The Mackinac Center for Public Policy highlights an interesting financial conundrum.
The entirety of Ford’s normal vehicle profits was undone by its losses on electric vehicles.
Ford’s 2024 Q3 Earnings Presentation delivers the details: The year-to-date losses on Ford’s EV business (what the company calls “Ford Model e”) totaled $3.7 billion. Profits from Ford’s “Model Blue” division, which sells traditional internal combustion vehicles, also happened to be $3.7 billion.
This past quarter, Ford reported losses of $1.2 billion on its EV business. Energy reporter Robert Bryce calculated that Ford likely lost almost $60,000 for every electric vehicle it sold this past quarter. “Ford has been hemorrhaging cash on EVs for the past two years,” Bryce wrote. “It lost $4.7 billion on EVs in 2023 and $2.2 billion on EVs in 2022.”
General Motors and Stellantis are having their own problems with EV's, of course. Only massive government subsidies are enabling automakers to avoid the reality of the US market. As the Mackinac report points out:
A Gallup poll from March found that 48% of respondents would not consider buying an electric vehicle– a number up 7% from the year prior. while a McKinsey reported in June that 46% of Americans who owned electric vehicles were very likely to buy a gas-powered vehicle next time.
There's more at the link.
Without government tax incentives and subsidies, electric vehicles would be dead on arrival. They can't be produced at a low enough price to persuade people to buy them - let alone their problems with sufficient range, extraordinarily expensive battery replacements, and the like.
Give me an EV that has a practical range of 400-500 miles between recharges (further would be better), while carrying a full load of passengers and/or cargo, in high summer in Texas or deep winter in Montana, with the A/C or heater running full blast, while towing a trailer. Also, let there be an abundance of high-speed recharging stations to allow for long road trips. If EV's can handle that load and those conditions, I'll take a long, hard look at them. Anything less than that, and it's no dice.
Peter
21 comments:
I doubt if Ford will back off on the electric vehicles as the CEO drives a Chinese EV for a daily driver.
https://www.motor1.com/news/738491/ford-ceo-jim-farley-praises-xiaomi/
Last Friday night a couple came into our bridge game and had only 36 miles left of electricity left on their electric car. They lived 32 miles from our game. They said they coasted into their driveway. And no they will not buy another.
The vehicles you want exist today: HEVs or PHEVs. Of course, they are 'recharged' by filling a gas tank.. I'm on my 4th Ford hybrid vehicle beginning in '06 (two SUVs, a sedan, and now an F150 truck).
A smart executive for an auto maker would expect those EV subsidies to end come January 20 and plan accordingly. Question is do these auto makers have any smart executives any more....or are they all DEI idiots.
EVs are like so much of the liberal worldview--in theory, great, but with no connection to reality. "Wouldn't It Be Nice" is a great song, but not much of a financial plan.
I wouldn't mind having an electric ATV to cruise around my property. Something like a golf cart with more clearance and bigger tires. As far as replacing my F350 diesel? Not a chance.
This is what happens when "They" force the consumer to buy something they don't want. They just don't buy ANYTHING.
EV's have their place. It's just not EVERY place.
Bigger they are, harder they fall. Could not get me in a ford.
I have a 2012 Chevy Volt. It'll go around 40 miles on battery. When the battery gets low a small engine will start and turn a generator to run the drive motors. From there on it runs pretty much like a hybrid, though the gas engine is not connected to the drivetrain in any way. It's pretty much the best of both worlds. For the record, I've got almost 200K miles on it.
I would NEVER rely on an EV as my sole means of transport! NEVER...
All you have to do is buy one of those cyber trucks and mount a big diesel electric generator in the back and tow a fuel trailer. Problem solved. Of course it was already solved by gas and diesel powered vehicles.
I wouldn't mind having an electric runabout that was enclosed from the weather that would be warm in the cold and get me around town. The farthest place I go locally is the range and that only 7 miles away. When we do travel an electric car wouldnt keep up with our needs. When we go to florida we drive about 5-600 miles a day and in the summer we often tow a travel trailer. Maybe down the road the next generation may have sufficient storage and recharging infrastructure to make it viable.
Ford hasn't figured out how to make an EV that people want to buy at a profit.
Tesla has.
As Peteforester says, EVs have their place, but they should win because they are better than the competition, not because the Government outlaws the competition.
And the idiot is driving a Chinese EV. THAT, right there shows he is an idiot. This says nothing good about Ford. Can't claim it is for research purposes, that would be done by an engineer, NOT the CEO.
Much as I respect Musk, I wonder if govt subsidies for EVs will disappear with him running the "Waste Division" for Trump. I could be surprised though.
The EV subsidies need to go. I'm in favor with EVs one day when the infrastructure will support them. Until now, hybrids are a good transition option. I still run gasoline engines, though so you can call me a hypocrite.
No and probably 1 or 2 aren't
> Much as I respect Musk, I wonder if govt subsidies for EVs will disappear with him running the "Waste Division" for Trump.
He has been saying they should not exist for several years in the quarterly and annual meetings at Tesla.
Before the IRA was passed, there was a subsidy for the first X EVs a manufacturer produced (something like the first 100k IIRC). Tesla had run through that credit years ago, but nobody else had, they were doing well in the market without that, and will do well without the IRA credit. But while the IRA is in force, Telsa does insist on being treated fairly (they sued after the first list of what cars qualified left out the model Y because it was 1" too short and 200 pounds too light to count as a "SUV" under the definition they used, while a Jeep Wrangler Hybrid qualified)
Whenever you see an article about EV problems, check to see what car they are driving. The Tesla charging network is gigantic compared to everything else. With few exceptions, articles that show EVs in a bad light need to have "* Except for Teslas" added to it
(I don't own a Tesla, and don't expect to for a long time, if ever. One of my frequently driven vehicles is a '99 E-350 with a V-10. I do have a couple hundred shares of Tesla stock because I think they are doing a good job and wildly underestimated)
I agree with Peter’s conditions, and add one more — a reasonable time to recharge to a full battery. As others have said, EV’s have their place, even now … but now in northeastern Montana ain’t one of ‘em! Having to wait two hours to “refill” to only 80% full charge is, along with the other present serious limitations, is an absolute deal-breaker. I think the EV technology will maybe develop to make ‘em realistic, but it’s got a LONG way to go.
Ford and the other makers aren't just hurting because of EVs. They're hurting because they all suck, coast to coast, top to bottom.
Have you seen the PRICES of the current crop of fail-mobiles??
$100K and more for a standard car or truck????
On what planet, in what crack-smoking universe?!?!?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HwDvt2eoJc&t=375s
Until there is a charging station every 25 miles along every Interstate and major highway, and they're as common as gas stations everywhere else, and a full charge takes no more time than about 20 minutes (i.e., twice as long as filling a gas tank), they're not practical for anything but local driving, 5-10 miles at most. And even then, batteries that spontaneously catch fire and cost as much to replace as a good used car aren't exactly a selling point.
Post a Comment