Ford Inside News banner

21 - 40 of 63 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,025 Posts
The power and range is already here for the competition, it just takes 'volume' to bring down the unit price. Which is why the Model 3 starts at $35k today, but at 10k weekly production by 2019 it drops to $28, which should put a dual mode performance model at about $40k. And it is in chasing those rainbows and unicorn that is the power behind all innovation and advancements across industries. No one innovates at a profit.....it is an investment in future profitability. Tesla has just expanded that envelope more than any other automaker dared to do, and a few now trying to catch up, and others like Ford timidly waiting for their safety net, after others have led the way. But this is consistent for Ford, who is more comfortable in the midrange with innovation, not on the leading edge, but trying not to get left too far behind. Unfortunately for Ford, the auto industry is blending with the fast paced technology industry, where you are either one of the leaders or you fade away.

I know, Ford has to play it safe because they mad bad and slow decisions and now don't have the cash to fund the EV push without dropping out of the car market for several years, unable to fund a generation of cars. Everyone knows that story. But it is also necessary to understand that every action moving forward is hinged on that failure. So no, battery tech is not to immature, it's just Ford's version of the battery tech that is still too immature. And Ford has waited too long to move forward with EV technology banking on hybrids instead, trying to hold on to combustion engine profits as long as possible, While making a last ditch effort at more SUVs right as gas prices begin to spike long term globally, sending more consumers toward EVs.

As a combustion engine company, Ford does have a disadvantage compared with a new EV company. Which is why it would have been better if Ford would have launched a separate EV only company, instead all the 'mobility' distractions, ramped up technology, platforms, products, charging infrastructure and production so they are prepared to compete directly with the EV competition globally, while transitioning their ICE business products as the market dictates over time. Because every year that Ford does not have production EVs out on the road in customer hands, driving them, the further Ford gets behind with the technology, market/investor perception and penetration. Dropping out of the EV business for 2 years will hurt, and again give Ford another hill to climb, just like dropping out of the small pick-up market and having to re-enter. But this time they won't have an established model to use to re-enter the market, and just using names from old ICE models won't get them there.

About those 2 years for Ford without a pure EV , those are 2 years without big loses. Let Tesla burn their money. When the EV will be ready to be commercialized with profits, there will be Ford in the business.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
I am still wondering what will happen to the market when it is flooded with BEV options. Specifically price. Will BEV's start sitting on lots with huge discounts because consumers are not adapting nearly fast enough, combined with evolving hybrid benefits. I think that will be the norm. At least in the immediate future. I am actually to the point of not caring what happens to Tesla, and if we could shut the blow hard up (Musk), I might actually be grateful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
It might be better if new upcoming BEVs are higher priced luxury models rather than lower priced mainstream models. People with money are more likely to be early adaptors and less likely to be put off by a high price tag.

The infrastructure for battery charging won't be able to keep up with huge numbers of mainstream BEVs at first. A trickle of luxury BEVs allows the charging infrastructure to phase-in more slowly while the affordable BEV tap opens up slowly.

IMO, if Ford's first BEV was a 2019 luxury model (Hello Lincoln), Ford might make a (small) profit while getting real-world performance data and giving investors something to talk about. As battery prices fall, more lower-priced, higher-volume mainstream vehicles will present a more favorable ROI. Waiting for a lower price threshold on batteries before introducing affordable vehicles may give other manufacturers beside T***a head starts. Just speculatin'.

My guess is that the first non-T***a production BEVs will come from high-margin (read luxury) manufacturers like Jaguar, Porsche, BMW & Mercedes-Benz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
The power and range is already here for the competition, it just takes 'volume' to bring down the unit price. Which is why the Model 3 starts at $35k today, but at 10k weekly production by 2019 it drops to $28, which should put a dual mode performance model at about $40k. And it is in chasing those rainbows and unicorn that is the power behind all innovation and advancements across industries. No one innovates at a profit.....it is an investment in future profitability. Tesla has just expanded that envelope more than any other automaker dared to do, and a few now trying to catch up, and others like Ford timidly waiting for their safety net, after others have led the way. But this is consistent for Ford, who is more comfortable in the midrange with innovation, not on the leading edge, but trying not to get left too far behind. Unfortunately for Ford, the auto industry is blending with the fast paced technology industry, where you are either one of the leaders or you fade away.

I know, Ford has to play it safe because they mad bad and slow decisions and now don't have the cash to fund the EV push without dropping out of the car market for several years, unable to fund a generation of cars. Everyone knows that story. But it is also necessary to understand that every action moving forward is hinged on that failure. So no, battery tech is not to immature, it's just Ford's version of the battery tech that is still too immature. And Ford has waited too long to move forward with EV technology banking on hybrids instead, trying to hold on to combustion engine profits as long as possible, While making a last ditch effort at more SUVs right as gas prices begin to spike long term globally, sending more consumers toward EVs.

As a combustion engine company, Ford does have a disadvantage compared with a new EV company. Which is why it would have been better if Ford would have launched a separate EV only company, instead all the 'mobility' distractions, ramped up technology, platforms, products, charging infrastructure and production so they are prepared to compete directly with the EV competition globally, while transitioning their ICE business products as the market dictates over time. Because every year that Ford does not have production EVs out on the road in customer hands, driving them, the further Ford gets behind with the technology, market/investor perception and penetration. Dropping out of the EV business for 2 years will hurt, and again give Ford another hill to climb, just like dropping out of the small pick-up market and having to re-enter. But this time they won't have an established model to use to re-enter the market, and just using names from old ICE models won't get them there.
Remember that the Ford quote came from a Ford Europe chief with a different perspective to North America.
So in that respect what's being said about battery development required is actually the chenistry required for faster charge but also faster release at an more affordable price. we're now locked int LI Ion because manufacturers want to ride that pony into the ground before making that tech redundant - avoiding the NiMH situation (like Beta Tapes).

All I see is a Ford Europe voicing a regional opinion of what Europe and rest of the world markets require that really secondary to what's going on with the US Tax rebate driven advancement, there will be no such schemes in Europe or elsewhere to encourage buyers into BEVs, so battery tech has to be a lot more mature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
It might be better if new upcoming BEVs are higher priced luxury models rather than lower priced mainstream models. People with money are more likely to be early adaptors and less likely to be put off by a high price tag.

The infrastructure for battery charging won't be able to keep up with huge numbers of mainstream BEVs at first. A trickle of luxury BEVs allows the charging infrastructure to phase-in more slowly while the affordable BEV tap opens up slowly.

IMO, if Ford's first BEV was a 2019 luxury model (Hello Lincoln), Ford might make a (small) profit while getting real-world performance data and giving investors something to talk about. As battery prices fall, more lower-priced, higher-volume mainstream vehicles will present a more favorable ROI. Waiting for a lower price threshold on batteries before introducing affordable vehicles may give other manufacturers beside T***a head starts. Just speculatin'.

My guess is that the first non-T***a production BEVs will come from high-margin (read luxury) manufacturers like Jaguar, Porsche, BMW & Mercedes-Benz.
If Lincoln did offer a 2019 BEV, which means it would be available today or very soon, how should it be priced I wonder?. And just how well would it sell today? Would it outsell their other products? I do feel strongly that BEV's need to be sleek, preferably sedans, but what do I know. I simply base that on a gut feel, not an ounce of real research. I guess we should presume Ford has studied the trends and has planned to land where they feel they need to be in coming years. My point goes back to, how bad is FoMoCo really suffering by not having several BEVS's this year or next. And again, I doubt they would be profitable so soon anyway. I also think that no matter who floods the market first, second or third, consumers just don't give a **** as long as you show up with a compelling product. And again, if your argument is more sales, then I say again, red ink is NOT your friend. Balance, young grasshopper.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,893 Posts
I am still wondering what will happen to the market when it is flooded with BEV options. Specifically price. Will BEV's start sitting on lots with huge discounts because consumers are not adapting nearly fast enough, combined with evolving hybrid benefits. I think that will be the norm. At least in the immediate future. I am actually to the point of not caring what happens to Tesla, and if we could shut the blow hard up (Musk), I might actually be grateful.
It will take a very long time before the market is flooded with BEV options like it is currently with ICE options with huge discounts because consumers don't want them. The market is just getting to the point where automakers are beginning to offer BEV options that consumers actually want. Mostly what we have today are compromise first gen BEV options. Leaf(dorky hatchback), Focus Electric (retrofit hatch low range), Bolt ($40k subcompact), i3 (overpriced low range, ugly), etc. But now that we have the Model S on the high end that stills it's ICE competition combined, and Model 3 that's already outselling it's ICE competition with over 400k reservations, then there is the Jaguar i-Pace that is set to do well on the mid-high end. We are just waiting for more Model 3 $30k 200+ mile range competition that looks like it's worth $30k.

There is no question that the BEV is the future of transportation, and that it will very quickly dominate the commuter market once more viable options are available. But right now aside from Model 3, we just have early adopters and compromise models, while ICE automakers slowly and reluctantly transition from ICE to BEV. VW is the only global automaker that actually have/forced to have a plan, and is implementing it today to transition in a big way and challenge Tesla.

And by this time next year Electrify America will have over 500 charging station with over 2,000 chargers across the US, along with over 100 charging stations at Walmart locations across the nation near freeways.

But for those who need the big heavy SUVs to haul stuff and lots of people around, they will stay back on old school ICE with hybrid tech for some time. It's going to take another battery innovation like solid state to get a pack powerful enough to move all that weight and not take up too much space. This is where Ford will live for a while since what they are focused on offering is not easily compatible with going BEV. But what will have that group wanting a BEV is the higher cost of gasoline as it increases, as the volume demand continues to decrease as many more move to BEV.

Think about it...most every city in the country is in the process or is planning to replace their ICE buses with BEVs, which eliminates the fuel of 30 cars per BEV bus. Gas prices have no place to go but up and those ICE/hybrid vehicles will continue to pay the price.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,893 Posts
If Lincoln did offer a 2019 BEV, which means it would be available today or very soon, how should it be priced I wonder?. And just how well would it sell today? Would it outsell their other products? I do feel strongly that BEV's need to be sleek, preferably sedans, but what do I know. I simply base that on a gut feel, not an ounce of real research. I guess we should presume Ford has studied the trends and has planned to land where they feel they need to be in coming years. My point goes back to, how bad is FoMoCo really suffering by not having several BEVS's this year or next. And again, I doubt they would be profitable so soon anyway. I also think that no matter who floods the market first, second or third, consumers just don't give a **** as long as you show up with a compelling product. And again, if your argument is more sales, then I say again, red ink is NOT your friend. Balance, young grasshopper.
A Lincoln BEV should be a next gen Continental Electric. Bold, AWD, Powerful, 400+ miles of range, and the ultimate in Quiet Luxury. Inductive charging so no need to plug anything in at home. Early on when Tesla offered to let other automaker s invest in the Supercharger network, Ford should have done so, then the Continental Electric would be able to use the Supercharger network that is currently available.

And there it is.... a missed opportunity.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Those who know me already know that I am not a fan of the BEV, IMO it's a forced technology that is almost certainly never going to be both practical and truly affordable. That said, I'm not surprised that Ford is telling it like it is here, when it comes to hybrids and BEV's Ford has generally been more blunt about shortcomings than most automakers.


I would also forward the idea that this is just one more reason not to burn the Mach-1 moniker on this vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
I don't know that the U.S. market will be flooded with BEVs in 2-3 years. The charging infrastructure won't support it. Many are announcing that they are going to dive off the high board but most will dip their toes into the water first. Every company has a plan for BEV conversion and their engineers are working hard but until those plans are executed, there is no way to know the results. Reality has a way of modifying plans. Mike Tyson once said, "Everybody's got a plan (to defeat me) until I punch them in the face."

Luxury automakers will have the funding and the overhead to risk introducing BEVs first. They will be high-end and expensive. Even T***a introduced the relatively low-volume Model S, a luxury sedan, as their first product. Battery tech is not so immature that it cannot produce here and now vehicles. I just don't see high volumes of mainstream BEVs appearing on the forecasted timelines and only partly because of the infrastructure deficit. Right now, all we have is hype, projections and announcements.

BTW & IMHO, Amazon and T***a have proved that profits are not the only thing that excites shareholders. A disruptive vision for the future and the prospect of profits in that future can also drive shareholder interest. T***a's only weakness is that it hadn't a clue as to what it took to be a volume auto manufacturer; a condition that it may have the funding and the time to overcome, much like Amazon had. But since the disruptive horse is now out of the barn, every other automaker is in catch-up mode. And that's just the way it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
546 Posts
I am still wondering what will happen to the market when it is flooded with BEV options. Specifically price. Will BEV's start sitting on lots with huge discounts because consumers are not adapting nearly fast enough, combined with evolving hybrid benefits. I think that will be the norm. At least in the immediate future. I am actually to the point of not caring what happens to Tesla, and if we could shut the blow hard up (Musk), I might actually be grateful.
No way anyone who drove an electric and an ICE back to back would pick the ICE, unless it was sold at a considerable discount. I expect that to be the case, which the opposite of what you're predicting. BEVs will cause ICE cars to drop precipitously in price as legacy manufacturers attempt to dismantle their legacy commitments with some semblance of order.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
546 Posts
The S with the specs to go that quick, costs well over $100k.

Gee, I don't know, maybe Ford has some crazy idea to make their first new BEV affordable and......something Tesla has never heard of.....profit.
Road and Track tested original P85+ back in 2013 did 0-60 in 4s and started as about $96k, and stickered out at $112k and had 265mi of range. The Model P3D that I can order today (got my invite finally) does 0-60 in a claimed 3.5sec (but likely, probably around the low 3s) would sticker out with the 20" tire package at $69k with a 310 range on a smaller battery than the old P85+ has/had.


That is a massive decrease in cost. Also, I'd wager Tesla sells more $35k SR Model 3s by the end of 2019 than Ford will have sold EVs since they began selling EVs....at a very good margin. Ford is trailing badly in BEVs, and the Evos/Mach 1, whatever it will be called, which has yet to even be shown to even entice a potential Tesla buyer to wait, will make a minimal impact on the marketplace. Ford has too much legacy baggage to move to EVs too quickly. They'd have to shutter half their NA operations to be right sized for BEV. The industry has been upended by Tesla. How it shakes out depends on how well each company is steered through the transition. Hopefully the file cabinet salesman knows what he is doing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Road and Track tested original P85+ back in 2013 did 0-60 in 4s and started as about $96k, and stickered out at $112k and had 265mi of range. The Model P3D that I can order today (got my invite finally) does 0-60 in a claimed 3.5sec (but likely, probably around the low 3s) would sticker out with the 20" tire package at $69k with a 310 range on a smaller battery than the old P85+ has/had.


That is a massive decrease in cost. Also, I'd wager Tesla sells more $35k SR Model 3s by the end of 2019 than Ford will have sold EVs since they began selling EVs....at a very good margin. Ford is trailing badly in BEVs, and the Evos/Mach 1, whatever it will be called, which has yet to even be shown to even entice a potential Tesla buyer to wait, will make a minimal impact on the marketplace. Ford has too much legacy baggage to move to EVs too quickly. They'd have to shutter half their NA operations to be right sized for BEV. The industry has been upended by Tesla. How it shakes out depends on how well each company is steered through the transition. Hopefully the file cabinet salesman knows what he is doing.
$70K huh.

Hmmm.

Still, not only about 0-60 and certainly not only about sales volume.

Profit is the name of the game.
Care to bet who profits first? I bet you won't.:laugh2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
If profit is the name of the game, why is Ford's stockholder value in the tank? Ford is a very profitable company. However, management's latest moves (the cabinetmaker, for example) are driven by the downward valuation of the company's shareholder value.

Ford is fighting for its future and the stakes are high. For decades, Ford has let its public image as an auto industry leader decline to the point that it is now reacting to - and trying to catch up with - a startup competitor that has no manufacturing history and is making zero profits. That should be a profoundly uncomfortable fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
If profit is the name of the game, why is Ford's stockholder value in the tank? Ford is a very profitable company. However, management's latest moves (the cabinetmaker, for example) are driven by the downward valuation of the company's shareholder value.
There is a difference between a profitable company like Ford and one that gives high returns to investors.
This is what the crap is really abourt - the inability to speculate on Ford's future product directions.





Ford is fighting for its future and the stakes are high. For decades, Ford has let its public image as an auto industry leader decline to the point that it is now reacting to - and trying to catch up with - a startup competitor that has no manufacturing history and is making zero profits. That should be a profoundly uncomfortable fact.
It's a measured response to Wall Street more than directly competing with Tesla, Ford's stock holders
have very little say in the decision of Ford's business decisions and that's what really gets under the skin
of Wall Street analysts and why Ford's stock value is so poor compared with actual profits earned.

Ford will start switching to BEVs, after its customers are used to hybrids and PHEVs
so there's a lot of room to move in before any mass migration to BEVs..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
There is a difference between a profitable company like Ford and one that gives high returns to investors.
This is what the crap is really abourt - the inability to speculate on Ford's future product directions.





It's a measured response to Wall Street more than directly competing with Tesla, Ford's stock holders
have very little say in the decision of Ford's business decisions and that's what really gets under the skin
of Wall Street analysts and why Ford's stock value is so poor compared with actual profits earned.

Ford will start switching to BEVs, after its customers are used to hybrids and PHEVs
so there's a lot of room to move in before any mass migration to BEVs..
Just a reminder, that Ford has many years of experience with all the above, far more than most, as it works toward perpetuating it's electrification cadence of products, which includes 7 BEV's by 2022.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
546 Posts
$70K huh.

Hmmm.

Still, not only about 0-60 and certainly not only about sales volume.

Profit is the name of the game.
Care to bet who profits first? I bet you won't.:laugh2:
Margin is the name of the game. OTBE (other things being equal) the only thing profit shows about a company is that it is no longer expanding. You turn a profit when expansion no longer brings a reasonable return on investment. Margin, OTOH, is very important at it provides the structural information about whether a company will be profitable once capex ends. A Model S currently has a 25% margin, which trounces about everyone, and is targeted at 28% later this year, IIRC.

Model 3 obviously has much bigger issues. If Tesla was just about the Model S, they'd be golden, but they are making capital expenditures to grow quickly. They want to grab as much market and mind share as possible before legacy manufacturers get in the fray. They have to strike while they have the advantage. If they wait and do things the way of the old legacy manufacturers, no doubt it would result in a better end product, but they would lose their advantage. They have to operate this way if they stand a chance of surviving. Unfortunately at times they look like a monkey humping a football.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Margin is the name of the game. OTBE (other things being equal) the only thing profit shows about a company is that it is no longer expanding. You turn a profit when expansion no longer brings a reasonable return on investment. Margin, OTOH, is very important at it provides the structural information about whether a company will be profitable once capex ends. A Model S currently has a 25% margin, which trounces about everyone, and is targeted at 28% later this year, IIRC.

Model 3 obviously has much bigger issues. If Tesla was just about the Model S, they'd be golden, but they are making capital expenditures to grow quickly. They want to grab as much market and mind share as possible before legacy manufacturers get in the fray. They have to strike while they have the advantage. If they wait and do things the way of the old legacy manufacturers, no doubt it would result in a better end product, but they would lose their advantage. They have to operate this way if they stand a chance of surviving. Unfortunately at times they look like a monkey humping a football.
No need to explain the very simplistic margin formula to me, I am quite well versed in it. Net profit, to be a bit more specific, is what is missing from Tesla and clearly what I was referring to, and clearly what you skirted around when you started beating your chest about volumes. Would you care to continue that discussion? And yes, Musk is desperate to overcome considerable problems, problems typical of rapid expansion, especially for newbie companies. Problems btw, that Ford is quite well versed in. But forget Ford, it is that same industry that will trounce Tesla with what is quite simplistic technology, and certainly manufacturing, in BEV production.
 
21 - 40 of 63 Posts
Top