We asked them for the full data, and depreciation came up as the bad guy for this to happen – by a large margin. . . .
There are charts.

A Model Y AWD LR is apparently going to base at around $53K-$55K with no fed. credit, and we know from reservations for the Mach-E that the longest-ranged version of that with AWD is the one that people want. As both of these cars will run at least $15K and maybe $20K over the median U.S. sales price, neither of them has the ability to grow the market beyond the well-off.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:35 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:53 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:21 pm
2014 to 2015 had two down quarters. PEV sales were under 1%... until they were no longer under 1%, and I had to keep reminding you of that. I was interested in the next 1%, remember?

I'm now interested in the next 2%.

This market is over twice the size it was a bit over two years ago.
Uh huh, and has now suffered two quarters of major reductions in both China and the U.S., the two biggest auto markets. Why? Because subsidies were reduced in both countries. See above.
After two quarters well above trend. Actually look at this graph.
Image

I did look at it along with the individual sales numbers before posting the numbers several posts back, and you can see the effects of the loss of subsidies as well as the general lack of interest in PEVs beyond the (now-declining sales) Model 3. After all, the Model 3 sales should have spiked in Nov./Dec. as Tesla and most PEV sales have in past years, both for tax reasons and because the last of the fed. credit was going away for them. Instead, the increase was very modest (IEVS can no longer provide monthly sales for many vehicles) - certainly the Model 3's quarterly sales were down Y-o-Y, and almost flat compared to Q3.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3749
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm

GRA wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:35 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:53 pm



Which has been been of my points all along, and I'm glad to see that you are now onboard. Consistent growth doesn't happen, there are always ups and downs. In this case, it also illustrates another one of my points, which is that PEV sales remain dependent on subsidies, perks and mandates. We can hope that won't be the case in a few years, but it sure isn't the case now.
Higher priced EVs such as Audi and Tesla's sales in Washington State have no state subsidy, no perks and few mandates (cities have to buy some small but growing fraction of city vehicles as EVs, usually buy Chevy Bolts). Lower priced EVs get a sales tax break in Washington State. Tesla has no federal tax credit. Tesla is selling EVs in Washington State.

All models are wrong. Some models are useful. Moore's law, for example. Wrong at high magnification. Very useful.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 1-2018.png

EV doubling sales every 2-3 years is going to be wrong on a day by day basis, a month by month basis, a quarter by quarter basis. So far it looks useful. I predict we will be discussing how EVs have only a 4% market share in a few years.

Out of curiosity, how many years do you think that will be in the U.S., with subsidies decreasing manufacturer by manufacturer? Most predictions are that we won't hit ICE cost-comparability/capability until about 2025, which is the earliest that mainstream buyers will buy them bar mandates, but do you see 4% being reached before that, and have you allowed for the possibility/likelihood of the longest economic growth in U.S. history suffering a correction before then?
If you don't bother to read what I write, I shouldn't bother to reply.

The median buyer will hit ICE cost-comparability/capability about 2025

Median.

Median.

Median.

To grow EVs now, we need the next 2% to go from 2% to 4%. Not 50%.

4% is not 50%.

4% is not 50%.

4% is not 50%.

Got that?

Battery manufacturing capacity is limited, and ramping up production without wasting a lot of money takes time. Double every 2-3 years on this end. So price to consumer will NEED to be higher to limit demand to about what can be produced.
GRA wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm
We know that people at the higher end of the income scale can still buy premium-priced cars regardless of subsidy, but in order to grow the market we have to have PEVs that the average car buyer can afford (and want's to).
In order to grow the market, the cars need to appeal to the next slice of the market, the next 2%, not to "average" or "median" buyer.
GRA wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm
After all, the Model 3 sales should have spiked in Nov./Dec. as Tesla and most PEV sales have in past years, both for tax reasons and because the last of the fed. credit was going away for them. Instead, the increase was very modest (IEVS can no longer provide monthly sales for many vehicles) - certainly the Model 3's quarterly sales were down Y-o-Y, and almost flat compared to Q3.
Why, when Tesla is sending USA production overseas? If Tesla wanted more sales in the USA they would reduce prices in the USA. Higher profit margin by selling overseas. USA competition is not strong, 80% market share, so go for profits.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm
GRA wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:35 am


Higher priced EVs such as Audi and Tesla's sales in Washington State have no state subsidy, no perks and few mandates (cities have to buy some small but growing fraction of city vehicles as EVs, usually buy Chevy Bolts). Lower priced EVs get a sales tax break in Washington State. Tesla has no federal tax credit. Tesla is selling EVs in Washington State.

All models are wrong. Some models are useful. Moore's law, for example. Wrong at high magnification. Very useful.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 1-2018.png

EV doubling sales every 2-3 years is going to be wrong on a day by day basis, a month by month basis, a quarter by quarter basis. So far it looks useful. I predict we will be discussing how EVs have only a 4% market share in a few years.

Out of curiosity, how many years do you think that will be in the U.S., with subsidies decreasing manufacturer by manufacturer? Most predictions are that we won't hit ICE cost-comparability/capability until about 2025, which is the earliest that mainstream buyers will buy them bar mandates, but do you see 4% being reached before that, and have you allowed for the possibility/likelihood of the longest economic growth in U.S. history suffering a correction before then?
If you don't bother to read what I write, I shouldn't bother to reply.

The median buyer will hit ICE cost-comparability/capability about 2025

Median.

<snip repetition>

To grow EVs now, we need the next 2% to go from 2% to 4%. Not 50%.


4% is not 50%.

<snip repetition>

Got that?
Well aware of it, just as I'm aware that 2.3% (excuse me, 1.93% now) isn't 4%, but before you can get to 50% you first have to get to 4%, as we've both noted. And of course, cost comparability by 2025 is a forecast, not a guarantee. Could take longer, might even be less (unlikely). And we're talking about median price, not median buyer. So I'll ask again, when do you forecast 4% being reached?

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm
Battery manufacturing capacity is limited, and ramping up production without wasting a lot of money takes time. Double every 2-3 years on this end. So price to consumer will NEED to be higher to limit demand to about what can be produced.

Or the better option, which is to concentrate on smaller-pack PHEVs and even HEVs, to make AFV cost as affordable as possible and reduce GHGs as much as possible as early as possible, by not locking up the limited supply of batteries in cars which will rarely use most of the capacity, and which most people can't afford. But that will take a change in subsidies, especially lower max. price and max. income limits.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm
GRA wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm
We know that people at the higher end of the income scale can still buy premium-priced cars regardless of subsidy, but in order to grow the market we have to have PEVs that the average car buyer can afford (and want's to).
In order to grow the market, the cars need to appeal to the next slice of the market, the next 2%, not to "average" or "median" buyer.

See above.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm
GRA wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:04 pm
After all, the Model 3 sales should have spiked in Nov./Dec. as Tesla and most PEV sales have in past years, both for tax reasons and because the last of the fed. credit was going away for them. Instead, the increase was very modest (IEVS can no longer provide monthly sales for many vehicles) - certainly the Model 3's quarterly sales were down Y-o-Y, and almost flat compared to Q3.
Why, when Tesla is sending USA production overseas? If Tesla wanted more sales in the USA they would reduce prices in the USA. Higher profit margin by selling overseas. USA competition is not strong, 80% market share, so go for profits.

Tesla can just reduce prices in the US anytime they want? I thought they were trying to behave like a profit-making company now, instead of a faith-based cult. How are they going to help get to 4% share if they only sell even more expensive cars here?
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3749
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:36 pm

GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
Well aware of it, just as I'm aware that 2.3% (excuse me, 1.93% now) isn't 4%, but before you can get to 50% you first have to get to 4%, as we've both noted. And of course, cost comparability by 2025 is a forecast, not a guarantee. Could take longer, might even be less (unlikely). And we're talking about median price, not median buyer. So I'll ask again, when do you forecast 4% being reached?
Median price not the same as median buyer? Do explain.

4%? Before end of next year. This year: Tesla Y, VW ID.3, Byton M-Byte (unless trade war prohibits), Polestar (Volvo) Polestar 2, Volvo XC40 Electric, Ford Mustang Mach-E, Volkswagen ID Crozz, Rivian R1T Truck, BMW iX3 (maybe), Audi ETron Sportback and another rumored from Audi. I've probably missed a few.

I'd bet one or more is a hit. Some will not arrive in volume, such as Rivian and the Etron Sportback. Mandates and subsidies in Europe are going to suck up batteries. Production ramp times will slow others.
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
Or the better option, which is to concentrate on smaller-pack PHEVs and even HEVs, to make AFV cost as affordable as possible and reduce GHGs as much as possible as early as possible, by not locking up the limited supply of batteries in cars which will rarely use most of the capacity, and which most people can't afford. But that will take a change in subsidies, especially lower max. price limits.
Better in some ways, worse in others. PHEVs are often bought for two reasons. Wanted an EV, but not sure about range. Owning an PHEV seems to cure range anxiety. Next car bought is often a BEV. Or wanted the car pool perk and never plugged it in.

High end cars don't need subsidies or mandates. That's better.
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm
In order to grow the market, the cars need to appeal to the next slice of the market, the next 2%, not to "average" or "median" buyer.
See above.
See what above? The call for mandates and subsidies for PHEVs and HEVs? Perhaps counter productive in the long term.
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
After all, the Model 3 sales should have spiked in Nov./Dec. as Tesla and most PEV sales have in past years, both for tax reasons and because the last of the fed. credit was going away for them. Instead, the increase was very modest (IEVS can no longer provide monthly sales for many vehicles) - certainly the Model 3's quarterly sales were down Y-o-Y, and almost flat compared to Q3.
That is Model 3 US sales.

GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
Tesla can just reduce prices in the US anytime they want? I thought they were trying to behave like a profit-making company now, instead of a faith-based cult. How are they going to help get to 4% share if they only sell even more expensive cars here?
No law preventing Tesla from reducing prices anytime they want. They are in the happy place of selling every car they can make, at least with the Model 3. So "where to sell for the best profit" is the question. And how to price so as to get the sales you want for the largest profit.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Sat Jan 25, 2020 5:24 pm

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:36 pm
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
Well aware of it, just as I'm aware that 2.3% (excuse me, 1.93% now) isn't 4%, but before you can get to 50% you first have to get to 4%, as we've both noted. And of course, cost comparability by 2025 is a forecast, not a guarantee. Could take longer, might even be less (unlikely). And we're talking about median price, not median buyer. So I'll ask again, when do you forecast 4% being reached?
Median price not the same as median buyer? Do explain.

Simple. Not everyone buys the car they could theoretically afford. They may (like me) buy cheaper cars because they don't see any (or enough of an) advantage to buying a more expensive one, or (a smaller number) may stretch to buy a more expensive one. What matters is the median price of cars people buy, not what they could theoretically buy.


WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:36 pm
4%? Before end of next year. This year: Tesla Y, VW ID.3, Byton M-Byte (unless trade war prohibits), Polestar (Volvo) Polestar 2, Volvo XC40 Electric, Ford Mustang Mach-E, Volkswagen ID Crozz, Rivian R1T Truck, BMW iX3 (maybe), Audi ETron Sportback and another rumored from Audi. I've probably missed a few.

I'd bet one or more is a hit. Some will not arrive in volume, such as Rivian and the Etron Sportback. Mandates and subsidies in Europe are going to suck up batteries. Production ramp times will slow others.

I was referring to the U.S., so we can eliminate the ID.3 and a few others, but most of these cluster well above the median price so I think it virtually impossible we'll see another 2% (In the U.S.) by next year, especially as many of these will just shift sales from the Model 3/S/X. Europe's getting serious about emissions now, but China will have to goose things somehow to get the adoption rate climbing again, and as they want to decrease subsidies it will have to be via ZEV zones or some perk.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:36 pm
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
Or the better option, which is to concentrate on smaller-pack PHEVs and even HEVs, to make AFV cost as affordable as possible and reduce GHGs as much as possible as early as possible, by not locking up the limited supply of batteries in cars which will rarely use most of the capacity, and which most people can't afford. But that will take a change in subsidies, especially lower max. price limits.
Better in some ways, worse in others. PHEVs are often bought for two reasons. Wanted an EV, but not sure about range. Owning an PHEV seems to cure range anxiety. Next car bought is often a BEV. Or wanted the car pool perk and never plugged it in.

High end cars don't need subsidies or mandates. That's better.

Not if you want to boost the adoption rate while also dealing with a limited supply of batteries, it isn't. A 250 mile Model 3 SR+ has around 54.5kWh usable, maybe 60 total and has a U.S. base MSRP of $38,990. A Prius Prime has an AER of 25 miles, a total capacity of 8.8 kWH (not sure of usable), and has a base U.S. MSRP of $27,900, $11,090 less (and you can fully charge such a PHEV via L1 overnight), spreading the same battery cells as an SR+ (or a Bolt etc.) over 6+ cars instead of one. As the size of the potential market is said to double for every $5k reduction in price, there are a lot more people out there who can seriously consider such a car. The fact that such a car can be fully charged overnight using only L1 is another point in its favor, as people lower down the income demographic are more likely to be renters, and not have the ability to install L2, and it saves them the price/hassle of doing so even if they could.

The Ionic PHEV is even cheaper than the Prius Prime, but Hyundai doesn't advertise it and they don't have the large pool of satisfied Prius owners to draw on that Toyota does. As the average U.S. round-trip commute is 34 miles, most of the SR+/Bolt battery is wasted most of the time. 25 miles daily times 8-12% of the 227.5 million licensed U.S. drivers is a lot more GHG reduction than 34 miles daily times 2% of those same drivers, and you're prepping a lot more people for the move to full ZEVs once they can meet their requirements.

Of course, the Prime suffers from its looks (although better than the regular Prius) and also its limited cargo space and performance, but the RAV4 Prime is an improvement on all of those and hopefully will take off among all the people who can't or won't buy a Model Y/Mach-E (we'll have to see how the Crozz/XC-40 go pricewise); the 2019 Hybrid RAV4 version has been selling well here (and Toyota's hybrids have been selling very well in Europe now that diesel is dying), and as long as its price and features are acceptable I expect the RAV4 Prime to do very well - it certainly should be far more affordable than a Model Y/Mach-E.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:36 pm
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:33 pm
In order to grow the market, the cars need to appeal to the next slice of the market, the next 2%, not to "average" or "median" buyer.
See above.
See what above? The call for mandates and subsidies for PHEVs and HEVs? Perhaps counter productive in the long term.

I'm not talking about the long-term, I'm talking about the "limited-battery production, limited-charging infrastructure, let's reduce GHGs and other emissions as much as possible now" near term. HEV/PHEVs are transitional techs until batteries/fuel cells/biofuels improve enough to completely replace them.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:36 pm
GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
After all, the Model 3 sales should have spiked in Nov./Dec. as Tesla and most PEV sales have in past years, both for tax reasons and because the last of the fed. credit was going away for them. Instead, the increase was very modest (IEVS can no longer provide monthly sales for many vehicles) - certainly the Model 3's quarterly sales were down Y-o-Y, and almost flat compared to Q3.
That is Model 3 US sales.

GRA wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:35 pm
Tesla can just reduce prices in the US anytime they want? I thought they were trying to behave like a profit-making company now, instead of a faith-based cult. How are they going to help get to 4% share if they only sell even more expensive cars here?
No law preventing Tesla from reducing prices anytime they want. They are in the happy place of selling every car they can make, at least with the Model 3. So "where to sell for the best profit" is the question. And how to price so as to get the sales you want for the largest profit.

The wait time for the Model 3 has dropped to nothing in the U.S., and the same will happen in Europe in the not too distant future; IIRR it's already happening in a few markets. China should grow for awhile, but the Chinese want CUVs almost as much as the rest of the world, so that's going to be Model Ys or something else. And the Model Y will have direct competition, unlike the Model 3. Do you see Tesla finally managing a profit for an entire year this FY?
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:16 pm

IEVS:
Chinese NEVs Market Slightly Declined In 2019: Full Report
https://insideevs.com/news/396291/chine ... ined-2019/

Six months of decline caused a small sales drop for the full year.
According to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM), the total New Energy Vehicle (NEV) production and sales (including cars, buses, commercial vehicles) continue to decline since subsidies were cut in summer.

In December, the drop was still significant, especially for the plug-in hybrid vehicles, which are, by the way, just a tiny fraction of the overall plug-in market:

  • Total NEVs: production of 151,000 (down 33%) and sales of 163,000 (down 30%)
    BEVs: production of 133,000 (down 27%) and sales of 145,000 (down 26%)
    PHEVs: production of 16,000 (down 62%) and sales of 17,000 (down 53%)
Because of the weak second half of the year, the overall NEV market in 2019 declined by some 4.0% to 1.2 million.

  • Total NEVs: production of 1,242,000 (down 2.3%) and sales of 1,206,000 (down 4.0%)
    BEVs: production of 1,020,000 (up 3.4%) and sales of 972,000 (down 1.2%)
    PHEVs: production of 220,000 (down 22.5%) and sales of 232,000 (down 14.5%)
    FCVs: production of 2,833 (up 85.5%) and sales of 2,737 (up 79.2%)
The hydrogen fuel cell vehicles were the only one that expanded, but the volume is still meaningless.

Hopefully, China as the biggest EV market in the world will rebound in 2020.
There are graphs.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Return to “Off-Topic”