I would be interested how much of the “there is just no demand for EVs in the US” narrative is either:
- manufactured consent, pumped out on all corporate owned media to foster demand for oil
- the fact that US companies refuse to make affordable EVs, and the demand is plateauing only for luxury cars
The problem with the cheap Chinese EV import is that once you’re hooked on that, your domestic EV industry will not develop, which makes it reasonable to guard against. Then again, you actually have to whip your domestic production into shape. I think the US has the whole subsidy game upside down - governments should subsidize societally positive actions even if companies are currently not doing them, like cheap electric cars in this case; and not just make subsidies that target specific companies and sectors to throw government money at them and let their CEOs do whatever they like.
There’s plenty of demand for EVs here, just very little demand for $40,999 starting MSRP, fuckhuge, unreliable, unrepairable, iPad-dash, “luxury” crossovers with trim packages nobody wants that every company in the US market wants to shove down our throats. Show me an EV equivalent of something like the Mirage made by a company whose track record doesn’t look like a midtown Baltimore backstreet (looking at the Chevy Spark), isn’t price gouged to hell by dealerships, and I’ll take my ass down wherever I can pick one up
It’s interesting that you’d mention “trim packages“ here, because that’s one of the things that’s turned me off of one manufacturer.
I was seriously looking into an Ioniq 6 at one point. It’s got a look only a weirdo like me can love. However, it starts at a decent price—even if it goes up quickly from there—gets some good positive reviews, and has some decent performance. But, I like the things that I have in my current car, like a sunroof, heated seats, and a heated steering wheel. Well, in order to get those, I have to step up to 20-inch wheels, which eats into the range by almost 50 miles—or some 15%.
Can I get the premium trim line without the monster truck wheels? No. Can I get the heated seats and steering wheel (I’ll forego the sunroof) on the lower trim line with smaller wheels and more range? No. And, they’re not the only ones. For some reason, all these EV manufacturers think they have to put bigger wheels on the premium lines, and thereby kill range.
And I just don’t get it…
It’s because the things you don’t want wouldn’t sell if they were separate items, and those are the things which justify the large incremental price. I mean only an idiot would pay extra for wheels that cut the range by 15% unless it was bundled with other things.
They think they can upsell you to buy a load of things you don’t want. In this case though, that greed cost them a sale.
Case in point, I would have been drooling at an actual Mustang EV. The Mach-E is a joke.
Theyre coming for the Corvette and Chally, too, friend. Personally, I said the Mirage because that’s exactly what I want out of an EV. Sportiness and EV just doesn’t mesh to me and I’ve got a whole backyard of cars I’ve spent years building/restoring/modding to fit all my performance needs. What I’d love to have is an EV that actually delivers on what they were sold to us as: an economic choice. I’ll take my V8s out on the weekend, but give me a new shitbox that’s dirt cheap off the lot and even cheaper to run around on my daily commute and I’ll be happy.
An electric GTI or Civic Type R would be sick. Crazy performance, but still a lot smaller and more lightweight than other stuff on the market, so charging could be faster and the price could be less insane.
Maccy could have stood on its own - it seems like a decent vehicle, but wtf were they thinking abusing the Mustang name like that. It is clearly not a vehicle someone looking for a Mustang would like, nor does it add value to the Mustang name. It was just a seriously boneheaded move - did they lay off marketing and go with some engineering comment?
EV sales in the US were 50% higher in 2023 than in 2022. So not only is there plenty of demand, but demand is rapidly growing.
However, car manufacturers anticipated even faster growth, hence they made more EVs than they could sell, hence all the complaints about unsold inventory and “lack of demand for EVs”.
Dealerships are the bottleneck here. They’ve lobbied the states to make it illegal/very difficult for manufacturers to sell straight to consumer and have jacked up EV prices as a result. MSRP on most electrics are a joke right now.
Funny enough, perhaps the most innovative thing Tesla ever did was breaking this mold and look how successful they’ve become because of it.* Ford’s been trying for years now to get their dealers under control to middling results, just to show how pervasive it is.
- please don’t read into this as any kind of pro-Elon praise. There’s plenty to criticize Tesla/Elon Musk for, but the only point I’m making here is that selling directly to consumers isn’t one of them.
If legacy automakers don’t want to make affordable EVs, so be it. I would also prefer to help give an edge to a thriving local industry and develop more local jobs but they need to actually cooperate. In the face of serious competition, despite huge economic protectionist barriers, they don’t want to compete in this market.
“You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink.” <==> you can create incentives to develop local industry and protectionism to help them while they’re weak but you can’t make them succeed
The thing is that on the one side this is becoming a national security issue where China is basically building a capability where they can cripple the US economy, on the other side Tesla is already getting subsidized to high heaven already, so it’s more about whether the US government deigns to actually attach strings to the carrots it hands out quite regularly.
On the first topic though, it wouldn’t be a big problem if the US would start to depend on Chinese imports more, as long as all that is symmetrical and China develops dependencies on US imports. We got the French and the Germans to stop trying to kill each other that way. The question is whether China expects this to be a good faith let’s tie ourselves together deal, or a one-sided let’s get ahead by getting leverage thing.
I think the US has the whole subsidy game upside down - governments should subsidize societally positive actions even if companies are currently not doing them
Your bang on here. Externalities are a must. Most economists love them, but they tend to be unpopular with the public.
But I think you miss the point. Cycling, rail, micromobilty, high density are what should absolutely be subsidised. Instead they are taxes more than they should be and cars and suburbs and subsidised because, well I don’t know why lobbying I guess.
I live in a place where cycling is the norm for short trips, trains are for longer trips. I still understand that the US is currently fucked up with their infrastructure to the point that people will need to buy cars either way.
Cities and metropolitan areas should be free of car dependency, but rural places will need something. And that something would better be an EV rather than another F150.
IMO drop in EV demand is because people discovering what an asshat Elon is. In LA previously I saw a large number of Teslas, now more and more other companies like BMW, Mercedes, Hundai and also ones that I previously never heard of like Lucid, Polestar.
Idk what’s up with the downvotes here. Just speaking anecdotally, Tesla was the face of EV up until like four years ago, and Elon was the face of Tesla. Him coming out against the demographic that was among the earliest supporters of EVs (read: Tesla (read: Elon Musk)) definitely did a blow to support for them from what I’ve seen. I once watched a Tesla driver get booed out of an Electric Car show in Madison, WI, because of how much the community hates Elon lol
I still see way more Teslas in Denver, but also finally some Kias, Rivians and others.
