Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<Yet, the auto industry continues to say that battery technology is preventing them from building a mass produced electric car.>> actually the hold up is that the cost of the vehicles is very high to produce and the consumer will not pay it. As it stands, every alternative fuel vehicle sold in the US is at a lost to the manufacturer by at least 25% of production costs. Why would a company switch mostly to a product that loses them money? If more people would pony up the real money for an alternative fuel vehicle than maybe they would sell more. Dont blame the auto manufacturers, blame the consumer. << Why doesn't Detroit or the Bush administration want you to drive the 202 mpg vehicle?>> that car costs around 40k to produce and no consumer will pay that much.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut Also, LaSorda goes on alot of speaking tours. I met him last year at a Long Beach Armada game. I got a bunch of pictures and a baseball signed. It was also boyscout night so he did the boy scout pledge thingy with them. That was kind of cool.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Tom Lasorda and George Bush, What a meeting of minds that must have been << At least Tommy knew how to win.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Did you know that the technology exists today to run an electric vehicle on battery packs made from the same lithium-ion batteries you use in laptop computers?<< For some reason I had a vision of a car with 200 laptop batteries, all on fire
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << actually the hold up is that the cost of the vehicles is very high to produce and the consumer will not pay it. As it stands, every alternative fuel vehicle sold in the US is at a lost to the manufacturer by at least 25% of production costs. Why would a company switch mostly to a product that loses them money? If more people would pony up the real money for an alternative fuel vehicle than maybe they would sell more. Dont blame the auto manufacturers, blame the consumer. >> Detroit loses gobs of money on most every vehicle they sell right now. Why do they continue to stay in business? Meanwhile, Toyota -- the market leader in hybrid vehicles -- is gaining market share and increasing profits every quarter. Interesting how they do that with all of those "unprofitable" vehicles in the mix. Auto manufacturers are mass-producing all-electric vehicles for a number of reasons, but lack of consumer demand is not one of them. It is a known fact that auto parts suppliers stand to lose in a big way if all-electric vehicles hit the market -- no more oil filters, fuel injection cleaners, spark plugs, air filters, or thousands of other parts related to internal combustion engines will ever need to be sold for an electric vehicle. In fact, recurring maintenance for electric vehicles is practically non-existent, so an entire industry of auto mechanics and parts suppliers that make huge profits selling over-priced parts and service don't like the idea of electric vehicles at all.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 "At least Tommy knew how to win." Hmm, as I remember, Bush won twice. No wait - those two elections were rigged, weren't they?
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger >>It is a known fact that auto parts suppliers stand to lose in a big way if all-electric vehicles hit the market -- no more oil filters, fuel injection cleaners, spark plugs, air filters, or thousands of other parts related to internal combustion engines will ever need to be sold for an electric vehicle. << That is why I don't like the idea of the hybrids that are so popular. They just add more complexity to the mix - now you have both an electric system _and_ an internal combustion system to deal with. I saw "Who Killed the Electric Car" about a month ago, and GM is officially off my Christmas card list this year. (And I disagree with the film's conclusion that the consumers were to blame in the death of the electric car. GM couldn't have done more to sabotage that effort if they'd painted it candy apple primer gray, and upholstered the seats with 16D nails.)
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Hmm, as I remember, Bush won twice. No wait - those two elections were rigged, weren't they?<< I was thinking more along the lines of Iraq.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<Meanwhile, Toyota -- the market leader in hybrid vehicles -- is gaining market share and increasing profits every quarter. Interesting how they do that with all of those "unprofitable" vehicles in the mix.>> You fail to mention certain things about Toyota. They also have one of the highest Non hybrid fleet sales divisions in the world. They also have one of the highest light truck divisions in the world behind Isuzu. Also, TRD as a racing development division, while not successful in F1 or Nascar Cup at the moment, still generates more revenue for the manufacturer than any other auto manufacturer in the world. While Toyota may sell more hybrid cars, they also sell more cars in general, carrying more models/brands worldwide than any other manufacturer. << so an entire industry of auto mechanics and parts suppliers that make huge profits selling over-priced parts and service don't like the idea of electric vehicles at all.>> Do you make auto parts or accessories for a living? Than how do you know they are overpriced? Because your cheap? YOu certainly make alot of assumptions about things you apparently know nothing about. Do some research. CT: do you own an electric car? If not, than you are as much to blame for the death of the electric car as the next guy.
Originally Posted By jonvn I own a Toyota. It's not a hybrid. It gets about 16mpg. We got it because it was the most reliable, technologically advanced car in its class (it's a sienna). The only thing wrong with it is the lack of kneeroom (I'm quite tall) but other than that, it's really a great vehicle.
Originally Posted By disneydad109 don't they have a car that can run on pork fat. The Biodiesel Islam eight .
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << Do you make auto parts or accessories for a living? Than how do you know they are overpriced? Because your cheap? YOu certainly make alot of assumptions about things you apparently know nothing about. Do some research. >> I make assumptions based on facts. For example, did you know that profit margins at Advance Auto Parts were greather than 40%? At least that's what they report in their earnings press releases. When you buy parts from a dealer or other OEM distributor, you pay even more. Compare that to other industries where profit margins range from 15-20% on average. Everyone loves to hate companies like ExxonMobil, including me, but their margins are only in the neighborhood of 15%. Walt Disney only has margins of about 20%. What makes auto parts a product that demands premium pricing, particularly when we're manufacturing most of that product overseas these days? Auto parts are a cash cow for automobile dealers and retail sales outlets. They have a big interest in keeping Americans in internal combustion engines. As for the ridiculous argument about consumers not having the money or will to spend extra money on an electric vehicle, I can't see where that argument is anything but ridiculous. Just go to Best Buy and look at all the rubes lined up to buy overpriced flat-screen TVs -- 5-10 times the cost of a tube TV. Why doesn't the same argument apply here. Obviously, consumers aren't going to spend more than what is necessary for a TV, right?
Originally Posted By dsnykid At our best buy you can't even buy a tube tv anymore without special ordering it,so it is no longer a matter of paying a premium price - it's an issue of buying something that will be able to get repaired if it ever breaks down. But I am veering off topic. I've worked in retail at a gift shop and i can say that a 40% mark up is really not that big of a deal. The gift shop was a 60% markup and clothing stores are more than that. So I can believe that auto makers do mark up their parts a whole heck of a lot which is their right, but then perhaps they should venture into the market with the electric car and give consumers a choice; make it a true supply and demand market - if there is no demand, supply will become cost prohibitive and eventually deteriorate, and then the electric car will go the way of the edsel. Personally I'd find the 40k for an electric car because in the long run I would be saving money on all the other things I pay for such as gas and oil and scheduled maintenance.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj The nation's #1 retailer, Wal-Mart, has profit margins less than 10%. 40% mark-ups are not the industry standard for retail.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<As for the ridiculous argument about consumers not having the money or will to spend extra money on an electric vehicle, I can't see where that argument is anything but ridiculous. Just go to Best Buy and look at all the rubes lined up to buy overpriced flat-screen TVs -- 5-10 times the cost of a tube TV. Why doesn't the same argument apply here. Obviously, consumers aren't going to spend more than what is necessary for a TV, right?>> I didn't say the consumer didn't have the money. But they are not willing to pay the high dollar amounts that the cars should cost. The consumer doesn't thing 40k for a hybrid outweights 40k for a sports sedan or something along those lines. They do however think that 3k for a TV is acceptable which makes no sense to me either. << Compare that to other industries where profit margins range from 15-20% on average. Everyone loves to hate companies like ExxonMobil, including me, but their margins are only in the neighborhood of 15%. Walt Disney only has margins of about 20%. What makes auto parts a product that demands premium pricing, particularly when we're manufacturing most of that product overseas these days? Auto parts are a cash cow for automobile dealers and retail sales outlets. They have a big interest in keeping Americans in internal combustion engines.>> Basic economics tells you that the lower you pay an employee the less likely that employee is to do a good job. Parts for the car are a life and death situation and I wouldn't want parts made my some minimum wager. Also, it depends on what kind of parts that you buy and what company you choose to purchase from.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << The consumer doesn't thing 40k for a hybrid outweights 40k for a sports sedan or something along those lines. >> Consumers pay ridiculous prices for dolled up Corollas and Camrys that have a Lexus symbol slapped on them. Why not just market electric vehicles as upscale and go after the market that already exists for overpriced vehicles? Does anyone really think there are that many differences between a Chevy Suburban and Cadillac Escalade? Does anyone think Honda doesn't make more money when they sell an Acura vs. an Accord? Considering that the automakers have never put any effort into marketing fuel efficient vehicles, or all-electric vehicles, how can you claim that a consumer won't pay for them? They don't even have the option to pay for them right now. They do have the option of paying for a lot of overpriced cars that are already on the market, and it seems to me that there are plenty of people paying those prices now.
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger Because not everyone has seen "Who Killed the Electric Car", or may not remember the EV1 fiasco, let me point out a couple of things: 1) It was impossible to buy the EV1. GM would only lease them. That was how GM was able to take them all back and send them off to be destroyed. 2) GM made them in such limited quantities that they were almost impossible to find. 3) GM would only lease them to celebrities, so the common person was just plain out of luck. 4) The celebrities who did have and were interviewed for the movie complained that the work involved in getting one, even for them, was like applying for citizenship. 5) The management at GM considered the EV1 to be "the enemy". It was dangerous to market the EV1, because to do so, the ads would have to show that conventional cars were not as good. But conventional cars are GM's bread and butter. How do you market a product that requires you to point out the deficiencies in your mainstay product line? The only way, AFAIK, to own an electric car now is to buy your own car, and then take it to a customizer to have it ripped apart and rebuilt as an electric. So no, I don't own one.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut MR: You would be surprised. Back when the Isuzu Rodeo was rebadged by Honda to be the Passport, people refused to believe it. People still refuse to belive that GEO was nothing more than a new car company. When in reality, GEO made no cars of their own. Tons of people are suprised to find that there is no Acura, Lexus, Infinity, etc in other parts of the world. GM did put an effort to market the electric vehicle. It failed miserably. Partly their fault and partly the consumers fault. Also GM was forced to sell that car based on the number of standard cars they were selling. They wanted it to fail because no other auto manufacturer was required to do such a thing at the time. Now there are federal mandates in regards to the percentage of alternative fuel vehicles they have to see. (The reason why Toyotas numbers are so high is because they count fleet sales, where as other companies do not.) My main issue with a fully electric car is where we end up getting the electricity, which isn't clean either. If everyone who owned an electric car installed solar panels to store electricity and charge the car than that would be a much greener way to go.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << My main issue with a fully electric car is where we end up getting the electricity, which isn't clean either. >> Even if all of our electricity came from coal fired power plants, the efficiency of getting power from that source with all of the environmental controls installed at those plants along with the inherent efficiency of an all electric powertrain, would be far better than having millions of individual tailpipes polluting the environment with an inefficient internal combustion engine. There is no comparison.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << Also GM was forced to sell that car based on the number of standard cars they were selling. They wanted it to fail because no other auto manufacturer was required to do such a thing at the time. >> The requirements were levied by the state of California and applied to every automobile manufacturer in the state. That's why Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, and Honda were all selling electric vehicles in the state of California at the time. The automobile lobby spent big bucks to get the California requirements rescinded, and promptly stopped selling all electric vehicles anywhere.
